The Revival of Ray LXI

“In every case where a statute inflicts a penalty for doing an act, though the act be not prohibited, yet the thing is unlawful, because it is not intended that a statute would inflict a penalty for a lawful act. It is a question of construction in each case whether the Legislature intended to prohibit […]

Read more "The Revival of Ray LXI"

The Question of Apparent Conflict

One of the meanings of the expression ‘inconsistent’, as approved by this Court, is: mutually repugnant or contradictory. Constitution itself has used the words ‘inconsistency’ and ‘repugnancy’ interchangeably. Things are inconsistent when they cannot stand together at the same time and one law is inconsistent with another law when the command or power or provision […]

Read more "The Question of Apparent Conflict"

Cadaveric Consequences in Interpretation

See, Bennion on Statutory Interpretation, 5th Edition. The concept of ‘absurdity’ in the context of interpretation of statutes is construed to include any result which is unworkable, impracticable, illogical, futile or pointless, artificial, or productive of a disproportionate counter mischief. Logic referred to herein is not formal or syllogistic logic, but acceptance that enacted law […]

Read more "Cadaveric Consequences in Interpretation"

Ratio Decidendi II

It is settled law, only the ratio decidendi is binding as a precedent. Thus, in B. Shama Rao v. Union Territory, Pondicherry, (1967) 2 SCR 650 Majority Judgment of Shelat J, speaking for himself and other Two Learned Judges held: “It is trite to say, a decision is binding not because of its conclusion but […]

Read more "Ratio Decidendi II"

Referred to Larger Bench XXV: Doctrine of Separability of Arbitration Agreement

It is well settled, an Arbitration Agreement is distinct and separate; independent from the substantive commercial contract in which it is embedded. Autonomy of Arbitration Agreement is based on twin concepts of separability and kompetenz – kompetenz; which, though inter-related, are distinct. Doctrine of Separability of Arbitration Agreement connotes, invalidity, ineffectiveness or termination of the […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XXV: Doctrine of Separability of Arbitration Agreement"

Principles of Natural Justice VII / The Revival of Ray LVIII

The core issue: not to say, consultation should be open ended/indefinite or Govt. must release all information; disclosure of certain information may violate right to privacy of individuals/cause breach of national security/impinge on confidentiality; information may be abridged or even denied for larger public interest; there should be good grounds and justification to withhold information; […]

Read more "Principles of Natural Justice VII / The Revival of Ray LVIII"

Timing of Votes

The disqualification under Section 8 of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 is relatable to Article 191(1)(e). Therefore, any interpretation to Section 8 should be in sync with the constitutional scheme. Once the period of disqualification starts running, the seat, hitherto held by the person disqualified, becomes vacant by virtue of Article 190(3). His […]

Read more "Timing of Votes"

Section 34 of The Arbitration Act IV / Arbitral Award Dissent

Mr. Peter Leaver [Queen’s Counsel], Justice V.K. Gupta [Retd.] and Mr. Anthony Houghton [Senior Counsel] delivered their International Arbitral Award in New Delhi, on 12.05.2014. Majority Award [Mr. Peter Leaver and Mr. Anthony Houghton] was in favor of Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pty Ltd. and Dissenting Award [Justice V.K. Gupta] dismissed the claim of Anglo […]

Read more "Section 34 of The Arbitration Act IV / Arbitral Award Dissent"

Section 53 of The Competition Act / Aggrieved Person II / The Revival of Ray LVII

Samir Agarwal sought, by an information filed, CCI to initiate an inquiry, under Section 26(2) of The Competition Act, 2002, into the alleged anti-competitive conduct of Ola and Uber. Shri Rajshekhar Rao, appearing on behalf of Ola, submitted, Samir cannot be said to be a ‘person aggrieved’ for the purpose of sections 53B and 53T. […]

Read more "Section 53 of The Competition Act / Aggrieved Person II / The Revival of Ray LVII"

The Revival of Ray LIV

Court should be over­ cautious to place reliance on a piece of evidence with which the concerned witness has not been confronted despite an opportunity to do so. As held by this Court in Sita Ram Bhau Patil v. Ramchandra Nago Patil, (1977) 2 SCC 49 an admission must not only be proved but also […]

Read more "The Revival of Ray LIV"

Default Bail I

The 90 day period indicated by the first proviso to Section 167(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be extended up to a maximum period of 180 days under the first proviso in Section 43D(2)(b) of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. As long as an application, which need not even be in […]

Read more "Default Bail I"

Section 90, Indian Penal Code

A ‘consent’ given under fear of injury is not a ‘consent’ in the eyes of law. We are not persuaded to accept the solitary statement, at the time of the first alleged offence, ‘consent’ was obtained under fear of injury. A ‘consent’ given under a misconception of fact is no ‘consent’ in the eyes of […]

Read more "Section 90, Indian Penal Code"