Skip to main content

Failure to lower National Flag at or before sunset - not dishonor of the National Flag

The High Court of Kerala in P.K Satheesh Babu v State of Kerala [Crl M.C 1208 OF 2016] has ruled that mere failure or omission to lower National Flag at or before sunset does not in any manner amount to dishonor of the National Flag. Prosecution was launched against accused for offence under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insult to National Honour Act,1971. It was alleged that he has not cared to lower the National Flag hoisted in front of his office even at sunset. Taking cue from a Judgment of Bombay High Court and Apex Court, Justice B. Kemal Pasha noted that prosecution launched against petitioner was unnecessary, as he had no intention to dishonor the national flag at any point of time. The bench referred to the ratio laid down by Apex Court in Navin Jindal’s Case[ Civil Appeal No:453 of 2004] which had ruled that flag code being in the nature of mere executive instructions issued by the Central Government do not the posses the sanctity of being a Law contemplated under Article 13(3)(a) of the Constitution of India. A reference was also made to the Judgment of Bombay High Court Amgonda Vithobha Pandare v Union of India and others [2012(4)Bom.C.R(Cri) 219] to hold that mere omission to lower the flag after sunset does not amount offence as mentioned in Explanation 4 or Section of the Prevention of Insult to National Honour Act,1971. The High court noted that under the circumstances in the absence of statutory prescriptions, penal consequences cannot be inflicted on the cases like those of the petitioner. The bench hence quashed all proceedings launched against petitioner in this regard.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MACT - Permanent disability - calculate - compensation - Supreme Court - Part 2

1) C. K. Subramonia Iyer vs. T. Kunhikuttan Nair - AIR 1970 SC 376 2) R. D. Hattangadi vs. Pest Control (India) Ltd. - 1995 (1) SCC 551 3) Baker vs. Willoughby - 1970 AC 467 4) Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. - 2010(10) SCALE 298 5) Yadava Kumar v. D.M., National Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2010 (8) SCALE 567) 5. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of ...

An order of attachment before judgment ends if a suit is dismissed

An order of attachment before judgment passed under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code will not survive the dismissal of a suit and it ends when the suit is dismissed after trial. Contents 1 (i) Whether an order of attachment before judgment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“the Code”, for short) made in a suit for recovery of money will survive the dismissal of the suit on merits? 2 (ii) If the appellate court reverses the decree of the trial court and allows the suit claim, will it result in an automatic revival of the order of attachment before judgment? 3 (iii) Whether the ratio in the decision by Full Bench in Thampi Muhammad Abdul Kadir v. Padmanabha Pillai Parameswaran Pillai (1952 KLT 264) holds good in view of the change in the precedential law and insertion of Order XXXVIII Rule 11A to the Code? 3.1 “11A. Provisions applicable to attachment.- 3.2 “57. Determination of attachment.- 3.3 Arumuhom Ammal v. Nayanar Panicker (1962 KLT 264) 3.4...

Full & Final payment - No dues certificate - end of contract

Whether after the contract comes to an end by completion of the contract work and acceptance of the final bill in full and final satisfaction and after issuance a `No Due Certificate' by the contractor Supreme Court of India Supreme Court of India R.L. Kalathia & Co. vs State Of Gujarat on 14 January, 2011 Author: P Sathasivam Bench: P. Sathasivam, B.S. Chauhan IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3245 OF 2003 R.L. Kalathia & Co Appellant(s) Versus State of Gujarat .... Respondent(s) JUDGMENT P. Sathasivam, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 07.10.2002 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat whereby the High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.12.1982 passed by the Civil Judge, (S.D.), Jamnagar directing the State Government to pay a sum of Rs.2,27,758/- with costs and interest and dismissed the Civil Suit as well as cross objections filed by the a...