(1) SUPREME COURT
Artificial Intelligence
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 7—Artificial Intelligence (AI)—Reliance on fake or hallucinated precedents—Effect—Held: Any judicial or adjudicatory decision founded upon non-existent, fake or AI-generated hallucinated precedents is no decision in the eyes of law and is liable to be set aside irrespective of whether such material had a direct or indirect bearing on the outcome. Courts and Tribunals must adopt a zero-tolerance approach towards citation or reliance on unverified AI-generated authorities in order to preserve the sanctity and integrity of the adjudicatory process. (Paras 1, 6–20) B. Artificial Intelligence—Judicial Process—Professional responsibility of Bar and Bench—Held: While Artificial Intelligence may be legitimately employed as an aid to legal rese...
(2) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 108, 115(2), 351(2) & 352—Anticipatory Bail—Interim protection—Held: Where the petitioner, a woman with no criminal antecedents, sought anticipatory bail in a case alleging abetment of suicide and allied offences, and the charge-sheet had already been filed with no suicide note left by the deceased, the Supreme Court granted interim protection from arrest by directing that the petitioner shall not be arrested till further orders, pending consideration of the Special Leave Petition. (Paras 2–4) B. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 108, 115(2), 351(2) & 352—Anticipatory Bail—Post charge-sheet stage—Held: Filing of the charge-sheet and the surrounding circumstances of the case, including the absence of a suicide note and the petiti...
(3) SUPREME COURT
POCSO
A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Section 64(1)—Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012—Sections 3 & 4—Bail—Grant of bail in POCSO case—Held: While considering bail, the Court may take into account the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the period of incarceration already undergone by the accused, the stage of trial, and the likelihood of its early conclusion. Where the accused had remained in custody for about eight months and the trial was likely to take considerable time with several prosecution witnesses yet to be examined, bail was granted subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. (Paras 3, 5–6) B. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012—Bail—Relevant considerations—Held: At the stage of considering bail, factors such as the ...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Quashing of proceeding
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 465—Cognizance—Error in mentioning penal provision—Curable irregularity—Held: An erroneous reference to a penal provision while taking cognizance does not render the proceedings void where the court otherwise has jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence. Since cognizance is taken of the offence and not of the offender, such defect is a curable irregularity under Section 465 CrPC unless it occasions a failure of justice. (Paras 10–14) B. Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1994 (as amended in 2005)—Rule 7A—Election Affidavit—Disclosure of Assets—Scope—Held: A candidate contesting municipal elections is under a mandatory obligation to disclose in the prescribed affidavit the assets of herself, her spouse and h...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Remission in sentence
A. Remission—Premature release of life convicts—Applicable policy—Conflict between Haryana's 2002 Policy (dated 12.04.2002) and 2008 Policy (dated 13.08.2008)—Source of power—Held: The 2002 Policy, being in substance and effect referable to Article 161 of the Constitution of India (papers to be routed to the Governor for orders), is constitutional in origin notwithstanding that it does not expressly recite the source of power. The 2008 Policy, by contrast, expressly invokes Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and makes the Chief Minister the deciding authority, and is therefore statutory in character. A policy traceable to a statute cannot override or supersede the exercise of the constitutional power under Article 161, that power being distinct, independent and uninfluenced by an...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Income Tax
A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Sections 166 & 168—Assessment of Income—Income Tax Returns—Self-employed deceased—Held: There can be no rigid or inflexible formula for determining the annual income of a deceased or injured claimant. While Income Tax Returns constitute an important statutory indicator of income, in the case of self-employed persons or those carrying on business, the average income reflected in the Income Tax Returns of up to the preceding three years should ordinarily be taken as the reference point. At the same time, the Court must also consider the nature of the business, its growth pattern, future earning potential, business fluctuations, losses in initial years and other surrounding circumstances to ensure award of just and fair compensation. (Paras 17–22) B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Charge-sheet
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 187(3)—Default Bail—Charge-sheet filed within statutory period—Non-filing of additional copies under Section 193(8)—Effect—Held: The right to default bail arises only when the charge-sheet itself is not filed within the prescribed period of sixty or ninety days. Once a police report complying with Section 193(3) BNSS is filed within time, the indefeasible right to default bail stands extinguished. Mere non-filing or delayed supply of additional copies of the charge-sheet or accompanying documents as contemplated under Section 193(8) or Section 230 BNSS does not vitiate the charge-sheet nor entitle the accused to statutory/default bail. (Paras 19–27) B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Sections 193(3), 193(8) & 230—Polic...
(8) SUPREME COURT
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 209 and 244—Committal proceedings—Cases exclusively triable by Court of Session—Scope of Magistrate's powers—Held: In cases exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the Magistrate performs only administrative and ministerial functions, namely, ensuring compliance with Sections 207 and 208 CrPC and committing the case under Section 209. Recording of pre-charge evidence under Section 244 CrPC is not contemplated or mandatory at the committal stage. (Paras 6, 9, 10, 12 and 13) B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 207, 208 and 209—Committal proceedings—Legislative intent—Held: The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has substantially curtailed the role of the Magistrate at the stage of committal in comparison to the Code of 1898. The o...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Rejection of plaint, Suit for specific performance
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order VII Rule 11(d)—Rejection of plaint—Specific performance—Suit based on unregistered agreement to sell dated 21.08.1984 instituted after about thirty-eight years—Held: The suit was ex facie barred by limitation under Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The period of limitation commences from the date fixed for performance or when the plaintiff first becomes entitled to sue. Clever drafting or artificial pleadings creating an illusion of a continuing cause of action cannot defeat the statutory bar of limitation. Rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC was justified. (Paras 15, 22 to 26) B. Limitation Act, 1963—Article 54—Suit for specific performance—Limitation—Held: A suit for specific performance must be instituted within three y...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Compromise, Decree
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order XXIII Rule 3—Compromise decree—Validity and requirements—Held: A lawful compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC must be in writing, signed by the parties, and based on their free and voluntary consent. An advocate has no implied authority to enter into or consent to a compromise affecting the substantive rights of a party without specific authorization. A compromise decree obtained without complying with these mandatory requirements is unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside. (Paras 5 to 5.6) B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 151—Compromise decree obtained by fraud—Delay in seeking recall—Effect—Held: Where a compromise decree is alleged to have been obtained by fraud or without the consent of the affected party, mere delay in approach...
(1) DELHI
A. Administrative Law—Blacklisting of contractors—Duration of debarment—Held, an order of blacklisting cannot operate indefinitely or permanently and must conform to the principles of proportionality and applicable administrative guidelines prescribing the maximum period of debarment—Continuous blacklisting since 2008 was held to be arbitrary, unreasonable, and legally unsustainable, particularly in light of the subsequent development of jurisprudence governing the permissible duration of such punitive measures. (Paras 24, 30, 35, 39, 45) B. Administrative Law—Remedies—Continuing and recurring cause of action—Held, the continuance of an unlawful order of blacklisting gives rise to a recurring cause of action, entitling the affected contractor to challenge the ongoing deprivation notwithstanding...
(2) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Section 18—Compensation for acquisition of land—Apple trees uprooted and partially damaged—Enhancement of compensation—Held, the claimant was entitled to compensation in respect of 14 uprooted apple trees, in accordance with the expert valuation report (Ext. PW-1/A), which assessed the loss at Rs. 2,66,889/-—The Reference Court erred in restricting compensation to 12 trees despite the expert evidence supporting the existence and valuation of 14 uprooted trees—The award was accordingly enhanced to that extent. (Paras 9-13) B. Evidence—Compensation for partially damaged trees—Burden of proof—Held, a claim for compensation in respect of partially damaged apple trees cannot be allowed in the absence of reliable documentary or expert evidence establish...
(3) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 109, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2) and 117(2)—Bail—Principles governing grant—Held, where the allegations disclose that the accused, acting in furtherance of a common intention, attacked the victims with a deadly weapon and caused serious injuries, the gravity of the offence and the severity of the prescribed punishment constitute significant considerations against the grant of bail—The Court must also assess the possibility of the accused absconding, influencing witnesses, or otherwise interfering with the course of justice—In the facts of the case, these considerations weighed against enlargement of the petitioner on bail. (Paras 11-13) B. Criminal Procedure—Bail jurisprudence—Relevant factors for exercise of discretion—Held, the discretion ...
(4) HIMACHAL PRADESH
A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Section 103; Arms Act, 1959—Sections 25 and 27—Regular bail—Parameters governing grant in heinous offences—Held, while considering a prayer for bail in cases involving allegations of murder and criminal conspiracy, the Court must evaluate the nature and gravity of the accusations, the severity of the punishment prescribed, the prima facie material connecting the accused with the offence, the likelihood of influencing witnesses or obstructing the administration of justice, and the larger societal impact of the crime—Where the allegations disclose prima facie involvement of the petitioner in facilitating the commission of the offence as part of a conspiracy to commit murder, the seriousness of the charge and the possibility of punishment extending to death or imprisonment ...
(5) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Anticipatory bail
A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 103 and 3(5); Arms Act, 1959—Sections 25 and 27—Anticipatory bail—Heinous offences involving murder and conspiracy—Held, the extraordinary remedy of pre-arrest bail is not to be granted as a matter of course and is intended only for exceptional situations—While considering such relief, the Court must have due regard to the gravity and nature of the accusation, the prima facie involvement of the accused, the impact on investigation, and the severity of the prescribed punishment—In cases attracting punishment of death or imprisonment for life under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the grant of anticipatory bail is ordinarily inappropriate unless compelling circumstances are established. (Paras 9, 12, 13, 17, 18) B. Criminal Procedure Code...
(6) BOMBAY
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 9—Interim measures for securing assets pending arbitration—Held, where the petitioner establishes a strong prima facie case, the balance of convenience lies in its favour, and denial of protection would result in irreparable prejudice through diminution or dissipation of the respondent's assets, the Court may grant appropriate interim measures under Section 9—In such circumstances, directions requiring the respondent to secure the claim by depositing the disputed amount or furnishing a bank guarantee, coupled with restraint against alienation or encumbrance of assets except in the ordinary course of business, are justified to safeguard the efficacy of the arbitral process. (Paras 8, 45-49) B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 9 and 17&mdas...
(7) HIMACHAL PRADESH
Quashing of FIR
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 482—Successive petitions for quashing of FIR—Maintainability—Held, a second or successive petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the same FIR is not maintainable in the absence of any substantial change in circumstances or emergence of new material facts—Re-agitating identical grounds through repeated petitions amounts to an abuse of the process of law and cannot be permitted. (Paras 6-8, 10-12) B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 362 read with Section 482—Inherent powers of High Court—Scope and limitation—Held, the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 cannot be invoked to circumvent or override the express prohibition contained in Section 362 CrPC against review or alteration of a final or...
(8) KERALA
Territorial jurisdiction
A. Trade Marks Act, 1999—Sections 28(3), 34—Infringement between registered proprietors—Different classes—Prior user doctrine—Held, the bar under Section 28(3) applies only where both parties hold registrations in respect of the same goods or services—A defendant registered under Class 35 cannot claim immunity when dealing in gold jewellery falling under Class 14, in which the plaintiff holds registration—Prior user rights prevail over mere registration, and the plaintiff successfully established continuous commercial use and a superior claim to the composite mark—S. Syed Mohideen distinguished. (Paras 13, 16) B. Trade Marks Act, 1999—Sections 9, 32—Geographical expressions—Composite marks—Deceptive similarity—Held, a geographical expression like “Malab...
(9) KERALA
Service Law
A. Constitution of India, 1950—Article 227—Supervisory jurisdiction—Limited scope of interference—The High Court's power under Article 227 is supervisory and not appellate—Interference with orders of the Administrative Tribunal is permissible only in cases of patent perversity, manifest error, grave dereliction of duty, abuse of law, or violation of natural justice, and not merely because another view is possible. (Paras 6–11) B. Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985—Interim stay of transfer/promotion orders—Non-impleadment of affected employees—Violation of natural justice—Beneficiaries directly affected by a challenge to transfer or promotion orders are necessary parties—Grant of interim relief without impleading such persons or following the prescribed procedure viol...
(10) MEGHALAYA
Service Law
A. Service Law—Regularization of casual/temporary employees—Long and continuous service—Availability of sanctioned vacancies—Employees who have rendered continuous service for long periods and are performing perennial duties cannot be denied consideration for regularization merely on technical grounds—Where sanctioned vacancies exist, the employer must review the sanctioned strength and consider eligible employees for regularization in accordance with the applicable rules and qualification requirements. (Paras 10, 13, 14) B. Service Law—Regularization—Illegal and irregular appointments—Applicability of Umadevi—Though State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3) prohibits regularization of appointments made dehors the rules, subsequent judicial pronouncements clarify that the decision cannot be...
