Penal Code, 1860—Section 304 Part I—The appellant, sole accused, was initially convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC for allegedly causing the death of his wife by pouring kerosene and setting her ablaze—The conviction was based primarily on two dying declarations—one recorded by a Magistrate and the other by a police officer—However, all eyewitnesses including the deceased’s daughter and neighbours turned hostile, and no independent corroboration of the incident was available—The High Court noted material contradictions between the two dying declarations regarding the incident’s motive and subsequent actions, undermining their reliability—Relying on Uttam v. State of Maharashtra (2022) 8 SCC 576, the Court held that in the absence of consistent, corroborated, and credible evidence, t...

The Constitution of India (Articles 243-O and 329(b)) and the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (Section 204) impose a bar on judicial interference in the election process once it has commenced—Courts must exercise restraint and refrain from intervening in electoral matters, directing that disputes should be addressed through election petitions post-election to avoid delay in the process—In the context of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act and the Conduct of Election Rules, 2006, the Court held that elections for the President/Vice President of Mandal Praja Parishads and Chairperson/Vice Chairperson of Zilla Praja Parishads could proceed even if casual member vacancies remain unfilled—The Court declined interim relief, emphasizing the statutory bar on interference in election proceedings—However, the State E...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 21 Rules 37—The revision was filed against the order in E.P. No. 29 of 2022, where the decree-holder sought execution of a Lok Adalat award—The Lok Adalat, in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, recorded a compromise between the parties, with the judgment debtor agreeing to pay Rs. 5,00,000 towards settlement—However, the judgment debtor defaulted in payment, leading to the decree-holder filing an execution petition under Order XXI Rules 37 & 38 of CPC—The judgment debtor contended that the execution petition was not maintainable, asserting that the remedy should be under Section 421 of Cr.P.C—The Court held that as per Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, an award passed by Lok Adalat is deemed a decree of a civil court and is ex...

This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT)—The scope of the appeal is confined to determining just and adequate compensation, as the findings on negligence and liability were not challenged—In fatal accident claims, the multiplier is based on the age of the deceased (20 years in this case), following the Sarla Verma guidelines, warranting a multiplier of 18—For a deceased student working part-time, the tribunal should consider notional income based on part-time earnings, educational qualifications, and socio-economic conditions, assessing the income at Rs. 6,000/month—Future prospects are added in line with Pranay Sethi guidelines (40% addition), and a 50% deduction for personal ...

Penal Code, 1860—Section 498-A—The revision petition was filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 11.05.2012 in Crl.A.No.7 of 2011, confirming the conviction and sentence of the petitioner for the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)—The petitioner was sentenced to six months of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500—The petitioner contended that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was erroneous—He also claimed the right to a speedy trial was violated, and requested the court to consider the sentence already undergone—The prosecution argued that the evidence presented was sufficient to prove the petitioner’s guilt—After reviewing the evidence and releva...

Constitution of India 1950—Article 226—The petitioner, a partnership firm running The Snap Gym 24/7 LLP, challenged the action of the State Bank of India (SBI) to take possession of gym equipment under the SARFAESI Act in relation to a loan availed by a different gym, New Snap Gym 24/7, located in the same premises—The petitioner claimed that they had never taken a loan from the bank and that no hypothecation existed regarding the equipment in their gym—The bank countered by stating that a loan was granted to New Snap Gym 24/7 with gym equipment hypothecated as security—Despite filing a civil suit for permanent injunction, the petitioner sought relief from the High Court—The Court, after reviewing the matter, noted that there were disputed facts that required documentary and oral evidence, which could n...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 22 Rule 3—The applicant, Dr. Sailaja, sought to be brought on record as the legal representative of her deceased mother, Dr. C. Padmavathi, the sole appellant in the pending appeals—The appeals arose from suits concerning properties claimed under two Wills, one dated 09.09.2000 and another executed by Dr. Padmavathi in favor of Dr. Sailaja on 06.05.2017—The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the Trial Court had disbelieved the earlier Codicil (Will), thereby invalidating the claim to the properties—However, the Court held that, under Order XXII Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the right to pursue the appeal survived after the death of the appellant, and the legal representative, Dr. Sailaja, was entitled to continue the proceedings—The Court a...

Arbitration Act, 1996—Sections 16, 34—This case highlights the limited scope of judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, especially concerning statutory arbitration under Section 18(3) of the MSMED Act—The High Court is advised to exercise restraint and generally refrain from interfering in ongoing arbitral proceedings, including challenges to the applicability of the MSMED Act or allegations of duress in settlement agreements—Such jurisdictional issues should be raised before the Arbitral Tribunal or Facilitation Council, invoking the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz—The parties must typically await the final award and then seek remedies under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996—Furthermore, disputes regarding whether a settlement agreement was executed u...

This case addresses the applicability of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and the Limitation Act, 1963, to proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Section 35(1) of the PMLA indicates that the Appellate Tribunal is not bound by the CPC but is guided by the principles of natural justice, while Section 35(2) grants it civil court-like powers—However, provisions like Order 22 CPC or Article 120 of the Limitation Act (prescribing a 90-day period for legal representative substitution) do not automatically apply to PMLA proceedings unless specifically regulated—The Limitation Act primarily governs courts, not tribunals, unless expressly stated by the special statute, and PMLA does not impose a limitation period for legal representatives under Section 72—Therefore, dismissing an appeal or rejecting a...

The writ petition challenges the office order issued by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) for the recovery of amounts from the petitioners' salaries, claiming that it was issued without notice, enquiry, or adherence to the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Regulations, 1967—The petitioners argue that the recovery was arbitrary, unjust, and in violation of natural justice principles, as they were not given an opportunity to be heard or informed of the allegations against them—The respondents, on the other hand, defend the order, stating that it followed an audit report and a subsequent inquiry that found financial discrepancies—The court held that the respondents failed to comply with the mandatory procedure outlined in the Regulat...