(1) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India—Article 136—Civil Procedure—Finality of proceedings—Maintainability of Miscellaneous Application—Recall of SLP dismissal—Functus officio—After dismissal of a Special Leave Petition, the Supreme Court becomes functus officio and cannot entertain a Miscellaneous Application seeking recall on the basis of subsequent events, except in limited circumstances such as correction of clerical errors or impossibility in implementing executory directions—Subsequent developments, including those arising from insolvency proceedings, cannot reopen the finality of concluded civil proceedings. (Paras 3, 4, 5, 9) B. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 12A—Withdrawal of CIRP—Commercial wisdom of CoC—Limited judicial review—Approval of withdrawa...
(2) SUPREME COURT
A. Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997—Rule 11(3)—Select list—Scope of operation—Vacancy due to non-reporting—The select list prepared under Rule 11(3) is service-wise and limited to the number of notified vacancies—The Rules do not permit operation of the select list beyond its statutory framework—A vacancy arising due to non-reporting of a selected candidate cannot be claimed as of right by a candidate next in the order of merit from the same selection process. (Paras 6 to 13, 19 to 20) B. Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985—Section 19; Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997—Rule 11(3)—Non-appointment—Challenge before Tribunal—Scope of jud...
(3) SUPREME COURT
A. Recruitment Rules—Relaxation in qualifying criteria—Migration to general category—Reserved category candidates—Merit-based selection—In the absence of any express prohibition in the recruitment rules or notification, candidates belonging to reserved categories who have availed relaxation in qualifying examination criteria (such as TET) are entitled to migrate to the general category based on their merit in the main examination (such as TAIT). (Paras 28 to 32) B. Recruitment Rules—Relaxation in eligibility criteria—Effect on merit—Eligibility vs. merit—Distinction—Relaxation in eligibility criteria, such as reduced qualifying marks in TET for reserved category candidates, pertains only to eligibility and does not affect merit determination—Merit is to be assessed solel...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Maintainability
A. National Green Tribunal Act, 2010—Sections 14 & 15—Jurisdiction of NGT—Adjudicatory function—Delegation to committees—The National Green Tribunal, being an adjudicatory authority, cannot abdicate its jurisdiction by delegating decision-making powers to committees, including expert committees—Such committees are constituted only to assist the Tribunal, and the final adjudicatory determination must be rendered by the NGT itself. (Paras 10 to 14) B. National Green Tribunal Act, 2010—Section 19(1)—Principles of natural justice—Notice and consideration of material—Orders passed by the NGT without affording notice to affected parties or without due consideration of relevant reports violate the mandate of Section 19(1) of the Act—Adherence to principles of natural justic...
(5) SUPREME COURT
A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Section 2(30)—Requisitioned vehicle—Liability for accident—Transfer of control—Where a vehicle is requisitioned by public authorities in exercise of statutory powers under Section 160 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the ownership and effective control of the vehicle stand transferred to the State for the period of requisition—The private owner is divested of control and decision-making authority—Consequently, liability arising from any accident during such period rests with the requisitioning authority and not with the private insurer engaged by the owner for ordinary use. (Paras 6, 9 to 11) B. Representation of the People Act, 1950—Section 160—Requisition of vehicle—Inclusion of driver—Liability—Though Section 160 empower...
(6) SUPREME COURT
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 11, 34 & 37—Indian Contract Act, 1872—Section 28—Interpretation of contract—Restriction on legal remedies—Validity of clauses—A contractual clause which restricts or ousts recourse to judicial remedies or arbitration proceedings is void under Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872—A stipulation enabling one party to be the sole arbiter of its own liability, especially where such liability is disputed, is impermissible—Administration of justice cannot be foreclosed even by contractual terms—A broadly worded arbitration clause encompasses disputes arising out of the agreement. (Paras 9, 25 to 30, 32, 35, 38) B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—“Excepted matters”—Scope and interpretation&mda...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Cancellation of bail
A. Constitution of India—Article 136—Special Leave Petition—Interference with bail order—Limited scope—Even where the impugned order granting bail is not happily worded, the Supreme Court may decline to interfere if the ultimate conclusion granting bail is found to be justified—Interference under Article 136 is not warranted merely on account of defective reasoning when the order is otherwise sustainable in law. (Para 2) B. Constitution of India—Article 136—Cancellation of bail—Liberty reserved—Grounds—While declining to interfere with an order granting bail, the Court may reserve liberty to the petitioner to seek cancellation of bail in the event of violation of bail conditions or where any threat or intimidation is extended to witnesses. (Para 2) C. Code of Criminal...
(8) SUPREME COURT
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 95—Application before NCLT—Time-bound direction—Non-compliance—Where a time-bound direction is issued to the National Company Law Tribunal to decide an application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, failure to adhere to the timeline resulting in refusal to consider the matter on merits may warrant interference—Procedural delay should not defeat substantive rights of the parties. (Paras 2, 4, 5) B. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 95—Extension of time—Interest of justice—One final opportunity—In appropriate cases, the Court may grant a final opportunity to the applicant to pursue the application under Section 95, even after expiry of the earlier stipulated timeline, to ensure that the m...
(9) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India—Article 136—Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968—Unrecognized political party—Symbol dispute—Jurisdiction of Election Commission of India—Disputes relating to allocation of symbol between rival groups of an unrecognized political party cannot be adjudicated by the Election Commission of India under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968—Such disputes fall outside its jurisdiction. (Para 2) B. Constitution of India—Article 136—Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Alternative remedy—Civil suit—Expeditious disposal—Where a civil suit has already been instituted in respect of the dispute, the aggrieved party is at liberty to seek appropriate relief before the Civil Court—The Court may direct expedi...
(10) SUPREME COURT
A. Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976—Section 321A—Special Leave Petition—Liberty to approach statutory authority—Disposal—Where the petitioners seek relief which can be appropriately considered by the competent statutory authority, the Court may dispose of the Special Leave Petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file an application under Section 321A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976—The authority is directed to consider such application in accordance with law. (Paras 2, 3) ...
(1) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Conviction
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 341, 354 & 323—Conviction—Sustainability—Corroboration of victim’s testimony—Conviction under IPC for offences of wrongful restraint, causing hurt, and outraging modesty is sustainable where prosecution evidence, including the testimony of the victim, is cogent and duly corroborated—Unauthorized investigation under another statute does not vitiate conviction under IPC where evidence otherwise establishes guilt—Sentence imposed found reasonable and upheld. (Paras 13 to 29, 36 to 37) B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 324—Hurt by dangerous weapon—Scope—Injury by teeth—Injury caused by human teeth cannot be construed as being inflicted by a “dangerous weapon or means” within the meaning of Section 324 IPC&mdash...
(2) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138 read with Sections 118 & 139; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 313—Presumptions—Cheque issuance admitted—Burden of proof—Where issuance of cheque and signature are admitted, presumptions arise under Sections 118 and 139 of the Act that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability—The burden lies on the accused to rebut the presumption by cogent evidence—Mere denial in the statement under Section 313 CrPC is insufficient to discharge such burden. (Paras 21 to 23, 29) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Subsequent payment—Effect on offence—Payment made after the cause of action has arisen, including after issuance of legal notice, does not ex...
(3) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 341, 352, 506; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989—Section 3(1)(x)—Appeal against acquittal—Scope of interference—Double presumption of innocence—In an appeal against acquittal, the High Court cannot interfere unless the judgment suffers from patent perversity, is based on misreading or omission of material evidence, or results in manifest miscarriage of justice—After acquittal, the accused enjoys a double presumption of innocence—Where the view taken by the Trial Court is a reasonable and possible view, the same is not liable to be interfered with merely because another view is possible. (Paras 12, 13, 30 to 32) B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 437A [Corresponding to Section 481 of the Bharatiya ...
(4) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Quashing of FIR
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 341 & 323 read with Section 34—Constitution of India—Article 21—Quashing of FIR—Right to speedy trial—Inordinate delay—The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution—Where proceedings remain pending for over 14 years for offences punishable only with a nominal fine not exceeding Rs.100/-, such delay amounts to a travesty of justice—Continuation of such proceedings would be unjustified, and the FIR along with consequential proceedings is liable to be quashed on the ground of unreasonable delay. (Paras 10, 11, 13) B. Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994—Section 33—Jurisdiction of Gram Panchayat—Minor offences—Delay in proceedings—Under Section 33 of the Himach...
(5) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Section 64—Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012—Sections 4 & 6—Quashing of FIR—Compromise between parties—Marriage between accused and victim—Where the accused and the victim have solemnized marriage and are living together happily, continuation of criminal proceedings arising out of offences under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 would not serve any fruitful purpose—In such circumstances, the FIR is liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers, considering the settlement between the parties—(Para 8, 9, 10) B. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Section 64—Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012—Sect...
(6) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Acquittal
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 101, 102—Dishonour of cheque—Presumption—Rebuttal—Presumption of legally enforceable debt arises on admission of issuance of cheque—However, accused can rebut presumption on preponderance of probabilities—Defence that cheque was issued as security for committee transaction found probable—Failure of complainant to produce proof of loan weakens case—Acquittal justified. [Paras 16 to 19] B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 378; Principles governing appeal against acquittal—Appellate Court can interfere with acquittal only if findings are perverse, based on misreading of evidence, or no reasonable view possible—Where two views are possible, view favouring accused must p...
(7) CALCUTTA
. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 362—Review/recall/modification of judgment—Scope of power to recall or review criminal court’s final order is extremely limited—Once a judgment is signed, it cannot be altered except for correcting clerical or arithmetical errors—No review on merits is permissible—Application seeking modification of final revisional order amounts to re-arguing the case and is not maintainable—No error apparent on face of record found, hence recall refused. [Paras 8 to 10, 13 to 15] B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 362—Error apparent on face of record—Distinction from appeal—Only self-evident errors can justify review—Errors requiring elaborate reasoning cannot be treated as “error apparent”—Review ju...
(8) ALLAHABAD
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 307 & Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Section 134—Injured Witness—Testimony of the wife as an injured and sterling witness, despite strained matrimonial relations and dowry disputes, was held reliable—Injuries caused by the husband using a firearm were proved through consistent and credible evidence—In cases based on direct evidence, motive loses significance—Conviction under Section 307 IPC was upheld. B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 307—Appreciation of Evidence—Evidence of an injured witness carries great evidentiary value and, when corroborated, prevails over minor inconsistencies, including discrepancies in medical reports—The prosecution successfully established guilt beyond reasonable doubt. C. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—...
(9) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 37—Bail Conditions—Grant of bail under Section 37 is subject to stringent conditions—The Court must record satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail—Mere prolonged custody or delay in trial, without meeting these statutory requirements, is insufficient to grant bail. B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 37—Successive Bail Applications—Subsequent bail applications are maintainable only upon a material change in circumstances—Judicial discipline requires that successive applications be placed before the same judge to avoid conflicting orders and prevent misuse of process. C. Criminal Law—Bail &...
(10) GAUHATI
Writ jurisdiction
A. Assam State Commission for Women Act, 1994—Section 10—Jurisdiction—The Assam State Commission for Women has no authority to adjudicate or direct payment of maintenance—Its functions under Section 10 are limited to investigative, recommendatory, and promotional roles, and do not extend to determination of rights or liabilities between parties. B. Constitution of India—Article 226—Writ Jurisdiction—The High Court, in exercise of writ jurisdiction, set aside the Commission’s order directing maintenance, holding it to be a jurisdictional error as the Commission acted beyond its statutory powers. C. Maintenance—Statutory Remedies—Maintenance claims are governed by specific legal provisions such as Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS) and personal laws—The Commission ...
