A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 11, Order I Rule 10 & Order XXII Rule 10—Res judicata—Subsequent impleadment application—Held: A subsequent application seeking impleadment on substantially the same facts and for the same relief is barred by the doctrine of res judicata where an earlier application under Order I Rule 10 CPC has already been decided on merits. The distinct object and scope of Order XXII Rule 10 CPC cannot be invoked to reopen an issue already finally adjudicated, though impleadment may still be considered where a separate and independent cause of action subsequently arises. (Paras 28 to 40) B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 146, Order XXII Rule 10 & Section 11—Devolution of interest pendente lite—Rights of transferee—Held: A transferee pendente lite is ent...
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 451 and 457—Interim custody of seized vehicle—Scope—Held: While deciding an application for interim custody of a seized vehicle, the Court is not bound solely by the name appearing in the registration certificate—The discretion under Sections 451 and 457 is to be exercised on a holistic consideration of all relevant circumstances, including actual possession, beneficial use, financial obligations, and overall equities between the parties—Accordingly, interim custody may be granted to the person who establishes a stronger prima facie entitlement to preserve and use the property pending adjudication. (Paras 27 to 37) B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 451 and 457—Seized property—Interim custody—Nature of order—Held: An order...
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Section 14—Scope of moratorium—Held, the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC applies exclusively to the corporate debtor and operates only to halt continuation of pending suits and proceedings against it—Such moratorium does not extend protection to promoters, directors, landowners, or other entities/respondents arrayed alongside the corporate debtor, unless such protection is explicitly provided by statute—In the absence of any statutory bar, proceedings against such other respondents can continue notwithstanding the moratorium against the corporate debtor. (Paras 5–7) B. Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Section 21—Consumer complaint against multiple respondents including corporate debtor under moratorium—Held, where moratorium under Section ...
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 187(2) and (3)—Police custody—Fifteen-day custody window not confined to first fifteen days of remand—Outer time-limit condition set aside—Held, Section 187(2) and (3) BNSS, unlike the erstwhile Section 167 CrPC, enlarges the window during which police custody, in the aggregate not exceeding fifteen days, may be sought, such custody being available in parts during the first forty or sixty days of the total permissible period of detention rather than being confined to the first fifteen days of remand alone—This legislative change is intended to meet situations where fresh facts, discoveries or leads emerge during investigation warranting further custodial interrogation, and an unduly rigid or premature foreclosure of that statutory window cannot be sust...
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 154 and 482—Clubbing and consolidation of multiple FIRs—Governing principles—Held, multiple FIRs cannot be registered for the same incident or for connected transactions constituting the same offence—However, subsequent FIRs are permissible where they relate to distinct and separate transactions or disclose the commission of distinct offences—A "test of sameness" governs whether registration of multiple FIRs is permissible in a given case. (Paras 14–16) B. Constitution of India, 1950—Article 32—Writ petition for quashing multiple FIRs—Maintainability—Held, jurisdiction under Article 32 is an extraordinary remedy to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances—A petitioner must ordinarily approach t...
A. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997—Sections 11, 13, 29, 34, 36 and 37—Adjudicatory jurisdiction—Disputes between Multi-System Operators and Local Cable Operators—Held, TRAI has no jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes or enforce penalties between Multi-System Operators (MSOs) and Local Cable Operators (LCOs); its role is confined to regulatory functions such as issuing directions for compliance with regulations and acting as a complainant before a competent court for non-compliance—Adjudication of disputes between service providers lies exclusively with the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) under Section 14 of the Act. (Paras 11, 13, 15, 17–19) B. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997—Section 11(1)(b) read with Section 13—Scope of direction...
A. Uttar Pradesh Industrial Training Institutes (Instructors) Service Rules, 2014—Rule 16(3)(b)(i)—Fixation of qualifying/cut-off marks absent statutory prescription—Held, where the 2014 Rules did not prescribe any qualifying or cut-off marks for selection to the post of Instructor, the fixation of such cut-off marks by the Selection Committee/State was arbitrary and contrary to the recruitment procedure prescribed under the Rules, and such arbitrary criterion cannot be validated merely on the ground that the candidates participated in the selection process without raising a prior objection. (Paras 18–19) B. Service Law—Recruitment—Relief to candidates subjected to arbitrary selection criteria—Availability of vacancies—Held, where the appellants were subjected to arbitrary treatment on ac...
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Sections 8/20—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B—Regular bail—Criminal antecedents—Alleged misuse of concession of bail in earlier case—Prolonged custody—Held, though a suspect who misuses the concession of bail by committing subsequent offences would ordinarily not be entitled to discretionary relief, and though the petitioner had criminal antecedents and was alleged to have committed the subject offence while on bail in an earlier case, the petitioner having already spent more than eighteen months in custody, co-accused having already been enlarged on bail, chargesheet having been filed, and conclusion of the trial likely to take further time, bail directed to be granted without expressing any opinion on meri...
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Anticipatory bail—Compliance with interim conditions—Held, where the appellant, granted interim protection from arrest subject to conditions including deposit of passport, appearance before the Investigating Officer, and cooperation with investigation, was found to have fully complied with such conditions, cooperated during investigation, and neither threatened nor influenced any witness nor attempted to interfere with the investigation, and having regard to the nature of the crime and the manner of its alleged commission, the interim order granting anticipatory bail confirmed—Appellant directed to continue cooperating during investigation/trial, avoid unnecessary adjournments, and report before the Investigating Officer every alternate Monday until completion of investigation, with li...
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Anticipatory bail—Cross-FIR—Compliance with conditions of interim protection—Held, where the appellant, granted interim protection from arrest subject to conditions including cooperation with investigation, deposit of passport, and appearance before the Investigating Officer, was found to have fully complied with such conditions, cooperated during investigation, and neither threatened nor influenced any witness nor attempted to interfere with the investigation, and having regard to the nature of the crime and the existence of a cross-FIR, the interim order granting anticipatory bail confirmed—Appellant directed to continue cooperating during investigation/trial, avoid unnecessary adjournments, and report before the Investigating Officer every alternate Monday until completion of ...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 372 Proviso—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 413—Appeal against acquittal—Complainant as victim—Held: In prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant, being the payee or holder in due course of the dishonoured cheque, is also the "victim" of the offence and, therefore, possesses an independent statutory right to challenge an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the Court immediately superior to the Trial Court, namely the Sessions Court. Consequently, appeals erroneously instituted before the High Court under Section 378 o...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 372 Proviso—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 413—Appeal against acquittal—Complainant as victim—Held: In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant, being the payee or holder of the dishonoured cheque, is also a "victim" of the offence and is entitled to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the Court immediately superior to the Trial Court, namely the Sessions Court. Such remedy is independent of the procedure under Section 378 of the Code, and pending appeals presented before the High Court ...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138, 118(a) and 139—Dishonour of cheque—Statutory presumptions—Rebuttal—Service of notice—Held: In a prosecution under Section 138, once the drawer admits or the complainant proves execution of the cheque and the signature thereon, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 arise that the cheque was issued for valid consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability. The burden then shifts to the accused to rebut the presumptions by leading cogent and probable evidence. A mere denial of liability or an explanation offered in the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, without supporting evidence, does not rebut the statutory presumptions. Further, where the statutory demand notice is dispatched to th...
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 120B, 420 and 406—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Quashing of cognizance—Held: Where the allegations against the petitioner merely disclosed that the disputed transaction took place at his residence and no material indicated his participation in the alleged conspiracy, cheating, criminal breach of trust or issuance of the dishonoured cheque, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences were absent. A cognizance order passed without assigning reasons or demonstrating due application of judicial mind cannot be sustained. In the absence of a prima facie case, continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court and the cognizance order together with all consequential proce...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Dishonour of cheque—Compounding after conviction—Held: The offence under Section 138 is compoundable at any stage of the proceedings, including after conviction by the Trial Court and affirmation thereof in appeal. Where the parties voluntarily settle the dispute and the accused agrees to pay the entire agreed compensation to the complainant, the High Court, in exercise of powers under Section 147, may compound the offence, set aside the judgments of conviction and sentence, and acquit the accused. While granting such relief, the Court may impose appropriate conditions, including payment of litigation expenses to the complainant and compounding costs in accordance with the principles governing delayed compounding. (Paras 5 to 10) B. Negotiable Instruments ...
A. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Section 13(1)(i-a)—Cruelty—Irretrievable breakdown of marriage—Held: Although irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not an independent statutory ground for divorce, where the spouses lived together only for a brief period, remained separated for nearly two decades, mediation failed and there was a complete absence of any intention to resume cohabitation, the marriage had become a mere shell. In such circumstances, irretrievable breakdown constituted mental cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(1)(i-a), entitling the husband to a decree of divorce. (Paras 35 to 52) B. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Section 13(1)(i-a)—Order XLI Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Nullity, desertion and additional evidence—Held: Failure to prove non-consummation, desertion or cru...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Dishonour of cheque—Statutory demand notice—Validity—Compensation—Held: Compliance with proviso (b) to Section 138 requires the statutory demand notice to clearly and correctly specify the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. A notice does not become invalid merely because, in addition to the cheque amount, it also claims interest, litigation expenses or other legally recoverable amounts, provided the cheque amount is distinctly identifiable. Likewise, a single consolidated notice in respect of more than one dishonoured cheque is legally permissible if the amount relating to each cheque is separately and accurately mentioned. Any material discrepancy in the cheque amount demanded, however, vitiates the statutory notice and the prosecution founded ther...
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Dishonour of cheque—Compounding of offence after conviction—Held: An offence under Section 138 is compoundable at any stage of the proceedings, including after conviction, where the parties voluntarily settle the dispute. On being satisfied that the compromise is genuine and the agreed amount has been paid or secured, the Court may exercise its power under Section 147 to set aside the judgments of conviction and sentence, acquit the accused, and impose appropriate conditions, including payment of litigation expenses and compounding costs, to ensure that the settlement is fair and in accordance with law. (Paras 8 to 10) ...
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Compounding of offence—Post-conviction compromise—Held: An offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable at every stage of the criminal proceedings, including after conviction, where the parties voluntarily settle the dispute. Upon being satisfied about the genuineness of the compromise and fulfilment of the agreed terms, the Court may permit compounding under Section 147 of the Act read with the applicable procedural provisions, set aside the conviction and sentence, and terminate the criminal proceedings. While granting such relief, the Court may impose appropriate conditions, including payment of litigation expenses to the complainant and compounding costs, to balan...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 139—Dishonour of cheque—Statutory presumption—Financial capacity of complainant—Held: Once the execution of the cheque and the drawer's signature are admitted or proved, the presumption under Section 139 arises that the cheque was issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability. The presumption, however, is rebuttable and the accused need only establish a probable defence on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities. Where the accused, through cross-examination or other material, creates a genuine doubt regarding the complainant's financial capacity to advance the alleged loan or the very existence of the transaction, the statutory presumption stands rebutted. In such circumstances, the burden shifts back to the complainan...