[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Yes, the information about the current status of all cases filed in the Supreme Court (including an SLP) is easily available online. You can check the status of your SLP online at any time, without any password. This information is available online to the public at large; any person can access this information even if he has not filed a case in the Supreme Court.

Online information about the disposed of and pending cases in the Supreme Court can be accessed at the following link:

http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/casestatus_new/caseno_new_alt.asp

Visit this website and from the left-side vertical menu bar, select the criterion on the basis of which you want to find your case, such as the Case No., Title of the parties (such as petitioner or respondent), Advocate name, High Court Case No. (against which SLP / appeal has been filed in the Supreme Court) or Diary No. For example, if you know your Case No., then select it and on the next page, select Case Type (i.e., whether it is SLP Civil or SLP Criminal, Writ Petition Civil, etc.), Case No. and Case Year, and click the Submit button. You should get the full details of your case, including the daily orders that have been passed in your case. You can download copies of these orders that might have been passed in your case. The next date in your case is also displayed on this case status page. It is all free.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Please note that if you are named as an accused person in the charge sheet filed by police, then you have a right to receive a copy of the charge sheet along with all relevant papers, including statements of the witnesses and copies of other documents annexed thereto. You do not have to pay any charges for this purpose and the copy has to be given immediately after filing of the charge sheet. This right has been provided under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., which is reproduced below:

“207. Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents.— In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following:—

(i) the police report;

(ii) the first information report recorded under Section 154;

(iii) the statements recorded under sub-section (3) of Section 161 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses, excluding therefrom any part in regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub-section (6) of Section 173;

(iv) the confessions and statements, if any, recorded under Section 164;

(v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub-section (5) of Section 173:

Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused:

Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in Court.”

It is pertinent to point out that the words “police report” in above section refer to the “charge sheet”.

Usually, a copy of the charge sheet along with other documents is provided to the accused by the police after filing of the charge sheet. In this regard, Section 173(7) of Cr.P.C. is also relevant which provides that:

“(7) Where the police officer investigating the case finds it convenient so to do, he may furnish to the accused copies of all or any of the documents referred to in sub-section (5).”

Therefore, you would be able to get the copy of the charge sheet after it is filed by police in the court. However, the charge sheet is not available online (but, the FIR may be available online nowadays due to a Supreme Court order). Charge sheet is supplied in person.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Offence under Section 354 of the IPC, which defines the offence of “Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty” is a non-bailable offence and it is a cognizable offence. Further, this offence is a non-compoundable offence.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Relevant extracts from Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are given below:

“142. Cognizance of offences.— (1)] Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),—

(a) no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be, the holder in due course of the cheque;

(b) such complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138:

Provided that the cognizance of a complaint may be taken by the court after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period.”

It is clear from the above that the normal limitation period for filing a complaint in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Act is one month from the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138. This means one month from the date on which the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the amount of money to the payee within 15 days of the receipt of the notice.

However, it is also clear from the above that the court has the power to condone the delay in filing the complaint of cheque bounce beyond the above one month time limit, if the complainant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within the said period of one month.

There is no limit mentioned in the above legal provision up to which the delay can be condoned. This basically means that theoretically there is no time limit for delay which can be condoned. However, in practice, it has to be a reasonable delay which can be satisfactorily explained by the complainant.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

When a complaint with regard to the commission of a cognizable offence is given to the police station, the police registers a First Information Report (FIR) on the basis of such complaint, in accordance with Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Such report under Section 154 Cr.P.C. is popularly called FIR. Thereafter, investigation is conducted by police in the offence(s) mentioned in such FIR. On completion of the investigation, if the police finds sufficient evidence in support of the offence(s) mentioned in FIR, it files charge sheet before the court under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the accused persons. Meanwhile, during investigation, police may also arrest the accused persons. The prosecution or trial in such a case is conducted by the State (through public prosecutor, etc.).

On the other hand, where a complaint is directly submitted in the court by a person and if the court takes cognizance of the same and proceeds further on the basis of such complaint, it is generally called private complaint. A private complaint may in respect of a cognizable offence or a non-cognizable offence. The prosecution or the trial against the accused persons is conducted in such a case by the complainant himself (or through his advocate), who has filed such private complaint.

What is indicated above is the basic difference between the FIR and private complaint.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

A warrant case and a summons case are defined in Section 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

As per clause (x) of Section 2 of the Cr.P.C., a warrant case is defined as a case relating to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years.

And, as per clause (w) of Section 2 of the Cr.P.C. defines a summons case to be a case relating to an offence, which is not a warrant case.

So, the basic difference between the two is that summons case relates to a smaller offence where the punishment may be up to two years’ imprisonment. Other cases, which are comparatively serious cases, are called warrant cases.

The procedure for trial of a warrant case by Magistrate is laid down in Chapter 19 of Cr.P.C., from Sections 238 to 250 of Cr.P.C.

And, the procedure for trial of a summons case by Magistrates is laid down in Chapter 20 of Cr.P.C., from Sections 251 to 259 of Cr.P.C.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

The words “investigation” and “inquiry” are defined in Section 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code as under:

(g) “inquiry” means every inquiry, other than a trial, conducted under this Code by a Magistrate or Court;

(h) “investigation” includes all the proceedings under this Code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is authorised by a Magistrate in this behalf;

So, investigation is conducted by police for collection of evidence in a criminal case.

On the other hand, inquiry is any proceedings conducted by a court or Magistrate, other than a trial.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Section 185 of the Companies Act, 2013, imposes restrictions on the grant of loan by a company to a director of the company and to persons in whom directors are interested (such as his relatives).

However, there are no restrictions on a Private Limited Company to grant loan to any other shareholder of the company (who is not a director of the company or a person in whom a director is interested) if the conditions mentioned in Section 186 of the Companies Act are fulfilled, which section is reproduced below:

“186. Loan and investment by company.—(1) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in this Act, a company shall unless otherwise prescribed, make investment through not more than two layers of investment companies:

Provided that the provisions of this sub-section shall not affect,—

(i) a company from acquiring any other company incorporated in a country outside India if such other company has investment subsidiaries beyond two layers as per the laws of such country;

(ii) a subsidiary company from having any investment subsidiary for the purposes of meeting the requirements under any law or under any rule or regulation framed under any law for the time being in force.

(2) No company shall directly or indirectly—

(a) give any loan to any person or other body corporate;

(b) give any guarantee or provide security in connection with a loan to any other body corporate or person; and

(c) acquire by way of subscription, purchase or otherwise, the securities of any other body corporate,

exceeding sixty per cent of its paid-up share capital, free reserves and securities premium account or one hundred per cent of its free reserves and securities premium account, whichever is more.

(3) Where the giving of any loan or guarantee or providing any security or the acquisition under sub-section (2) exceeds the limits specified in that sub-section, prior approval by means of a special resolution passed at a general meeting shall be necessary.

(4) The company shall disclose to the members in the financial statement the full particulars of the loans given, investment made or guarantee given or security provided and the purpose for which the loan or guarantee or security is proposed to be utilised by the recipient of the loan or guarantee or security.

(5) No investment shall be made or loan or guarantee or security given by the company unless the resolution sanctioning it is passed at a meeting of the Board with the consent of all the directors present at the meeting and the prior approval of the public financial institution concerned where any term loan is subsisting, is obtained:

Provided that prior approval of a public financial institution shall not be required where the aggregate of the loans and investments so far made, the amount for which guarantee or security so far provided to or in all other bodies corporate, along with the investments, loans, guarantee or security proposed to be made or given does not exceed the limit as specified in sub-section (2), and there is no default in repayment of loan instalments or payment of interest thereon as per the terms and conditions of such loan to the public financial institution.

(6) No company, which is registered under Section 12 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992) and covered under such class or classes of companies as may be prescribed, shall take inter-corporate loan or deposits exceeding the prescribed limit and such company shall furnish in its financial statement the details of the loan or deposits.

(7) No loan shall be given under this section at a rate of interest lower than the prevailing yield of one year, three year, five year or ten year Government Security closest to the tenor of the loan.

(8) No company which is in default in the repayment of any deposits accepted before or after the commencement of this Act or in payment of interest thereon, shall give any loan or give any guarantee or provide any security or make an acquisition till such default is subsisting.

(9) Every company giving loan or giving a guarantee or providing security or making an acquisition under this section shall keep a register which shall contain such particulars and shall be maintained in such manner as may be prescribed.

(10) The register referred to in sub-section (9) shall be kept at the registered office of the company and —

(a) shall be open to inspection at such office; and

(b) extracts may be taken therefrom by any member, and copies thereof may be furnished to any member of the company on payment of such fees as may be prescribed.

(11) Nothing contained in this section, except sub-section (1), shall apply—

(a) to a loan made, guarantee given or security provided by a banking company or an insurance company or a housing finance company in the ordinary course of its business or a company engaged in the business of financing of companies or of providing infrastructural facilities;

(b) to any acquisition —

(i) made by a non-banking financial company registered under Chapter III-B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934) and whose principal business is acquisition of securities:

Provided that exemption to non-banking financial company shall be in respect of its investment and lending activities;

(ii) made by a company whose principal business is the acquisition of securities;

(iii) of shares allotted in pursuance of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 62.

(iv) made by a banking company or an insurance company or a housing finance company, making acquisition of securities in the ordinary course of its business.

(12) The Central Government may make rules for the purposes of this section.

(13) If a company contravenes the provisions of this section, the company shall be punishable with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees but which may extend to five lakh rupees and every officer of the company who is in default shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees but which may extend to one lakh rupees.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,—

(a) the expression “investment company” means a company whose principal business is the acquisition of shares, debentures or other securities;

(b) the expression “infrastructure facilities” means the facilities specified in Schedule VI.”

 

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

As per the schedule of GST rates for services as approved by GST council on 19 May 2017, following items are provided under Sr. No. 82 of the heading of “Service Tax Exemptions to be continued in GST as decided by GST Council”:

(i) Health care services by a clinical establishment, an authorised medical practitioner or para-medics;

(ii) Services provided by way of transportation of a patient in an ambulance, other than those specified in (i) above;

In view of this, it is clear that health care services by hospitals and doctors are exempt from the GST. Please mark the word “services”.

But, if a doctor or hospital is also providing medicines to the patients, then such medicines would not be covered within the word “services” but would rather be covered under “goods”. Now, for medicines as goods, GST is applicable generally at the rate of 5%. Therefore, I am of the opinion that GST may be applicable on such medicines which are supplied by a doctor or a hospital to their patients, if the gross value of such supplies is above the exempted threshold value.

As regards various types of medical tests (such as pathological tests) which are conducted in the hospital or by a doctor, they are also in the form of “services” and not “goods”. There is no separate category shown for such medical tests. Therefore, they can be included within the above health care services provided by doctors and hospitals under Sr. No. 82, which is exempted from GST. Therefore, I think there would be no GST on such medical tests conducted by doctors and hospitals.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Usually, a Government job is considered to be a full-time job even if you are required to work only for a few hours. It requires your complete devotion and dedication.

Therefore, even if the college timings for the LL.B. course that you want to pursue are beyond the office hours of the Government job and are not in conflict with the Government job, it may still be advisable to obtain permission from the Government or the competent authority in this regard. It is better to take prior permission in order to avoid future complications. Generally speaking, the Government may permit you for pursuing this course if it finds that your job will not be adversely affected by the same.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

You may have to file the Income Tax Return for the relevant financial year / assessment year. You can show the details of the income, including the salary received from your employer, and also the TDS deducted by him. If the IT Return shows that you have paid more tax (including by way of TDS) than what was due from you, then you will get refund from the Income Tax Department. If you file the online IT return, nowadays the IT department is very quick in refunding the extra tax paid by you, if any. It may come to your bank, may be, within a month itself.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., maintenance can be ordered to be paid to a wife, only if she is unable to maintain herself. If the wife is working in permanent job of an officer in a nationalised bank and is getting a good amount of Rs. 60,000 per month, then that clearly implies that she can maintain herself. Therefore, it may not be possible to get an order of maintenance in favour of the wife under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., more so, when you say that the husband is also earning almost the same amount.

However, if the children are living with the wife and there is substantial amount being spent on their upkeep and education, etc., then perhaps maintenance can de demanded by her in respect of such children. At least some contribution for the expenses of the children can be demanded from the husband in the form of maintenance of the children.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Under the provisions of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), anticipatory bail can be granted only in respect of a non-bailable offence.

On the other hand, the offence of stalking under Section 354-D of IPC is a bailable offence.

Therefore, it is not possible to get anticipatory bail in a case under Section 354-D IPC.

However, since this offence is a bailable offence, getting bail in this case is a matter of right under Section 436 of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is as good as getting an anticipatory bail since you get the right to be released on bail on being arrested for this offence. This is what would have happened also in the case where one gets anticipatory bail.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Please note that under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the period of limitation for filing an application for setting aside an arbitral award is three months. Further, under this section, the court has the power to entertain such an application within a further period of 30 days if sufficient cause is shown for the delay. Thus, a total of about 120 days is available to file an application for setting aside the arbitral award. No further delay can be condoned under the said Act.

You have said that in your case the delay is already about six months, which is beyond the maximum period permissible under Section 34 of the said Act.

One possibility could have been filing an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act which lays down as under:

“5. Extension of prescribed period in certain cases.—Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.

Explanation.—The fact that the appellant or the applicant was misled by any order, practice or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period may be sufficient cause within the meaning of this section.”

It is pertinent to mention that Section 43 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act specifically states that the Limitation Act will apply to arbitrations. Therefore, Section 5 of the Limitation Act should perhaps have been applicable.

However, in the case of State of Goa v. Western Builders, (2006) 6 SCC 239 : AIR 2006 SC 2525, the Supreme Court has ruled out this possibility also, by holding that:

“…by virtue of Section 43 of the Act of 1996 the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to the Act of 1996 but by virtue of sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Limitation Act, if any other period has been prescribed under the special enactment for moving the application or otherwise then that period of limitation will govern the proceedings under that Act, and not the provisions of the Limitation Act. In the present case under the Act of 1996 for setting aside the award on any of the grounds mentioned in sub-section (2) of Section 34 the period of limitation has been prescribed and that will govern. Likewise, the period of condonation of delay i.e. 30 days in the proviso.”

“Therefore, by virtue of sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Limitation Act what is excluded is the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act and under Section 3 read with the Schedule which prescribes the period for moving application.”

This judgment of the Supreme Court was subsequently followed in certain other judgments of the Supreme Court.

In view of these reasons, the maximum period for making an application for setting aside an arbitral award would be 3 months plus 30 days, which is about 120 days. Thereafter, it is not possible to file such application.

In your case, thus, you have exhausted this possibility.

In consultation with your advocate, you may perhaps consider filing a writ petition or may be a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, citing the special reasons in your case by showing that you never got any information about the arbitration proceedings or about the arbitral award earlier; though I may caution you that the chances of success in these proceedings will also be quite limited.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

No appeal can be filed under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code against an order passed under Section 151 of the CPC which is passed in exercise of the inherent powers of the court as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. There is no such provision in Sections 104 or 105 of CPC, which relate to appeal from orders.

In the case of Keshardeo Chamria v. Radha Kissen Chamria, 1953 SCR 136 : AIR 1953 SC 23, a 4-judge bench of the Supreme Court held as under:

“It was not contended and could not be seriously urged, that an order under Section 151 simpliciter is appealable. Under the Code of Civil Procedure certain specific orders mentioned in Section 104 and Order 43 Rule 1, only are appealable and no appeal lies from any other orders (vide Section 105 CPC). An order made under Section 151 is not included in the category of appealable orders.”

Likewise, Allahabad high court has observed in the case of Zila Parishad, Budaun And Ors. vs Brahma Rishi Sharma, AIR 1970 All 376, that no appeal lies against an order under Section 151. be it ex parte or otherwise.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Author]

Posts