(1) SUPREME COURT
Criminal proceedings
A. Criminal Procedure—Bail—Annulment of bail order—Suppression of criminal antecedents—Perversity and non-consideration of material evidence—High Court granted bail in offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC concerning alleged fabrication and circulation of forged LL.B. degree—Bail granted relying upon disputed documents forming subject matter of prosecution—Failure to consider categorical communications from University denying issuance of degree and lack of affiliation of institution—Suppression of multiple criminal antecedents by accused—Discretion exercised on incomplete and misleading facts—Held, appellate court can annul bail where order is perverse, illegal, or passed ignoring relevant material; supervening circumstances not necessary in appeal against grant of ...
(2) SUPREME COURT
A. Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972—Section 2(e)—Interpretation of “Employee”—Exclusion of Central Government servants—Heavy Water Plant (HWP), Department of Atomic Energy—Employees of Heavy Water Plant, Tuticorin—Whether entitled to gratuity under PG Act—HWP not a separate corporate entity/PSU/Government Company but functions as an adjunct of the Department of Atomic Energy under the Central Government—Employees hold civil posts under the Central Government and are governed by CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 which provide for gratuity—Definition clause under Section 2(e) expressly excludes persons holding posts under Central Government and governed by other rules providing gratuity—Held, employees of HWP fall within exclusionary clause—PG Act inapplicable. [Paras 1...
(3) SUPREME COURT
Service Law
A. Service Law—Disciplinary proceedings—Charge of forgery of medical certificate—Allegation that employee fabricated medical certificate not proved—Doctor admitted that employee had consulted him and that letterhead belonged to him; disputed signature not examined by handwriting expert—Inquiry Officer accepted doctor's version without proper verification—Finding of forgery held perverse and based on no credible evidence—Dismissal from service set aside and reinstatement with all consequential benefits ordered. [Paras 31 to 36, 40, 45] B. Judicial Review—Scope of interference in disciplinary matters—Though High Court ordinarily does not reappreciate evidence in disciplinary proceedings, interference permissible where findings are perverse or based on no evidence—Where ...
(4) SUPREME COURT
POCSO
Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n)—Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012—Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6—Conviction under Section 6 of POCSO Act—Sentence of 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment—Appeal dismissed by High Court—Plea for bail pending appeal before Supreme Court—Having regard to oral testimony of victim and attending circumstances, Supreme Court exercised discretion to grant bail—Appellant directed to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as Trial Court may deem fit—Original records directed to be called for. [Paras 6 to 9] Result : Bail granted ...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 379, 411, 413, 414, 120B—Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960—Section 11(a)—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 438—Anticipatory Bail—Petitioner apprehending arrest in connection with FIR—Interim protection granted earlier subject to cooperation—Petitioner found cooperating with investigation—Court, without expressing opinion on merits, confirmed interim protection and granted anticipatory bail—Direction that in event of arrest, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bonds and subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.—Liberty to trial Court to act in case of violation—Special Leave Petition disposed of. [Paras 2 to 6] Result : Bail granted ...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Rejection of plaint
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 7 Rule 11—Rejection of plaint—Scope—Plaint challenging family partition deed (KBPP) on grounds of coercion, undue influence and misrepresentation and assailing subsequent so-called Conciliation Award as fabricated—Distinct and triable causes of action disclosed—Allegations not illusory or vexatious—Court, at Rule 11 stage, cannot test truth of pleadings or demand proof—Erroneous to reject plaint by conclusively construing disputed documents and findings on merits—Rejection of plaint set aside. [Paras 27–31] B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Part III—Conciliation Award—Validity—KBPP and document dated 02-01-2019 treated by defendants as Conciliation Award—Plaint specifically pleaded absence of concil...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Eviction
A. Forest Conservation—Reserved Forests—Encroachment—Constitutional obligation and due process—State has a constitutional duty under Articles 48A and 51A(g) to protect forests and prevent environmental degradation—Large-scale encroachments threaten ecological balance—However, removal of unauthorised occupation must conform to rule of law—Environmental protection cannot be pursued through arbitrary or summary action—Balance between conservation and procedural fairness is mandatory. [Paras 2, 6, 9–10] B. Eviction from Reserved Forests—Procedure—Natural justice—Before eviction, State must follow a structured, fair procedure—Constitution of committee of forest and revenue officials—Issuance of notice to alleged encroachers—Opportunity to produce ...
(8) SUPREME COURT
Constitution of India—Article 226—Writ Petition—Delay and laches—Claim for Assured Career Progression (ACP) benefits—Petitioner retired on 31.05.2003—Writ Petition filed in 2019 after delay of 16 years—Subsequent Government order dated 05.05.2015 relied upon to contend fresh cause of action—Held, mere representations cannot revive a stale or dead cause of action—Extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 not to be exercised in cases of inordinate and unexplained delay—High Court justified in rejecting petition on ground of delay and laches—Special Leave Petition dismissed. [Paras 3 to 6] Result : S.L.P. dismissed ...
(9) SUPREME COURT
NDPS
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Sections 8(c), 22(c), 29(1)—Bail—Recovery of 52 gms of methamphetamine (commercial quantity being 50 gms and above)—Appellant in custody since 27.12.2024—Chargesheet filed; charges yet to be framed—First-time offender with no criminal antecedents—Without expressing any opinion on merits, including validity of search and seizure—Supreme Court granted regular bail—Appellant directed to deposit passport, appear before trial Court on all dates, and liberty granted to prosecution to seek cancellation in case of involvement in similar offences—Subject to further conditions imposed by trial Court. [Paras 5 to 7] Result : Bail allowed ...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Cancellation of bail, Agreement to Sell
Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 406, 409, 420—Bail—Cancellation of bail—Agreement to Sell—Dispute relating to sale of land—FIR lodged alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust—Regular bail earlier granted on basis of accused’s voluntary undertaking to repay amount—Failure to comply with undertaking led to recall of bail order—During pendency, accused paid substantial amount (Rs.57 Lakhs in total) to complainant—Civil suit for specific performance pending—Held, though bail conditions should not ordinarily involve payment, present case involved voluntary undertaking by accused—In light of substantial repayment and civil nature of dispute, earlier bail order revived—No opinion expressed on merits—Appeal allowed. [Paras 7 to 10] Result :&nb...
(1) KERALA
Constitution of India, 1950—Articles 14, 16, 23; Equal Pay for Equal Work—Medical Education—Senior Residents Performing Duties of Assistant Professors—Senior Residents undergoing bonded service after completing DM/MCh courses and discharging the duties of Assistant Professors are entitled to the minimum pay scale of Assistant Professors—The principle of equal pay for equal work applies even to contractual employees and those under bonded service; deviation from this principle violates Articles 14 and 16—Regulations of 2019 and 2022 mandate appointment as Assistant Professors upon completion of DM/MCh—While appointment to the post requires a sanctioned vacancy, lower remuneration during bonded service despite performing higher duties may constitute forced labour under Article 23, and the government...
(2) KERALA
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967—Section 44(2)—Protection of Witnesses—Under Section 44(2) UAPA, the power of the court to issue witness protection orders is contingent upon satisfaction that the life of a witness is in danger, based on available materials—The court must record its satisfaction, apply its mind to the evidence, give brief reasons for secrecy measures, and consider each witness individually—Orders issued by Special Courts without recording satisfaction of danger, without application of mind to materials, without reasons, or without individualized consideration are unsustainable—Redaction of documents and treating witnesses as protected must satisfy these criteria; failure to do so renders such orders liable to be set aside—If a witness’s identity is already revealed,...
(4) KERALA
Essential Commodities Act, 1955—Sections 3(1), 6A, 6A(2), 6A(3)(c), 6C(2)—Confiscation of Goods—Acquittal—Entitlement to Price and Interest—The entitlement to compensation and interest under Section 6C(2) arises only upon acquittal in a prosecution specifically instituted under Section 6A of the Act—An acquittal in a general prosecution under Section 3(1) does not satisfy the statutory pre-conditions for Section 6C(2)—Where seized goods are perishable, Sections 6A(2) and 6A(3)(c) govern their sale through the Public Distribution System, and proceeds are payable to the owner if no confiscation order is made—Acquittal of a managing partner for offences under Section 3(1) and relevant state orders does not invoke Section 6C(2)—In such cases, the price of confiscated goods is determined un...
(5) DELHI
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 34 & 37(1)(c)—Challenge to Arbitral Award—Patent Illegality, Perversity, and Compensation—Appeal under Section 37(1)(c) against dismissal of Section 34 petition challenging an arbitral award—Appellants contended encashment of performance security was without pleading or proof of loss, alleging violation of Sections 73 and 74 of the Contract Act, 1872—The Court held that appellate interference is limited to grounds under Section 34; re-examination of evidence is impermissible unless the award is patently illegal, perverse, or contrary to fundamental law—The arbitrator’s adverse inference due to appellants’ failure to produce salary records was a plausible exercise of discretion, not perverse—Partial encashment of performance secu...
(6) PATNA
Quashing of proceeding
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Quashing of Complaint/Protest Petition—Magistrate's Cognizance—Landlord-Tenant Dispute—Petitioners sought quashing of an order taking cognizance of offences under Sections 448, 323, 379, and 504 IPC, arising from a landlord-tenant dispute—Petitioners contended that the police had filed a final report absolving them of liability and that the Magistrate erred in treating a subsequent protest petition as a complaint, relying on Surendra Pandit v. State of Bihar—The Court held that acceptance of a police final report does not bar the Magistrate from taking cognizance under Section 190 Cr.P.C. if a complaint satisfies the requirements—Evidence on record, including inquiry witness statements, disclosed prima facie commission of offences—Allegatio...
(7) PATNA
Compassionate appointment
Compassionate Appointment—Rejection—Surviving Family Member as Breadwinner—Evidence and Affidavit—Petitioner sought compassionate appointment following the death of her father—The Appointment Committee rejected the application on the ground that the younger brother was already employed as an Inspector in ITBP—Petitioner contended that she and her brother were separated and relied on a later affidavit filed by him to support her claim—The Court held that the earlier affidavit filed in 2016, supporting joint family status, had been considered by the Committee, while the subsequent 2023 affidavit claiming separation was an afterthought, filed years after the rejection—The rejection was upheld, noting that the primary purpose of compassionate appointment is to provide relief to families facing s...
(8) GAUHATI
Writ petition
Constitution of India, 1950—Article 226; Foreigners Act, 1946—Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964—Determination of Citizenship and Review of Tribunal Orders—Petitioner challenged the declaration of her as a foreigner by the Foreigners Tribunal under Article 226, presenting documents including voter lists and school certificates—The Tribunal’s finding was upheld, as the evidence was insufficient and unreliable to establish Indian citizenship—Alleged review petitions were found to be manufactured, with discrepancies in dates and notarization—School certificates and letters produced by witnesses not being the authors, and lacking contemporaneous records, were deemed inadmissible for proving lineage or connection to purported parents—Failure to link petitioner’s name in voter lists (1...
(9) GAUHATI
Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Rules, 2018—Seniority of Graduate Teachers and Appointment of In-charge Principal—Under Rule 14(1) Proviso, seniority of Graduate Teachers is determined from the date of receiving the Graduate Scale of Pay provided the teacher is a Graduate—A teacher receiving the Graduate Scale of Pay without possessing a Graduate degree cannot claim seniority from that date—Rule 2(i) defines a "Graduate Teacher" as one holding a degree in Arts, Science, or Commerce; mere pay scale does not qualify—Retrospective regularization of service does not confer retrospective seniority, and seniority cannot pre-date inclusion in the relevant cadre—Ad hoc service is generally excluded from seniority, and prospective regularization applies for seniority purposes—A...
(10) DELHI
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Arbitral Award—Reasoned Award and Appeal Against Setting Aside—Under Sections 31(3), 34, and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an arbitral award must state intelligible and adequate reasons linking material on record to conclusions, unless parties agree otherwise or the award is on agreed terms—An award is “reasoned” if it demonstrates a logical nexus between evidence and findings, even if reasoning is brief—Courts under Section 34 may set aside awards only if they are patently illegal, against public policy, or lack intelligible reasoning; mere inadequacy of reasons does not suffice—Appeals under Section 37 are limited to grounds in Section 34 and do not permit re-appreciation of evidence or substitution of the arbitrator’s view&m...