(1) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Anticipatory bail—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 201, 383, 406, 417, 420 and 506 read with Section 34—Information Technology Act, 2000—Section 66D—Held: Where accused had joined investigation pursuant to interim protection granted by Supreme Court and was cooperating with Investigating Officer, custodial interrogation was not considered necessary at that stage—Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail by setting aside High Court order refusing relief. (Paras 3–8) B. Criminal Procedure—Anticipatory bail—Cooperation with investigation—Held: Grant of anticipatory bail justified where accused complied with interim directions of Court, appeared before Investigating Officer and extended cooperation during investigation—Protecti...
(2) SUPREME COURT
Cancellation of bail
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Bail—Cancellation of bail—Subsequent FIR—Held: Bail granted in earlier FIR cannot continue to remain cancelled once accused has already been granted bail in subsequent FIR forming basis for cancellation and there is no allegation of commission of offence after grant of earlier bail—Supreme Court restored liberty and enlarged petitioner on bail considering totality of circumstances. (Paras 4–12) B. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 64, 64(2)(m), 332(b), 351(2)—Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989—Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va)—Delay in lodging FIR—Held: Delay of one year and seven months in lodging subsequent FIR was significant circumstance favouring grant of bail, parti...
(3) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail, SCST
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 482—Anticipatory bail—Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989—Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va)—Held: Where chargesheet had already been filed, trial was underway and accused were cooperating with proceedings and regularly appearing before trial Court, no grounds were made out for custodial incarceration pending trial—Supreme Court set aside High Court order refusing anticipatory bail and directed release of appellants in event of arrest. (Paras 5–7) B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 482(2)—Conditions of anticipatory bail—Held: Accused granted anticipatory bail are bound to comply with statutory conditions stipulated under Section 482(2) BNSS and continue cooperati...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Title of landlord
A. Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966—Section 126(1)(b)—Transferable Development Rights (TDR)—Additional amenity TDR—Held: Landowner surrendering reserved land and developing amenity thereon at own cost is statutorily entitled to additional TDR equivalent to area of construction/development of amenity—Corporation cannot curtail or deny such statutory entitlement through executive circulars, letters of intent, undertakings or contractual stipulations. (Paras 26–37, 39–44) B. Constitution of India—Article 300A—Right to property and fair compensation—Held: Right to fair compensation upon acquisition of property is intrinsic component of Article 300A and constitutes a sacrosanct constitutional and human right—Once statute prescribes mode and measure of compensa...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Acquittal, Criminal Trial
A. Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967—Sections 10(a)(i), 10(a)(iv) and 38(1)—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 120B—Identity of accused—Mistaken identity—Held: Conviction of appellant unsustainable where prosecution failed to establish through reliable oral or documentary evidence that appellant “Ranjan” was same person as absconding accused “Sri” (A-5)—Belated introduction of alias name after arrest constituted material improvement creating serious doubt regarding prosecution case. (Paras 41–56) B. Criminal trial—Appreciation of evidence—Material improvements and contradictions—Effect—Held: Where prosecution witnesses in earlier statements and depositions never referred to accused by alleged alias name and introduced such identity onl...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Electricity
A. Electricity Act, 2003—Punjab State Grid Code, 2013—Regulations 11.3.4, 11.3.12 and 11.3.13—Declared Capacity (DC)—Misdeclaration and demonstration of capability—Held: Failure of generating station to demonstrate declared capability on being called upon by State Load Despatch Centre within prescribed operational time frame attracts penalty under Regulation 11.3.13—Liability is distinct from “gaming” and does not require proof of mens rea, deliberate intention or illegal profiteering—Penalty imposed for failure to demonstrate DC is in nature of strict civil liability. (Paras 18–32) B. Electricity law—Gaming and misdeclaration—Distinction—Held: “Gaming” under Grid Code contemplates intentional misdeclaration of parameters to secure undue commercia...
(7) SUPREME COURT
A. Tender—Earnest Money Deposit (EMD)—Out-of-State bidders—Interpretation of tender conditions—Held: Furnishing of Demand Draft by out-of-State bidders was not mandatory under tender document—Clauses 2.13(a)(xiii), 2.13(b) and 2.15 employed expression “may”, indicating only an optional mode of furnishing EMD—Fixed Deposit Receipt furnished by appellant constituted valid “Approved Interest Bearing Security” under Clause 2.13(a)(iv)—Disqualification of appellant on opening of Envelope A held unsustainable. (Paras 7–10) B. Tender conditions—Interpretation of mandatory and directory clauses—Held: Tender clauses must be construed according to plain language employed therein—Use of permissive expression “may” ordinarily denotes directory or ...
(8) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India—Article 21—Public safety and right to life—Stray dog menace—Held: Right to life guaranteed under Article 21 includes right of citizens to safe and secure public spaces free from threats of stray dog attacks—State authorities and local bodies are under constitutional obligation to ensure public safety while implementing animal welfare measures—Failure to effectively control stray dog population and enforce sterilization/vaccination mechanisms amounts to failure of public duty—Directions issued to ensure strict implementation of Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 with primacy accorded to human safety and protection of vulnerable persons such as children, patients and senior citizens. (Paras 41–49, 101–104) B. Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023—Interpretation...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Criminal conspiracy, Murder
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 120B and 34—Murder and criminal conspiracy—Appreciation of evidence—Trial Court convicted accused persons on basis of direct and circumstantial evidence including eyewitness testimony, approver evidence, money trail, recoveries and motive—High Court reversed conviction by re-appreciating evidence and treating contradictions, omissions and delay in examination of witnesses as fatal—Held: High Court committed grave error in interfering with legally sustainable findings of Trial Court without demonstrating perversity, illegality or impossibility in Trial Court’s appreciation of evidence—Minor contradictions and omissions which do not affect substratum of prosecution case cannot render otherwise credible evidence unreliable—Evidence of approver, whe...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Appointment
A. Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980—Sections 12, 13 & 14—Waitlisted candidate—Change in place of posting—Held: Once a waitlisted candidate is recommended for appointment to a particular institution under Section 13(3) of the Old Act, there exists no power under Section 13(4) to subsequently alter or substitute place of posting merely because candidate did not join owing to personal reasons—Interpretation permitting such change would defeat statutory scheme governing appointments and recommendations. (Paras 13–20) B. Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980—Section 13(4)—Expression “otherwise”—Interpretation—Held: Word “otherwise” occurring in Section 13(4) must be construed ejusdem generis wi...
(1) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Security cheque
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 118, 139—Presumption—Rebuttal—Held: Once issuance of cheque and signature thereon are admitted or proved, statutory presumption arises that cheque was issued towards discharge of legally enforceable debt—Burden shifts on accused to rebut presumption on preponderance of probabilities—Failure to lead evidence or raise probable defence results in conviction. (Paras 6–8, 12) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—“Security cheque”—Liability—Held: Dishonour of cheque issued as “security” also attracts offence under Section 138, if it relates to a subsisting liability and becomes enforceable on default—There is no statutory exemption for security cheques under the Act. (Paras 10–11) ...
(2) ALLAHABAD
A. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Section 35(1)—Appeal—Pre-deposit—Nature—Held: Requirement of pre-deposit of 50% of adjudicated amount is mandatory and jurisdictional—Use of expression “no appeal shall lie” makes it a condition precedent for institution of appeal—In absence of such deposit, appeal is non-est and not maintainable in law. (Paras 27–29, 55) B. Limitation—Pre-deposit—Interplay—Held: Pre-deposit and limitation are cumulative requirements—Deposit made beyond limitation does not validate an otherwise incompetent appeal—Appeal is treated as instituted only upon compliance of pre-deposit, and delay must be separately explained and condoned—Pre-deposit cannot cure limitation defect. (Paras 31–33, 4...
(3) 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...
(4) 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...
(5) 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...
(6) 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...
(7) ALLAHABAD
A. Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021—Section 35(1)—Appeal—Pre-deposit—Continuing obligation—Held: Pre-deposit of 50% of “entire amount payable” is mandatory and not confined to a one-time deposit at the time of filing appeal—Where impugned order creates recurring liability (e.g., revised rent), obligation extends to continuous deposit during pendency of appeal—Requirement is dynamic and subsists so long as liability continues. (Paras 14–17, 23.3–23.4) B. Rent law—Recurring liability—Interpretation of “entire amount payable”—Held: Expression “entire amount payable” includes ongoing accruals and cannot be restricted to amount due on date of appeal—Restrictive interpretation would defeat legislative ...
(8) 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...
(9) 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...
(10) 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) ...