(1) SUPREME COURT
Education Law
A. Education Law—Degree validity—University established under statute later declared ultra vires—Effect on students who had already passed out—University established under Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya Act, 2002—Act subsequently declared ultra vires by Supreme Court in Prof. Yash Pal v. State of Chhattisgarh (2005)—Appellants had obtained B.Lib degree in 2004 prior to declaration—Held, students who had studied and obtained degrees when university was functioning under colour of valid statute cannot be penalised for subsequent invalidation of Act—Absence of fraud or misrepresentation on part of appellants—Degrees protected—Termination of services solely on ground of invalidity of Act unsustainable. [Paras 12, 13, 16] B. Service Law—Termination—Appoi...
(2) SUPREME COURT
Mandatory injunction
A. Limitation Act, 1963—Article 135—Enforcement of decree granting mandatory injunction—Limitation—Execution application under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC seeking enforcement of decree granting mandatory injunction—Decree of First Appellate Court did not fix any specific date for performance—Execution filed more than three years after date of decree—Held, in absence of any date fixed for performance, limitation under Art. 135 commences from date of decree—Application clearly barred by limitation—Execution Court justified in dismissing the application—No interference warranted. [Paras 4 to 6] B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order 21 Rule 32—Execution of decree for mandatory injunction—Scope—Where execution petition confined only to enforcement of mandato...
(3) SUPREME COURT
Abetment of Suicide
A. Penal Code, 1860—Sections 306 and 107—Suicide pact—Surviving partner—Criminal liability—Participation in suicide pact—Reciprocal commitment between parties provides the necessary moral support and impetus to commit suicide—Where one partner survives, such participation constitutes intentional aiding and instigation within meaning of S. 107 IPC—Surviving partner legally culpable under S. 306 IPC for abetment of suicide—Survival does not dilute culpability as acts of participants are interdependent in execution of pact. [Paras 117 to 119] B. Penal Code, 1860—Section 306—Abetment of suicide—Procurement and joint consumption of lethal poison—Accused procured highly toxic organophosphate pesticide and consumed it along with deceased—Knowledge of toxi...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Remission in sentence
A. Penal Code, 1860—Sections 307, 326 and 324—Sentencing—Reduction of sentence by High Court—Legality—Accused convicted for causing grievous and life-threatening stab injuries—Trial Court imposed sentence of three years’ rigorous imprisonment—High Court reduced sentence to period already undergone (two months) and enhanced fine—Held, reduction wholly unjustified and contrary to settled principles of sentencing—Courts must ensure punishment is commensurate with gravity of offence—Undue leniency erodes public confidence in justice system and defeats deterrent object of criminal law—Sentence restored. [Paras 18 to 27] B. Criminal Justice Administration—Sentencing policy—Balancing factors—Sentencing requires balancing aggravating and mitigating c...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 29, 209 and 323—Bail—Grant by High Court—Validity—Accused charged under Ss. 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, etc.—High Court granted bail on ground that offences triable by Magistrate and on principle of parity—Accused had criminal antecedents, multiple FIRs in different jurisdictions, operated under several aliases with forged IDs and had earlier absconded after obtaining bail—Held, High Court’s assumption that case was triable by Magistrate was premature in view of serious offences punishable with life imprisonment—Power of committal under Ss. 209 and 323 CrPC overlooked—Failure to consider criminal history and distinctive features of case rendered order perverse—Bail order set aside. [Paras 12, 14, 22, 24] B. Bail&...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Allotment of Flat
A. Constitution of India—Article 226—Writ jurisdiction—Maintainability against private society—Registered housing society comprising government employees—Land allotted by Government—Allegations of lack of transparency, fairness and reasonableness in allotment of flats—Governing Body comprised ex officio Government officers—Held, writ petition maintainable—When actions of such society bear public law element and reflect arbitrariness or violation of fairness in distribution of housing benefits, High Court justified in invoking jurisdiction under Art. 226. [Para 5] B. Societies Registration Act, 1860—Housing allotment—Preferential allotment to Governing Body member—Legality—Bye-laws permitted allotment only to eligible members fulfilling service and pay cr...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Circumstantial evidence
A. Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 8 and 27—Circumstantial evidence—Recovery pursuant to statement—Admissibility and evidentiary value—Recovery of bone remnants allegedly at instance of accused—Accused not in police custody at time of recording statement under S. 27—S. 27 therefore not attracted—Recovery admissible under S. 8 as conduct of accused—DNA profiling matched remains with deceased—Held, such recovery evidence only corroborative in nature—Cannot independently establish guilt in absence of complete chain of circumstances. [Paras 10, 11, 15, 18] B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 313—Evidence Act, 1872—Section 106—Accused’s explanation—Scope—Accused denied DNA matching evidence and offered no explanation regarding l...
(8) SUPREME COURT
Contempt of Court
A. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971—Civil contempt—Wilful disobedience of order of Supreme Court—Undertaking filed before Court—Payment of ₹4 crores with interest within stipulated period—Non-compliance despite expiry of time—Subsequent assurance before Court to deposit ₹1 crore not honoured—No material placed to establish bona fide inability—Dishonour of cheque relied upon without initiating action against drawer—Held, conduct indicates deliberate and wilful disobedience—Contemnor held guilty—Matter posted for hearing on punishment. [Paras 4 to 7] B. Contempt proceedings—Liability of company and its Directors—Company failed to comply with money decree executable undertaking—Other Directors impleaded—Notice issued to explain non-compliance&md...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Criminal proceedings
Criminal Procedure—Custodial safeguards—Direction regarding electronic device—Pen drive furnished to detenu in custody directed to be taken into possession by Jail Authorities; to be kept in a sealed box in the presence of the detenu and forwarded to the Court. Concerned Jail Authorities directed to ensure strict compliance with the said direction. [Para 2] ...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Suspension of sentence
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 389—Suspension of sentence pending appeal—Life imprisonment—Prolonged incarceration—Appeal pending for nearly a decade—Appellant convicted under Ss. 302/34 IPC and S. 27 Arms Act and sentenced to life imprisonment—Appeal filed in 2016 pending before High Court—Application for suspension of sentence rejected though appellant had undergone more than 11 years’ incarceration—Interim bail granted for three months only—Held, continued incarceration during pendency of appeal for inordinate period amounts to serious failure of justice—Right of appeal under S. 374(2) CrPC is a statutory right—If appeal ultimately succeeds, irreparable injustice would result—Delay not attributable to appellant—Following Kashmira Singh v...
(2) DELHI
Suspension of sentence
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Dishonour of cheque—Conviction—Suspension of sentence—Petitioner convicted under S. 138 NI Act and sentenced to imprisonment and fine—During pendency of revision petitions, substantial payments made to complainant (₹ 1.5 crores in addition to ₹ 75 lakhs already deposited and released)—Considering partial satisfaction of liability and overall circumstances, sentence suspended temporarily—Suspension subject to furnishing personal bond and compliance with conditions—Interim protection granted pending further proceedings. [Paras 3 to 8] B. Criminal Procedure—Suspension of sentence—Conditions—While suspending sentence, Court imposed safeguards to secure presence of accused and ensure compliance—Conditions in...
(3) ALLAHABAD
Appreciation of evidence, Dacoity
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 374(2)—Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 395 & 397 (Paras 1–3, 8, 15, 28–29) Dacoity—Appreciation of Evidence—Material Contradictions—Failure to Prove Factum of Dacoity—Benefit of Doubt—Acquittal (Paras 16–27) The present appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC was preferred against the judgment dated 29.08.1983 passed by the Special Sessions Judge, Badaun in Special Sessions Trial No.157 of 1982, arising out of Case Crime No.321, Police Station Ujhani, District Badaun, whereby the accused-appellants were convicted under Sections 395 IPC and 395 read with 397 IPC (Paras 1–3, 8). During pendency of the appeal, four appellants died and the appeal abated against them (Para 3). The core issue before the Court was whether t...
(4) JHARKHAND
Circumstantial evidence, Murder
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 374(2)—Appeal Against Conviction—Reappreciation of Evidence—In an appeal against conviction under Section 374(2) CrPC, the appellate court is duty-bound to re-examine whether the prosecution has established guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly where conviction under Sections 302/34 IPC is challenged on grounds of absence of credible evidence and lack of proof of common intention (Para 9). Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302/34—Circumstantial Evidence—Common Intention—Where the prosecution case rests substantially on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and unbroken—Hostility of seizure list witnesses and failure to convincingly prove recovery of alleged incriminating articles, such as blood-stained clothes, creat...
(5) KARNATAKA
Recall of witness
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 348—Recall of Witness—Scope—Court empowered to summon, recall or re-examine any witness at any stage of trial—Provision to be interpreted purposively to advance cause of justice and discovery of truth—Essentiality of evidence to just decision is determinative test—Rejection of application solely on ground that it was second in line held improper—One opportunity ought to have been granted. [Paras 5 to 7] B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Further Cross-examination of Defence Witness—In prosecution under Section 138 NI Act, recall of DW.1 for further cross-examination permissible where it aids fair adjudication—Though power under Section 311 CrPC...
(6) KERALA
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 482—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Quashing of Proceedings—Drawer and Account Holder Distinction—Petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment of prosecution under Section 138 NI Act—Allegation that cheque was drawn on account maintained by proprietary concern through its proprietor (first accused), but cheque was signed by second accused as authorised signatory of proprietor—Complaint itself disclosed that signatory was not the account holder and account holder had not signed the cheque—Under Section 138 NI Act, criminal liability arises only against “drawer” who maintains the account and draws the cheque—In case of individual/proprietorship concern, neither non-signatory account holder nor signatory who is n...
(7) GUJARAT
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 378—Appeal Against Acquittal—Scope of Interference—In an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 CrPC, the High Court may review and reappreciate the entire evidence; however, it must bear in mind the double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused—Interference is unwarranted where the trial court’s view is a possible and reasonable conclusion based on the evidence on record (A). Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 498A, 114—Murder and Cruelty—Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt—Though medical evidence established homicidal death by burns, the prosecution failed to prove the identity and role of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to absence of reliable direct or corroborative evidence and material weaknesses in the case (C). Evide...
(8) JHARKHAND
Murder
Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 304 Part I, 34—Murder vs. Culpable Homicide—Application of Section 300 Exception 4 In a case arising out of a sudden quarrel between brothers over house construction, resulting in death, the conviction under Section 302 IPC was modified to Section 304 Part I IPC (Paras 30–62) The Court held that the incident occurred without premeditation, in the heat of passion during a sudden fight, and without the accused taking undue advantage or acting in a cruel or unusual manner, thereby attracting Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC (Paras 38–40, 45). Testimony of the sole eyewitness (wife of the deceased) revealed that the appellants were initially unarmed and procured weapons only after a scuffle; they did not flee the scene—circumstances inconsistent with a pre-planned murde...
(9) CALCUTTA
Writ jurisdiction
Railways Act, 1989—Sections 66 & 73—False Declaration—Requirement of Mens Rea—For imposition of penalty under Sections 66 and 73 of the Railways Act, 1989, deliberate intention to defraud or cause wrongful loss must be established—Mere operational discrepancies, clerical errors, or procedural variations do not amount to “false declaration” in the absence of concealment, misrepresentation, or demonstrable freight loss (Paras 47, 49, 51, 55). Contract Act, 1872—Section 74—Forfeiture and Penalty—Forfeiture of earnest money or security deposit requires proof of breach and must represent a reasonable pre-estimate of loss—Confiscatory or deterrent charges imposed without proof of actual loss are punitive and legally unsustainable (Paras 15, 45, 52). Administrative Law&m...
(10) MEGHALAYA
Service Law
All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Regulations — Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) — Ph.D. Requirement — Prospective Application—The requirement of possessing a Ph.D. degree for promotion to higher grade pay under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) is prospective in operation and applies only to faculty who entered service after the cut-off date specified in the Regulations; it cannot be imposed retrospectively upon existing incumbents (Paras 12, 13)—For determining eligibility under CAS, the relevant consideration is the date of entry into service, not the date on which promotion becomes due (Para 12). A clarificatory notification issued by AICTE cannot operate as an amendment to existing Regulations so as to curtail accrued service benefits (Para 14). Distinction between technical and non-t...
