Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140-155]Musmat Shanti Devi & Anr vs. Lallu and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140Lalan Kumar Yadav & Ors vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 141Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142Mahavir Sharmik and Nirman Swalambi Sahkari Samiti Limited vs State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat)...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140-155]
Musmat Shanti Devi & Anr vs. Lallu and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140
Lalan Kumar Yadav & Ors vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 141
Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142
Mahavir Sharmik and Nirman Swalambi Sahkari Samiti Limited vs State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 143
Md. Tazuddin vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 144
Avinash Kumar Ranjan vs The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 145
Navjot Singh Sidhu vs The State of Bihar and Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 146
The State of Bihar vs. Amar Kumar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 147
M/s Trimurti Private Limited vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 148
M/s Friends Mobile vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 149
M/s Ceat Ltd. vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 150
M/s ACC Limited vs. The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 151
M/s Micro Zone vs The Union of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 152
Smt. Rudra Maya Sinh vs. The Registrar General and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 153
Alok Bharti, vs. Jyoti Raj 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 154
M/s Prince Sanitation Gandhi Path vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 155
Judgments/Orders This Month
Case Title: Musmat Shanti Devi & Anr vs. Lallu and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140
The Patna High Court recently ruled that an unregistered sale agreement remains admissible as evidence in a lawsuit seeking specific performance of the agreement.
Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra observed, “It is clear from the above that even where the sale agreement is not registered, the document can be received as evidence for considering the relief of specific performance and the inadmissibility will confine itself only to the protection sought for under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act.”
Candidates With B.Ed. Not Eligible For Primary School Teaching Jobs: Patna High Court
Case Title: Lalan Kumar Yadav & Ors vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 141
The Patna High Court, while allowing a set of writ petitions challenging a 2018 notification by the National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE), has ruled that candidates holding Bachelor of Education (B. Ed.) qualifications cannot be deemed eligible for appointment as primary school teachers.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy observed, “The writ petitions are allowed with the finding that the notification dated 28.06.2018, issued by 'the NCTE' is no longer applicable and the B.Ed candidates cannot be considered eligible for appointment as primary school teachers.”
Case Title: Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of Indias
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142
The Patna High Court has held that offering legal assistance to banned organizations (such as Popular Front of India cadre) or interviewing candidates for selecting them for giving scholarships would never fall in any one of the proscribed categories of the Terrorist Acts under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that mere membership in a banned organization should not be sufficient grounds for denying bail, especially when the trial is anticipated to extend over an extended period.
Case Title: Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of Indias
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has said that mere membership in a banned organization shouldn't be reason enough to deny bail, particularly when the trial is anticipated to be prolonged.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Alok Kumar Pandey said, “Merely being a member of a banned organization, would not justify rejection of bail when the Trial is likely to continue for a longer time.”
Case Title: Mahavir Sharmik and Nirman Swalambi Sahkari Samiti Limited vs State of Bihar & Ors.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 143
In a recent legal development, the Patna High Court has ruled in favor of a Cooperative Society registered under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST Act), stating that the Solid Waste Management Activity undertaken by the petitioner is exempt from BGST. The court quashed assessment orders and demand notices against the Cooperative Society, emphasizing that there is no supply of goods involved in the solid waste management disposal work awarded to the petitioner.
A division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy opined, “There is no supply of goods in the solid waste management disposal work awarded to the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the activity of the petitioner regulated by the work order produced as Annexure-5 and the consideration received for the same would be exempt from the BGST Act.”
Case Title: Md. Tazuddin vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 144
The Patna High Court has observed that any order or judgment issued by a Court or Tribunal, even if done ex parte, can be subjected to the writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
Referring to the Supreme Court's 2020 decision in the case of N. Mohan Vs. R. Madhu, Justice Harish Kumar observed, “The analogy, which is deducible from the judgments referred hereinabove, this Court is of the opinion that any order/judgment passed by a Court or Tribunal even if it is ex parte is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and such power cannot be scuttled nor any embargo be fixed thereupon, on the plea of remedy provided under Order IX Rule 13 of the C.P.C.”
Case Title: Avinash Kumar Ranjan vs The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 145
The Patna High Court has observed that the Investigating Officer must ascertain the age of the victim in cases falling under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The court added that relying solely on medical opinion and self-assessment is not a reliable method for determining a person's age.
The division bench comprising Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Nani Tagia observed, “Be that as it may, with such confusion over the age of the victim, it was the solemn duty of the Investigating Officer to inquire about her age from the school in which she had been studying. It appears from the records of the case that no such effort was made with respect to ascertaining the age of the victim for confirming that she was less than 18 years of age, when she entered into a sexual relationship with the appellant.”
Case Title: Navjot Singh Sidhu vs The State of Bihar and Anr
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 146
The Patna High Court last week quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu for allegedly violating the restraining orders while appealing and cautioning Muslims against splitting their votes in his address before a public gathering during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections campaign.
Justice Sandeep Kumar opined, “In my considered opinion, the part of the speech on which the informant has relied upon to show that the petitioner was asking for votes on the ground of religion does not support the allegation. The petitioner has not made any statement which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity.”
Case Title: The State of Bihar vs. Amar Kumar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 147
This week, the Patna High Court overturned the death penalty handed down to a man convicted of the murder and rape of a 12-year-old girl. The court reached this decision upon discovering that the prosecution's entire case relied solely on the presence of a sniffer dog entering the accused man's house.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Alok Kumar Pandey observed, “We fail to understand as to how the Trial Court proceeded in the same manner as the investigation had proceeded, on the presumption that the dog would never have faulted in entering the house of the appellant. There is evidence of the dog having entered another person's house also. We, for the present, do not say that help of a snifer dog cannot be taken by the police.”
Case Title: M/s Trimurti Private Limited vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 148
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court, while adjudicating a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has granted relief to Trimurti Private Limited by issuing a conditional stay on the GST demand. The petitioner sought various reliefs, primarily aiming to avail the statutory remedy of appeal against an impugned order under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act (BGST Act).
Case Title: M/s Friends Mobile vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 149
In a notable decision, the Patna High Court has ruled that the Revenue Department lacks the authority to mandate the Appellant to make a complete pre-deposit when filing an appeal under the Amnesty Scheme using the Electronic Cash Ledger.
The central question addressed in the writ petition pertained to whether, upon initiating an appeal, ten percent of the outstanding amounts should be sourced from the Electronic Cash Ledger or the Electronic Credit Ledger.
M/s. Friends Mobile (“the Petitioner”) made a payment of ten percent from the Electronic Credit Ledger as required under the amnesty scheme introduced by the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) for filing appeal.
Case Title: M/s Micro Zone vs The Union of India and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 152
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court overturned the dismissal of a GST appeal and reinstated the appeal, contingent upon meeting specified conditions outlined in Notification No. 53 of 2023-Central Tax.
Emphasizing the significance of adhering to statutory timelines while recognizing the opportunities provided by relevant notifications to revive dismissed appeals under specific conditions, the division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy stated, “In this context, noticing the Notification, we also make it clear that wherever we have rejected the writ petitions filed against orders; rejecting appeals for reason of delay being beyond that prescribed under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act; the assessee would be entitled to invoke the said remedy de hors the orders of this Court and avail of the benefit of Notification aforementioned, subject to the conditions therein being satisfied.”
Case Title: M/s Ceat Ltd. vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 150
Patna High Court has ruled that penalty is imposable under section 56(4)(b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (Bihar VAT Act) on account of clerical mistake in mentioning of invoice number in SUVIDHA Form.
The above ruling came in a case filed by the petitioner, M/s Ceat Ltd. engaged in the manufacture and sale of tyres, tubes and flaps who was concerned with a penalty order passed under Section 60(4) (b) read with Section 56(4) (b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 after detention of a truck carrying goods at the integrated check post, Dhobi, Gaya.
Case Title: M/s ACC Limited vs. The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 151
In affirming the directive of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, the Patna High Court ruled that the adjustment of entry tax paid on damaged cement is not permissible under the Bihar Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use, or Sale therein Act, 1993. The court reiterated and upheld the tribunal's decision, reinforcing that the provisions of the aforementioned act do not allow for the adjustment of entry tax in the case of damaged cement.
Case Title: Smt. Rudra Maya Sinh vs. The Registrar General and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 153
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court dismissed a petition filed by a 96-year-old widow, seeking a family pension for her late husband, a retired Judicial Officer, citing a gross delay of more than 30 years in the claim, coupled with a lack of substantiating material to establish her marital status and her husband's service history.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy observed, "The claim made now after more than 30 years is grossly delayed. The petitioner herein also does not have any substantiating material to indicate that she was married to the Judicial Officer."
Case Title: Alok Bharti, vs. Jyoti Raj
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 154
In a noteworthy judgment, the Patna High Court has declared that making baseless accusations of adultery, fornication, and coerced prostitution by a woman against her husband not only constitutes harassment and character assassination but also tarnishes the individual's public reputation in society.
The division bench of Justice P B Bajathri and Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya observed, “The leveling of false allegation by one spouse to the other having alleged illicit relations with different persons outside the wedlock amounted to mental cruelty. In the present case, respondent – wife alleged allegations before the employer of appellant and in the domestic violence allegations of soliciting prostitution by appellant and his mother and appellant involved in adultery and fornication etc. Respondent admitted those allegations are at the instigation of her advocate and they are not true.”
Patna High Court Allows Appeal Beyond Stipulated Time based on CBIC Notification
Case Title: M/s Prince Sanitation Gandhi Path vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 155
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has provided relief to individuals facing delayed appeals under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act.
The judgment, arising from a petition challenging the rejection of an appeal due to a five-day delay, underscores the significance of a recent notification by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.
According to Notification No. 53 of 2023-Central Tax, dated 02.11.2023 (S.O. 4767(E)), the time for filing appeals against orders passed by the Proper Officer on or before 31.03.2023 has been extended.