Back
(2009) 17 Supreme Court Cases 90
K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI., MARKANDEY KATJU AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.
ARCHBISHOP RAPHAEL CHEENATH S.Y.D. (3) – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER – Respondents.
WP (C) No. 404 of 2008
Decided on : January 5, 2009
[Para 3]
ORDER
1. This Court by an order passed on 22-10-20081 indicated that sufficient paramilitary forces be deployed in the State of Orissa till December 2008. Learned counsel for the State submits that still these forces are required in f the State to maintain the law and order situation and even if removal of a group of battalion is necessary the same should be done in a phased manner.
2. We make it clear that the State Government may have discussions with the Home Secretary of the Home Ministry and take an appropriate decision having regard to the law and order situation prevailing in the State for protection of minorities in the State.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stated that a large number of churches have been demolished and the State Government is giving meagre amount by way of compensation. Some churches and religious places were in existence which are being destroyed and the State Government is not giving any compensation on the ground that there is some dispute regarding the land. The Government may formulate a scheme regarding these religious places and take appropriate decision.
4. Adjourned by six weeks.
Court Masters
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.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
