, 1988 CriLJ1661 , 1988 (2 )Crimes753 (SC ), 1988 INSC 123 , JT1988 (2 )SC 325 , (1988 )2 SCC602 , [1988 ]Supp1 SCR1 , ,MANU/SC/0002/1988B.C. Ray#G.L. Oza#M.N. Venkatachaliah#Ranganath Misra#S. Natarajan#S. Ranganathan#Sabyasachi Mukherjee#71155SC11000Judgment/OrderAIR#Allahabad Criminal Cases#BomLR#CriLJ#Crimes#INSC#JT#MANU#SCC#SCR(Supp)Ranganath Misra,G.L. Oza,B.C. Ray,M.N. Venkatachaliah,S. Ranganathan,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2013-11-29Later Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions,External Aids to Construction,Cases of nullity,The Extent Of Exclusion,Statutes Affecting Jurisdiction of Courts,Cases of nullity,The Extent Of Exclusion,Statutes Affecting Jurisdiction of Courts,Avoidance of anomaly,Regard to consequences,Guiding Rules,Precedents,Miscellaneous Interpretations,Introduction,Scope and applicability,What persons may be charged jointly,The Charge,Enforcement of Decrees and Orders of Supreme Court and orders as to Discovery, etc.,The Union Judiciary,The Union,Cannot be challenged equality before law,Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals,Transfer of Criminal Cases,Res judicata.,Jurisdiction of Courts and res Judicata,Suits In General,Constitution of India,Civil Procedure,Criminal Procedure,Consumer Law,Interpretation of Statutes16625,15962,22924,16223,16263,15899,15913,17060,16918,17507,16618,16910,16400,16860,16859,16939,17053,17061,17062,17065,17067,17071,16909,17166,17057,16824,22926,22925,22928,22929,16916,17163,17056,16932,20197,17064,16560,16371,15817,17051,17055,17059,17063,17162,17165,17169,16576,15737,65977,16864,16604,16605,16606,16607,16608,16609,16610,16611,16612,16866,16836,17066,16858,16857,16856,16855,17491,19119,20375,17069,16917,16920,16911,16125,15947,53874 -->

MANU/SC/0002/1988

BomLR

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 468 of 1986

Decided On: 29.04.1988

Appellants: A.R. Antulay Vs. Respondent: R.S. Nayak and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
B.C. Ray, G.L. Oza, M.N. Venkatachaliah, Ranganath Misra, S. Natarajan, S. Ranganathan and Sabyasachi Mukherjee

JUDGMENT

1. The main question involved in this appeal, is whether the directions given by this Court on 16th February, 1984. as reported in R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antulay   MANU/SC/0102/1984 : 1984CriLJ613 were legally proper. The next question is, whether the action and the trial proceedings pursuant to those directions, are legal and valid. Lastly, the third consequential question is, can those directions be recalled or set aside or annulled in those proceedings in the manner sought for by the appellant. In order to answer these questions certain facts have to be borne in mind.

2. The appellant became the Chief Minister of Maharashtra on or about 9th o........