Sriharan, 7 SCC 1 , the constitution bench comprising of H. The Court held that a special category sentence, in substitution of death sentence, that is, sentence barring remission under CrPC for specified term beyond 14 years, is valid. It is clarified that power under Arts. After expiry of said non-remittable term, remission powers under CrPC would be exercisable. Such special sentence, is not a new sentence but within limits of life imprisonment and thus, not violative of separation of powers.
Such special sentence when imposed under substantive provisions of IPC does not overlap procedural power under CrPC either. Considering the crime situation in India particularly nexus between hardened criminals and ill-gotten wealth, and nature of heinous crimes on the rise , delay in disposal of cases, and balancing interests of victims with those of convicts, such a special category of sentence is necessary.
Arguments based on ray of hope for the convict were held not tenable. Such hope is rather required for victims, the Court observed. Such special category sentences can only be imposed by the High Court or Supreme Court and not by a trial court. Such special category sentence not prescribed by any statute, barring operation of remission powers under CrPC, is invalid. Such a special category sentence closes doors for reformation and encroaches upon power of legislature by prescribing a new sentence.
Some of the important observations by Justice UU Lalit in this case were. Ravindra Bhat, JJ has held that no person is entitled to a copy of statement recorded under Section of the Criminal Procedure Code, till the appropriate orders are passed by the court after the charge-sheet is filed.
Abdul Nazeer, JJ. Held the triple talaq to be violative of Article 14 and pronounced it to be unconstitutional. Nariman, J, writing down the majority judgment for himself and Lalit, J noted that given the fact that Triple Talaq is instant and irrevocable, it is obvious that any attempt at reconciliation between the husband and wife by two arbiters from their families, which is essential to save the marital tie, cannot ever take place.
After going through the Hanafi jurisprudence, the Court noticed that very jurisprudence castigates Triple Talaq as being sinful. The Court said that Triple Talaq is a form of Talaq which is itself considered to be something innovative, namely, that it is not in the Sunna, being an irregular or heretical form of Talaq, it was held that:. Section 43 lays down the restrictions on transfer of land sold or purchased under the Tenancy Act and Section 63 bars the transfer of agricultural lands to non-agriculturists.
This may not only render the natural heirs of the tenant without any support or sustenance but may also have serious impact on agricultural operations. Holding that the minimum period of six months stipulated under Section 13B 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for a motion for passing decree of divorce on the basis of mutual consent is not mandatory but directory, the bench of AK Goel and UU Lalit, JJ said that it will be open to the Court to exercise its discretion in the facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation.
Noticing that where death sentence could be one of the alternative punishments, the courts must be completely vigilant and see that full opportunity at every stage is afforded to the accused, the 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, Indu Malhotra and Krishna Murari, JJ has laid down the norms to ensure the same.
In the case where the question as to how proceedings for an offence under Section of the Negotiable Instruments Act, can be regulated where the accused is willing to deposit the cheque amount, the bench of AK Goel and UU Lalit, JJ held that Section of the Act confers implied power on the Magistrate to discharge the accused if the complainant is compensated to the satisfaction of the Court, where the accused tenders the cheque amount with interest and reasonable cost of litigation as assessed by the Court.
The Court said:. A Division Bench of Uday U. Lalit and Vineet Saran, JJ. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions v. Present appeal challenged the decision of Calcutta High Court setting aside the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption cancelling the registration of respondent Trust under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, and another order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing appeals therefrom.
Investigation officer obtaining further approval prior to carrying out an arrest. J Lalit, J Gogoi and J Joseph, in Ranjana Kumari v State of Uttarakhand , ruled that a migrant cannot be recognised as a Scheduled Caste person in the migrant state, merely because that state recognises the specific caste as a Scheduled Caste. In Pradyuman Bisht v Union of India , J Lalit and J Goel directed that CCTV cameras without audio recordings be installed inside courts, and in important locations in the court complex, in at least two districts in every state.
However, they ordered that these recordings will not be subject to the Right to Information Act. J Lalit was on the 2-judge Bench of the Supreme Court that held that the prescribed 6 month waiting period under Section 13B 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for divorce by mutual consent, is not mandatory. His judgement with J Goel in Amardeep Singh v Harveen Kaur settled a contentious issue by holding that the prescribed waiting period can be waived under certain circumstances.
Judgments 3. Triple Talaq. Electoral Appeals Case. Brand Solutions. Video series featuring innovators. ET Financial Inclusion Summit. Malaria Mukt Bharat. Wealth Wise Series How they can help in wealth creation. Honouring Exemplary Boards. Deep Dive Into Cryptocurrency.
ET Markets Conclave — Cryptocurrency. Reshape Tomorrow Tomorrow is different. Let's reshape it today. Corning Gorilla Glass TougherTogether. ET India Inc. ET Engage. ET Secure IT. SC refuses to entertain plea for advancement of facilities for athletics, says there has to be individual drive "Are you into sports? Duty of society to offer opportunity to 'criminal' to defend himself: SC Judge Justice Lalit was speaking at the launch of the year-long campaign "Quality of services is key to access to justice for all", organised by Haryana Legal Services Authority in Gurugram in Haryana.
All News Videos Photos. Container shipping earnings now rival Apple. New York Gov.
0コメント