Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

State Of U.P. vs Ram Chander on 12 January, 2010

\ITEM NO.101                           COURT NO.12                     SECTION II

                S U P R E M E       C O U R T   O F    I N D I A
                                 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
                            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 1127 OF 2003

STATE OF U.P.                                                         Appellant (s)

                      VERSUS

RAM CHANDER                                                           Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report)

Date: 12/01/2010          This Appeal was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
           HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI
           HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULY

For Appellant(s)           Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv.
                           Mr. Rajeev K. Dubey, Adv.
                           Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, Adv.

                            Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia,Adv.

For Respondent(s)          Mr.   Sunil Kr. Singh, Adv.
                           Mr.   R. Nedumaran, Adv.
                           Ms.   Mukti Singh, Adv.
                           Mr.   Anil Kumar Jha,Adv.

                UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
                                    O R D E R

The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.



    [Neetu Khajuria]                                             [Mithlesh Gupta]
        Sr.PA                                                      Court Master

(Signed order is placed on the file.) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 1127 OF 2003 STATE OF U.P. Appellant (s) VERSUS RAM CHANDER Respondent(s) O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the peculiar facts of the case, we are satisfied that the impugned order of the High Court does not call for interference.

The appeal is dismissed. However, the question of law relating to interpretation of Sections 10 and 14 of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 together with the Rules framed by the Central Government and the State Government is left open to be decided in an appropriate case.

.....................J. (G.S. Singhvi) .....................J. (Asok Kumar Ganguly) NEW DELHI, 12TH JANUARY, 2010.