Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.84 seconds)Article 136 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 406 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Suthenthiraraja @ Santhan And Others ... vs State Through Dsp/Cbi, Sit, Chennai ... on 8 October, 1999
As noted by a Constitution Bench of this Court in P.N. Eswara Iyer and Ors.
v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India [ 1980 (4) SCC 680 ], Suthendraraja
alias Suthenthira Raja alias Santhan & Ors. v. State, through DSP/CBI,
Chennai [ 1999 (9) SCC 323 ], Ramdeo Chauhan alias Raj Nath v. State of
Assam [ 2001 (5) SCC 714 ], and Devender Pal Singh v. State, NCT of Delhi
and Another [ 2003 (2) SCC 501 ], notwithstanding the wider set of grounds
for review in civil proceedings, it is limited to 'errors apparent on the
face of the record' in criminal proceedings. Such applications are not to
be filed for the pleasure of the parties or even as a device for
ventilating remorselessness, but ought to be resorted to with great sense
of responsibility as well.
Ram Deo Chauhan @ Raj Nath Chauhan vs State Of Assam on 10 May, 2001
As noted by a Constitution Bench of this Court in P.N. Eswara Iyer and Ors.
v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India [ 1980 (4) SCC 680 ], Suthendraraja
alias Suthenthira Raja alias Santhan & Ors. v. State, through DSP/CBI,
Chennai [ 1999 (9) SCC 323 ], Ramdeo Chauhan alias Raj Nath v. State of
Assam [ 2001 (5) SCC 714 ], and Devender Pal Singh v. State, NCT of Delhi
and Another [ 2003 (2) SCC 501 ], notwithstanding the wider set of grounds
for review in civil proceedings, it is limited to 'errors apparent on the
face of the record' in criminal proceedings. Such applications are not to
be filed for the pleasure of the parties or even as a device for
ventilating remorselessness, but ought to be resorted to with great sense
of responsibility as well.
Devender Pal Singh, Dharmendra Singh, ... vs State, N.C.T. Of Delhi & Another, State ... on 17 December, 2002
As noted by a Constitution Bench of this Court in P.N. Eswara Iyer and Ors.
v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India [ 1980 (4) SCC 680 ], Suthendraraja
alias Suthenthira Raja alias Santhan & Ors. v. State, through DSP/CBI,
Chennai [ 1999 (9) SCC 323 ], Ramdeo Chauhan alias Raj Nath v. State of
Assam [ 2001 (5) SCC 714 ], and Devender Pal Singh v. State, NCT of Delhi
and Another [ 2003 (2) SCC 501 ], notwithstanding the wider set of grounds
for review in civil proceedings, it is limited to 'errors apparent on the
face of the record' in criminal proceedings. Such applications are not to
be filed for the pleasure of the parties or even as a device for
ventilating remorselessness, but ought to be resorted to with great sense
of responsibility as well.
Zahira Habibulla H Sheikh And Anr vs State Of Gujarat And Ors on 12 April, 2004
JUDGMENT
2004 Supp(2) SCR 571
with
Miscellaneous Petition(Civil) 4827-4833 of 2004
The Judgment was delivered by : HON'BLE JUSTICE ARIJIT PASAYAT
Hon'ble Justice ARIJIT PASAYAT
These two applications "for directions and modification of the judgment and
order dated 12.4.2004 in Crl. Appeal Nos. 446-449 of 2004 and Crl. Appeal
Nos. 450-452 of 2004 (Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and Anr. vs. State of
Gujarat and Ors. and connected cases)" (reported in 2004(4) SCALE 375) have
been filed by the State of Gujarat and one of the accused by name Tulsibhai
Bhikhabhai Tadvi who faced trial in the case. It would be appropriate to
first deal with application filed by the State of Gujarat.
Union Carbide Corporation Etc. Etc vs Union Of India Etc. Etc on 3 October, 1991
The direction given in the present case for transfer though keeping in view
normal principles governing claims for transfer was really in exercise of
powers as an Appellate Court with plenary and unlimited powers to do
justice while dealing with an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution
and as an inevitable consequence of the appeals being allowed the reasons
for which, would equally justify on their own the need for transfer outside
the State as well. It is in essence an adjunctive power. As noted in Union
Carbide Corporation and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. [ 1991 (4) SCC 584
)] the purposed constitutional plenitude of the powers of the apex Court to
ensure due and proper administration of justice is intended to be co-
extensive in each case with the needs of justice of a given case and to
meeting any exigency. Very wide powers have been conferred on this Court
for due and proper administration of Justice. This Court retains an
inherent power and jurisdiction for dealing with any extra ordinary
situation in the larger interests of administration of justice and for
preventing manifest injustice being done. The power is required to be
exercised only in exceptional circumstances for furthering the ends of
justice.