A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order XIV Rule 5—Framing of additional issues—Scope—Where the Supreme Court, while declining to interfere with re-impleadment of defendant, expressly kept open the issue whether such defendant was a necessary or proper party, the Trial Court was required to frame an additional issue to give effect to the Supreme Court’s direction—Additional issue regarding status of defendant as necessary or proper party, therefore, validly framed. [Paras 7–11]B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order XIV Rule 5—Additional issues—Issues arising from subsequent pleadings and material circumstances—Additional issues relating to maintainability of claim in view of an order of a foreign court restraining commencement or continuation of proceedings, and applicability of res judicata on account of prior rejection of...

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 439(1A)—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 483(2)—Bail—Victim/prosecutrix—Right to hearing—In cases involving Section 376 IPC or corresponding Section 69 BNS, the informant or person authorised by her is entitled to participate at the stage of hearing of bail application—Presence of informant is statutorily obligatory in cases specifically covered by Section 439(1A) CrPC and corresponding Section 483(2) BNSS—Victim's right to be heard is substantive and cannot be defeated merely because the State is represented. [Paras 5–6]B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 439—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 483—Victim's participatory rights—Regular bail—Supreme Court in Jagjeet Singh v. Ashish Mishra and Ms. X v. State of Maharashtra reite...

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order VII Rule 10, Section 20—Return of plaint—Territorial jurisdiction—At the stage of considering objection under Order VII Rule 10, Court must proceed on the averments in the plaint and documents filed therewith, assume them correct for the limited purpose of threshold examination and read the plaint meaningfully and as a whole—Disputed questions of fact are not to be adjudicated at this stage—Where sale transaction and transportation arrangement give rise to distinct causes of action, jurisdiction over one cause of action cannot automatically confer jurisdiction over the other. [Paras 24–27]B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 20(c)—Territorial jurisdiction—Sale transaction—Part-payment received in plaintiff's bank account at New Delhi and pleaded obligation to pay balance amo...

A. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Sections 18 and 18A(2)—Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 482—Anticipatory bail—Statutory bar—Sections 18 and 18A(2) expressly bar applicability of Section 438 CrPC, corresponding to Section 482 BNSS, in cases involving offences under the SC/ST Act—However, the bar operates only where the FIR or complaint, on its plain reading and without conducting a mini-trial, discloses a prima facie offence under the Act—If the necessary ingredients of the alleged offence are not made out even at first impression, the Court may consider pre-arrest bail—Where prima facie offence is disclosed, anticipatory bail is not maintainable. [Paras 6–11] B. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atr...

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 307—Attempt to murder—Essential ingredients—Intention or knowledge is the decisive requirement and not the actual consequence of the act—The prosecution must establish that the accused intended to cause death or intended to cause such bodily injury as was likely to cause death, or possessed the requisite knowledge contemplated by Section 300 IPC—The intention being a state of mind, direct evidence is ordinarily unavailable and may be inferred from the weapon used, nature and location of injuries, persistence of assault, preparations, words uttered and surrounding circumstances—The physical act need not be the penultimate act and the fact that death did not result is immaterial where the requisite intention or knowledge is established [Paras 23–23.3]. B. ...

A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Sections 438(3) and 528—Criminal revision—Inherent powers of High Court—Bar against second revision—Where a party has already availed the remedy of revision before the Sessions Court and the revision has been dismissed, the same party cannot ordinarily re-agitate the same issue by invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, as that would amount to circumventing the express prohibition contained in Section 438(3) BNSS—Inherent powers, though wide, are required to be exercised sparingly and cautiously and cannot be used as a routine backdoor entry to what the statute expressly prohibits [Paras 10–10.4]. B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Sections 438(3), 528 and 175(3)—Criminal revision—Exceptional exercise of inherent ju...

A. Code of Civil Procedure,1908—Section 114—Order XLVII Rule 1—Review—Scope—Error Apparent—Reappreciation of Findings— Review jurisdiction is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record,discovery of new and important matter or evidence,or any other sufficient reason—a review petition cannot be used as an appeal in disguise to re-argue the case or challenge findings already recorded after consideration of the material—where cogent reasons support the original conclusion,a mere disagreement with such findings does not constitute an error apparent warranting review. [Paras 21–25] B. Code of Civil Procedure,1908—Section 114—Order XLVII Rule 1—Review—Lease—Extension of Tenancy—Unregistered Documents—Challenge to Finding— A...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Partnership Firm—Partner—Vicarious Liability—In-charge and Responsible for Day-to-Day Affairs— Complaint specifically alleged that petitioner-partner was in-charge of and responsible for day-to-day affairs and operations of the partnership firm—Partnership Deed also described petitioner as a working partner responsible for and entitled to carry out day-to-day functioning of the firm—Such specific averments and supporting material were sufficient to decline quashing of proceedings—Defence that petitioner was inactive partner could not be conclusively determined at the stage of inherent jurisdiction. [Paras 10–16, 21] B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Inherent Powers—Quashing of Proceedings u...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 141—Dishonour of Cheque—Vicarious Liability of Director—Specific Averments— Mere designation as Director or Whole Time Director does not create deemed vicarious liability under Section 141—complaint must specifically aver that the accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company’s business at the time of commission of the offence. (Paras 8–11) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 & 141—Resignation of Director Before Issuance of Cheques—Quashing of Proceedings— Where the accused had ceased to be a Director nearly two months before issuance and dishonour of the cheques, and statutory records conclusively established such cessation, he could not be held vicariously liable und...

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311—Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Recall of Witness—Additional Evidence— Power under Section 311 is wide and may be exercised at any stage where the proposed evidence is germane and essential for a just decision—mere delay or closure of evidence does not create an absolute bar, provided the opposite party is afforded an effective opportunity of cross-examination and rebuttal. (Paras 30–38, 58–62) B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 294(3) & 482—Promissory Note—Disputed Document—Proof of Genuineness— Dispute regarding genuineness of a document does not make it inadmissible or incapable of being produced—Section 294(3) merely dispenses with formal proof where genuineness is admitted&...