Supreme Court on Benami TransactionsSupreme Court of IndiaSamittri Devi & Anr. vs Sampuran Singh & Anr. on 21 January, 2011Author: GokhaleBench: Dalveer Bhandari, H.L. GokhaleIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCIVIL APPEAL NO. 846 OF 2011ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 1305 OF 2010 Samittri Devi and another. ...Appellants VersusSampuran Singh and … Continue reading Supreme Court on Benami Transactions
Comment : In this case the Court held two basic points :-i) Civil and Criminal Proceedings can go on, on an acquittal u/s 138 would not automatically oust a civil suit for recovery. ii) Doctrine of Reverse Burden - to be proceeded with caution - presumption de hors proof of foundational facts improper. Supreme Court of IndiaVishnu Dutt … Continue reading 138 Acquittal won’t bar civil suit for recovery says Supreme Court
QUESTION : Cinematograph Act 1952 Section 5A-Whether the issuance of the certificate issued by the specialised Board of Film Censors bars the criminal Court's jurisdiction to try for offences under Sections 292/293 I.P.C ? Court said no...read on Supreme Court of IndiaRaj Kapoor And Ors vs State And Others on 26 October, 1979Equivalent citations: 1980 AIR 258, … Continue reading Supreme Court on obscenity (Raj Kapoor v. State) Justice Krishna Iyer.
A Remarkable judgment outlining the law of obscenity as it stands in India, in a nutshell, while holding Bandit Queen to have been rightly passed by the Censors, held it not to obscene as it in no manner appeals to the prurient interests or is lascivious - or corruptive to the minds of people whose … Continue reading Supreme Court on obscenity (Bandit Queen Judgment)