Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr on 9 September 2011

Posted on April 28, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Even though Supreme Court upheld High Court decision in holding the Police officer who executed the cancelled Non-bailable warrant against the practicing advocate, it held that Police officer was sufficiently reprimanded. High Court had also granted a compensation of Rs.2000/- from the personal account of Police officer to the Advocate!!!

Citations: [2012 SCC 9 791], [2011 AIOL 663], [2012 AIR BOMR 1 197], [2011 AIR SC 3393], [2011 AIR SC 5347], [2011 ANJ SC SUPP 2 65], [2012 BOMCR CRI SC 1 260], [2011 JT 10 253], [2011 RCR CRIMINAL SC 4 212], [2011 SCALE 10 233], [2011 SLT 7 1], [2012 SCC CRI 4 679]

Other Source links: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1934058/ or https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/575fd363607dba63d7e6e2d9

CrPC 83 – Attachment of property of person absconding

Posted on April 28, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

(1) The Court issuing a proclamation under section 82 may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, at any time after the issue of the proclamation, order the attachment of any property, movable or immovable, or both, belonging to the proclaimed person:
Provided that where at the time of the issue of the proclamation the Court is satisfied, by affidavit or otherwise, that the person in relation to whom the proclamation is to be issued,—
(a) is about to dispose of the whole or any part of his property, or
(b) is about to remove the whole or any part of his property from the local jurisdiction of the Court, it may order the attachment simultaneously with the issue of the proclamation.
(2) Such order shall authorise the attachment of any property belonging to such person within the district in which it is made; and it shall authorise the attachment of any property belonging to such person without such district when endorsed by the District Magistrate within whose district such property is situate.
(3) If the property ordered to be attached is a debt or other movable property, the attachment under this section shall be made—
(a) by seizure; or
(b) by the appointment of a receiver; or
(c) by an order in writing prohibiting the delivery of such property to the proclaimed person or to any one on his behalf; or
(d) by all or any two of such methods, as the Court thinks fit.
(4) If the property ordered to be attached is immovable, the attachment under this section shall, in the case of land paying revenue to the State Government, be made through the Collector of the district in which the land is situate, and in all other cases—
(a) by taking possession; or
(b) by the appointment of a receiver; or
(c) by an order in writing prohibiting the payment of rent on delivery of property to the proclaimed person or to any one on his behalf; or
(d) by all or any two of such methods, as the Court thinks fit.
(5) If the property ordered to be attached consists of live-stock or is of a perishable nature, the Court may, if it thinks it expedient, order immediate sale thereof, and in such case the proceeds of the sale shall abide the order of the Court.
(6) The powers, duties and liabilities of a receiver appointed under this section shall be the same as those of a receiver appointed under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).

CrPC 82 – Proclamation for person absconding

Posted on April 28, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

(1) If any Court has reason to believe (whether after taking evidence or not) that any person against whom a warrant has been issued by it has absconded or is concealing himself so that such warrant cannot be executed, such Court may publish a written proclamation requiring him to appear at a specified place and at a specified time not less than thirty days from the date of publishing such proclamation.
(2) The proclamation shall be published as follows:—
(i) (a) it shall be publicly read in some conspicuous place of the town or village in which such person ordinarily resides;
(b) it shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the house or homestead in which such person ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of such town or village;
(c) a copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the Court-house;
(ii) the Court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of the proclamation to be published in a daily newspaper circulating in the place in which such person ordinarily resides.
(3) A statement in writing by the Court issuing the proclamation to the effect that the proclamation was duly published on a specified day, in the manner specified in clause (i) of sub-section (2), shall be conclusive evidence that the requirements of this section have been complied with, and that the proclamation was published on such day.
(4) Where a proclamation published under sub-section (1) is in respect of a person accused of an offence punishable under section 302, 304, 364, 367, 382, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 402, 436, 449, 459 or 460 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), and such person fails to appear at the specified place and time required by the proclamation, the Court may, after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, pronounce him a proclaimed offender and make a declaration to that effect.
(5) The provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) shall apply to a declaration made by the Court under sub-section (4) as they apply to the proclamation published under sub-section (1).

Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam Vs State of Jharkhand on 27 April 2020

Posted on April 28, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Jharkhand High Court (Single Bench) has quashed and set aside 3 Orders of Magistrate Court issued under Sections 73, 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, they being with out any application of mind, issued in mechanical manner and with out any reasons recorded as necessary by Code/Law.

From Para 3,

3. The main contention of the petitioners is that the Court below, in a most mechanical manner issued non-bailable warrant of arrest. In the similar
manner the process under section 82 of the Code and thereafter attachment order in terms of Section 83 of the Code have been issued. It is their contention that, even without receipt of the service report of bailable warrant of arrest, non-bailable warrant of arrest have been issued against the petitioners.
Similarly, without there being any service report of non-bailable warrant of arrest, process under Section 82 of the Code has been issued. Further, without any service of the process under Section 82 of the Code, attachment order in terms of Section 83 of the Code has been issued. It is also the case of the petitioners that the processes are being issued in utter violation of the respective provisions laid down in the Code, i.e. Sections 73, 82 & 83 thereof, thus, these orders need to be set aside.

Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam Vs State of Jharkhand on 27 April 2020

Disclaimer:

Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in or Government websites.

I have no control to remove copies of this document(s) that may be available on websites of High Courts or Supreme Court of India or any of the many other sites, law journal or reporters which carry the same judgment in it’s entirety, not I can remove references/links to this document(s) from the results of Search Engines such as Google.com.

CrPC 73 – Warrant may be directed to any person

Posted on April 28, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

(1) The Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Magistrate of the first class may direct a warrant to any person within his local jurisdiction for the arrest of any escaped convict, proclaimed offender or of any person who is accused of a non-bailable offence and is evading arrest.
(2) Such person shall acknowledge in writing the receipt of the warrant, and shall execute it if the person for whose arrest it was issued, is in, or enters on, any land or other property under his charge.
(3) When the person against whom such warrant is issued is arrested, he shall be made over with the warrant to the nearest police officer, who shall cause him to be taken before a Magistrate having jurisdiction in the case, unless security is taken under section 71.

G.O. Ms. No. 623 Guidelines on Colour combination theme for painting of Gram Panchayat Buildings

Posted on April 27, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

The High Court of AP had dismissed the Govt Order to color all the Government building to YSRCP Colours in the State of AP here. State Government failed at Supreme Court too. Judgment is here.

The AP Govt had the following Order passed (2020PR_MS623) to obtain the very same colors to paint Government Buildings in the State of AP this time via the namesake committee to submit recommendations to exactly match the YSRCP colours to meet their party agenda item.

2020PR_MS623 Guidelines on Colour combination theme for painting of Gram Panchayat Buildings

G.O. Ms. No.20 Medium of Instruction in all Government schools in the State – Parents committee resolutions Dt 21 April 2020

Posted on April 27, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

The High Court of AP had dismissed the Govt Order to change the medium of instruction to English in all Government run schools in the State of AP here.

The AP Govt had the following Order passed (21042020SE_MS20) to obtain the preferred Medium of Instruction in all Government schools in the State via the Parents committee resolutions to get the mandated English Medium schools for all agenda item.

21042020SE_MS20 Medium of Instruction in all Government schools in the State – Parents committee resolutions

High Court of A.P. Family Courts (Court) Rules, 2005

Posted on April 26, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

The following are the Rules made under the Family Courts Act 1984, last amended in 2005.

2 High Court of A.P. Family Courts (Court) Rules, 2005

The Family Courts Act is available here.

Disclaimer:

The Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance 2020

Posted on April 25, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

This Ordinance was brought in by the Central Government to protect the Healthcare Service Personnel from the idiotic folks who misbehaved, assaulted and obstructed while performing their yomen duties during the pandemic COVID-19

The Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance 2020

Earlier enactment is here.

Disclaimer:

Revanasiddappa and Anr Vs Mallikarjun and Ors on 31 March 2011

Posted on April 23, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Supreme Court was constrained to take a view different from the one taken by it in Bharatha Matha on Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

From Para 41,

41. In the instant case, Section 16(3) as amended, does not impose any restriction on the property right of such children except limiting it to the property of their parents. Therefore, such children will have a right to whatever becomes the property of their parents, whether self acquired or ancestral.

But thankfully, referred the matter to a larger bench in March 2011.

43. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the matter should be reconsidered by a larger Bench and for that purpose the records of the case be placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger Bench.

Revanasiddappa and Anr Vs Mallikarjun and Ors on 31 March 2011

Citations: [2011 SCJ 4 4], [2011 AIOL 244], [2011 CTC 2 810], [2013 ILR 4291], [2011 SCC 11 1], [2011 MWN CIVIL 3 528], [2011 MLJ 5 392], [2011 GLH 1 757], [2011 JCR SC 2 259], [2011 CLT SC 112 469], [2011 LW 3 255], [2011 SCALE 4 189], [2011 SCR 4 675], [2011 AIC 101 73], [2011 SCSUPPL CHN 4 50], [2011 AIR SC 2447], [2011 CALLT 3 58], [2011 KCCR 2 1531], [2011 AIR SC SUPP 155], [2011 JT SC 4 90], [2011 AWC SC 3 3126], [2011 UJ 2 1342], [2011 SCC CIV 3 581], [2011 KERLT 2 176], [2011 CGLRW 2 13], [2011 CUTLT 112 469], [2011 GUJ LH 1 757], [2011 ALR 86 450], [2011 RLW SC 3 2547], [2012 CCC SC 4 279]

Other Source links: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/138849/ or https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609aef4e4b014971141545b

The current status of this case is as follows:

12574_2003_8_5_21000_Order_24-Feb-2020

The earlier Judgment contradicted by this one is Bharatha Matha and Anr Vs R. Vijaya Renganathan and Ors here.

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Month: April 2020

Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr on 9 September 2011

CrPC 83 – Attachment of property of person absconding

CrPC 82 – Proclamation for person absconding

Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam Vs State of Jharkhand on 27 April 2020

CrPC 73 – Warrant may be directed to any person

G.O. Ms. No. 623 Guidelines on Colour combination theme for painting of Gram Panchayat Buildings

G.O. Ms. No.20 Medium of Instruction in all Government schools in the State – Parents committee resolutions Dt 21 April 2020

High Court of A.P. Family Courts (Court) Rules, 2005

The Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance 2020

Revanasiddappa and Anr Vs Mallikarjun and Ors on 31 March 2011