In a case involving dacoity and murder, one of the eight accused was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. The question that arose for adjudication was identification of the accused. The Supreme Court held that when the faces of the offenders were covered at the time of occurence and the witness was injured, his identification was doubtful. The minor daughter of the victim failed to identify the accused in court. The reason offered by the high court ' that the incident must have left a deep impression on the mind of the witness ' does not warrant such assumption. The sentence was set aside (Umesh Kamat vs State of Bihar).
The authorities gave notice of disconnection of water supply to a convent as the residents paid water tax at domestic rates instead of commercial. The Kerala High Court held that a convent is the residence of women devoted to religion and thus falls outside the purview of a commercial establishment. The convent does not become commercial just because its water consumption is high. The court also rejected the argument that the convent is a lodge as it houses students (Mother Superior vs Kerala Water Authority).
On a firm ground
A company applied for a no objection certificate for setting up an electroplating plant. The pollution control board issued the certificate for establishment of industry without permission for electroplating. Later, the authorities found that the company was carrying out operations in electroplating. A notice was issued to the company. The Madras High Court held that where the company had invested a substantial amount on effluent treatment plant and sent numerous representations stating the necessity of electroplating, the authorities should not reject their argument on hyper-technical grounds (M/s Belmarks Metal Works, Pondicherry vs The Member Secretary, Pondicherry Pollution Control Committee).