V.P.TIPNIS, K.SUKUMARAN
Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. . & another – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & others – Respondent
K. SUKUMARAN, J.:---Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company (Pvt.) Ltd., (a long name; we shall refer it hereafter as "Godrej") had an encounter with the Excise Wing of the Central Revenue. It was somewhat exhausting and exhaustive. Every weapon in the armoury, from sound missiles to sterile spears, were employed. On the eve of the ides of March of 1990, the war was over. Atleat so thought Godrej. It was, however, soon disillusioned. The Union of India wants to open another front. That is not part of an adverserial affront, assures the Union. Court itself could open the front, for the crime complained of, is one against administration of justice itself. Everythng is fair in love and war it is generally said. That is not the rule within the sanctified precincts of the courts of Law. It has been declared in explicit terms in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (abbreviated as I.P.C.). The responsibility for overseeing the enforcement of that salutary statutory provision rests with the Court; for a sanction for such legal action is to be granted by the Court. The Court itself is the custodian of the key, and the controller of the arena. That is an indication of the seriousness attached
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.