Alakh Alok Srivastava vs Union Of India on 1 May, 2018

On

Supreme Court of India Alakh Alok Srivastava vs Union Of India on 1 May, 2018Author: . Dipak Misra 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) No.76 OF 2018 ALAKH ALOK SRIVASTAVA     ……PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                       …….RESPONDENTS                                                     J  U  D  G  M  E  N  T Dipak Misra, CJI.   The instant Writ Petition initially raised two issues, first, the treatment of an eight month old female child who had become a victim   of   a   crime…

Satpal vs State Of Haryana on 1 May, 2018

On

Supreme Court of India Satpal vs State Of Haryana on 1 May, 2018Author: J Navin Sinha NON­REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1892 OF 2017 SATPAL ………APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA …..RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J. The appellant assails his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 201 I.P.C., by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar in   case   No.54­SC   (RBT)   of   2008,   affirmed…

Jeevak Aushadhi Arogya Shetaki … vs Shri Zolba S/O Buddhuji Bandhate … on 2 May, 2018

On

1. By this writ petition, the Management i.e. Jeevak

Aushadhi Arogya Shetaki Sanshodhan Sanstha and the Head

Master of the School run by the aforesaid management has

challenged judgment and order dated 31.03.2016 passed by

the School Tribunal, Nagpur, in favour of respondent no.1,

thereby setting aside order dated 23.08.2014 terminating the

services of respondent no.1 and a further direction to reinstate

the said respondent with continuity of service and full back

wages.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the

parties.

3. Mr. A.C. Dharmadhikari, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the petitioner, contended that a perusal of the

impugned order shows that there were as many as 8 charges

::: Uploaded on – 03/05/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/05/2018 01:44:18 :::
3 WP2642-16.odt

levelled against the respondent no.1 and that a detailed

enquiry as contemplated under the provisions of Maharashtra

Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service)

Regulation Act, 1977 and Rules framed thereunder, was

conducted. The enquiry report was voluminous and it was

signed by all the three members i.e. the representative of the

Management, the representative of the respondent no.1

(delinquent employee) and the State Awardee Teacher. It was

found that the respondent no.1 was guilty of all the charges

levelled against him.

Balu S/O Pundlik Ingle vs State Of Maharashtra … on 2 May, 2018

On

::: Uploaded on – 02/05/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/05/2018 01:40:10 :::
apeal106.01.J.odt 2

2] Heard Shri R.L. Khapre, the learned Counsel for the

appellant and Shri N.B. Jawade, the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

3] The genesis of the prosecution lies in oral report

dated 01.07.1994 (Exh.14) lodged by P.W.1 Sou. Chhaya Ravindra

Deshmukh at Police Station Nandura, the gist of which oral report

is thus:-

P.W.1 Chhaya and her husband P.W.2 Ravindra

Deshmukh and their two daughters aged 4 years and 2 years

reside in Sahayata hutment area at Wadner (Bholji) within the

jurisdiction of the Nandura Police Station. The accused, then aged

18 years, resides two houses away, with his mother.

On 30.06.1994 between 03:00 and 04:00 p.m., the elder

daughter-victim came home crying. P.W.1 pacified her and asked

her as to what happened and the response of the victim was to

disclose that the accused (referred to as “Mama” or maternal

uncle) made her lie on the ground and asked her to show her

buttock. The victim then disclosed, that she was ravished, by

pointing finger towards her vagina. P.W.1 rushed to the house of

::: Uploaded on – 02/05/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/05/2018 01:40:10 :::
apeal106.01.J.odt 3

the accused and confronted him. The accused was frightened and

kept mum. P.W.1 personally inspected the vagina of the victim and

noticed sticky fluid and that the vagina was reddish. P.W.2 came

home at 05:00 p.m. and the incident was disclosed to him by P.W.

Baburao S/O. Govinda Kumoti (In … vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso … on 2 May, 2018

On

ORAL JUDGMENT :

The appellant-accused is aggrieved by the judgment and

order dated 27-10-2016 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Gadchiroli in Special POCSO Case 12/2015, by and under

which the accused is convicted for offence punishable under Section

376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short)

and Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Protection of Children from

::: Uploaded on – 02/05/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 04/05/2018 01:44:13 :::
2 apeal217.17

Sexual Offences Act (“POCSO Act” for short) and is further convicted

for offence punishable under Section 506 Part-II of the IPC and is

sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to

payment of fine of Rs.3,000/- for offence punishable under Section 4

read with Section 17 of the POCSO Act and to suffer rigorous

imprisonment for three years and to payment of fine of Rs.2,000/- for

offence punishable under Section 506 Part-II of the IPC. Separate

sentence for offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section

511 of the IPC is not awarded.