A. Constitution of India, 1950—Arts. 233, 217(2)(b) and 124(3)(b)—Judicial service—Entry-level recruitment—Practical experience—Requirement of prior exposure to court functioning—Necessity—Experience of working of courts is indispensable for a person entering judicial service, as a Civil Judge from the very first day is required to deal with questions affecting life, liberty, property and personal rights of litigants—Practical exposure contributes to judicial temperament, patience, empathy, courtroom discipline and appreciation of respective roles of Bench and Bar—Mere academic knowledge or pre-service training cannot wholly substitute such first-hand experience. (Paras 43-47, 59, 91-92) B. Recruitment of Civil Judge (Junior Division)—Three years' practice at Bar—Jud...
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 100—Second appeal—Concurrent findings of fact—Scope of interference—High Court cannot disturb concurrent findings merely by reappreciating evidence and substituting another possible view—Interference permissible only where findings are perverse, based on inadmissible evidence, vital evidence has been ignored, or conclusion is one which no reasonable judicial mind could have reached—Trial Court and First Appellate Court concurrently found alleged relinquishment of proprietary interest by Ramprasad not proved—High Court, in reversing such findings without establishing perversity or error of law, exceeded its jurisdiction—Impugned judgment set aside. (Paras 17, 29-30) B. Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959—Revenue mutation—Effect ...
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 386—Appeal against acquittal—Double presumption of innocence—Scope of interference—High Court, while reversing acquittal, must bear in mind that accused enjoys double presumption of innocence—Interference permissible only where Trial Court's view is one which no reasonable court could have taken—Where two reasonable views are possible, view favourable to accused must prevail—Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415. (Para 22) B. Evidence—Child witness—Competency and reliability—Child aged about 4½ years at time of occurrence—Evidence recorded after four years—Allegation of tutoring specifically supported by child's own statement and his residence with a police constable—Material contradic...
A. Chhattisgarh State Universities Service Rules, 1983—Rule 10—Eligibility determined by Public Service Commission—Finality—Where the Public Service Commission, in exercise of the statutory power under Rule 10, had determined a candidate to be eligible for appointment, the Appointing Authority could not reopen or independently reassess such eligibility by constituting an expert committee; its verification was confined to genuineness of documents and patent or manifest deficiencies—State Government’s contrary action held impermissible. (Paras 53–61) B. Service Law—Appointment to public post—Public Service Commission—Appointing Authority—Scope of discretion—Though selection or recommendation by the Public Service Commission does not by itself confer an indefeasible r...
A. Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994—Sections 17(4), 27, 28 and 30—Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996—Rule 18A(3)—Investigation of offences—Held, the Appropriate Authority is the primary and exclusive authority competent to investigate offences under the Act and to initiate proceedings by way of complaint; police have no independent power to investigate such offences or file a chargesheet, their role being confined to rendering assistance to the Appropriate Authority when requested. Consequently, cognizance cannot be taken on a police chargesheet and offences under the Act are required to proceed as complaint cases. (Paras 5–10) B. Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Pr...
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 125—Interim maintenance—Maintenance of minor children—Obligation of parents to maintain minor children is joint and cannot be apportioned by mechanically dividing the assessed expenses—Earning of mother, by itself, is no ground to halve the father's liability—Where two minor daughters, aged about 9 and 8 years, were residing with the mother who was also bearing their day-to-day care and upbringing, Family Court, after considering income affidavits, educational expenses and status of the parties, rightly awarded Rs.30,000 per month to each daughter—High Court erred in reducing the amount to Rs.15,000 per month each merely because the mother was employed—Family Court's award of Rs.60,000 per month in aggregate restored. (Paras 7–12) ...
A. Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986—Sections 2 and 3—Validity of proceedings—Act does not create an independent substantive offence but merely identifies a person as a “gangster” on the basis of his involvement in offences specified in the definition—Punishment under Section 3 cannot stand in the absence of creation of a distinct offence under the Act—Proceedings initiated solely under the Gangsters Act held unsustainable and liable to be quashed. (Paras 26–58) B. Penal Law—Principle of nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege—No person can be punished unless the law clearly creates an offence and prescribes punishment therefor—A statutory provision prescribing punishment without creating a corresponding substantive offence cannot sust...
A. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989—Section 3(1)(r), (s)—“Within public view”—Alleged caste-based insult, intimidation or abuse must be uttered at a place where members of the public are present and capable of witnessing or hearing the same—Occurrence inside an enclosed room of school, without public access, does not satisfy the statutory requirement—Mere presence of persons elsewhere in the school is insufficient. (Paras 10–12, 17) B. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989—Section 3(1)(r), (s)—Caste-based allegation—Specific attribution necessary—FIR and statement of informant containing no specific caste-based words or slurs attributable to appellant—Witnesses only spoke o...
A. Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948—Section 32G—Protected tenancy—Where claim of protected tenancy and possession was pending before the High Court, Supreme Court declined to adjudicate the merits and directed preservation of the subject matter pending final adjudication. (Paras 9, 16) B. Civil Procedure—Execution proceedings—Appellate jurisdiction—Division Bench, while hearing an appeal against an interim order, cannot travel beyond the scope of the appeal or decide issues pending before the Single Judge—Findings beyond such scope liable to be set aside and application restored for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. (Para 15) C. Interim relief—Status quo—Competing claims to possession—Where there was a scramble for possession and divergent claims re...
A. Service Law—Pension—CPF/GPF Scheme—Regularisation of service—Petitioner’s services as Professor were regularised by Office Order dated 04.05.2012 subject to condition that regularisation would take effect from the date of the order and service would continue under CPF Scheme—Terms were never challenged and were accepted by petitioner—Claim for GPF benefits raised only after retirement and after receiving CPF benefits rightly rejected. (Paras 7–8) B. Service Law—Regularisation—Effect of regularisation—Following National Institute of Rural Development v. Shyam Sunder Prasad Sharma, Civil Appeal No.542 of 2023, regularisation under identical Office Order dated 04.05.2012 operates prospectively from date of order and does not relate back to initial appointment—Petit...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Ss. 118, 138 and 139—Presumption as to consideration and legally enforceable debt—Held, statutory presumptions under Ss. 118 and 139 arise in favour of the holder, but are rebuttable on the standard of preponderance of probabilities; once the accused raises a probable defence, the burden shifts back to the complainant to establish the underlying transaction and legally enforceable liability by reliable evidence. Mere assertions unsupported by documentary material are insufficient. (Paras 12–21) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—S. 138—Dishonour of cheque—Maintainability and proof of liability—Held, complainant must establish that the cheque was issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability and that he is the payee or holder in due ...
A. Specific Relief Act, 1963—Co-sharer—Injunction against construction on joint property—A co-sharer cannot ordinarily be restrained from raising construction on joint property merely because the property has not been partitioned; however, where the construction would diminish the value or utility of the common property, materially prejudice the rights or enjoyment of other co-sharers, or amount to ouster of a co-owner, injunction can be granted. In the present case, defendant’s denial of plaintiff’s co-ownership and proposed construction over the only vacant portion of the joint property would prejudice the rights of the other co-owners and amount to ouster; injunction therefore rightly granted. (Paras 15–19) B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 100—Second appeal—Substantial quest...
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 438 (corresponding to Section 397 CrPC)—Revisional jurisdiction—Scope—High Court, while exercising revisional jurisdiction, cannot reappreciate evidence as an appellate court and interfere with concurrent findings unless there is perversity, glaring contradiction, illegality or miscarriage of justice warranting interference. (Paras 12–13, 28–30) B. Indian Forest Act, 1927—Sections 41, 42—HP Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978—Rule 20—Conviction for violation of transit requirements—Specific accusation/charge necessary—Where the accused was not specifically informed of the alleged violation of Rule 20, conviction on such ground causes prejudice; prosecution must further establish by reliable and scient...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 141—Dishonour of Cheque—Sole Proprietary Concern—Separate Arraignment—Not Necessary— A sole proprietary concern has no independent legal or juristic existence apart from its proprietor—the proprietor and proprietary concern are legally one and the same person—therefore, where the cheque is issued from the account of a sole proprietary concern and the proprietor is himself prosecuted, separate arraignment of the proprietary concern as an accused is not necessary—the principle in Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels & Tours (P) Ltd. requiring arraignment of the principal offender is applicable where the principal offender is a separate juristic entity and not to a sole proprietary concern. (Paras 17–20) B. Code of Criminal P...
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 143(3)—Dishonour of Cheque—Expeditious Trial—Time Limit— In a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, the trial is required to be conducted as expeditiously as possible, with an endeavour to conclude it within six months from the date of filing of the complaint—where the proceedings had remained pending due to the respondent’s non-appearance and pending exemption application, the Trial Court was directed to take necessary measures to secure his presence and endeavour to conclude the trial within six months from production of the certified copy of the order. (Paras 6–7) ...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Section 138—Dishonour of Cheque—Compounding After Conviction— An offence under Section 138 is compoundable at any stage, including after conviction and dismissal of appeal or revision—voluntary settlement between the parties can be accepted notwithstanding that no further proceedings remain pending. (Paras 12–15) B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Inherent Powers—Quashing of Conviction and Sentence— The High Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction to give effect to a settlement and compound an offence under Section 138 even after conviction and sentence have attained finality in revision—upon valid settlement, the conviction and sentenc...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Dishonour of Cheque—Joint Account Holder—Non-Signatory—Prosecution Not Maintainable— A joint account holder who has not signed the dishonoured cheque cannot be prosecuted under Section 138 merely because she is a joint account holder or wife of the signatory—liability under Section 138 is confined to the drawer of the cheque, except where Section 141 applies. (Paras 4–5) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Quashing of Proceedings—Joint Account—Non-Signatory—Abuse of Process— Where the applicant was impleaded as an accused solely on the ground that she was a joint account holder and wife of the cheque-signatory, without any allegation of her having signed or drawn the cheque, continuation of the...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 141—Dishonour of Cheque—Vicarious Liability of Director—Specific Averments— Mere designation as Director or Whole Time Director does not create deemed vicarious liability under Section 141—complaint must specifically aver that the accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company’s business at the time of commission of the offence. (Paras 8–11) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 141—Resignation of Director Before Issuance of Cheques—Quashing of Proceedings— Where the accused had ceased to be a Director nearly two months before issuance and dishonour of the cheques, and statutory records conclusively established such cessation, he could not be held vicariously liable und...
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311—Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Recall of Witness—Additional Evidence— Power under Section 311 is wide and may be exercised at any stage where the proposed evidence is germane and essential for a just decision—mere delay or closure of evidence does not create an absolute bar, provided the opposite party is afforded an effective opportunity of cross-examination and rebuttal. (Paras 30–38, 58–62) B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 294(3) & 482—Promissory Note—Disputed Document—Proof of Genuineness— Dispute regarding genuineness of a document does not make it inadmissible or incapable of being produced—Section 294(3) merely dispenses with formal proof where genuineness is admitted&...
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311—Criminal Trial—Defence Evidence—Fair Opportunity—The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is wide and may be exercised at any stage where the evidence of a witness is essential for a just decision of the case—the accused must be afforded a fair and reasonable opportunity to adduce defence evidence, particularly where such evidence is necessary to rebut statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act. (Paras 9–14) B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311—Closure of Defence Evidence—Recall—Last Opportunity—Where defence evidence had been closed due to the accused’s repeated absence, but denial of such evidence would prejudice a fair trial, the Magistrate’s order refusing recall was set aside&md...