Supreme Court Decisions/Judgements Directory

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.Vs. RESPONDENT:EX. PILOT OFFICER ARUN GOVIL DATE OF JUDGMENT21/11/1989 BENCH:VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (CJ) BENCH:VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (CJ) SINGH, K.N. (J) KASLIWAL, N.M. (J) CITATION:1990 AIR 458 1989 SCR Supl. (2) 239 1989 SCC Supl. (2) 593 JT 1989 (4) 414 ...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:DWARKA NATH SHARMA Vs. RESPONDENT:UNION OF INDIA & ORS.DATE OF JUDGMENT08/08/1989 BENCH:MISRA RANGNATH BENCH:MISRA RANGNATH OZA, G.L. (J) CITATION:1990 AIR 428 1989 SCR (3) 767 1989 SCC Supl. (2) 225 JT 1989 (3) 373 1989 SCALE (2)205 ACT:Civil Services: Military Engineering...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:UNION OF INDIA & ANR.Vs. RESPONDENT:RAGHUBIR SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT16/05/1989 BENCH:PATHAK, R.S. (CJ) BENCH:PATHAK, R.S. (CJ) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J) MISRA RANGNATH NATRAJAN, S. (J) CITATION:1989 AIR 1933 1989 SCR (3) 316 1989 SCC (2) 754 ...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:ANDHRA KESARI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs. RESPONDENT:DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT18/11/1988 BENCH:SHETTY, K.J. (J) BENCH:SHETTY, K.J. (J) RAY, B.C. (J) CITATION:1989 AIR 183 1988 SCR Supl. (3) 893 1989 SCC (1) 392 JT 1988 (4) 431 1988 SCALE (2)1334 CITATOR INF...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:DR. MS. O.Z. HUSSAIN Vs. RESPONDENT:UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT15/11/1989 BENCH:MISRA RANGNATH BENCH:MISRA RANGNATH SAWANT, P.B. RAMASWAMY, K.CITATION:1990 AIR 311 1989 SCR Supl. (2) 177 1990 SCC Supl. 688 JT 1989 (4) 407 1989 SCALE (2)1134 ACT:Civil Services: Service...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:R. VENUGOPALA NAIDU AND ORS.Vs. RESPONDENT:VENKATARAYULU NAIDU CHARITIES AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT26/10/1989 BENCH:KULDIP SINGH (J) BENCH:KULDIP SINGH (J) NATRAJAN, S. (J) CITATION:1990 AIR 444 1989 SCR Supl. (1) 760 1989 SCC Supl. (2) 356 JT 1989 (4) 262 1989 SCALE (2)902 ACT:Civil...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:S. BANERJEE Vs. RESPONDENT:UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT24/10/1989 BENCH:DUTT, M.M. (J) BENCH:DUTT, M.M. (J) RANGNATHAN, S. PANDIAN, S.R. (J) CITATION:1990 AIR 285 1989 SCR Supl. (1) 562 1989 SCC Supl. (2) 486 JT 1989 (4) 547 1989 SCALE (2)941 ACT:Central Civil Services (...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.Vs. RESPONDENT:COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT02/05/1989 BENCH:PATHAK, R.S. (CJ) BENCH:PATHAK, R.S. (CJ) MISRA RANGNATH VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J) CITATION:1989 AIR 1707 1989 SCR (2) 994 1989 SCC Supl. (2) 642 JT 1989 (2) 335 198...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:R. NARAYANAN Vs. RESPONDENT:UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT25/10/1989 BENCH:NATRAJAN, S. (J) BENCH:NATRAJAN, S. (J) OJHA, N.D. (J) CITATION:1990 AIR 746 1989 SCR Supl. (1) 720 JT 1989 Supl. 292 1989 SCALE (2)1031 ACT:Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme: Para 4, Cl. 3(e)-...

Judges: Act Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Sections 468 473 Limitation Applicability Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty, The Non Obstante Clause Of Section 473 And Its Over Riding Effect Explained Criminal Procedure Code 1973 Section 482 Quashing Of Pro Ceedings Before Magistrate By The High Court No Cognizance Of Offence Section 498 A I P C After Expiry Of Three Years Validity Of Maxim Vigilantibus It Non Dormientibus, Jura Subveniunt Applicability Of In Cases Of Matrimonial Offences Like Cruelty Basic Difference Between The Limitation Under Section 473 And Section 5 Of The Limitation Act Explained Headnote A Complaint Petition Was Filed Before The Magistrate By The Appellant That She Was Ill Treated And Subjected To Cruelty By Husband The Accused Respondent And Her In Laws, And That During The Subsistence Of Their Marriage He Married Again And Got A Second, Wife The High Court On An Application Filed By The Accused Respondent Under Section 482 Of Cr P C Quashed The Criminal Proceedings, Holding That It Was Time Barred Since After Three Years Cognizance Cannot Be Taken Of An Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code, 2188 In View Of The Section 468 Of The Criminal Procedure Code Allowing The Appeal, The Court, To Take Cognizance Even Of He Offence Under Section 498 A Of The Penal Code Ignoring The Bar Of Section 468 Of The Cr P C 295 C 2 In View Of The Allegation Of Second Marriage During

20 April, 1990·PETITIONER:AJMER SINGH AND ORS. ETC.Vs. RESPONDENT:STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT17/11/1989 BENCH:RAMASWAMI, V. (J) II BENCH:RAMASWAMI, V. (J) II SHARMA, L.M. (J) CITATION:1989 SCR Supl. (2) 209 1990 SCC (1) 227 JT 1989 (4) 481 1989 SCALE (2)1137 ACT:The Punjab Security & Land Tenure...