Legal Dictations Dr. G. D. Bist LV Cu) Te ea Ems ¢48/66, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058 Pee cee ay M; 09810834669; 011-25553702Sais gf ay FATS seae Aye pen Ee > Aue » VON ap? 3m. “liraack,Appelan’s we ded ater thineea The Appellant martied the duper of espondent SOM] ine islamic rites and customs. Two chigien wee born yes el re bor / ‘ut of the| meets ee he mared gan itn rt mr ndfather, respondent nos. 23, and 4 mateel aunts unc Iino eilren, ett /// aged 13 years and boy aged S years ental [proceedings u/s 7.9 and 17 ofthe Guardian and (2) Wards Ac, 18901 opeintment as guardians. They alo fled application ufs a0 ofthe praying for interim protection of the persons and properties ofthe nina children and also fr an injunction restraining the appetort | from interfering or disturbing the custody ofthe nor chien. Fam [Court passed an interim order restraining the appellentom/| limerfering with the custody of the children with the respondent | [appellant challenged the order. Farly Court st aside te sald (2) order [of injunction. High Court set aside the said order and passed certain flicections Hence the present appeal was made by the sppelan inthis [court [sections 12 of the Guaralan and Wards at, 2890 empowers our to / "make such order for the ternporary custody and protection of the person of property of the minor as it thinks proper” In matters of custody, welfare of the chidren isthe sole and sing ‘yardstick by which the Court shall aes (3) the comparative welfare of ‘the eiléren is the sole and single yardstick by which the Cour shal ‘assess the comparative / merit of the partis contesting for custody ‘Therefore, while deciding the question of interim custgy, the cour must be guided by // the welfare ofthe children snceEmpowers the Court to make any order asit deems proper. With regard to /// guardianship, the prima facie case Hes favour of the father as u/s. 19 of the Ac, unless he (fathers not to be a guardian, the Court has no jurisdiction to appoint another Guardian. Respondents, cespite the / voluminous allegations leveled 28ainstthe appellant have not been abe to prove that he i not ft}here aan il est rnin taney ser oganeen ae be a a ance chy et Peay trewe i at ceyei, et ents ete encores em Shay ken arse eo Tbe Rtn rmene erin mtn etre he Sue cara tag stewie atone ct, ache ata tiereur ater ecto ci ota see wvbe rane sas ae era oer aeeseer nie Sree Soest Soren te ects sree tetra cenrecar ee Peewrekgare cach toreretne “The High Court in // its Impugned judgment had held that while vine rn sn Senta cena es Siac dsteGetcersepmant ces et cies esabann ec obesuereararae eee on [Ssh nr rn wae sts se es [acini oy coo ese tt crates tat nt cea aa fare os nar Satoneetonrete neat aoeoton ay, instead of recocdig abstract fnings questions of prim face case | thi eco ese Sonor a (onsite eee rt oa ie care dure oa nase loaf tnerean cheater sng ec Sete un he ine fir na lunfit to take care of the ctldren, the welfare of children cannot be} Ee 15/400 words) LM-7dyn Rat dst aet'M zea yo 4 Mb? We AS Nes. 4 cf tag | __ apron spel Sea tae eal ee order doted, It October, 2012 passed by the / igh Cou or te, oe he th ery oa vend wth Secon a0 ce ne Ca sn nosh We the wis! ee pes ar Poel entoetey eicty Semis te tent of artpstny tl othe appelrs fs es Paap! tor 8m stoce pul ose Sete ee hese afr, Dohontsans erie he acta mati ht eee ob eonted fr puncte of dpe ofthe peer spel = tate Peden don Fane cen appr lege ober al copestqarst asad a hace ste Ra cosprcy, hey te ufc hm cheng tr! ea Eearat oon apres meray dee rte Face ances alow esha townoctt Gare ut Etta Lat / oe, New Gc fren hepa onsen Se corset nro Sc Wt eat ev BF Ss comernr es: papsctoereea Seas tonearm ftv pound ter wth ove senor ard tow eo owner ignsin elon unrest oud be ttn od fib devvere acart peses py) poate Tre CEs of ter alegatens whch ou how hat on heb or cement carta amu wa pal ard on 8h 2 213 eee ose was dy ecued between prea fee tte ormant at rear per tear Rs [ocr wes toe pau tote sr eons tte ef | retistration of the sale deed cn or before 26th September, 2011. Gl st ategatons peed ate cep oe aot lspoelnts disputed the amount and delayed the fpeaton of the!) S218 deed. On an enguiry being made, the 2 respondent came f) Ino thet he spelt hd entered an ae el {the said property to a third person. That was the foundation 10 lodge) Ihe re ren of the FR eae Move St) Pann noe ve fornia 15/400 words) —aan: cap Zan t . ; idered by the learned Additonal Sess | eos onal eon Judge South fost Ne “yt eC oF ret Ay SEN) foctiwo 7 owed the sae byte igure de ded 10 peel 3 March, 2012 the aloresald oder wasasndedtctectictieece A Te ede. | ii amanda land that there was no change in the circumstances, 2nd second, he Jappication for grant of anticipatory bail coud. not have be) entertained by the learned Adon) Sesions judge forthe rt application was rejected by the learned Addtonal Sessions sudge-5 south East Saket. (// “The High Court referred to certain decsons with regard to the lparometers for grant of anticipatory bal, absence of change (2) of [Greumstances, conduct ofthe accused person inthe manner in which leey had executed the agreement forsale, the / need for castodal interrogation and the impropriety in view ofthe fact tht another cout had entertained the appleaton for // consideration deste the fac Itat the frst application wae eater rejected by another cour ané analyzing these aspects, set aside fi the order for grant of bal Wis necessary to state here thatthe High Court has drawn a distinction between an arder passed which is perverse in nature intr the wrath lof impropriety and 2 canceling order of tall / due to supervising) [reumstances after the grat of bai ‘We have heard the leaned senior counsel for the appellants RN te Sd wt fe a cy per ee ae (ee Aen WZ Ue pet ts aay IO ae RENO Le Sle Va vie=| > \y eily when the earer Nd 5 lsvalable. To elaborate, the Additonal Sessions idee who as oe sth the matter on / the rst ocasion, had nether een transfer? rom the said court, nor had he become incapactates to come (sia Lael| No i aed ise RNAS Yet ERE LN. ops bag £ Ww 82 ae ESS = Nasi: ‘ (a0 wm) application wat 3s tan exception ote fc tae the ae rowed when the 2 / Judge was ete te padre silane aired To appreciate the saa mse a eet we hn eownd or sss encanta fr athe ff docon tr 9 ea mene perverse manner excluding the relevant mater and conden te [Soaneo mates (wi ane tee [supervisory jurisdiction to nulify the same and the other, which | [erdetoy and bien Strib fee Sat bse Olin ote tome retetere rk ipoare Cl and iorouse ameteral ne ee pattem Une cmt Cog li aes ana jul sine ees at pean vee fe np brochseaggene oe east iors Siameek oie cal outing cart nt aed ge oa fscuaa to ener he per byt bar a ea Tes he nr tl econ ornseenc hes 9 [Sin comonare mh te pane of ota onm tepe oo propyl te s,m sch pcp ered a [iitow ae ele har ore eecaean bee sar ped pieicearmnth te ohtonaenen'/ of the Poe Mars Heh Gt chm The sopelentsin ped ze Peon of 28 ee chndgar Amati tae Gorermnent Medes ole espe Cain he ppt ase te Sc ieee vt he sensor fea or, wo ws ery, er eo he Se vage bth Gen Sec 6 te Pra ad vey ene eal re een sor [considering the grievances expressed / by the said Appellant contending limplemented, her // chance of getting admission to the course waa er 03 Ieee No een Indla category would be impugned. The present impugned or ders of {ison enc cane wis)Nei Py Sa [gt mens me y SPY ALS emg Sy er aN een | Papen awe tora Pope fee Gn. ee a The appl was ne a ens of Respondent In both the Ci Appeais who was realy aggrieved of ene pene dhe nets si oso a cong th cog er ee etsnadian Ctizen fe an NRA, tat therefore, she wes ented ae oe Pte fab ane at ete tetra eee ee o) RRL ped ne weg er stearate anf Conran er eae Crane othe snd eo 21213 vu tench east nie wire face, The coe OMEN Siete bs em dar an Under Sony heya ate es eves o te Sta Can he al tt Soe Peyton leet kt md edt afer eam Sermon proved byte Gunde Art Fo Eset som ht the te of Gaerne armrion Perna y the Goverment the er oe cone pee sich nes acanedaOeena 2 srt Mera he erred gn eho oer eet Ino te coetng Reds dome ot he ua 9 esac foo he pesto oma [morephs of we poser pet hb ob me Re aes orb. course sig a he nee ren of the nates edb ress Ce 9 fasars pres sats oi of nan shou hve rr op et ane Gane fotaatetsyersntsatcrettot elt e405 esate ero ml Craton Cane fet ote ta henge cane 7 ma ye oi Pec than nw rhs) 2 re Sng age eer el ht ese 8 ose yea ce al oe red Se he er nob usin het Sf ge wer thr atone [rortesting Respandent can be granted adrission. 14 he Corer cuneeeeee bats7 Bee ‘is spel eve ptton hs ten fe asin Seve and order dated 24th Apr, 2008 pased mn virktPesk ee oy te Heh Couto dha Peat one | aint /f the order of dsmissal ofthe peldoners copes eo scesive appeals under the Rht to Icon stato Seem dried n the sad pettion, the deton wa cupt oy ta peitioner to the Respondent No, 1% (1) provid nfermation ss ted iy tim vide is appleation dated 250 November, 2008 om th Respondent No. 4 / a Jutial Offeer ae for what tees, the espondent No. had decided his Miscelaneous hopes! dhnesty, ‘The fects and // crcumsances ging se to this eve r,t the petioner cle tobe in excuse possesion ofthe nd in respect oF wich cul sult No. 810 of 200) wa ld before Adina ‘Gu ude, Ranga (2) District payne er erpetal injunction By. faint the petioner and another, rm entering ito the st lan {opieaon [fled for iter retin the sid st stood dre Being aggrieved, the plain thern prefered CMA. No. 10 // of 12000 and the same was sea dmice. Two ater ats were led in 11 propery impeaig the Pionero 3 the = ofthe sits Le. OS. No 875 2) of 2C03, the Tl ‘court granted tporary injunction agaist the Petione. Beg ‘saree Pettoner preferred the CMA / no. of 203, whch ws texener withthe retrespecive date not eu in atoms sion ofthe entng plc edn. (5/400 wore) 1ae2sverve 1x lke natura elries tase boon human onl ens gst resulting fm human err er negignes pers ene eeretrely | ibolince he eteeqresiond coon to ce come carage tote eat and enone fo vee ton asnees eae ta Sfon poe ape ets i tae is Seer rl aba Mere of Bane os oe ree oie tana td rey ts a eas (St etece tata mestr ea Sabah npg df ower nese eae ea /huam erasnine raciaicees naets eine jp] MEA eee he cart ow megs ep [feu po eas Siocon | es event ee i cnc nee a ete Ea = Shep! es Tae eal of ne Sl snsoaneestngsen sr nurse ort Sa tot). SNA g- | Settee et dc fe Bp ae De we see te Se be fiSoN GAs Stn tect ante ced pie wna ie ity Aya oe ‘Teri, Rest tat ota sa nob of eons re a ed Spr? | ecesin terms of heath oc ebarie by the //f alae of oe te pS teen ut wee LS p> “7. om he Union Carbie Unt hop Hwee the Sete camsion {or Cntrng tres on (3) fet of Bhopal Gs Leakage on ite Stems 0 s2eesud a Reported The Bhp Gas Dieser: fects one Systems / iy, 1967 which suggested eererise. Tis Report stated that fo the date!) SS) ace opdten of 2 a ens hone ne see ‘6 = . + _and moderately // affected areas of Bhopal and the variety of longterm lat Cosa feer4 pate sped ine ce pt oe naar oes 1 ured fr bythe Ian Coe fer Mes Rech eh tess cstt es an 29 rc oe pop. HEH te psa of tne the igure of eed pone svar sea siah oy te ane scene camszaon rar soot terre carta te mse poe 01a ot ee Meno ets area oom ena 8 "oes vated sa wel 8 pre os, TH aH ‘emediodin hehe aoe snare Senet) umesSot so jaan it Uae by him thatthe igh Cou hasten c= fen to etry 21.10 5 ping at thee WS 0 stteston to eer sen der 1 ie 26 oe in fn we i pW epranted dtetion of sich an obesraton bythe ORAT aa buna S oS I rein to want sch bey anf] expec, wom 8 2 ALF = foe noment between the Borrower and auton puch purchaser ha been | Tae Ya LL dey a) | he sed eae wt hth A a ey er sdresed to ay ese an ale recodig a etemest na most EL 2 \\ bet snes cre he seats whch ey seed oe TEATS cee ty he eh Cis or nat ye at Some Nee i ut st we a te of ea at ee 2 Re eh 28 1 dy em od D 1s | nt sonecesry to dag the uo ttre wich ae bP) Saear 5. Monee tothe spit ofthe et td he pose of Recover of Debs YS dete ants ad Fnac stuns At, 1988 / tis abo contended tothe aed toe ott he / rae ade byte petrt z thi oro orart exon tater ws pede Nobama urate NTRS, Me ae cn weigh Rep i SE comers te he had pete) a the ban tn ie ice! AVL elite ot ad ers nso vost one et ae ENS intr ot id pry do franc tees see | Sy CAEN AGT p A stn tame un tt oes a Ses, Ty to cause serous os ohn. Te eed oul apes fr te = acon purchaser, submited tht onthe bse tery Pe tye ut im the Det Mey out an () ered pumie tte emedy beau the acon was ena hot at yk eh propery to suena ein ENE ‘oing on between the borrower and the bank. is ge /f by Hi ad the ald fact was made sown te hd espendert weal oh rita inthe econ ue by bn tat Karen ‘anaes cannon ered tha deco ote COM) Matele La wiele ce Loe) Tee Baia mpea ‘he il ad expres malted elucence wo ahh ater, the Heh Court woo the span th es Pe Setting ig eon Gua nt eae Sa une lw ake sue elas Ivey Sete tae nth ep rete Tor fhe mrt ns wo a [etn afiets! of ating milescence te ager eration, both not a cnc oe she il bent fer ene (1) ternal aun, fcasoyinguento espe Jen appeton wi benno poston ade Fart her tcl bonding betwee th chen dts desl tha ey xy eine ah hte atral eal / nhs ao inca of eutody othe mor ies he omy aw, eh tetaneeton a el py pe tm const Meer under acon 253 of te Mcharmedon a the 2H cor hd et tat he referent gh garage cate ‘Stor len rests wt he maternal wana Ate ig ual proposton ht nce of eon beer personal tse etree the len terme sal pete tag cout ed atthe oe at hnd teen ch cor Ff the vex Shore mertoned the gh cout tempigned ores ode he 2e ae CEN La) BY, recent a ei ced in Jp | uncton ised agsinst the appellant. Ii this order ofthe High Net Ne yy Se [our which i / challenged before us by way of spesol leave . Sa A} lamttion which on grant of leave Ras been ard y uti / he RELL IGN? Rp de LAM] Eh tn learned cons! pean nba othe pr abo Ne rT ae en ax\,~ L525 |wes the contention of the apptlot before // stat the Act wl X 35: a7 1 [tit the present case because tee» nfl between th Nee 29: Cae Z—*-| |preterential guardian in (4) Mohammedan Law and the Act. it Was an. c > ep [pointed out that while deciding the custody ofthe minor chien] = the nellare / ofthe cikren had tobe taken int consideration and tse wasguarantead bythe Act They Fave acd / the lance ons case of Rajasthan The Rajasthan High Court nthe ced cose ed hat where the provisions [et pron aware in confit wth the provisions of Guardians and Wards Act the ater shal peal ovr the frmer. (5/400 words Se ee rt ‘Set cy ana recy Mistakes by win 25 tne och out 2 Laz =Bree 4 aaa reign tea, twas contended bythe earned cure fot a aputtn tat there 3 provement pe ne spots ere nthe wee oth aien, sr fenton bal orgs tt he eames go imereence. Sore passe the puted ce, te lange na spe verona owr with the clo eames pic pefeence, The chien ove been ic with te ets) sce ther mothers deat in fne, 2006S he High eso ape the order cf the Fry Court wating the Hc cour te respondents ha ben amphig with te tater orc ted tthe poli he // een wer at apr we tens re meted out to therm Grng the tne they sper th eer Tf sept. In coe respondent a3, cont ah ehensons expressed by the appetant har aed on record (2) teen nent ro mary a would deve her etwas Mt Otare ofthe cron, Resondets ure fazed tht te th Jones oe no apse tothe fac i se hove hen the are cone! / for bth he pres an amined the impugned order ofthe igh Coure and ao the ores Saray the 1 Forly Cou. Aer conieing the mse Ferd ante impugned oer, we ate ofthe ve tat 0) sae he respondents shoud be gen ner toy ofthe minor een lt he copra ofthe procedings le / under Sectons 7a 2 the nt section 12 ofthe At empowers corso make sch re Mo ote temporary custey and protectin of the pon rpeperty : he minr at thinks proper In mater of estoy, awa ete ee lyst precedents, welfare ofthe cient sole ad sr Ty TD A 2 af rte by ich the Cour sa ass the comgarave met of ALN [the paris contesting for custody Ths Court had observed inthis “\™ lesan that usta exer by the nature canoer be Aa however, before a change is mage must be prove to ben the prone met of he cren t eson wl ond = ecm custoay to the father a agaist misters ne zien ta the tan bn eps se ‘al postion.” (5/400 words} SND ne TMs La-30ercise 15 Pept a) nee aT earn sue me! Mee A AD TAS) coat of te ptr pond prea wth we thee er con SS Xe yO a ce, staying and the attempt of the respondent no. 1 was to alter that - why postion before the// application fied by them is considered by the me Fermi Cour For this purpose it was very relevant to conser ‘whether /// leaving the minor eden in custody oftheir father ti ‘the Family Court dgifed the matter would be so detrimental (1) to the interest ofthe minors that their custody should be changed forthwith The observations thatthe fathers acing /a criminal case, that mostly resides in US.A, and that ialleged that he Han afar wit ater aya, nour view, n0t suet te come to the conclusion that custody of the /// minors should be changed Immediately, What is importent for us to note from these observations is tfat the Court shall (2) determine whether, in proceedings relating to interim custoey, there are sfient and (unfit. However, the High Court of Rajasthan held that in /// the a secu S0 wae ct fectot oases “EA, 1,2 Melos on war ef be near wighaoe mtn wh cone tno spp any mana onde Ss0 porto ve a epson w/the mor np re ern coed rece i¢ eaten, Ue Wteenrsend season, fered ror eet of a gurden Ne Goat, wice be oa pen et Ue tsionn roam Nea oe poe racial ie Mao uncer ertanecroayerm torte Lert ctr smedstas oor conchae ts tras nates ody an cnced Coa ak ext te bar srg una Secton 13 aA ot face se tou teow he epander Toren the tlc of comenene He a fou of ring cast tothe mara gant, aunt and uc. A loro desi oft Cu end e propestion hat ater of ctey et cne, her ware ta be be ol Ponce wean te us frm the iis of he costing fetes the ware oftheir ren be oer in dtr te quest of ance of cones ao er Me tate note ofthe tact ft reoondr / no. nd a tection hs noenon gerard ners ashe ~-|had // resigned from her job as @ technical writer to take care of the Ehren nas contorted We oe, ene cma a he respondent roe steno aa carte ceo tise tat anpovl ene garda apieton (1400 csbythe paris to conclude the proceedings. Arbitration san efcacious and "sthernative way of spite resolution between the parts. // Tere sno denying the fact thatthe method of arbtration has eveved over the pviog| lof time to hap (2) the partes to speedily resolve ther dlsputes though is a, 143 of the Companies Act. The present / Act, before amendment, has DN 9 ee anny fh ats fo the Cina BE a ee eh a mmc incl it hs bon OA Ca acup weston oy wie nts Spy 1th auditors to the Cental Government and ia below the iveshol iit wl be reported othe company by the (I) auditor and A, thea eae anand, bt with ad Si, 1 welcome amendment, but with rider, eons Xa becuse porting af fraud, repectve of he on! invalid, 0 ee Ane OF fe, a avert Was ay ewig ap P +S =~ Gowever, sme aspects need to be looked ito. One, eporing of DP AA EAE ys shy ange pee weedy ey ee Let, ius thing a therefore shoud be reported to the Nepal a Ea a SID PP UCL SA bie tin he pon 2) lat ads a Uectve mechanism ie evolved at the Cena Government level to So L Ae (agin 28. Spy 8 el with the information / on fraud ectved from the auditors of i "various companies. What is happening now and even eri this DAT NY Pg ONT Te fa alt ports and CAG comments are once, the tea ag thy ‘Central Government o the concerned Ministry has to go through it a art att 06 2h Sg ere tam nes to Hoar a So ae PEE AT Co Ree eae st a Sas Lea Vice amet ten eee eae Tot sling inti vaws comme of the GAG and ean Tae fe AAS BT ining mis rpering provision, you shold stent th ens ART Boveri LOS ap ie proposed amendment should ato requte to didose LS [te sorts reported Repo sho scot whatve LA Se Reaek mantener of est Des 7 detecting job. Now, inthis Bill // the entire responsibilty of detecting. th aor the sor esponityof tecing tne tau bee pit Fegoby and they mast be lle to grove Wo ert Cnr beaten caerWA as ere 32 (s0upm) kee inte of cere Recor as ae ved m1 \ x tauciting standards and the fraud reporting methodology is incorporated “Vey | inition aun standards St, deteing te ful has teen with A cite iS spoil’ aso te canaid 10 te aul ts ata fs ete Maan Doe, a 0am Arto te Admins whoo’ Sg), Sena cnr ie is ing the on vse cans Dictate vl iors LK kA Se ie Dic hve (1) Bern exempt ko why a6 — Se ee tars w dec, th amend 1 -e(gS,2 sath iin eet pep anne Sk ~~ Se sate Sect 18 shoo b sn a be wR Tiron Sr SED! continues rove fr the requirement of “45 [aati nna ad uy ranch eae ee eri Oh te stato ering ier Seton TOD sate apmopriteo woth cause wo requ he spet lion Irate nad pay tacos involve av aC ARO 8 o= ctain sol mit Trower encourage arsperncy, explanatory statement 3 sce be given ner Rr ot sales shoud a tate the lust bs rte (2) mange fer considrng npr acd pry wena te onnay sors of sige and at arnt tea The SEDI eqrenet od provisos unr Compare Lae ie iflerondetton of eld portant Stgned een he crea or ater rete party an “Ph rea nuh ef erence on te corporate governance equreret ak AY SS Te Govemmen shoul eve seca that SEB an ES Eh ons Baa Cn e~! © “Tie Communes" Law requrenents converge ie. ep 10 fed “AACA tompant comps with sipifeart poli ieee. The wo sorte tp exon. bsins in Inla ex wel, St, We oer emma cosevenial welcome some ofthe amendment a Tagen he Goverment lok ito te provisos of Section 13 edhe spe esl wae With tse er wor 1 supa he Bil and hope tat the Be. 5 g632 SOM sins wil wok inthe sins ad conser em sel ih Be ca NE BA te SNa + a Evertise 4 (80 wpm) Mr. Deputy Chairnan, Tam extremely grateful t0 the hon Members wo have spoken. Infact, its very rare, / as sid that law Trade in 2013 has to be reviewed, Because it is an Act with 470 ‘Seton Therefor, lo of representations had sated coming inthe Seetent this Act was notified. There I were some drafting eaights, because i is feng ACt. Pls, some inconveniences were far ben the Act yeas (1) being implemented, We, therefore, held nautations with all stakeholders and we were able to identify ‘SSreal points which rogired to / be revisited. Some of those points Bc reste by virtue of notifations or even under rules. For eile, one of the issues that my fiend from the Opposition, has 7) faiaed is with regard to a frge number of private limited “Companies and the provision of very onerous nature being made Spptcable te them. Now, by virtue of a notification it was 2) Treble to give private Limited companies exemions from some of {hose provisions And, therefor, those exemption notifications have ton gen andthe pain of some of those provisions has been ited by that paicolar process Now, Iwas, initially, able / to shorlist fourteen amendments and then two more have been added after the Bill was passed inthe Tak ‘Sob! Provisions have tO be brought in Tine with the international standards Nov, the question asked is: Why are we in (3) rh? Ae iy mentioned by ame Ho. Members, ope ae finding it extremely inconvenient afer ths legislation to comply / with all the provisions. Ang, therefore, they ae fining out devises of ‘ot forming & company and going infor eter devices, including & Timed Tisblty partnership. People ars thinking whether it will be a better option t do busines eather than a company registered under this Ac isl, For example, you look at sub-section (6) of seetion 212. (4) For some reason we have tebe careful ofthis whole proces. ‘About four yeas ago, even in the Customs Act this provision was brought in. So, a provision for bail which was consifered very Cnerous ven for at-teroriam law i brought in fr violation ofthe Companies Act. So, it was earlier brought in under the Customs ‘Act ‘When {ad poled tout to the then Kon, Finance Minister, he | withdrew i being an onerous provision. (3) wertrercse 35 resin pe thes ol Exerc 38 (80pm) ‘So, except in very serious cases of faud, we cannot use this. ‘So, have amended that provision. And the / normal provisions under the CrP. ply as far as bal is concerned. Now, the provisions ended, were refered to by Shi Rahman Khan, are ‘lating tothe mandatory capital iit. Similarly, the whole idea of PCompany sal as also now sted becoming almost a relic as far as ‘lobal leavs are concerned. So, our (1) law is being brought to. this feel, The tied amendment relates 10 deposits. Of there is a ‘rohit in accepting deposits and if company violates het and still c.Mcepts deposits, a / provision was enacted but punishment for ‘jolation was forgotten fo put in. So, that gap has oe filled up by ire of an amendmen. "The neat provision is with regard 10 inspection of records of * companies. Now, AGM resolutions are meant for public display ‘But Board resoletions are not. A Board resolution of company may vtually contain (2) confidential things. You have 2 private company ‘Sr public company, its entre corprate strategy may be contained in {the Boards resolution, the manner in which its financial strategy tnay be contained in tha, its intellectual propery strategy may be at his is going to be the name Sota Ee oreltainer tart ee teal dsnaion wea» Beard cei ot ts SOM lato, Hens coesion ad be aie ae aes ce sin hae Se i oe pes an depres tte Tere (ans ta hve cme ago soon se ee nt I ny ten shares ge poe gt deta tows npn ner hres wou pe peer, SE ae ae rs dating ean ee ae) CAT by Ae Lye ie. Siar te at rstering esi sae which Net Q Amy LVS 4879) nce sen a 0 be seed to te Ines Eaton ‘ el! ee ran oa and tl ova gs Lossy Ans D3 9 So be toned Now. doe was ting or ee NS) EERE ees er wate oe Le Title ambiguous drafting whieh hs to be crete. (8) 4 Sime terri ain a sare aster = aMong yet B AS Wed at | oe Sa SS) 2 SY rv le 2-| USES od = eae = SOA GS Se Nea Tet Sea 89> ye . a Late Exercise 36 (80pm) Si, 1 support the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tex Bil, 2015./ As our eer has sa, the Congres Paty fll suppers this Bil. AT the sane ime, we have to bring! up certain defieienies which are there to be rested in future amendments. Fest of ll, T would ike to bring wo the “atetion ofthe Government that we are bound bythe United Nations General Assembly which, a early as (I) 31st October, 2003, had made that on the basis of recalling its Resolution No. 61 of sth / December, 2000, i established an adhoc commitee to go ino the ‘question ofthese types of evasion of taxation / throughout the world happened for thre years by having diferent types of meetings and finally, they’ care forward with the Urited Nations Convention ‘ysint Corupion, I would just quote the begining of the Preamble ‘quote, “Concemed abou the (2) seriousness of problems and threats posed by comiption to the stability and security of societies, Udernining the inition and values /of democracy ethical values and justice jeopardising sustainable development and the rte of aw". “This is where the Government ha tll the Sate Parties of the Convention have signed it, [M0 counties have signed this Convention. On that basis, differen levels of discussions were {sing on and finally, they eae outwith different topics and chapters, So to (3) sa, covering about 71 ances. In different ways. States Parties have to follow it in their own countries. I ifnd that this particular Bll which is coined asthe Black Money Bill (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Asses) and Imposition // of Tax Bill very fragile and itis only an extension of Section 139 of the Income Tax Act. Seotion 139 is very cleat in stating thatthe fling of Income Tax Resum (4) compulsry. In various cases, they are ‘sing tht Finally, Sub-lause (4) provides that any asset including Financial inerest in F-any emity Heated outside India or signing authority in any secount loeated outside India i required to file & ‘etur of income in preseribed form compulsorily, whether or nt he ‘has the income chargeable to ax Bui so ee the pesent Act. it : rms woul btogivehim be benefit of dou Acting, Ne EE ap Men Fe a charge 90 ond 24 TPC p> \e Ne a Ms Haryana High Cou in Criminal Appeals Nos. 201 <7 ‘rimin Appeals Now 201 @) of 196, _ensrmng the applian’s conviction ender eto 312 of he pera £2 at cour er having commie the murder O Kanes, This taenent before the pols be si ha in the and Kanes (he decane) was siting on the haba of thr hain vig, Keskopar when Kalesh proceedel for (his ewes deo eppearin/ the BA examination. Ashe reached the Chntyl where the lane ted, he wae wad By the acid [ian ate eens ofthe ite tt ety bee RP eC ING enn 2 — ji! occurence his younger brother Suresh was elected asthe village weg IO oF’ SEE eB he Sct 4 Pt tet 18 0 i eigen — ttioners- France Becon 47 Stedene rome fit tht init teem he ie ad i Sivp hath ni fond onthe peso of PV.) wee) reseed = 7a ag Ich dees skilled in he ring Th rena rosea, Bot the infact ae ely damaging 10 he AE a Leg hint far the fens of murder andthe prudent and safe “The next appeal is directed against the judgment of the Punjab Suc and the sence of ie inprsnmet avd tim Ge csngn slang wi nn to-youner bt, Ra Ker (= Aitveed at he resionce a he area Magistrate on the same AN? Wate LEA? 6 A vation oie var apo the al sy Tee IC Wee Hg ¥,Y>\sntelsved ©) a abstnta part ofthe prosecution sry. The -—_* ee ee CLR een “pe pti se at ed wr Pet eH ~ Se plc of ocurence ach sesoringly, deste thar aot ae oe Sn oT NS 4 Plt eet te court pointed out that the te need wounds NOV EAM AA a ty cms the melee, postin nai, ha : {ay se vee re were nite afer Matesh wes aeady dead Eg pe NPL THY Arata evience, ©) than lary sine he pription of rekon ie eg, eig tae he am Hes el, ec aged Tin cna POPE SP CREE aearta Sa Sea Ba af © Ve a Ae o> 28 & i Anpareaty, teal ‘was one of the reasons for their conviction simply 2 es | Fee AP fo the thee accused whose presence atthe place oo : |ot coxneece was ot cepted, Ue tal cout als dob the Shp 7p Nae LS > hs) Rotem of two eu of) the tee eye winnstee The Gal cou ID ig Mo 5b 92 LAE fe ttl ht ean B72, oly reining je we, a Reet aL neal : ASF A sncd-up wath with falsehood bu his estinony was not Hable to be | sap) SIG SE Acca i gn ej at cat etme oy = mnie coolest The jury th and of Rakesh ws ony al cout eoled te contradiction by fastening te info Rakesh iscaréed wholly since-he had himself received injury the same pin existence and it // was also proved by the medical evidence. The Lacspied si set ot ; Exercise. Maga. ne CREA reset fe a want Tyo 8) ey 0 RS Cane ob ceed dr Sane sa re ae RS ona | meee meat Tat Under seen 2 es OS Ee ald a yal cote under secon 25 fe Ans Atty cpr y ie SOE, pb ge On2 NH Hale ne ebay phn Ses Mo ea eee a {se 2,998 n Seniors ce (2) No wr hy he eral sentenced othe ped of imprisonment sey unsere eet I) aaa ene 5 7 appeals were filed in the High Court. The Hii ty the ud 4 jee sear nie ac tay ener fod, hs eld he judgments of te cut al Mw > 7 2 a tA pa PL SY aa qt Pee v Mr, Sahai, Sexier Adv : Ae La ete tm Vonks uy set the igh Cour and te ial cut 2) fgets ad APO ad’ Le, 1 srened that he spins coviton forte otenee of uar Ex me oot etait Bah oe nd on See le} Sie et aN that here were at eat four camsice, tht fied and LR La Oe) mae Fromcutoa cate. Fink / tho was 0 7 ape LOY tinea seas Bec es st Bs eae 2.7 SASE, eran ta tomes corte aac Re 8 Pea Levey Panay ‘ete Rae he ly () oe nine te one LGR DL Sy Bin ne ye Mt? ne oY tte eer antics iecuanc eae are Ayn ye Si ted on acount of te nap of Pur rtf te eet le ten pea re ha x ey | pamite ti aves made a pt Coe ey ree ay Fre ne a pea A pe ie Nees en t J lountion to eablsh tut any pefoie ts bor exsed (Oe KAAS A, + | ccaiehly alee a ee oe 5 ay a deems ALR Mt guy wept No peas was acl sed Neh sea eee Gin th eon Thts wt re of use wee ie SS EN EE mee ee egg Nahe ote 7A nid © be soporte to te evi piivcperntagsiiey 7 |tsins te rapondet. The cages rated 1 the cond of te |bneis hist 400 we) nn Poms! Pci | bassExercise 42 SLA ET eb Ys, en OE a og RN Teel ts tl te (ar ba Ae ga) asin nina which ves vayile foie mre nee Beal EER TA ag ame fe meena areca oe ee eee NN AT ne litre. There tat exert sich interes nome mn ce 3.1% Jeannot be said tobe attributable (1) either to the activity mentioned pe in s. 80P(2) of the Act. Therefore, looking to the facts and Sh? om ireumstances / of the case, the Assessing Officer was right in gS FES fA tee hating te sid interest income ul 36 ofthe / Act. “ gah pet TTo say that the source of income is not relevant for NO i rere“ Sbrrour borat weighing Sete be geen othe word the wie mS ng ee o£ EER Aare tte nation peated ns SOrDxspof te Ack oe ends ot ab SS HO EF, Do VA hole of the amount of pros and gains of business” Fe ee eG en ee ee ee one a ata te Bae rr esa omg ee BEE 52782 Zar Ne >a Mi ta nl ce hes eae es ey 2001 v Aes ee Defi finding Authority under the Act, It has given a/ finding of fact fa though he : mole t=, 2 {hat though the writen communication ofthe sanction, wich bas ere ie? A605 tPA K,.«.3tem hoo presetbed format, was received bythe /! Assessing Officer on Dow . L=* 4 ih June, 2001 but, the approval or sanction for reopening of AES Sa Se eh eich case i ee feven prior to 31st May, 2007, There is (4) no reason to interfere ey yAvce ree ¢ wZN Eth stig tts ive yt ft ee inthe sat tee usin FV, 00 cts GATE EK abe cepindin te eneunanc ofc th bral we iia AAN ru Re © cgit holding that the income by way of interest on deposits held * Buk oT > ob ced ot or ses ce rw Sean nat Icone fm ae oe wou ogy Selscton nego of ade)Exercise 43, Pursuant to the aforessid order, the respondent has filed an sciitional counter affidavit, in which he has emphasized the tesirability 1 of remanding the mater back to the disciplinary Suthonty for re-deteminaton ofthe mater. He has emphasized tht Tailre (to supply the enquiry report tothe delinquent deprives him cof making «proper representation to the disciplinary authority, before 1H that authority arrives a is own Findings wit raed to the gui oF ‘othervise of en employee, This admindly not 1) having been done, ‘leary the respondent was prejudiced in submitting his defence. [Even if this Cout concludes not to remand / the mater back to the disciplinary authority, a least it has tobe remanded back othe High Court. He // has stated thet a numberof points were raised before the High Court which have net been considered on merit, ts the High Court decided the writ petition only onthe ground af non- fernishing ofthe enquiry report. Since 2) the Enquiry Officer and the disciplinary authority had concluded that some of the charges have been peril proved and oer completely proved it was necessary to supply the findings of the enquiry reports, Only en knowing the reasoning of the (/ Enquiry Office, could the respondent give an tfective explanation, Ts further pointed out that with regard tothe charges relating 1” to Maharjgnn, the entire emourt has been ecovefed. This fet is noiced by the diseptinary authority. But quite illegally, i (3) sll proceeded to impose punishment, on the ground of proved misconduct. Since the Uiscipinary authority arved atthe decision on the basis of changes which were paral 1) completely proved it was not possible to defend, during personal bearings. According fo the respondent, this ‘vas stted by him I the porsonal hearing, but it was ignore In fact the iseiplnary authority was adamant to punish the respondent ‘AIL (4) these sues could have been highlighted ifthe High Court hed decided the writ petition on merits. Therefore, mater needs ‘tobe remanded back tothe High Court fora deisen on meri, on fl the issues raised by the respondent. nour opinion, the aforesaid ivievances of the respondent are without any faewal basis. The Daftoner has placed on th record ofthis Court the translated copy ‘tthe chargeshee, reply of the respondent othe charae-sheet. (3) (400 words) Lu