(1) SUPREME COURT
Eye witness
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 147, 148, 302, 307, 326, 323, 341 read with Section 149—Conviction—Reliability of eyewitnesses—Held: Where prosecution case is based on testimonies of related witnesses whose presence at the place of occurrence is doubtful and injuries allegedly sustained by “injured witnesses” are not proved, their evidence becomes unreliable—Conviction cannot be sustained on such doubtful and inconsistent testimony—Accused entitled to acquittal. (Paras 16–19) B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 154, 161 & 164—Delay in FIR—Effect—Held: Unexplained delay in registration of FIR, especially when police reached the spot immediately and eyewitnesses were allegedly present, creates serious doubt about prosecution case—Fa...
(2) SUPREME COURT
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 5(8) read with Sections 5(7) & 62—Corporate guarantee—Financial debt—Held: Liability arising out of a corporate guarantee constitutes a “financial debt” as it involves consideration for time value of money—Guarantor’s liability is coextensive with that of principal borrower—Execution of corporate guarantee entitles lender to be treated as financial creditor. (Paras 22–23, 31) B. Insolvency law—Verification of claims—Role of Resolution Professional—Held: Resolution Professional is empowered to verify claims on the basis of available documents and may seek further evidence—Where execution of corporate guarantee is admitted and verified through Security Trustee, rejection of claim for alleged non-filing o...
(3) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India—Article 21A—Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009—Section 12(1)(c)—U.P. RTE Rules, 2011—Rule 8—Admission in neighbourhood school—Held: Once a student is selected and allotted to a school by the State under the statutory admission process, the school is bound to grant admission without delay—School cannot sit in appeal over the decision of the State authorities—Non-compliance defeats the fundamental right to education under Article 21A. (Paras 2, 4–7) B. Education law—Neighbourhood school obligation—25% quota for weaker sections—Held: Section 12 of the RTE Act mandates compulsory admission of children from weaker and disadvantaged groups to the extent of at least 25% of entry-level class strength—This statu...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Circumstantial evidence
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 364, 404, 201 r/w Section 34—Circumstantial evidence—Last seen theory—Held: Mere “last seen together” circumstance is insufficient to sustain conviction unless corroborated by other incriminating evidence—Where time gap is not narrow and no additional reliable link connects accused with crime, conviction cannot be based solely on last seen evidence. (Paras 41–44) B. Evidence Act, 1872—Section 27—Discovery of fact—Admissibility—Held: For discovery to be admissible, prosecution must prove exact information given by accused, authorship of concealment, and recovery pursuant thereto—Joint or vague disclosures without clear attribution to each accused are unreliable—Failure to prove proper procedure of discovery weaken...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Wild Life
A. Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972—Section 38H read with animal translocation—A.N. Jha Deer Park—Carrying capacity—Held: Where Central Zoo Authority cancels recognition of a facility and expert body finds that enclosure lacks carrying capacity to sustain existing wildlife population, continued retention of animals is impermissible—Scientific and regulated translocation to suitable habitats is justified and necessary for animal welfare and ecological balance. (Paras 5, 9–10) B. Environmental law—Wildlife conservation—Translocation policy—Held: Wildlife translocation must be based on scientific methodology, ecological feasibility and animal welfare considerations—Ad hoc or abrupt relocation without acclimatisation and safeguards is impermissible—Comprehensive guidelines f...
(6) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India—Article 32/142—Suo motu cognizance—Victim protection—Held: Supreme Court can take suo motu cognizance of grave incidents involving violation of fundamental rights, particularly in cases of brutal assault—Court empowered to issue immediate directions for fair investigation, protection of victim and minor children, and to secure ends of justice. (Paras 2, 6) B. Criminal law—Investigation—Fairness—Held: To ensure impartial and effective investigation, Court may direct entrustment of investigation to senior police officer, preferably a woman officer—Investigating agency also required to trace missing minor children and submit status report—Ensuring fairness to both victim and accused. (Paras 6, 9) C. Victim compensation—NALSA Scheme—Interim ...
(7) 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...
(8) 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...
(9) 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...
(10) 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...
(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) ...
