slcdailylaw
  • Home
  • Topic Search
  • Advanced Search
  • Citation Search
  • Bookmarks
  • Login
  • Superme Court
  • High Courts
(1) SUPREME COURT
Bail, NDPS

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 37—Bail in commercial quantity cases—Mandatory twin conditions—Held: Grant of bail in offences involving commercial quantity requires strict compliance with twin conditions under Section 37(1)(b)(ii)—Court must record satisfaction that accused is not guilty and not likely to commit offence while on bail—Non-compliance renders bail order illegal and unsustainable. (Paras 9–10, 26–27) B. Constitutional Law—Article 21—Right to speedy trial vis-à-vis NDPS Act—Held: Right to speedy trial cannot be used to dilute statutory rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act—Both must be harmoniously construed—Delay in trial alone is insufficient to grant bail in commercial quantity cases. (Paras 10, 27) C. Crimin...

(2) SUPREME COURT
Maintainability

A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 9—Post-award stage—Maintainability—Held: An application under Section 9 is maintainable even by a party unsuccessful in arbitral proceedings—Expression “a party” under Section 9 includes all parties to arbitration agreement and cannot be restricted to successful party—Contrary view of certain High Courts held not to be good law. (Paras 29–33, 61–62) B. Arbitration Law—Interpretation of statute—Expression “a party”—Held: Statutory language being clear, Courts cannot read into Section 9 a limitation restricting relief only to award-holder—Contextual or purposive interpretation cannot override plain meaning—Any such restriction would amount to judicial legislation. (Paras 28–31, 55&n...

(3) SUPREME COURT
Amendment in plaint

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order VI Rule 17—Article 227, Constitution of India—Amendment of plaint—Subsequent events—Held: Legal heirs of deceased landlord are entitled to amend plaint to bring on record subsequent events including their own bonafide requirement—Amendment permissible where original pleading included requirement of “family members” and no inconsistent or adverse plea is introduced—High Court erred in interfering by examining merits at amendment stage. (Paras 14–16, 19) B. Constitution of India—Article 227—Scope of supervisory jurisdiction—Held: High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227, cannot reassess evidence or examine merits of proposed amendment—Interference permissible only in cases of jurisdictional error&m...

Petition dismissed
(4) SUPREME COURT
Burden of Proof

A. Wakf Act, 1995—Sections 4, 5, 83(9)—Nature of property—“Service inam”—Declaration of title—Held: Land granted as “service inam” for rendering services to mosque partakes character of Wakf property—Such property is inalienable and cannot confer valid title through partition or sale—High Court erred in treating it as private property. (Paras 24–25, 36) B. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 101–103—Burden of proof—Title suits—Held: Plaintiff seeking declaration of title must succeed on strength of own case—Burden cannot be shifted on defendant—Failure to establish valid title fatal—High Court wrongly shifted burden. (Paras 32–34) C. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Revisional jurisdiction—Re-appreciatio...

Appeal allowed
(5) SUPREME COURT
Quashing of proceeding

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 482—Quashing of proceedings—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 498A, 494, 34—Matrimonial disputes—Held: Proceedings against relatives of husband liable to be quashed where allegations are vague, general, and do not disclose specific acts of cruelty—Mere presence or relationship insufficient to sustain prosecution—Continuation of proceedings amounts to abuse of process. (Paras 23–25, 28) B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 498A—Cruelty—Requirement of specific allegations—Held: For offence under S. 498A IPC, prosecution must disclose particularised acts of harassment or cruelty—General allegations of “encouragement” or “presence” without identifiable incidents do not constitute offence. (Par...

Quashed
(6) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 200, 202, 87—Private complaint—Arrest—Anticipatory bail—Held: In complaint cases, once cognizance is taken and summons issued, accused is only required to appear before Magistrate—Police has no authority to arrest unless non-bailable warrant is issued under S. 87 CrPC—Entertaining anticipatory bail in such cases is unwarranted. (Paras 8–10) B. Criminal Procedure—Anticipatory bail—Jurisdiction—Held: High Court erred in directing accused to surrender and seek regular bail while rejecting anticipatory bail—Such direction is without jurisdiction—Court may either grant or reject anticipatory bail but cannot compel surrender. (Paras 12–13) C. Criminal Procedure—Police powers—Inquiry under Section 202...

Rejected
(7) SUPREME COURT
Execution of decree

A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Sections 7, 65—Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)—Misuse as recovery mechanism—Held: Initiation of CIRP by decree-holder, bypassing execution proceedings, against a solvent company amounts to abuse of process—IBC is not a substitute for debt recovery or execution of money decree—Proceedings liable to be rejected. (Paras 18–19, 24, 32–33) B. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 5(8)—“Financial debt”—Existence of debt—Dispute as to quantum—Held: Where serious dispute exists regarding computation and quantum of debt, including contradictory claims before different forums, insolvency proceedings cannot be sustained—IBC not meant to adjudicate disputed claims of this nature. (Paras 28&nd...

Application dismissed
(8) SUPREME COURT

Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 120-B—Criminal Procedure—Stay of conviction and sentence—Special Leave Petition—Held: Pending consideration of SLP, Supreme Court stayed operation of impugned High Court judgment convicting appellant for offences under Ss. 302/120-B IPC and sentencing him to life imprisonment—Interim protection granted; also stayed operation of related impugned order—Notice issued to respondents and exemption from surrender allowed. (Paras 5, 7, 11) ...

(9) SUPREME COURT
Matrimonial Proceeding

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 25—Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Section 13(1)(ia)—Transfer of matrimonial proceedings—Convenience of wife—Held: In matrimonial matters, convenience of wife is a paramount consideration—Where wife is a cancer survivor and has custody of a minor child, insistence on her attending proceedings at distant place unjustified—Petition allowed—Divorce proceedings transferred from Family Court, Gurugram to competent Family Court at Vadodara. (Paras 1–3) B. Transfer of proceedings—Equitable considerations—Costs—Held: Court found opposition by husband unreasonable—Costs of ₹25,000 imposed on respondent to compensate inconvenience caused to wife—Humanitarian considerations relevant in transfer petitions. (Para 2) C. Ci...

Petition allowed
(10) SUPREME COURT
Bail

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Bail—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B—Information Technology Act, 2000—Sections 66-C, 66-D—Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022—Sections 7, 8—Regular bail—Magistrate triable offences—Held: Where offences are Magistrate triable and accused is in custody since 24.07.2025, continued incarceration not justified—High Court erred in denying bail—Appellant entitled to be released on bail subject to conditions. (Paras 5–7) B. Criminal Procedure—Conditions of bail—Held: Trial Court empowered to impose appropriate conditions to safeguard interest of prosecution—Liberty granted to prosecution to seek imposition of specific conditions—Bail granted with safeguards. (Para 7) ...

Appeal allowed
(1) ALLAHABAD
Custody of minor child

Constitution of India, 1949—Article 226—Custody of minor child—Writ jurisdiction—Natural guardian—After the death of the mother, custody of a 13-month-old child was claimed by the father as natural guardian—The child was in the care of maternal relatives—In the absence of any material showing the father to be unfit and considering his financial stability and ability to provide proper upbringing, the father’s legal and natural claim prevails—Welfare of the child does not justify denial of custody to the father merely on preference for maternal relatives—Mere claim that maternal relatives would better serve child’s welfare does not override father’s legal right —To preserve child’s emotional bond with father, custody directed to be given to him—Materna...

(2) MADRAS
Partition, Hindu Law

Hindu Law (Mulla, 22nd Edn.)—Artcles 241 & 254—Karta—Powers & Alienation—Legal Necessity—Binding Effect of—Karta of a Hindu Undivided Family is its supreme manager and legal representative, empowered to manage family affairs, represent it in proceedings, incur debts, and alienate coparcenary property—Such alienation is valid and binding on all coparceners, including minors and widows, if made for legal necessity or benefit of estate, with a presumption of validity attaching to Karta’s acts—Existence of legal necessity is fact-specific; discharge of tax liabilities of family business constitutes legal necessity—Once such necessity is proved, the alienation cannot be challenged by any coparcener. A. Specific Relief Act, 1963—Section 10 (prior to amendment)—Sp...

Appeal dismissed
(3) JAMMU & KASHMIR
Interim compensation

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 143-A—Sections 138 and 142—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Interim compensation—Discretionary power—Held: Power under S. 143-A NI Act to grant interim compensation is discretionary and not mandatory—Use of expression “may” requires judicial application of mind—Court must prima facie evaluate complainant’s case and defence of accused before granting such relief—Mechanical exercise of power without consideration of defence (such as denial of signature) is impermissible—Impugned order granting 10% compensation set aside. (Paras 16 to 20, 23 to 25) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 143-A—Interim compensation—Requirement of reasons and quantum—Held: Grant of in...

Appeal allowed
(4) ORISSA
Appeal against acquittal

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 372 proviso, Section 2(wa), Section 378(4)—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 413, Section 2(1)(y), Section 419(4)—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Appeal against acquittal—Complainant as “victim”—Maintainability—Held: In cheque dishonour cases, complainant who suffers pecuniary loss is a “victim” within meaning of S. 2(wa) CrPC / S. 2(1)(y) BNSS—Such complainant has independent statutory right to file appeal against acquittal under proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS—Resort to S. 378(4) CrPC / S. 419(4) BNSS not mandatory—Victim’s right of appeal is substantive and not diluted merely because case instituted on complaint. (Paras 11 to 18, 21) B. Code of Criminal Pro...

Appeal dismissed
(5) ALLAHABAD
Rejection of plaint

A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956—Section 14—Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order VII Rule 11— Rejection of plaint—Suit by son and daughter claiming property in mother’s name as HUF property—Held, not maintainable—Any property purchased by female Hindu whether before or after the commencement of the Act shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner—Where property is purchased in the name of a female Hindu after commencement of the Act, she becomes its absolute owner U/s 14, irrespective of source of consideration, unless a restricted estate is shown—Mere bald assertion by daughter and son that property was acquired from Hindu undivided family funds, without proof of nucleus, is insufficient—Therefore, even if consideration was provided by husband, title vest...

(6) ALLAHABAD
Eviction, Rent Law

A. Constitution of India—Article 227—Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 21(2)(b), 4(3) and 4(7)—Eviction—Scope of supervisory jurisdiction—Held: High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of Rent Authority and Rent Tribunal where landlord-tenant relationship and statutory default stand proved—Non-compliance with S. 4(3) constitutes a valid ground for eviction under S. 4(7)—Eviction orders upheld. (Paras 2–4) B. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Sections 21 and 4—Grounds of eviction—Statutory non-compliance—Held: Even if default prior to commencement of Act may not independently justify eviction, admitted non-furnishing of tenancy particulars under S. 4(3) is sufficient—Eviction le...

(7) RAJASTHAN
Handwriting expert

A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Section 45—Handwriting expert—Right of accused—Held: Accused disputing signatures on cheque is entitled to seek examination by handwriting expert—Denial of such opportunity amounts to denial of fair trial—Application should ordinarily be allowed unless found to be vexatious or intended to delay proceedings—Impugned order rejecting such request set aside. (Paras 9–11, 15–17) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138, 139—Presumption—Rebuttal—Held: Section 139 creates a rebuttable presumption in favour of the holder of cheque—Burden shifts on accused to disprove liability—To rebut such presumption, accused must be afforded full opportunity to lead defence evidence, including expert opinion. (Paras 12–14) ...

Allowed
(8) MADRAS
Rebuttal of

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Sections 118 and 139—Dishonour of cheque—Dismissal of complaint—Rebuttal of presumption—Held: Appellant/complainant failed to establish source of funds for alleged loan of Rs 5,00,000 and did not produce demand promissory note—Contradictions in her evidence regarding financial capacity and prior dealings created serious doubt—Respondent successfully rebutted statutory presumptions under Ss. 118 and 139 by cross-examination and by producing defence documents (Ex. D1 and Ex. D2)—Burden shifted back to complainant, who failed to discharge it—Trial Court’s dismissal of complaint held justified and based on proper appreciation of evidence. (Paras 2 to 5) B. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Section 145—Contradictions—U...

(9) MADRAS
Statutory presumption

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 118 and 139—Section 138—Dishonour of cheque—Statutory presumption—Rebuttal—Financial capacity—Evidentiary value—Held: Presumption that cheque was issued towards discharge of legally enforceable debt is rebuttable—Accused can discharge burden by raising a probable defence on preponderance of probabilities—Where accused questions complainant’s financial capacity and genuineness of transaction, burden shifts on complainant to establish source of funds—Failure to produce contemporaneous evidence such as income tax returns, bank statements or reliable records casts serious doubt on existence of debt—Documents prepared belatedly without supporting material lack probative value—In such circumstances, presumption stands re...

Acquittal
(10) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Compromise

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Conviction—Compromise between parties—Setting aside of conviction—Held: Petitioner convicted and sentenced under S. 138 NI Act and appeal dismissed—Subsequently, parties entered into compromise and complainant received entire compensation and expressed no desire to pursue proceedings—In view of settlement, judgment of conviction and sentence set aside—Petitioner acquitted subject to condition of depositing 10% of cheque amount with H.P. Legal Services Authority within stipulated time—Failure to comply to render order ineffective and petitioner liable to undergo sentence—Revision allowed and petitioner directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case. (Paras 5 to 11) ...

slcdailylaw

Tomar Publication

561, Sec-2, Jagriti Vihar, Meerut-250004

0121 3561932, +91 9458 5523 61

tomarpublication999@gmail.com

Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

© SLC Daily law all right reserved.

Cookies Required

Please enable cookies in your browser settings to continue.