Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

"Bombay High Court Upholds Justice in Bank Corruption Case: 'Depriving Appellant of Her Own Money Would be Travesty of Justice'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 In a landmark decision, the Bombay High Court, presided over by Justice M. S. Karnik, has set a significant precedent in a case involving the seizure of bank accounts in the wake of a corruption scandal. The court notably stated, "Depriving the appellant of her own money would be a travesty of justice," emphasizing the principles of fairness and rightful ownership in its ruling.

The case, Criminal Appeal No. 281 of 2024, revolved around Latha Mahalingam, the appellant, whose bank accounts were frozen during the investigation of her husband, an employee at Canara Bank, in a corruption case. The appellant's plea sought to overturn the decision that denied her access to her funds, an amount totaling Rs. 2 lakhs, which had been frozen since 2004.

In a compassionate observation, Justice Karnik noted the appellant's critical health condition, stating that she is suffering from fourth-stage cancer and should not be deprived of her funds for medical treatment. This observation underscored the court's commitment to ensuring justice is not only served but is empathetic to individual circumstances.

The original verdict by the trial court was challenged on the grounds that it had become functus officio, meaning it had no further authority to modify its decision post-trial. The Bombay High Court, however, disagreed with this interpretation, allowing the appeal and setting aside the previous order.

Justice Karnik's ruling emphasized that there was no conclusive evidence linking the seized funds to the crime for which the appellant's husband was convicted. The court ordered the refund or transfer of the Rs. 2 lakhs along with accrued interest to the appellant's account, subject to her furnishing a bond without security.

This judgment highlights the judiciary's role in balancing legal procedures with humanitarian considerations, ensuring that justice is not just blind to circumstances but is also compassionate and fair. The decision is a significant step in upholding the rights of individuals caught in the crossfire of criminal investigations involving their family members.

Date of Decided : 26-03-2024

LATHA MAHALINGAM VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

 

Latest Legal News