The Supreme Court has stated that “no roving enquiry is permissible” against managers of a company which is accused of committing an offence. It should be specifically alleged that the accused executive was in charge of the day to day affairs of the company. An obligation rests on the prosecution to give details so that the persons responsible for the offence are identified and the trial proceeds only against them. In this case, Subhankar Biswas vs Sandeep Mehta, the chairman and the deputy general manager of the company were named in a complaint under the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules. They moved the Calcutta high court against the prosecution, arguing that they were not directly responsible for the offence. The high court quashed the prosecution of the chairman as it found that he was not directly connected with the daily conduct of the company. However, the deputy general manager was not exonerated. He moved the Supreme Court, stating that he was roped in with a vague allegation, and he was not directly in charge of the business. The Supreme Court set aside his trial observing that the cases of the chairman and the manager stood on the same footing and the complaint did not specify their definite roles in commission of the offence.
SC declines stay on tendering for security licence plate
The Supreme Court last week declined to stay the tender process for procurement of Security Licence Plates and Associated Items for High Security Registration Number Plates (HSRNP) floated by Delhi Integrated Multi-Modal Transit System Ltd (DIMTS) for the national capital region. The court was hearing a petition by Tonnjes Eastern Security Tech Ltd which contended that the tender was against the conditions specified in the central rules under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Supreme Court observed that no order on the allotment of tender will be finalized until the Delhi high court gives its decision on the dispute.
Bombay HC quashes CBEC circular
A division bench of the Bombay high court has quashed the circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which put a condition for claiming benefits under the Target Plus Scheme in the Foreign Trade Policy (2004-09). Essel Mining Industries Ltd, a registered exporter and manufacturer of molybdenum with imported raw materials, challenged the condition. It argued that the May 2007 circular which stated that the input which is imported by an exporter must be one which is required to be used in the product exported. The revenue authorities, while rejecting the claim of benefits by the company, insisted that there should not only be a ‘broad nexus’ of the goods imported with reference to the product group of the exported goods but that the goods imported must constitute an input in the very products which are exported. The high court stated that the circular was against the Foreign Trade Policy and set it aside.
Injunction against copying design
The Delhi high court has restrained Bonjour International from manufacturing or selling any water jug which is similar in design to those made by Veeplast Houseware Ltd. The latter company manufactures plastic products with the trade name Nayasa. The present case was about the design of a water jug with novel features. The company claimed that it has been granted registration of the design by the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks in 2004. It alleged that the rival company manufactured and sold jugs of similar looks naming it Bonjour Maharaja. The high court stated that “even if the two products are placed side by side, it cannot be disputed that the primary design of the jug of Veerplast has been copied by Bonjour. In fact, there seems to be no distinction in the primary design of the two products.” Therefore the court passed an injunction.
Madras High Court dismisses writ petition of BSNL
Madras high court has dismissed the writ petition of BSNL and ruled that its employees are entitled to contribution from BSNL to their provident fund for the pre-induction training period undergone by them. The regional commissioner had accepted the plea of some officers that they are entitled to the company’s contribution for the training period. BSNL opposed it in the high court. Dismissing the petition, the court held that the term ‘employee’ in the law is wide and therefore covered trainees also. They are also entitled to gratuity and employees’ state insurance (ESI) benefit from the training period.
Damages for delay in delivery of air cargo
The National Consumer Commission has awarded compensation to a Delhi firm, Registan Exports, whose consignment of garments and precious stones were delivered in Paraguay after a two-month delay by Air France. The consignment was for the Christmas season, but the goods sent in November reached the destination January end. The airline contended that there was no special instruction to deliver the goods before Christmas and there was special urgency. The commission stated that there was clear deficiency in service causing mental stress to the exporter, loss of future business and reputation.
