1996(8) Supreme 199
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. Ahmadi, C.J.I., and Sujata V. Manohar, J.
Tushar Arun Gandhi --Petitioner
versus
State of Orissa & Ors. --Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 340 of 1996
Decided on 26-11-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Respondents Nos. 3-4 : Sanjay Kapur, Rajiv Kapur, Ms. S. Kapur, Advocates.
For the Respondent No. 5 : T.C. Sharma, P. Parmeswaran and P.N. Misra, Advocates.
JUDGMENT
A.M. Ahmadi, CJI. - Shri Tushar Arun Gandhi, the Great Grandson of Mahatma Gandhi addressed a letter in the form of an appeal to one of us (the Chief Justice of India) stating that he had come to know from Press reports about the existence of an Urn containing the ashes of his late Grandfather Shri M.K. Gandhi, popularly known as Mahatma Gandhi lying in a locker in the State Bank of India, Cuttack. On learning about the same he wrote letters to the Chief Minister and the Governor of Orissa as well as the Chairman of the State Bank of India, Cuttack requesting them to enquire into the matter and, if the Press reports were correct to use their good offices to help him secure the Urn from the locker to enable him to complete the last rites as per the Hindu religious practice. Unfortunately he did not receive any reply to his letters from the Chief Minister or the Governor of Orissa but the Chairman of the State Bank of India called him and assured him that he would ascertain the facts and inform him of the outcome of his enquiry. Sometime thereafter the Chairman verbally informed him about the existence of a box stated to contain the Asthis of Mahatma Gandhi kept in safe deposit in the year 1950 by the then Secretary to the Chief Minister of Orissa. This verbal information was followed by a letter from one Shri Mehrotra wherein he gave details of how and when the Urn was deposited with the Bank. In his letter of 8th March, 1996 Shri Mehrotra states as follows:-
(i) A sealed wooden box measuring approximately 18" x 18" x 20" said to contain an urn containing the ashes of Mahatma Gandhi was deposited with our Cuttack Branch on 29.11.1950 by the then Secretary to the Hon ble Chief Minister of Orissa as a Safe Deposit Article. Safe Deposit Receipt No. 30/21 dated the 29th November 1950 was issued by the Branch.
(ii) The box is kept by the Branch with due care and reverence.
(iii) In December 1994, a letter was addressed to the Chief Minister of Orissa and discussions took up with the Secretary to the Chief Minister for withdrawal of the Safe Deposit Article, but no response was received from them.
It was further added that since the box was deposited by the State Government, they alone could decide on its disposal.
2. After receipt of this letter the petitioner once again addressed a letter to Shri J.B. Patnaik, the then Chief Minister of Orissa, Shri G. Ramanujam, the then Governor of Orissa and the Chief Secretary of the State and requested them to help him in securing the box to enable him to complete the last rites as per the Hindu religious practice. He did not receive any response to his letters and so he visited Bhubaneswar on 21st March, 1996 and met the Chief Minister who, says he, responded by saying that it was a big hoax. On further enquiry as to why he considered it a hoax he was told that according to the State Bank of India the Secretary of the then Orissa Chief Minister Shri Naba Krushna Choudhury had kept the box in a safe deposit in 1950 when there was in fact no such post of Secretary to Chief Minister in existence. He was told that there was only a Private Secretary to the Chief Minister in those days and the Government also did not have any record of the deposit of the said box with the State Bank of India. The Chief Minister is even reported to have remarked that the State Bank of India was upto some mischief and so he would order a CBI enquiry into the entire matter.
3. The Petitioner then stated that he was taken aback by what the Chief Minister informed him and was also surprised that a responsible officer of the State Bank of India was prepared to stick his neck out on such a sensitive issue and felt hurt that he did not realise the seriousness of the matter. The Chief Minister is reported to have further stated that he was proposing to order a CBI enquiry so that the ashes could be chemically tested to ascertain if they really bel
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.