(1) SUPREME COURT
Further investigation
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 173(8)—Further investigation—Requirement of leave of Court—Though Section 173(8) CrPC does not expressly mandate prior permission of the Court for further investigation after filing of final report under Section 173(2), consistent judicial practice and doctrine of contemporanea expositio require investigating agencies to seek leave of the Magistrate/Court—Such requirement acts as a safeguard against abuse of power and arbitrary reopening of concluded investigations. [Paras 25, 26] B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 173(2) & (8)—Acceptance of closure report—Power to order further investigation—Who can direct—Once a closure report is accepted by the Magistrate, power to direct further investigation vests only with the Magis...
(2) SUPREME COURT
Consumer Protection
A. Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Section 2(1)(d)—Definition of ‘Consumer’—Commercial purpose—Leasing of residential flat—Mere fact that a residential flat is leased out after possession does not ipso facto establish that the flat was purchased for a “commercial purpose” so as to exclude the buyer from the definition of ‘consumer’ under Section 2(1)(d). The determinative test is the dominant purpose behind the purchase, and unless a close and direct nexus with profit-generating commercial activity is established, the purchaser continues to be a consumer. [Paras 10, 17] B. Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Section 2(1)(d)—Commercial purpose—Dominant intention test—Whether a transaction is for a commercial purpose depends on the dominant intention b...
(3) SUPREME COURT
Appointment of Arbitrator
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 11 (pre-2015 regime)—Appointment of Arbitrator—Scope of jurisdiction—Where the arbitrator was appointed prior to 23-10-2015 under the regime of SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd., the Section 11 Court was required to examine not only the existence but also the validity of the arbitration agreement—Order appointing arbitrator being a judicial order attains finality and binds parties at all subsequent stages. [Paras 18–22] B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 34—Challenge to arbitral award—Bar on reopening validity of arbitration clause—Once the Section 11 Court, in pre-2015 regime, appoints an arbitrator after impliedly or expressly holding existence and validity of arbitration agreement, parties are barre...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Custody of child
A. Guardians and Wards Act, 1890—Custody of Minor Children—Paramount consideration—Welfare of child—Relevant factors—While welfare of the child is the paramount consideration, court must evaluate cumulative impact of factors such as conduct of parents, educational continuity, stability, comfort, standard of living, past compliance with court orders, and inclination of minors—High Court erred in holding that such factors are irrelevant—Holistic assessment mandatory. [Paras 22, 24, 31] B. Custody Jurisdiction—International Child Removal—Effect of foreign court orders—Parental misconduct—Mother unilaterally removing minor children from Qatar to India mid-academic session without consent of guardian father and without court permission—Foreign court revoking custod...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Service Law
A. All India Services—IPS Cadre Allocation—Insider Vacancy—Claim of next candidate in merit—Once a candidate is allocated to a cadre pursuant to selection, the insider vacancy stands consumed—Non-acceptance or non-joining by a senior candidate does not automatically confer a right upon candidates lower in merit to claim such insider vacancy—Cadre allocation cannot be kept open indefinitely—Finality of allocation essential for stability in service administration. [Paras 4.1, 9, 11–12] B. Service Jurisprudence—Cadre Allocation—Delay and acquiescence—Effect—Challenge raised six years after 2004 selection held grossly belated—Appellant having accepted allocation and served in Tamil Nadu cadre for more than two decades—Doctrine of finality applies&mdash...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Rejection of plaint
A. Constitution of India—Article 227—Supervisory Jurisdiction of High Court—Scope and limitations—Power under Article 227 is supervisory and extraordinary—To be exercised sparingly and with judicial discipline—Not meant to function as appellate or revisional jurisdiction—High Court cannot invoke Article 227 to circumvent or supplant specific statutory remedies available under the Code of Civil Procedure—Availability of efficacious alternative remedy operates as a near total bar—Improper exercise of supervisory jurisdiction deprecated. [Paras 5, 5.1, 5.5–5.7, 7–9] B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order VII Rule 11—Rejection of plaint—Availability of statutory remedy—Effect on Article 227 jurisdiction—Where CPC provides specific provision fo...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Arbitral award
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 29A(4) & (5)—Extension of mandate—Award rendered after expiry of statutory time—An application under Section 29A(5) seeking extension of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal is maintainable even after the expiry of the periods prescribed under Sections 29A(1) and 29A(3) and even after an award is rendered in the interregnum—The statute does not prescribe any threshold bar against entertaining such an application post-award—Power and jurisdiction of the Court under Section 29A are not denuded by the arbitrator’s act of delivering an award without mandate. [Paras 1–2, 14–17, 21–23] B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 29A—Nature and effect of award passed without mandate—An arbitral award r...
(8) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 438—Anticipatory Bail—Grant of—Offences under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 5 of MPID Act, 1999—High Court rejected anticipatory bail—Supreme Court had granted interim protection—Investigation under IPC completed and charge-sheet filed—No charge-sheet filed under MPID Act—Accused cooperated with investigation—Interim protection made absolute—Anticipatory bail granted. [Paras 6–9, 11] B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471—Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999—Sections 3, 4 & 5—Anticipatory Bail—Effect of filing of charge-sheet—Serious allegations of financial fraud and misappropriation&md...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Suspension of sentence
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 389—Suspension of Sentence—Pending Criminal Appeal—Conviction under Section 302 IPC and life imprisonment—Appellant undergone about fourteen years of actual incarceration—Appeal pending since 2016—Repeated rejection of suspension applications by High Court—Likelihood of inordinate delay in disposal of appeal—Long incarceration held to be a relevant and determinative factor—Refusal to suspend sentence held unjustified—Sentence suspended and bail granted pending appeal. [Paras 6–9, 11] B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 498-A, 304-B—Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961—Sections 3 & 4—Suspension of Sentence—Principles governing—Seriousness of offence and nature of conviction not sole ba...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Bail—Grant of Bail by Supreme Court—Interference with High Court order rejecting bail—Serious offences under IPC, Prevention of Corruption Act and Motor Vehicles Act—Appellants not principal offenders—Allegations primarily of post-occurrence conspiracy and evidence manipulation—Long incarceration up to about eighteen months—Large number of prosecution witnesses and likelihood of delay in trial—Continued detention held unjustified—High Court order rejecting bail set aside—Bail granted with stringent conditions. [Paras 7–12] B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 201, 467, 468, 471, 120-B read with Section 34—Bail—Nature of allegations—Appellants neither named as perpetrators of accident nor accused of causin...
(1) PUNJAB & HARYANA
Abetment of Suicide
Copyright Act, 1957—Section 14, 51—Infringement—Rights and Remedies A. Copyright Act, 1957—Section 14—Exclusive Rights—Copyright vests in the author of a literary, artistic, musical, or cinematographic work the exclusive right to reproduce, adapt, distribute, perform, or communicate the work to the public. (Para 2) B. Copyright Act, 1957—Section 51—Infringement—Unauthorized use of a copyrighted work, including reproduction, adaptation, sale, or public communication, constitutes infringement, regardless of intent. (Para 3) C. Copyright Act, 1957—Exceptions—Limited exceptions such as private study, research, criticism, review, and reporting of current events do not amount to infringement. (Para 4) D. Remedies—Civil remedies include injunction, damages, and a...
(2) PUNJAB & HARYANA
Copyright Act, 1957—Section 14, 51—Infringement—Exclusive Rights—Remedies A. Definition and Scope—Copyright grants the creator of a literary, artistic, musical, or cinematographic work exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, perform, or communicate the work to the public. (Sec. 14) B. Infringement—Any unauthorized use of a copyrighted work, including reproduction, adaptation, sale, or communication to the public, constitutes infringement. Innocent intention does not absolve liability. (Sec. 51) C. Exceptions and Fair Use—Certain uses, such as private study, research, criticism, or reporting, may not amount to infringement, provided they are within statutory exceptions. D. Remedies for Infringement—Civil remedies include injunction, damages, or accounts of profits; criminal rem...
(3) ALLAHABAD
A. Criminal Procedure Code—Police encounter—Compliance with Supreme Court guidelines—Reiteration of directions in PUCL v. State of Maharashtra (2014) 10 SCC 635—Mandatory registration of FIR in all cases of police encounters resulting in death or grievous injury—Independent investigation to be conducted by CID or by a team headed by an officer senior in rank to head of police team involved—Statement of injured person to be recorded before Magistrate or Medical Officer. (Paras 5, 6 & 13) B. Police conduct—Use of force—Unjustified firing—Infliction of firearm injuries below knee level for extraneous considerations such as career advancement or public image impermissible—Police cannot assume role of judiciary in punishing accused—Right to life and dignity under Art. 21 ...
(4) CALCUTTA
Statutory presumption
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 139—Dishonour of cheque—Legally enforceable debt—Statutory presumption—Accused admitted issuance of cheque but pleaded that cheque was issued as security for a different transaction—Defence of cheque issued for security without cogent proof held untenable—Once execution of cheque admitted, presumption under Sections 118 and 139 operates—Absence of written loan agreement not fatal—Complainant established ingredients of Section 138 by oral and documentary evidence—Accused failed to rebut statutory presumption—Conviction upheld. [Paras 10 to 16, 29 to 30] B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Demand notice—Service and compliance—Cheque dishonoured for insufficiency of funds—S...
(5) DELHI
Civil Suit For Recovery
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 96—Appeal against decree—Recovery suit based on promissory notes and cheques—Proof of execution—Suit for recovery of money decreed on basis of two promissory notes and five undated cheques—Promissory notes bearing signatures of deceased borrower—Defendants neither specifically pleaded forgery of handwriting/signatures nor led evidence to disprove execution—Plaintiff proved signatures by summoning bank record—Undated cheques, though not bills of exchange, held to possess corroborative evidentiary value—Trial Court rightly decreed recovery applying preponderance of probabilities—No infirmity in decree—Appeal dismissed. [Paras 18 to 24, 29] B. Evidence Act, 1872—Burden of proof—Denial of signatures—Failure t...
(6) DELHI
Rejection of plaint, Agreement to Sell
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 7 Rule 11(a) and (d)—Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 54—Rejection of plaint—Title in the suit property—On the basis of unregistered agreement to sell—An unregistered agreement to sell, without a registered sale deed, does not confer title under Section 54 of T.P. Act—In the absence of a Sale Deed, would not confer valid title—A General Power of Attorney and a receipt do not amount to transfer of ownership, as a power of attorney only creates an agency and is not a sale—In the absence of any registered title document in favour of the plaintiff, the suit is vexatious and does not disclose a cause of action, and is liable to be rejected. B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order VII Rule 11(a)—Rejection of plaint—Agreement...
(7) DELHI
Territorial jurisdiction
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 19—Territorial jurisdiction in defamation suits—Principles governing forum selection—Defamation suit based on publication of allegedly defamatory content on the internet—Held, mere nationwide accessibility does not confer jurisdiction everywhere—Two governing principles laid down: (i) Merger Rule—If defamatory content causes harm at the place where the defendant resides or carries on business, suit must be filed there; and (ii) Maximum Wrong Rule—Where no part of the wrong is done at the place of defendant’s residence, jurisdiction lies where the maximum harm to reputation is suffered—Plaintiff cannot choose forum arbitrarily. [Paras 29, 34, 38, 66] B. Defamation on the Internet—Determination of situs of wrong—Online...
(8) ALLAHABAD
Complainant
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138, 7, 9 and 142—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 401 and 397—Cheque dishonour—Complaint by third party—Not permissible—A complaint u/s 138 of the Act, for dishonour of a cheque is maintainable only at the instance of the "payee" or the "holder in due course" of the cheque, as explicitly stipulated under Section 142(1)(a) of the Act—A "third party" or a stranger having no legal title to the cheque as a payee or holder in due course lacks the locus standi to institute such a complaint in their own name, even if they are indirectly affected by the transaction—While a complaint can be filed through an authorized representative (such as a power of attorney holder or company signatory), the complainant must remain ...
(9) CALCUTTA
West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997—Sections 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 21, 22(2), 32—Ejectment Suit; Deposit of Rent; Deliberate Default; High Court Supervisory Jurisdiction—Constitution of India, 1950—Article 227: A. Deposit of Arrears and Current Rent: Tenant’s failure to deposit arrears and current rent as per court order, without seeking timely extension, amounts to deliberate default, justifying striking out of defence under Section 7(3). (Paras 2–5, 9–18) B. Extension of Time: Proviso to Section 7(2) permits extension only if application is made within original court-ordered period; belated applications are not maintainable. (Para 16) C. Remedies under Sections 21 & 32: Tenant’s non-availment of statutory remedies for non-acceptance or non-receipt of rent does not excuse defaul...
(10) CALCUTTA
Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 18, Rule 17; Sections 11, 151—Re-examination of witnesses, Recall of Evidence, Res Judicata—Succession Act—Will and Probate: A. Re-examination of Witnesses: Power to recall witnesses under Order 18, Rule 17 CPC is discretionary and intended for clarification of issues, not for filling omissions in evidence after witnesses are fully examined and discharged. (Paras 21, 38, 39) B. Inherent Powers: Section 151 CPC permits recall in appropriate cases, but not to permit fresh evidence or complete omissions. (Paras 38–40) C. Examination-in-Chief: Under amended CPC, written statements of examination-in-chief are treated as oral evidence; adoption of earlier evidence does not constitute fresh evidence. (Para 42) D. Framing of Issues: Post-evidence framing cannot create a ne...