text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
2.That the petitioners had agreed to sponsor only 26 episodes whereas the respondents had agreed to produce 52 episodes and had given a firm commitment to that effect to Doordarshan as is clear from the letter dated 12 July 1984 sent by the respondents to Doordarshan Ratio |
The trial court thus rightly noted that there was no agency between the parties Ratio |
3.That the titles of each episode indicated that respondent No.2 is the producer of the said serial and the petitioners are only the sponsors Ratio |
As late as on 22 April 1985,the petitioners communicated their displeasure on this display in the episodes as to the titles Ratio |
However,the titles continued to show Mr Ratio |
S.S.Oberoi as the producer of the serial and the petitioners did not withhold payments Ratio |
4.That the courts below have refuted the claim of the petitioners that the bill dated 19 March 1984 establishes the fact that the production work had been started by the respondents at the behest of the petitioners Ratio |
It has been proved that the said bill was ante-dated and raised by the respondents in July,1984 ostensibly for the purpose of benefiting the petitioners for their obtaining tax concessions Ratio |
5.That the Doordarshan,which have been impleaded as a party,in their written statement stated that they recognize the respondents as producers of the said serial and recognize the petitioners as sponsors only Ratio |
6.That the evidence of Mr Ratio |
S.S.Gill,who gave evidence on behalf of the Information & Broadcasting Ministry that he was not acquainted with Mr Ratio |
Pendharkar and that Doordarshan had no direct connection with the petitioners but only with the respondents as producers or the Director stood un-impeached Ratio |
In his further evidence,Mr Ratio |
Gill stated that some time in the month of May/June,1984 he had met Kundan Shah and requested to make a comedy serial for Doordarshan which clearly indicated that it is only the respondents who were dealing with Doordarshan Ratio |
7.That the video rights were assigned to Esquire Distributing & Servicing Pvt Ratio |
Ltd.by the respondents pursuant to letters dated 14 December 1984 and 15 November 1985 and had received royalty for the video rights and the original U-matic cassettes were returned to them by Esquire Distributing & Servicing Pvt Ratio |
Ltd.as their property Ratio |
8.That there was no transfer of rights in favour of the petitioners by the respondents in the aforesaid letters and no consideration whatsoever was paid to the respondents for issuing the said letters which have no legal consequences and it was after the petitioners received the letter dated 19 October 1985 from Esquir... |
Ltd.that the respondents were asked by the petitioners to issue another letter in this regard Ratio |
Thus the pleadings and the evidence on record clearly indicated that the respondents were not the agents of the petitioners for the purpose of producing the said serial Ratio |
The aggregate amount of Rs.76.50 lakhs which was paid to the respondents for 60 episodes is not the amount for cost of production but the fixed price for sponsoring the said serial in order to link up their advertisement with the serial and avail substantial benefit of concessional rate under the scheme envisaged by Do... |
The respondents were not liable to render accounts to the petitioners who paid them a fixed sum for sponsoring the programme Ratio |
If the expenses were less,the petitioners did not ask for a refund and the profit or loss was entirely of the respondents Ratio |
It is clear that the bills that have been raised were only to accommodate the petitioners from the circumstances narrated above Ratio |
However,the learned counsel for the petitioners made elaborate reference to the Income Tax Act,1961 and the provisions whether such availment of benefit could be taken or not pursuant to the amendment effected to the provisions relating to computation of business income at different stages may not be very germane to th... |
It is probable that the respondents had obliged the petitioners by issuing these bills because the bills cannot be read in isolation but with reference to surrounding circumstances Ratio |
Therefore,the view taken by the courts below in this regard appears to be correct Ratio |
So far as the contentions raised on the basis of S.17 of the Copyright Act is concerned,it is clear that the petitioners were not able to establish that the respondent Nos.1 to 4 produced the said serial (1) as the agents of the petitioners; (2) in the course of their employment with the petitioners; (3) for valuable c... |
When these factors had not been established and the suit is itself not dependent on the interpretation of S.17 of the Copyright Act,pleadings and issues raised did not attract the same Ratio |
On appreciation of evidence,the courts below have come to the conclusion that the respondents did not make the said serial for valuable consideration at the instance of the petitioners and in view of the findings of fact,the claim of copyright or ownership in respect of the serial u/s.17(b) and (c) would not arise at a... |
Thus we find absolutely no merit in this petition RPC |
We decline to interfere with the order made by the High Court affirming the decree of the trial court RPC |
Petition dismissed RPC |
The accused-appellant has been held guily of of-fences punishable under Section 302 and Section 376(2)(f) of Indian Penal Code FAC |
The trial Court sentenced the appellant to death under Section 302 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs RLC |
10,000, in default of payment to undergo further R.I. for 3 years, under Section 376(2)(f) IPC RLC |
While the learned Additional Sessions Judge made a reference to the High Court for confirmation of death sentence under Section 366 Cr FAC |
P.C., the appellant preferred an appeal putting in issue his conviction and sentence FAC |
The criminal reference and the criminal appeal were heard by a division bench of Rajasthan High Court FAC |
The two learned Judges, constituting the division bench, differed in their opinion FAC |
In the opinion of one learned Judge, the circumstantial evidence, on which rests the prosecution case, was not sufficient to record a finding of guilty against the appellant on any of the charges framed against him FAC |
In the opinion of the other learned Judge, the prosecution evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, as recorded by the trial Court, though, the case was not one of those 'rarest of rare cases' as would warrant death sentence being awarded to the appellant FAC |
In view of the difference of opinion, the learned acting Chief Justice assigned the case for hearing by a third Judge under Section 392 of Cr FAC |
P.C FAC |
The third learned Judge has, on an independent appreciation of evidence, recorded his own findings upholding the conviction of the accused on both the charges framed against him and thus agreeing with one of the two learned Judges constituting the division bench in conclusion FAC |
In the result, the High Court has declined the confirmation of death sentence but upheld the conviction on both the charges found proved and dismissed the appeal laying challenge to the conviction subject to modification in the sentence by substituting sentence of life imprisonment for death sentence under Section 302 ... |
The accused-appellant has filed this appeal by special leave RLC |
Kumari S, a young child aged about 5 years, was last seen at about 4 p.m. on 18th March, 1991 and thereafter she did not return home FAC |
At about 7 a.m. on 19th March 1991, Kishori Lal, PW4 informed BD (PW2), the unfortunate father of S, that dead body of a girl was lying near Mohalla Basera on the outskirts of village Kotputli FAC |
BD rushed to the place only to find that the dead body was of none else than his own daughter S. Blood was oozing out from her mouth and private parts FAC |
A noose was also found around her neck FAC |
At 7.25 a.m. on 19.3.1991 first information report was lodged by BD at police station Kotputli FAC |
Offence was registered under Sections 302 and 376 IPC FAC |
The inves-tigation commenced FAC |
The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination which was performed at 9.30 a.m., on the same day, by a medical board of three doctors FAC |
It was found that the victim was brutally ravished and thereafter killed FAC |
According to the medical opinion the probable cause of death of S was shock produced due to vaginal trauma and rupture of post- fornix along with asphyxia due to ligature around the neck FAC |
All injuries found on the person of the victim could be around 6 of 24 hours old prior to the time of post-mortem examina-tion FAC |
The vaginal injuries, clotted blood and injuries to post-fornix were indica-tive of rape having been committed on the victim FAC |
The clothes were removed from the dead body and seized FAC |
Slides of vaginal swab were prepared for cyto-chemical analysis for blood and seminal stains FAC |
The forensic science laboratory confirmed presence of Group-B blood on the clothes of deceased FAC |
The accused was arrested on 3.4.1991 on suspicion FAC |
On 4.4.1991, he was medically examined FAC |
There was no injury on his private parts or on any other part of body FAC |
The clothes on his person did not have any blood or seminal stains FAC |
He was a grown up male of 21 years and capable of performing sexual intercourse FAC |
On 5.4.1991, at about 12.30 p.m., he gave an information Exbt FAC |
P/23 FAC |
and in confirmation of the information led the police to a dry well wherefrom an underwear and baniyan wrapped in a newspaper dated 18.3.1991 were recovered FAC |
The clothes so recovered were sent to forensic science laboratory FAC |
According to report Exbt FAC |
P/27 FAC |
human semen was detected on underwear FAC |
P/30 of forensic science laboratory human blood of group 'B' was detected on the underwear FAC |
The accused was challaned and charge-sheeted for the offences as already stated hereinabove FAC |
The prosecution examined 21 witnesses in all FAC |
It is not necessary here to extensively deal with the evidence adduced by the prosecution FAC |
Suffice it to observe that there is no direct evidence connecting the accused with the offences charged FAC |
The prosecution case depends on circumstantial evidence FAC |
The pieces of circumstantial evidence which have been found proved and held as forging an incriminating chain against the accused are as under :- (i) last seen together; (ii) abnormal conduct of the accused; (iii) recovery of underwear and baniyan (which was found to be stained with semen and blood group 'B' which is a... |
We would proceed to examine each of the pieces of incriminating circumstantial evidence so as to find out if each one of the circumstantial evidence is proved individually and whether collectively it forges such a chain of incriminating circumstances as would fasten the guilt on the accused beyond by shadow of reasonab... |
In Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal, [1994] 2 SCC 220 1994 Indlaw SC 1743, (wherein one of us, Dr. A.S. Anand, J., as His Lordship then was, spoke for the Bench PRE |
this Court held as under : "In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn have not only to be fully established but also that all the circumstances so established should be of a conclusive nature and consistent only with the hypoth-esis of the guilt of t... |
Those circumstances should not be capable of being explained by any other hypothesis except the guilt of the accused and the chain of the evidence must be so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the belief consistent with the innocence of the accused PRE |
It needs no reminder that legally estab-lished circumstances and not merely indignation of the court can form the basis of conviction and the more serious the crime, the greater should be the care taken to scrutinize the evidence lest suspicion takes the place of proof PRE |
In Dhananjoy Chatterjee's case 1994 Indlaw SC 1743 (supra), the decision of this Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, [1984] 4 SCC 116 1984 Indlaw SC 432, was relied on PRE |
In the later case, it was also held that a false explanation or false plea taken by the accused can be used as an additional link in the chain of circumstantial evidence subject to satisfication of three essential conditions, namely (i) various links in the chain of evidence led by the prosecution have been satisfactor... |
i PRE |
Last seen together : On the point of last seen together there is solitary testimony of a child witness Shalu, PW7, aged about 4 years on 23.3.1992, the date of her examination in the court PRE |
On asking a few questions by way of preliminary examination the learned Trial Judge found that the witness could 'answer some of the questions PRE |
She stated that, accompanied by Phukla-another young girl, a cousin of hers, and S the deceased, she had gone to purchase balloon from the shop of Goma PRE |
While returning the accused told S that her feet were mudstained and he would wash her feet and saying so he took S inside his house, leaving behind the two girls, including Shalu PW7, who returned to their houses leaving S behind PRE |
It is this testimony which has been relied upon by the Trial Court as also by the High Court as the evidence of 'last seen together Ratio |
The witness is a child witness of very tender age and examined in the Court almost a year after the date of the incident Ratio |
We have very carefully read the statement of this witness Ratio |
There is nothing in her statement to suggest that what she is narrating in the court is the story of a day soon before the date and time of the incident or the date on which dead body of S was found Ratio |
To constitute evidence of last seen together, the evidence must definitely permit an inference being drawn that the victim and the accused were seen together at a point of time in close proximity with the time and date of the commission of crime Ratio |
From the evi-dence of Shalu, PW7 such an inference cannot be drawn Ratio |
Goma, to whose shop the three girls had gone to buy balloon, has not been examined Ratio |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.