Acquittal set aside. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138—Appeal to impugn Acquittal—Additional evidence allowed to be produced—Case remanded for fresh decision. (Para 27) Result :- Appeal allowed. ...

Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012—Section 4(2)—Penal Code, 1860—Section 376(2)(j)—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 374 and 164(5)—Offence of rape—Appeal against conviction—Medical evidence presented by the prosecution failed to substantiate the alleged sexual intercourse between the prosecutrix and the accused—Notably, no injuries were found on the private parts of the prosecutrix, and the torn hymen was determined to be of an old nature—Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, which indicates that the presence of spermatozoa in the vagina can be detected from 30 minutes to 17 days post—intercourse—Additionally, there was a significant inconsistency between the statements of the mother, who is the complainant, and the father of the prosec...

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 482—Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 96 and 49—Scope of Anticipatory Bail—The High Court examined the scope of Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) concerning anticipatory bail, recognizing it as an extraordinary discretionary relief that must be exercised with caution—It was held that anticipatory bail under the new legal framework can still be granted in exceptional and extreme circumstances, even after the issuance of an arrest warrant, provided there are substantial grounds to believe that the accused is falsely implicated, will not misuse their liberty, and where refusal to grant relief may lead to a miscarriage of justice—The court further examined Sections 96 and 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS...

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 319—Evidentiary Requirements and Sentencing in Cases of Voluntarily Causing Hurt—Under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, causing hurt does not mandatorily require the production of an injury report if the fact of bodily pain or hurt is otherwise established through credible evidence—The testimony of the victim and corroborative evidence from witnesses can be sufficient to sustain a conviction—In an appeal under Section 372 CrPC, the victim challenged the inadequacy of the modified sentence for voluntarily causing hurt—The High Court upheld the appellate court’s decision, affirming the conviction despite the absence of a formal injury report—The court reasoned that while medical evidence strengthens the prosecution’s case, its abse...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 8 Rule 3 and Section 151—Court Fees Act, 1870—Section 13—Erroneous Interpretation of Pleadings and Failure to Consider Evidence—Remand for Fresh Decision—The appeal arose from a money decree passed by the trial court, which was challenged on the grounds of misinterpretation of pleadings and improper appreciation of evidence—The appellant contended that the trial court had erroneously construed the denial in the written statement under Order 8 Rule 3 CPC, leading to a flawed conclusion regarding liability—The High Court examined whether the trial court had properly considered all material evidence, particularly documentary evidence, before rendering its judgment—It was observed that the trial court had failed to mark certain exhibits and did not fully as...

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 36-A(4)—NDPS Act—Section 36-A(4)—Default Bail—Extension of Detention—Public Prosecutor’s Report—Scope and Conditions—The High Court, in a writ petition concerning the extension of detention under Section 36-A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, held that the statutory right to default bail on non-completion of investigation within 180 days is inchoate and does not crystallize until the accused applies for it—If, before such application, a report by the Public Prosecutor is filed seeking an extension of time, the right to default bail stands extinguished—However, for such extension to be valid, the Special Court must apply its mind and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the twin re...

Limitation Act, 1963—Section 17—Registration Act, 1908—Section 87—Civil Procedure—Res Judicata—Validity of Sale Deeds—Procedural Irregularities in Registration—Effect of Prior Litigation—The High Court dismissed a regular second appeal challenging the concurrent findings of the trial and first appellate courts, which had dismissed a suit seeking cancellation of registered sale deeds on grounds of fraud—The Court upheld that the suit was barred by the principle of res judicata under Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, as a previous suit filed by the plaintiffs’ predecessor involving the same sale deeds and parties had been finally adjudicated—The Court further clarified that procedural defects or irregularities in registration under the Registration Act, 1908...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Sections 96, 100—Civil Procedure—Amendment of Plaint—Remand—Evidence—Indian Evidence Act—The High Court allowed an appeal concerning a suit for possession of land, where the appellant-plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to correct an inadvertent error regarding the date of dispossession—The appellant initially mentioned the date as 01.08.2015, but sought to amend it to 01.08.2014 during the trial—While the Learned Trial Court decreed the suit in favor of the appellant, the Learned First Appellate Court reversed the judgment, citing lapses in considering the evidence and the error in the plaint—The High Court, after allowing the amendment of the plaint, observed that both parties failed to properly prove their documents in accordance with the Indian Evi...

Service Law—Parity in Pay Scale—Revised Pay Rules—Draftsman Grade-III—Surveyors—Arrears—The High Court of Tripura, in a writ petition filed by Draftsman Grade-III employees in the Public Works Department (PWD), held that they are entitled to the revised pay scale of Rs.1,450–3,710/- under the Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1988 (ROP Rules, 1988), similar to Surveyors who were initially in the same pay scale of Rs.560–1,300/-—The Court relied on prior judgments of the Gauhati High Court and coordinate benches of the Tripura High Court, which had granted the revised pay scale to Surveyors under the same initial pay scale—The petitioners, being in an analogous position, were entitled to the same benefit—The Court set aside the rejection of their representati...

Service Law—Pay Fixation—Parity in Pay Scale—Revised Pay Rules—Equal Treatment—Arrears Limited to Three Years—The High Court held that employees appointed prior to the implementation of the Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1988 cannot be placed in a pay scale lower than the revised scale of the grade corresponding to their existing pay scale—The writ petition was filed by Draftsman Grade-III employees who were originally in the pay scale of Rs.560–1,300/-, similar to Surveyors—The Court observed that Surveyors had already been granted the revised pay scale of Rs.1,450–3,710/- under the same Rules—Relying on earlier judgments favoring Surveyors and a clarificatory memorandum issued by the Finance Department dated 28.04.1990, the Court held that the petitione...