Previous Sanction Of Central Government U/S 188 CrPC Not Required At The Stage Of Cognizance But Trial Cannot Commence Without It
The Supreme Court has observed that for offences that are committed outside India, trial of a criminal case against an Indian citizen cannot be commenced without sanction of the Central Government under Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The decision was given by Justice Aniruddha Bode and Justice Nageswara Rao. The case was of Nerella Chiranjeevi Arun Kumar V. State of Andhra Pradesh. Section 188 of the CrPC deals with offences committed outside India.
What do you think about this case?
Calcutta HC: Section 9 Of Arbitration Act Will Apply To Foreign Arbitration Unless Expressly Excluded By Parties In Arbitration Agreement
The Calcutta High Court has held that Section 9 of the Arbitration Act will apply to foreign arbitration unless it is expressly excluded by the parties to the arbitration agreement. The case was of Medima LLC V. Balasore Alloys Limited. The decision was given by Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya. Section 9 of the Act permits parties to approach Indian courts for interim protection or relief. The matter will be heard on August 11, 2021.
What do you think about this case?
Madras HC Asks Actor Dhanush To Pay 30 Lakhs For Seeking Entry Tax Exemption On Rolls Royce
The Madras High Court has cracked down on Actor and Singer Dhanush for seeking entry tax exemption on his Rolls Royce and asked him to pay Rupees 30 Lakhs within 48 hours. This was with regards to the writ petition filed by the actor in 2015 related to the payment of entry tax on a Rolls Royce car purchased from the United Kingdom. The decision was given by Justice S M Subramaniam. The Court remarked that rich and affluent people would ply their luxury vehicles on the streets of Tamil Nadu and refuse to pay the taxes and this leads to a loss of revenue for the state.
What do you think about this case?
Centre Introduces Taxation Laws Amendment Bill To Nullify Retrospective Tax Demand
The Union Ministry of Finance on Thursday introduced the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill,s 2021 in the Lok Sabha to nullify the effect of the amendment brought by Finance Act 2012 to impose tax liability on gains arising from indirect transfer of Indian assets with retrospective effect. The 2012 amendment was passed to overturn the Supreme Court verdict in the Vodafone case, which held that gains arisingfrom indirect transfer of Indian assets are not taxable under the then existing provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill proposes to amend the Income Tax Act to state that the effect of the 2012 amendment will be prospective in nature.
What do you think about this case?
SC: Cross Objection Not Necessary To Challenge Adverse Findings
The case was of Saurav Jain V. A B P Design. The case was heard by Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice M R Shah. In this case, it was held that the plea of a bar or lack of jurisdiction can be entertained at any stage, since an order or decree passed without jurisdiction is honest in law. The Court also discussed the applicability of the principle in Order XLI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure under Article 136 of the Constitution.
What do you think about this case?
Dalit Girl Raped By Priest And Forcefully Cremated
A 9 year old Dalit girl was allegedly raped, murdered and cremated by the attackers in South West Delhi on Sunday. All that was left of her for the forensic team to collect were her legs, apart from her ashes. Four suspects were arrested Monday — a priest, Radhe Shyam, along with Laxmi Narayan and Kuldeep, who worked with the priest, and Salim, a resident of the area — a day after the child’s mother identified them. The accused have been charged under Sections 376 (rape), 302 (murder), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 204 (destruction of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) apart from the relevant sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the SC/ST Act.
What do you think about this case?
Allahabad High Court Questions DM For Slapping Gangster Act Against Lady For 2 Pending Cases
In a peculiar case, as noted by the Allahabad High Court, a woman has been charged under the Gangster Act [The Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986], for simply having 2 pending criminal cases against her. The Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh sought a personal affidavit from the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, explaining as to under what circumstances, a lady (the applicant) against whom only two cases are pending, has been made a criminal under the Gangster Act. The matter has been posted for hearing on August 17, 2021. The case was of Smt. Aalia V. State of UP.
What do you think about this case?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
