Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 20 and 138—The revisionist, Uday Raj Singh, challenged the order dated 25.10.2024, passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 2023, denying permission to submit an expert report regarding the signature and handwriting on a cheque, in his appeal against conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—The revisionist had previously been denied permission to examine the signature by an expert during trial, and this decision was upheld by the higher courts—The revisionist sought to introduce the expert opinion at the appeal stage, which was deemed a late effort to delay the proceedings—The Court, noting the earlier rejections and the lack of prejudice to the revisionist, upheld the decision to deny the ...

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Sections 8—The applicant, Sultan Khan, sought bail in FIR No. 486/2023, under Sections 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, after being remanded to judicial custody on 22.09.2023—The charge-sheet was filed on 20.03.2024, 181 days after the remand—The applicant filed a default bail application on the 181st day, which was initially rejected on the ground that 20.03.2024 was the 180th day—However, it was found that the charge-sheet was filed after the bail application, as evidenced by the Case Information System (CIS) record, which listed the bail application before the charge-sheet—Consequently, the court held that the applicant was entitled to default bail, as both the charge-sheet and bail application were filed beyond the...

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 363—This case, the appellants were convicted for kidnapping (Section 363) and kidnapping for ransom (Section 364A) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC)—The victim, a 5-year-old boy, was abducted by Surendra Kumar and later found in a hotel in Nainital—The prosecution alleged the kidnapping was for ransom, demanding Rs. 50 lakh—However, the defense argued the absence of specific threats of harm or death, which is required under Section 364A—The Court emphasized that for a conviction under Section 364A, there must be either a direct threat of harm or a reasonable apprehension of harm created by the circumstances of the kidnapping—The Court reviewed precedents and determined that the circumstances, including the ransom demand and victim's fear, were sufficient to esta...

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 167(2); Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (U.A.P.A.)—Section 43D(2)(b)—Default Bail—Procedural Safeguards—Violation of Article 21 of the Constitution—The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that procedural safeguards under Section 43D(2)(b) of the U.A.P.A., 1967, are mandatory, including providing notice and opportunity to the accused before extending the detention period—Relying on Sanjay Dutt vs. State and Jigar @ Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya vs. State of Gujarat, the Court emphasized that failure to comply with these safeguards violates the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution—In the present case, the appellants were denied notice and an opportunity to be heard before the Special Court extended the inves...

Uttarakhand Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006—Sections 4(12), 4(14), and 5(2)—Retrospective Fee Determination—Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority—The Court addressed the retrospective application of a fee structure provisionally determined by the Fee Regulatory Committee in its meeting on 29.04.2019, challenged by students admitted in prior academic sessions—Section 4(14) of the Act prohibits revising fees for students after admission for the duration of their course—The Court held that applying the 2019 determination retrospectively to students admitted in 2017-18 and 2018-19 violated this provision—Additionally, the provisional nature of the fee determination lacked binding authority until finalized—The Cour...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order 9 Rule 13—The revision petition filed by the revisionist against the eviction order was dismissed—The revisionist's failure to pay arrears, comply with Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, and attempts to delay proceedings were considered misuse of legal procedures—The revision petition was also barred by the expiration of the limitation period for filing an appeal against the main judgment—The trial court’s dismissal of the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was upheld, as no valid grounds were shown to set aside the judgment, and the revisionist failed to deposit the due amount—The revision petition was deemed meritless, primarily aimed at prolonging litigation—The revisionist was directed to vacate the tenanted premises and com...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Order 6 Rule 17—Commercial Courts Act, 2015—Section 13 (1-A)—The appellant filed a suit for injunction to prevent the sale of molasses after making an advance payment for its delivery and later sought to amend the plaint—The Commercial Court initially allowed the amendment but later rejected it—The High Court, in its judgment, emphasized that under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), amendments should be allowed to determine the real questions in controversy, adopting a liberal approach rather than a hyper-technical one—The court clarified that the merits of the amendment should not be scrutinized at the amendment stage, and a belated amendment is acceptable if it helps resolve the real dispute—Additionally, amendments can be allowed even if th...

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), Sections 3, 4, and 50, the appellant sought bail after being arrested in India for drug trafficking and money laundering charges—The appellant, previously convicted in the U.S. for similar offenses, was alleged by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to have operated a drug trafficking syndicate, laundering proceeds via cryptocurrency, and splitting 4250 untraceable Bitcoins (BTC) with his brother—The appellant's counsel argued that he could not be prosecuted again in India for the same offenses, citing international law and human rights principles—They also contested the admissibility of statements under Section 50 of PMLA as non-substantive without independent corroboration and denied possession of the BTC—The ED argued that the appellant could be tried in Indi...

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 11—The court addressed the challenge to the appointment of an arbitrator—The applicants contended that the appointment of the named arbitrator was invalid, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC vs. HSCC (India) Limited, which held that a named arbitrator who is an interested party is unsustainable—The court concurred, stating that a person with an interest in the dispute outcome should not have the power to appoint the sole arbitrator—It emphasized the importance of impartial and independent arbitrators, especially in government contracts, as noted in a Law Commission report—The court set aside the contractual clause appointing the Principal Secretary/Secretary as arbitrator and appointed a retired judge as the sole arbitrator t...

Uttar Pradesh Nagar Palika Act, 1916—Section 43 AA—In multiple writ petitions challenging various aspects of the 2024 urban local body elections under the Uttar Pradesh Nagar Palika Act, 1916, the petitioners contested issues like seat reservations, rejection of nomination papers, and issuance of caste certificates—The State Election Commission had announced the election schedule on 23.12.2024—The court invoked Article 243 ZG of the Constitution, which restricts court intervention in electoral matters except through an election petition—Citing several Supreme Court judgments, the court emphasized that judicial intervention is prohibited once the election process has commenced—The court found no merit in the petitions, observing that they were attempts to interfere with and delay the electoral process&md...