A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985—Sections 20,29,37—Pre-Arrest Bail—Disclosure Statement of Co-accused—Financial Transaction—Prima Facie Material— Mere reliance upon a disclosure statement of a co-accused may not by itself justify denial of bail, but where the investigation discloses independent corroborative material such as a financial transaction through UPI connecting the applicant with the co-accused, the plea that the applicant is implicated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement cannot be accepted—the Court must consider the totality of the material collected during investigation. [Paras 13–18] B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985—Section 37—Pre-Arrest Bail—Anticipatory Bail—Commercial Quantity—Co-accused...

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 20(b)(ii)(B)—Criminal Procedure—BNSS Section 479—Suspension of Sentence—First-time Offender—One-third of Maximum Sentence— Where the convict is a first-time offender and has undergone imprisonment for more than one-third of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence, the benefit of Section 479 BNSS may be considered for suspension of sentence—In an offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) NDPS Act carrying maximum sentence of 10 years, completion of more than one-third of the maximum period justified suspension of substantive sentence during pendency of appeal. [Paras 4–8]. B. BNSS, 2023—Section 479—CrPC Section 436-A—Convict—Suspension of Sentence—Pending Appeal—Delay not attributable...

A. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005—Section 12—Interim Maintenance—Domestic Violence—Prima Facie Proof—Independent Income— Relief under the DV Act, including maintenance, is dependent upon prima facie establishment of domestic violence; where the wife’s allegations of cruelty were not corroborated by the contemporaneous compromise or other supporting material and both parties were financially independent, she was not entitled to interim maintenance or other relief. [Paras 9–12] B. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005—Sections 3, 12—Domestic Violence—Maintenance—Physical, Mental or Economic Abuse—Proof— Maintenance under the DV Act can be granted where physical, mental or economic abuse constituting “domestic vio...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Offence under Section 138—Compounding after Conviction—Settlement between Parties— Where the entire compensation amount was paid to the complainant and the complainant consented to settlement, the High Court could exercise power under Section 147 to compound the offence even after conviction and dismissal of appeal—No separate application for compounding was necessary where the complainant expressly had no objection—Following Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663, the conviction and sentence were set aside and accused was acquitted. [Paras 6–10] B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Compounding of Offence under Section 138—Compounding Fee and Litigation Charges— On compounding of the offenc...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Appeal against acquittal—Scope of appellate interference—An appellate Court, while examining an acquittal U/s 138 of the NI Act, is not required to substitute its own view merely because another view is possible; interference is warranted only where the view adopted by the Trial Court is impossible, perverse, wholly unsustainable or manifestly illegal—Where the Trial Court has taken a reasonable view on the evidence, the acquittal deserves to be maintained. (Para 12 and 25) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 118 and 139—Presumption in favour of holder—Acquittal in cheque dishonour case—Standard of appellate scrutiny—The general restrictions governing interference with an acquittal cannot be applied with identical rigour...

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963—Co-sharer—Injunction against construction on joint property—A co-sharer cannot ordinarily be restrained from raising construction on joint property merely because the property has not been partitioned; however, where the construction would diminish the value or utility of the common property, materially prejudice the rights or enjoyment of other co-sharers, or amount to ouster of a co-owner, injunction can be granted. In the present case, defendant’s denial of plaintiff’s co-ownership and proposed construction over the only vacant portion of the joint property would prejudice the rights of the other co-owners and amount to ouster; injunction therefore rightly granted. (Paras 15–19) B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 100—Second appeal—Substantial quest...

A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 438 (corresponding to Section 397 CrPC)—Revisional jurisdiction—Scope—High Court, while exercising revisional jurisdiction, cannot reappreciate evidence as an appellate court and interfere with concurrent findings unless there is perversity, glaring contradiction, illegality or miscarriage of justice warranting interference. (Paras 12–13, 28–30) B. Indian Forest Act, 1927—Sections 41, 42—HP Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978—Rule 20—Conviction for violation of transit requirements—Specific accusation/charge necessary—Where the accused was not specifically informed of the alleged violation of Rule 20, conviction on such ground causes prejudice; prosecution must further establish by reliable and scient...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 142—Dishonour of Cheque—Demand Notice—Deemed Service—Premature Complaint— Where the demand notice was sent to the correct address but its actual date of service was not proved, service could be deemed on expiry of 30 days from dispatch—the drawer thereafter gets 15 days to make payment and a complaint filed before expiry of such period is premature and not maintainable. (Paras 17–24 B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Premature Complaint—Jurisdictional Defect—Revision— Filing of a complaint before expiry of 15 days from service or deemed service of notice creates a jurisdictional bar to taking cognizance—the issue can be raised in revision even if not urged before the Courts below, and t...

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Compounding of offence after conviction— Parties entered into compromise for Rs.11,90,000/-, out of which Rs.9,90,000/- was paid to complainant and Rs.2,00,000/- was deposited before Trial Court—Complainant consented to compounding—High Court, exercising power under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and relying upon Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663, held that an offence under Section 138 can be compounded even after conviction by the Trial Court and dismissal of appeal—Conviction and sentence set aside and accused acquitted—Amount deposited before Trial Court directed to be released to complainant—Accused directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as litiga...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 118 & 139—Section 138—Presumption of Consideration—Rebuttal— Admission of issuance of cheque and signature raises the statutory presumption that the cheque was issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability—the accused may rebut such presumption either through cross-examination of the complainant’s witnesses or by leading defence evidence, and where the complainant’s own evidence discredits the existence of consideration, the presumption stands rebutted and the complaint must fail. (Paras 19–25) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Limitation Act, 1963—Section 19—Time-barred Debt—Acknowledgment of Liability—Appellate Interference with Acquittal— A cheque issued ...