IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
B. BHATTACHARJEE
Subbayan Nagarajan S/o Late Shri Karuppya Nagarajan – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B. BHATTACHARJEE, J.
1. This set of two criminal petitions has been filed challenging the FIR No. 0248/2023 dated 11-09-2023 by raising common ground and identical prayers have been made in both the petitions. Hence, both the criminal petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.
1.1 Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Abhishek K. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl. Petn. No. 61 of 2024. Mr. S.P. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M. Lyngdoh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl. Petn. No. 60 of 2024 has adopted the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel in Crl. Petn. No. 61 of 2024. Also heard Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG assisted by Mr. E.R. Chyne, learned GA, appearing for the State-respondent in both the cases.
2. The petitioners in both the criminal petitions are engaged in lottery business of distribution, marketing and sale of state organized lotteries of the State of Sikkim and Nagaland in the State of Meghalaya.
3. On 11-09-2023, an FIR was registered by the Sadar Police Station, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong against the petitioners at the instance of
Indian Oil Coron. vs. NEPC India Ltd and Others
Mahmood Ali and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Rajiv Thapar and Others vs. Madan Lal Kapoor
Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy and Another vs. Sudha Seetharam and Another
Subramanian Swamy vs. Union of India
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.