Inadequate Explanation Under Section 313 CrPC Cannot Be Foundation For Conviction If Prosecution Fails To Prove Case: Allahabad High Court No-Confidence Motion In Housing Societies Fails If 2/3 Majority Not Met; Fractions In Voting Threshold Cannot Be Rounded Down: Bombay High Court Successor Rent Controller Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Act As Appellate Court Under Review Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Restores Eviction Order Article 21 Overrides PMLA Section 45 Rigors In Cases Of Unduly Long Incarceration Without Trial: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To SSC Scam ‘Middleman’ Unregistered Family Partition Deed Recording Past Oral Arrangement Doesn't Require Compulsory Registration: Gujarat High Court Private Banks Acting As Authorised Dealers Under FEMA Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction; Can Refuse Transactions For 'Sanctions-Related' Concerns: Gauhati High Court Non-Examination Of Investigating Officer Not Fatal To Prosecution Case If Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible & Trustworthy: Jharkhand High Court Mere Denial Of Signature Insufficient When Execution Is Proved Through Endorsements: Karnataka High Court Restores Specific Performance Decree Sectarianism Claims Can't Discredit Reliable Testimony Of Child Sexual Abuse Victim: Kerala High Court Upholds Madrassa Teacher's Conviction State Must Prove Specific 'Public Interest' To Exempt Projects From Social Impact Assessment Under Section 10A Land Acquisition Act: Telangana High Court Or 2 Rule 2 CPC |Failure To Seek Specific Performance In Earlier Injunction Suit Bars Subsequent Claim; Readiness & Willingness Must Be Continuous: Madras High Court Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Does Not Result In Automatic Discharge In Criminal Case: Orissa High Court History Sheet Can Be Opened On 'Reasonable Belief' Even Without Conviction, But Must Be Reviewed After 7 Years Of Good Conduct: Rajasthan High Court

Upholds Second Proceedings Under Collection of Statistics Act: “Statistical Data Vital for Economic Policy-Making”: Karnataka HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Karnataka, headed by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, upheld the validity of the second proceedings under the Collection of Statistics Act, 2008, against M/S. Masturlal (Pvt.) Ltd. The court dismissed the petitioner’s claim of double jeopardy and emphasized the paramount importance of statistical data for economic policy-making.

The case pertained to the petitioner’s failure to furnish required statistical data to the Government of India’s National Sample Survey Office, thus violating Section 15(1) of the Collection of Statistics Act, 2008. In a previous proceeding, the petitioner had pleaded guilty, paid a fine, and the case was closed.

However, the respondent initiated a second proceeding under Section 15(2) of the Act, as the petitioner failed to furnish the necessary data even after the first conviction. The petitioner contended that this amounted to double jeopardy, as they were being vexed twice for the same offense.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna firmly rejected the double jeopardy claim, asserting that the second proceeding under Section 15(2) operates distinctly from the earlier conviction under Section 15(1). The court stressed that statistical data plays a pivotal role in economic policy-making and is crucial for meeting challenges posed by globalization and liberalization.

“The Act’s rigorous provisions aim to ensure diligent submission of statistical data, which forms the backbone of economic planning and policy formulation for the nation,” stated Justice Nagaprasanna in the judgment.

Furthermore, the court directed the concerned court to conclude the proceedings expeditiously and within six months from the receipt of the order.

This ruling reinforces the significance of adhering to statutory requirements in providing accurate statistical data, as it has far-reaching implications on economic development and international compliances.

Date of Decision: 28th July 2023

M/S. MASTURLAL (PVT.) LTD. vs GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/M_S_Masturlal_Pvt_Ltd_vs_Government_Of_India_on_28_July_2023_Karnt.HC_.pdf"]

Latest Legal News