Important Supreme Court Judgments January 11, 2019

1. Wazir v. State of Haryana

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4, 23 and 18 - Reference - Normally the additional component of compensation in terms of Section 23(1)(thirdly) of the Act is granted when, a landholder suffers damage as a result of acquisition to the extent that the holding that he is left with stands comparatively diminished in terms of quality and value. For instance, if a railway track is to be built through an agricultural land held by a person, leaving two different halves with him, it would be impossible for him to carry on agricultural operations at an optimum level. This would lead to reduction in the value of the halves that he is left with. On the other hand, in a case where part of the holding is acquired for which appropriate commercial value is awarded, the rest of the value of the land will not stand diminished in terms of commercial potential. On the other hand, the potential of the remainder of the land would also increase drastically as the development would be right in the neighbourhood, thus giving substantial benefit to the landholder.

Citations : 2019 (1) RCR (Civil) 702 : 2019 (1) Scale 364
Case Number : C.A. No. 264 - 270 of 2019 11-01-2019
Petitioner's Advocate : Usha Nandini. V
Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud

2. Suresh Kumar Goyal v. State of Uttar Pradesh

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 245 (2) and 482 - The Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406, 420, 467, 471, 323, 504, 506, 447 and 448 - Application for Discharge.

In the present case the shares in question, right since the date of acquisition have always been in the custody of Appellant No.1. The material on record is absolutely clear that the acquisition was from the funds of Appellant No.1. The complainant has merely alleged that the funds came from his bank account but beyond such allegations no material has been placed on record at any stage. The stand taken by the appellants in their application under Section 245(2) CrPC is quite clear that the shares can be sold in the market and the proceeds can be divided between Appellant No.2 and Respondent No.2. If Respondent No.2 is insisting on having complete ownership in respect of the concerned shares, the matter must first be established before a competent forum. Further, from the facts that Appellant No.1 had disowned Respondent No.2 and had filed civil proceedings seeking appropriate orders against them, we are also convinced that the present criminal complaint is nothing but an attempt to wreck vengeance against the father, brother and the brother in law of the complainant. The instant criminal complaint is an abuse of the process of Court and is required to be quashed.

Steps to determine the veracity of a prayer for quashment raised by an accused by invoking the power vested in the High Court under Section 482 CrPC

Step one: whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable i.e. the material is of sterling and impeccable quality? 

Step two: whether the material relied upon by the accused would rule out the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused i.e. the material is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions contained in the complaint i.e. the material is such as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis of the accusations as false? 

Step three: whether the material relied upon by the accused has not been refuted by the prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant? 

Step four: whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court, and would not serve the ends of justice? 

If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, the judicial conscience of the High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 CrPC. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in holding such a trial (as well as proceedings arising therefrom) specially when it is clear that the same would not conclude in the conviction of the accused.”

Citations : AIR 2019 SC 535 : 2019 (1) Crimes 1 : JT 2019 (1) SC 447 : 2019 (1) SCALE 355
Case Number : Crl.A. No. 56 of 2019 11-01-2019
Petitioner's Advocate : Venkita Subramoniam T. R
Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
Previous Post Next Post