venkatesh Rao
21 August 2013 at 15:50
Dear experts,
A case under prevention of corruption act ended in conviction of an accused government servant. single judge High court set aside the conviction. There are very good grounds for further appeal.The state complainant is managed not to proceed further, i. e. to appeal further or not.
Now my question is ;
1. Whether any appeal or revision lies?
2. If yes, before which court?
3. If the govt chooses not to appeal, if a third private party file any appeal showing glare miscarriage of justice?
4. under which provision of Cr.P.C. or any other law?
Thanx in advance.
manmeet singh
16 August 2013 at 20:53
Dear Visitors,
Hello,
I am seeking your great opinion for a matter like contempt of court. Facts are as below:-
1. Central Government of India issued a Rehabilitation scheme in 200. I am entitling for the same.
2. State Governments is the nodal agencies to execute the same. State government issued an office memorandum to execute after the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court but this office memorandum is not accordance to central government scheme.
3. Hon’ble High Court directed in a PIL to state Government to decide the all matters according to the central Government Scheme.
4. After the above order, I approached the state Government to obtain the desired relief. Unfortunately state government decided my application state government office memorandum which is not according to central government scheme.
5. I again approached the high court. High court again passed an order to commissioner to pay specific relief according to central government scheme.
Now faced problem is as below:-
Commissioner said to me orally that state government had already paid compensation to me, so nothing can pay to me. Therefore I can not obtain justrice as per the Central Government Scheme.
The Question of Laws arisen in this matter as below which can not solved by me:-
1. Which is the supremacy order between High Court Order and State Government Office Memorandum?
2. What is the legal status office memorandum after the order of High Court?
3. Is commissioner behaving like contempt of Court?
4. What is the proceeding of contempt of Court?
aditya naik
15 August 2013 at 16:43
FINAL MOOT PROBLEM
Poente is a state in the Union of India on the western coast. The state has a continuous stretch of 150 to 200 kms. of the coast line. The State mainly depends on tourism, domestic as well as international as a source of revenue. Tourism is not limited to the beaches as the State is also blessed with beautiful mountain ranges, deep valleys, waterfalls, natural lakes etc. The city of Zoori is the capital of Poente. Zoori is internationally known for its scenic beauty. With the rise of construction activity during the last two decades contributing to migrant population, a large slum area called Darawi developed, housing about 1000 families adjacent to the famous Linda beach, 3.5 knis away from Zoori. Various immoral activities and unhygienic living conditions in and around Linda beach was an eye sore to the people of Zoori and an embarrassment to the Government as well. This also created law and order problems including many instances of theft, murder etc. In order to promote tourism and also to get rid of the slum, the Municipal Corporation of Zoori passed an order of eviction and clearance to the residents of Darawi. There were reports in the newspapers that the Government intended to use this part of the beach to set up a 5-star hotel with casino facility in order to promote international tourism. The slum dwellers were much agitated by the Government order and refused to move out of their dwellings. With the help of some political leaders and NGOs the residents formed an organization called "Aam Janata Shaktr, and drew a plan for agitation against the Government action. After nearly a month long agitation which created much inconvenience to the people as there were many bandhs, protests. lathi charge etc. the Corporation entered into negotiations with Lokshakti at the behest of the Minister for Panchayat and a settlement was arrived at, wherein the Corporation agreed to construct a multi-storied building complex to house the residents of the slum at in the outskirts of Zoori, 30 kms. from the slum. They would be required to move out of the slum only after completion of the building. The Corporation immediately began the construction and completed the project with a span of 6 months. During that time there were news items wherein it was reported that the city of Zoori was a seismic area. Hence, proper precautionary construction technology would have to be adopted. As promised, on completion of the building complex, the Aam Janata Shakti took an initiative to ensure that all the then existing families in the slum got residential accommodation. Thereafter the Corporation demolished the remaining structures at Darawi and the land was leased out to a famous chain of hotels- La Indiana chain of hotels which was to put up a huge five star hotel with 24-hour casino facility, which was given much publicity world wide, specially in most of the European countries. On Thursday, 11th of September 2003, at about 1 a.m., there was an earthquake with an intensity of 6.3 on the richter scale, As a result of the earthquake, five of the buildings in the complex were raised to the ground and others developed deep structural cracks. As per news reports-, 200 people most of whom were women and children lost their lives. There were some Low-Income Group (MG) residential colonies in the vicinity. Many of the buildings had also developed cracks. Though there were reports of building damage, there was no news of any loss of lives of these residents. The Chief Minister of the State announced an ex-gratia payment of Rs. I 0,000/- per family of the deceased person. The members of Lokshakti immediately started an agitation alleging that the Corporation had intentionally shifted them to Darawi knowing very well that it was an earthquake prone area, only for setting up of a 5 star hotel at Bharavi and the Corporation did not care for the lives of the slum dwellers. Lokshakti further contended that if they were not shifted out of Darawi, many of them would have not lost their lives. Therefore, they demanded that the Corporation pay each of the deceased person's family compensation of Rs. l Lakh and rehabilitation to all the residents of Darawi to a safer place. The Corporation and the Government refused to pay any further compensation and did not entertain the grievance of Aam Janata Shakti. Aam Janata Shakti filed a Writ Petition under Art. 32 before the Supreme Court of India contendsing that:
l. The Corporation ignored the report of the newspaper and failed to take precautionary measures during construction.
2. Ex-gratia payment declared by the Government is inadequate.
3. Displacement of the slum dwellers amount to violation of Arts. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
4. Displacement is not for public purpose
5. Therefore the State is liable to pay adequate compensation of Rs. 1 Lakh and for proper and safe rehabilitation.
The State of Poente and the Corporation rejected the claim on the following grounds:
1.Writ is not maintainable, as there is no violation of fundamental rights.
2. The whole city is seismological sensitive
3. Petitioners waived their right to compensation as they occupied the complex with full knowledge.
Please help me to argue from the petitioner’s side ……..
Rajesh Tandon
14 August 2013 at 18:30
This is a query related to self-incrimination under article 20(3) of Indian Constitution & principle of natural justice. The query is as under:-
a) QUERRY NO1- can the protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution be claimed by an employee who is served with a show cause notice. The administrative authorities may be right in serving a show cause notice on account of giving an opportunity to employee of natural justice. The issue is that protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution towards the right of self-incrimination is available at pre-trial and trial stage. So is the stage of show cause notice considered under pre-trial stage? If not, is this protection still available at the show cause notice stage.
b) QUERRY NO 2- Is the protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution, an absolute protection /right enjoyed under fundamental rights .
c) QUERRY NO 3 A is a government employee. He does an oversight in his job and there is a lapse because of this oversight. The administrative authorities seek his comments/explanation. A offers his comments/explanation but offers a very large comments/explanation with the other related issues which he feels has a bearing in the case since he feels that despite accepting his oversight, the issue was not such big so as to call for comments/explanation and he feels that basically the comments/explanation asked for our with the intention to fix him. On being asked by administrative authorities to stick to the point and not to connect of the other issues, A does not change his explanation so offered with the reasoning that principle of natural justice requires that nobody should be condemned without giving a proper hearing and therefore howsoever lengthy his version may be and how soever administrative authorities may feels that the issues raised by him are not directly connected to the explanation sought for, he has a right to offer his defence under the principle of natural justice. More so, A further adds that he enjoys protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution i.e silence of accused and not to be witness against himself and yet he has atleast offered the comments. Now administrative authorities can not force/compel him to reduce the contents and offer the single line comments of only regretting the oversight on their line of thinking since it violates the basic tenets of Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution as this tantamounts to his compulsion by administrative authorities. In fact, A feels that this single line comment will be devoid of issues which he feels are essential to bring out mala fide intentions of administrative authorities and thus the administrative authorities will get a chance to fix him. Is this version/grounds taken by A for not reducing the comments/explanation & offering largish comments with other issues & coupled with accepting his mistake , legally sustainable and more so at the stage of seeking explanation. Is this right of protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution can be claimed by A at this stage of explanation. Would A be considered accused at this stage of explanation.
d) QUERRY NO 4 On what grounds, an accused can claim protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution if he/she is put under video surveillance or tape-recorded conversation since if he claims protection under article 21 of Indian constitution (right of privacy under the right to life and liberty), it is still understood on the ground of his/her privacy being infringed upon but what is not understood is claiming protection under Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution especially since there is no element of compulsion or coercion involved in surveillance. In this connection refer a similar citation R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra.
nagarajupatro
14 August 2013 at 15:37
dear experts
the public of andhra pradesh more particularly the people of rayalaseema, andhra were vexed with the decission of UPA government,bifercating the state into two parts giving separate telangana.
On the occassion of National Independence day, people decided to protest the celebrations
by wearing black badges, hosting the flag with a child in telugu thalli getup with black dress in protest of the decission of Central Government.
Whether it is lawfull can they do so???
definitely they will honour the flag,no doubt, but the activists would like to attending the flag hosting ceremony with black dress and conduct a rally after the flag hosting.
That way they would like to express their sad situation of separation of state
whether it is maintainable under law
Please be informed immediately
ADVOCATE NITIN KAPOOR
14 August 2013 at 10:01
hi,
im a law student and i want to know that how many articles are there in our constitution presently???? Some say 446, 498 n so on .....
infact i hv read some where that till now date we have only 395 articles and rest are just amendments and this is the most burning question in civil services. I will be highly obliged if someone provide me with some authentic source of answer...
thnking you....
Arvind Singh Chauhan
13 August 2013 at 18:49
Sir,
regarding my previous query-as posted-
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/My-previous-query-392341.asp#.UgouGxu6ZH0
I have to request to all members, whether My High court's judgment, supersede the judgment of apex court. Keeping in view the Art 142 of constitution, guide me please. I have filed appeal.
Please refer any citation on this point that- older judgment of SC if it is not overruled supersede the latest judgment of High Court.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Election duty exemption
Sir,
I have assigned city muncipal corporation election duty to be held on 1/9/2013 in Jalgaon-Maharastra.
I am having heart disease .In year 2009 two stains were installed(Engiyography and Engiyoplasty) in my veins/coronaries.since then my blood pressure becomes low i.e 100/70.Due to this I feels tired and head chakkar many times in day.So it seems difficult to me to work in election duty.Can I am exempted from election duties? I can submit health certificate to election officer.
Pl. give your expert constitutional guidance in this regards.
Thanks
A.J.Chaudhari