(1) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 438—Anticipatory bail—Post-charge-sheet stage—Petitioner denied anticipatory bail by High Court—Investigation completed and charge-sheet filed—Held, once investigation is complete, custodial interrogation is ordinarily not required—No useful purpose would be served by arrest—Petitioner directed to appear before Trial Court and seek regular bail. [Paras 4–5] B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Bail—Considerations—Allegation of misappropriation by public servant—However, filing of charge-sheet and pendency of trial relevant factors—Court balanced interest of investigation and liberty of accused—Direction issued to furnish bail before Trial Court. [Paras 3–5] Result: SLP disposed of—Petitioner...
(2) SUPREME COURT
NDPS
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 482 (corresponding to Section 438 CrPC)—Interim protection from arrest—NDPS offences—Petitioner apprehending arrest in FIR under Section 123 BNS, 2023 and Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) and 25 of the NDPS Act—Notice issued—Held, pending consideration, petitioner entitled to interim protection—Direction issued that she shall not be arrested subject to joining and cooperating with investigation—Petitioner to comply with conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS—Protection to continue till next date of hearing. [Paras 2–4] Result: Notice issued—Interim protection from arrest granted. ...
(3) SUPREME COURT
Bail granted
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 439—Bail—Prolonged pre-trial detention—Petitioner accused under Sections 409, 420, 467 and 468 IPC—Allegations of activating inoperative ATM cards and withdrawing money—Petitioner in custody for over two years and charge-sheet already filed—Held, prolonged incarceration of an undertrial coupled with slow progress of trial justifies grant of bail—Continued detention not warranted—Bail granted subject to conditions—Trial Court directed to expedite proceedings and liberty reserved to cancel bail in case of non-cooperation. [Paras 4–8] Result: SLP disposed of—Bail granted—Trial expedited. ...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Service Law
A. U.P. Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1981—Rules 3, 4, 13 to 15—Extraordinary pension—Nature and grant—Rules of 1981 constitute a complete code governing grant of extraordinary pension—Entitlement depends upon satisfaction of conditions specified therein—Award of extraordinary pension is not automatic and must strictly conform to statutory requirements including prescribed procedure and factual determination. [Paras 10–11] B. U.P. Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1981—Rule 4—Sanction of Governor—Mandatory requirement—Grant of extraordinary pension requires prior sanction of the Governor—Such sanction involves exercise of administrative discretion based on relevant factors under the Rules—In absence of such sanction, direction for ...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 482 (corresponding to Section 438 CrPC)—Anticipatory bail—Grant of—High Court rejected anticipatory bail—Supreme Court, after granting interim protection from arrest and considering overall facts, held that no compelling grounds exist to deny relief—Accordingly, impugned order set aside and it was directed that in the event of arrest, appellant shall be released on bail subject to terms imposed by Trial Court—Appellant directed to comply with conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS and cooperate in proceedings—Observations confined to grant of anticipatory bail and not on merits. [Paras 3–6] Result: Appeal allowed—Anticipatory bail granted. ...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Suit for specific performance
A. Specific Relief Act, 1963—Sections 16 & 20—Suit for specific performance—Non-examination of plaintiff—Effect—Non-appearance of plaintiff in witness box may give rise to an adverse inference—However, such presumption is rebuttable—Where cogent evidence is led through other witnesses, including a duly authorized representative/manager, and the case is otherwise proved, non-examination of plaintiff is not fatal—Manager’s testimony corroborating readiness and willingness held sufficient. [Paras 41–43] B. Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 52—Doctrine of lis pendens—Effect of transfer pendente lite—Transfers effected during pendency of litigation are not void but subservient to rights of parties as may be determined in the suit—Such tra...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Execution of decree
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 47—Execution of decree—Scope and powers of executing court—Held, the Executing Court cannot go behind the decree nor vary or modify its terms—It is bound to execute the decree as it stands and in its tenor—Though it may ensure compliance with reciprocal obligations, it cannot assume the role of a trial court—Exception lies only where the decree is a nullity or where a limited issue such as identity of the property arises. [Paras 23–30] B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 47—Impermissible modification of decree—Held, the Executing Court must enforce the decree as passed and cannot substitute its own view or rework the terms of the decree—Alteration of portions of land allotted under a compromise decree on grounds of pract...
(8) SUPREME COURT
Condonation of delay
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 468 to 473—Limitation for taking cognizance—Relevant date—Held, for the purpose of computing limitation under Section 468 CrPC, the relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint or initiation of criminal proceedings, and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence—Constitution Bench decision in Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases, (2014) 2 SCC 62, reaffirmed. [Paras 5–10] B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 468—Bar of limitation—Delay by court—Effect—Held, delay in taking cognizance attributable to the court, whether systemic or otherwise, cannot prejudice a diligent complainant—Doctrine embodied in the maxim “actus curiae neminem gravabit” (act of the court...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Appointment of Arbitrator
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 11—Scope of Court’s power—At the stage of appointment of arbitrator, the Court’s jurisdiction is confined to a prima facie examination of existence of an arbitration agreement—Post 2015 amendment (Section 11(6-A)), detailed scrutiny on merits, arbitrability, or disputed facts is impermissible—Principle of minimal judicial interference reiterated. [Paras 20–21, 42] B. Arbitration Agreement—Existence—Letter of Intent (LOI)—Nature and effect—A Letter of Intent (LOI) is ordinarily a preliminary document indicating intention to enter into a contract—It does not create a binding contractual relationship unless terms clearly demonstrate final and unconditional acceptance—Where LOI contemplates issuance of ...
(10) SUPREME COURT
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Sections 8 & 9—Operational debt—Pre-existing dispute—Scope—For admission of an application under Section 9, the Adjudicating Authority must examine whether a pre-existing dispute exists prior to issuance of demand notice—If such dispute is real, plausible and not spurious, the application must be rejected—IBC is not a substitute for debt recovery proceedings. [Paras 19–21] B. Pre-existing dispute—Test—Mobilox principle—Test is whether there exists a plausible contention requiring investigation—Authority is not required to examine merits or adjudicate dispute finally—Even if defence may ultimately fail, existence of genuine dispute is sufficient to reject CIRP—Distinction to be drawn between real dispute and &l...
(1) TRIPURA
Bail, NDPS
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 483—Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Sections 21(c), 25, 29, 37, 50—Bail—Commercial quantity—Rigours of Section 37—Where contraband of commercial quantity is involved, rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act apply and bail cannot be granted unless twin conditions are satisfied—Mere procedural objections or arguments on merits are insufficient to dilute statutory embargo—Bail rejected. [Paras 24, 25] B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 50—Compliance—Stage of consideration—Question whether mandatory safeguards under Section 50 have been complied with or not is a matter to be examined during trial and not at the stage of bail—Court should refrain from undertakin...
(2) ALLAHABAD
Maintainability
A. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 32, 34, 35—Constitution of India—Articles 226 & 227—Maintainability—Orders passed by Rent Tribunal under Section 35, presided over by District Judge/ADJ, are judicial orders of a Civil Court—Such orders are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226—Remedy lies under supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.[Paras 30, 31, 46, 54] B. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 32, 34, 35—Rent Tribunal—Nature—Persona designata vs Civil Court—Rent Tribunal is presided by District Judge/ADJ as a pre-existing judicial authority, not as persona designata—Exercises powers of Civil Court, renders binding adjudications, and forms part of judicial hierarchy...
(3) PATNA
Investigation
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 302 read with Section 34—Arms Act, 1959—Section 27—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 313—Appreciation of evidence—Related witnesses—Conviction can be sustained on the basis of testimony of related witnesses if found reliable and trustworthy—Mere absence of independent witnesses is not fatal—Minor contradictions regarding place or manner of presence of witnesses do not affect core prosecution case—Interested witnesses cannot be discarded solely on ground of relationship. [Paras 46, 53, 65] B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 174, 154, 156—Investigation—Inquest—Commencement prior to FIR—Proceedings under Section 174 CrPC (inquest) are distinct from investigation of cognizable offence&mdas...
(4) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Tenancy
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 96—Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958—Section 50—Tenancy—Burden of proof—Burden to prove existence of landlord-tenant relationship lies on the person asserting tenancy—Mere plea of oral tenancy without documentary or reliable oral evidence is insufficient—Proceedings under rent deposit provisions do not establish tenancy—Failure to discharge burden results in treating occupant as unauthorized/trespasser. [Paras 19, 20] B. Specific Relief Act, 1963—Section 5—Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 96—Recovery of possession—Trespasser—Where plaintiff establishes ownership and defendant fails to prove lawful possession, decree for recovery of possession and injunction is justified—Unauthorized occupation am...
(5) ALLAHABAD
Eviction
A. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Section 21(2)(m)—Eviction—Landlord’s requirement—Scope—Under Section 21(2)(m), landlord is only required to demonstrate that the premises are needed for his occupation—Requirement of proving “bona fide need” or comparative hardship, as existed under repealed U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, stands consciously omitted—Court cannot import such conditions—Once requirement is pleaded and remains unrebutted, eviction is justified. [Paras 12, 16, 33, 38] B. Statutory Interpretation—Casus omissus—Plain meaning rule—Where legislature has deliberately omitted expressions such as “bona fide requirement”, Court cannot reintroduce them by interpretation—Provision must be construed strict...
(7) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 447—Criminal trespass—Acquittal upheld—Prosecution must prove intent to insult, intimidate, or annoy the person in possession of the land—Mere possession, even if illegal, is insufficient to constitute criminal trespass—Demarcation conducted in absence of the accused and without following proper procedure held inadmissible—Complaint lacking averments regarding requisite intent—Essential ingredients of Section 447 IPC not satisfied. [Paras 6, 19, 22, 24] B. Indian Forest Act, 1927—Sections 26, 4—Prosecution for acts in reserved forest—Acquittal upheld—No evidence produced to show notification declaring the land as reserved forest—Notification relied upon did not specify relevant Khasra numbers—Mandatory requirements of ...
(8) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 447—Criminal trespass—Mere possession of Government land without intent to insult, intimidate, or annoy does not constitute criminal trespass—Complaint failing to specifically aver such intent—Essential ingredients of Section 447 IPC not satisfied. [Paras 6, 17, 19] B. Indian Forest Act, 1927—Sections 29, 30, 31, 33—Encroachment of Government land—Encroachment below 10 bighas—As per precedent, FIR not lodgable—Notification declaring reserved/protected forest and its publication in vernacular language mandatory to attract penal consequences under Section 33—Failure to prove such publication renders prosecution unsustainable. [Paras 15, 20, 21, 23] C. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 437A—Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh...
(9) CALCUTTA
Quashing of proceeding, Criminal conspiracy
A. Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 318(4), 316(2), 61(2)—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Quashing of criminal proceedings—Partnership dispute—Allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust arising out of business disagreement—Trial Court rightly directed investigation after preliminary inquiry—At the stage of quashing, Court should not appreciate evidence—Criminal proceedings may be quashed where allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence or are inherently improbable—However, where materials exist suggesting commission of a cognizable offence, quashing would lead to miscarriage of justice—Petitioner's failure to cooperate with investigation and remaining absconding weighed against grant of relief—Held, not a fit case for quashing at...
(10) ORISSA
Writ petition
A. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007—Section 16—Right of Appeal—Section 16 of the Act clearly and unambiguously grants the right of appeal only to senior citizens or parents aggrieved by an order of the Tribunal, to the exclusion of any other person, including children or other relatives—Consequently, an appeal filed by a son challenging a maintenance order passed in favour of his elderly mother is not maintainable, as he is neither a senior citizen nor a parent. [Paras 10–12] B. Jurisdiction—Appeal filed without statutory right—An appeal preferred before an Appellate Tribunal without a statutory right of appeal is not entertainable and the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the same—Any order passed in such an appeal is liable to be quashed. [Para 13...