Latest news with #PrashantKumarMishra
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
a day ago
- Business
- Business Standard
SC allows manufacturing unit's closure, orders ₹15 cr ex-gratia for workers
The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed the closure of a unit manufacturing biscuits for Britannia Industries Limited (BIL) for over three decades by overruling a Bombay High Court verdict. Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra passed the verdict on an appeal of Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd (HSML) against the high court's February 17, 2023 order. While HSML initially offered Rs 10 crore as a goodwill gesture to its employees, the court enhanced this amount to Rs 15 crore and ordered its payment within eight weeks. Considering that some of the employees may be, with the closure of this concern, losing the only job they have known and still others would be, for no fault of their own, rendered unemployed, we appreciate the gesture made by HSML. Such a statement is taken on record," the court said. Senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for HSML, had left it to the court to decide on the enhancement. We deem it just and proper to further enhance the appellants' offer by a sum of Rs 5 crore, thus, making it Rs 15 crore instead of Rs 10 crore, as mentioned in our order... Let the amount be released forthwith, as per their entitlement, in favour of the employees and, in any case, not later than eight weeks from the date of the judgment, it said. HSML was engaged in biscuit manufacturing exclusively for BIL for over three decades under successive job work agreements and the latest agreement of May 22, 2007 was terminated by BIL with effect from November 20, 2019, following a six-month notice period. In response, HSML applied for closure of its operations under Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, submitting the application on August 28, 2019, and notifying its workers shortly thereafter. The case reached the Bombay High Court through petitions after the Maharashtra State Government allegedly failed to respond to the closure application within the statutory period. The state government said that a letter of September 25, 2019, amounted to a refusal of permission. HSML contended that the delay triggered the deemed approval clause under the relevant provision of the Industrial Disputes Act. Justice Karol, who authored the verdict, considered whether the state government's communication of September 25, 2019, qualified as a valid refusal order under the Industrial Disputes Act. The bench also dealt with the question whether the deputy secretary, who issued the communication, was legally empowered to do so. The verdict ruled in favour of HSML and held that the letter of September 25, 2019 did not constitute a valid or reasoned order of refusal as mandated by law. The deputy secretary, it held, was not the 'appropriate government' under the Act, and had no authority to seek resubmission or revision of the closure application. The bench then held since no valid order was passed within 60 days of the application, permission to close must be deemed granted, effective from October 27, 2019. We hold that the application dated August 28, 2019 was complete in all respects, and the 60-day period for the deemed closure to take effect would be calculable from said date," it said. Secondly, the deputy secretary was not the appropriate government who could have asked HSML to revise and resubmit the application for closure as the authority was only vested with the minister concerned, it said. "The minister did not, even in the slightest, consider the merits of the matter independently, much less with or without any application of mind. Subdelegation to the officer was not permitted by law, and, therefore, any communication made by him would be without any legal sanction, the verdict said. The bench reiterated the constitutional right to trade and business under Article 19(1)(g) and closures must still adhere to statutory procedures that safeguard public interest and employee rights. The bench acknowledged the humanitarian aspect of the case and appreciated HSML's willingness to provide additional compensation. The amount was ordered to be disbursed among the affected employees within eight weeks from the date of the judgment.
Hans India
4 days ago
- Hans India
SC discharges hostel in-charge of abetting student's suicide
The Supreme Court has discharged a Tamil Nadu school hostel in-charge, who was accused of abetting a student's suicide. A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra was dealing with an appeal challenging a decision of the Madras High Court, which had rejected the prayer to discharge the appellant for the offence of abetment to suicide under the Indian Penal Code's Section 306. The appellant's counsel contended before the apex court that the appellant had scolded the deceased, due to which the latter had locked himself in a room and hanged himself with a nylon rope. It was argued that the response of the appellant, being the correspondent and in charge of running a school and hostel, was justified, and it was just a chiding as a guardian to ensure that the deceased did not repeat the offence, and there was peace and tranquillity in the hostel. It was further submitted that there was nothing personal between the appellant and the deceased, and such reprimanding was meted out to the deceased only on a complaint by another student. The appellant was accused in an FIR registered by the state police CB-CID for the offences punishable under Sections 306 IPC (abetment to suicide) and 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, charges were framed against him under Section 306. Before the apex court, the counsel representing the Tamil Nadu government "fairly" stated that there did not appear to be any valid ground for charging the appellant for abetment to suicide. In its order, the Supreme Court noted that despite valid service of notice, the complainant, the father of the deceased student, did not appear in the proceedings before the top court. "Having considered the matter in its entirety, we find it a fit case for interference. As has rightly been submitted by learned senior counsel for the appellant, no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life," it said. The apex court added that such scolding was the least a correspondent was required to do, to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures effected. After considering the factual position, the top court, in its considered opinion, found that no mens rea can be attributed to the appellant with regard to the abetment of suicide committed by the deceased. Allowing the appeal, it directed that "the order framing charge against the appellant under Section 306 of the IPC in connection with FIR No.01/2024 registered by CBCID stands set aside. The appellant stands discharged in the said case".
The Hindu
4 days ago
- The Hindu
Scolding does not amount to provoking someone to take own life: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has discharged a man who was accused of driving a student to suicide by scolding him. The accused, in charge of a school and a hostel, had scolded the deceased following a complaint by another student. After the incident, the student killed himself. A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra stated that no ordinary person could have imagined that a scolding would result in such a tragedy. The top court set aside an order of the Madras High Court, which had refused to discharge the teacher for the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. "Having considered the matter in its entirety, we find it a fit case for interference. As has rightly been submitted by the appellant, no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such a tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life," the bench said. The apex court said such scolding was the least to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures were effected. "In the considered opinion of this court, under such admitted factual position, no mens rea (knowledge of wrongdoing) can be attributed to the appellant, much less, with regard to abatement of suicide committed by the deceased," the bench said. The man, through his lawyer, had submitted that his response was justified and was merely a chiding as a guardian to ensure that the deceased did not repeat the offence, and to maintain peace and tranquillity in the hostel. He had submitted that there was nothing personal between him and the deceased. [Assistance for overcoming suicidal thoughts is available on the State's health helpline 104, Tele-MANAS 14416 and SNEHA's suicide prevention helpline - 044 24640050 or from any of the numbers in this link]
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
4 days ago
- Business Standard
Scolding does not amount to provoking someone to take own life: SC
The Supreme Court has discharged a man who was accused of driving a student to suicide by scolding him. The accused, in charge of a school and a hostel, had scolded the deceased following a complaint by another student. After the incident, the student hanged himself in a room. A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra stated that no ordinary person could have imagined that a scolding would result in such a tragedy. The top court set aside an order of the Madras High Court, which had refused to discharge the teacher for the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. "Having considered the matter in its entirety, we find it a fit case for interference. As has rightly been submitted by the appellant, no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such a tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life," the bench said. The apex court said such scolding was the least to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures were effected. "In the considered opinion of this court, under such admitted factual position, no mens rea (knowledge of wrongdoing) can be attributed to the appellant, much less, with regard to abatement of suicide committed by the deceased," the bench said. The man, through his lawyer, had submitted that his response was justified and was merely a chiding as a guardian to ensure that the deceased did not repeat the offence, and to maintain peace and tranquillity in the hostel. He had submitted that there was nothing personal between him and the deceased.
NDTV
4 days ago
- NDTV
Scolding Does Not Amount To Provoking Someone To Take Own Life: Top Court
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has discharged a man who was accused of driving a student to suicide by scolding him. The accused, in charge of a school and a hostel, had scolded the student following a complaint by another student. After the incident, the student hanged himself in a room. A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra stated that no ordinary person could have imagined that a scolding would result in such a tragedy. The top court set aside an order of the Madras High Court, which had refused to discharge the teacher for the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. "Having considered the matter in its entirety, we find it a fit case for interference. As has rightly been submitted by the appellant, no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such a tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life," the bench said. The top court said such scolding was the least to ensure that the complaint made against the dead by another student was taken note of and remedial measures were effected. "In the considered opinion of this court, under such admitted factual position, no mens rea (knowledge of wrongdoing) can be attributed to the appellant, much less, with regard to abatement of suicide committed by the victim," the bench said. The man, through his lawyer, had submitted that his response was justified and was merely a chiding as a guardian to ensure that the student did not repeat the offence, and to maintain peace and tranquillity in the hostel. He had submitted that there was nothing personal between him and the victim.
