1. Special Leave Petition challenging an impugned judgment. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2021 Supreme(SC) 410
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, VINEET SARAN, JJ.
THE STATE OF KERALA - Petitioner
VERSUS
ANIL KUMAR & ORS. – Respondent
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 2256/2021
Decided On : 17-03-2021
Important Points
The court's decision not to interfere in the impugned judgment and the specific observations regarding the learned Single Judge's remarks.
Subject
Civil Law - Appeals and Review
Headnote
Court's Observations - Impugned Judgment - The court observed that the observations made by the learned Single Judge in para 20 of the impugned order shall be ignored by the Court. The directions given, if any, shall not be given effect to. They are issued in the facts of this case only. They should not be taken as general in nature.
Fact of the Case:
The court heard the petitioner's counsel and found no ground to interfere in the impugned judgment. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of with the observation mentioned.
Finding of the Court:
The court did not find any ground to interfere in the impugned judgment and disposed of the Special Leave Petition with specific observations regarding the learned Single Judge's remarks.
Issues: The issue was whether to interfere in the impugned judgment and the observations made by the learned Single Judge.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided not to interfere in the impugned judgment and issued specific observations regarding the learned Single Judge's remarks, stating that they should be ignored and not taken as general in nature.
Final Decision: The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of with an observation that the observations made by the learned Single Judge in para 20 of the impugned order shall be ignored by the Court. The directions given, if any, shall not be given effect to. They are issued in the facts of this case only. They should not be taken as general in nature.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
practice and procedure
-
appellate jurisdiction
- special leave petition (Para 2)
-
appellate jurisdiction
Advocates Appeared:
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Basanth R., Sr. Adv. Mr. Suman Chakravarthi, Adv. Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Ms. Anu K. Joy, Adv. Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Basanth R., Sr. Adv. Mr. Suman Chakravarthi, Adv. Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Ms. Anu K. Joy, Adv. Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
Table of Contents
2. No grounds found to interfere with the impugned judgment; specific observations and directions of the lower court are limited to the case facts and not general. (Para 2 )
3. Observations and directions in a judgment may be restricted to the specific facts of the case and not treated as general in nature. (Para 2 )
4. Special Leave Petition disposed of without interference, with directions to ignore specific observations in the lower court's order. (Para 2 )
5. Can directions and observations in a judgment be limited to the facts of a specific case?
Yes, the court may specify that certain directions or observations are issued based on the specific facts of a case and should not be taken as general in nature. (Para 2 )
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. We do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned judgment. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of with an observation that the observations made by the learned Single Judge in para 20 of the impugned order shall be ignored by the Court. The directions given, if any, shall not be given effect to. They are issued in the facts of this case only. They should not be taken as general in nature.
3. Pending application, if any stands disposed of accordingly.
