After the sudden death of a man, his father lodged an FIR against the daughter-in-law, suspecting that she had poisoned her husband. The woman was involved in an affair with another man. The chief judicial magistrate took cognisance of the case. When the case reached the Supreme Court, it quashed it, stating that the court could not take cognisance of an offence merely on suspicion. The death certificate stated that the reason of death was cardiac failure and there was no evidence to support the father’s claim that his son was poisoned. The court cannot take cognisance on the basis of surmise and conjecture (Harish Chandra Prasad Mani vs State of Jharkhand).
In Rajasthan, manufacturers get a concession on the tax payable on raw materials. A polyester yarn maker claimed this rebate on purchase of diesel. The assessing authority did not permit this, contending that diesel is not used directly to produce the yarn. The Rajasthan Tax Board ruled in favour of the manufacturer, so the commercial taxation officer appealed to the Supreme Court. Dismissing the appeal, the apex court held that “raw material”, as defined in the statute, includes fuel used in the production process. In this case, the diesel is used to run generators to produce electricity, which in turn is used to manufacture the yarn. It can therefore be considered raw material (Commercial Taxation Officer, Udaipur vs M/s Rajasthan Tax Chemical).
A bank paid the family of an employee, who died in harness, a lumpsum of Rs 4,57,607 as terminal benefit as well as family pension but refused to grant employment on compassionate ground to a dependant, primarily because she had other sources of income. The petitioner took the bank to court. The Supreme Court reiterated that compassionate employment could be granted only if the penury of the dependents could be proved. In this case, the dependant did not fall under that category and the apex court held that the criteria of penury could not be diluted to “not very well to do” as had been done in this case by the high court (State Bank of India vs Jaspal Kaur).
SOLON
