A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,2023—Section 528—IPC,1860—Sections 503,506,34—Quashing of Criminal Proceedings—Criminal Intimidation—Ingredients—Common Intention— For an offence under Section 506 IPC,the complaint or charge-sheet must disclose a specific threat of injury to the person,reputation or property of the victim with the requisite intention to cause alarm or compel an act or omission—mere allegations of a broken relationship,refusal to acknowledge a relationship or other surrounding circumstances do not constitute criminal intimidation in the absence of such threat—where no offence under Section 506 is made out,the foundational requirement for applying Section 34 IPC is also absent. [Paras 17–20,25,28–29] B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,2023&md...

A. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005—Section 29—Appeal—Limitation—Condonation of Delay—Welfare Legislation— Rejection of an application seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 29, though interlocutory in form, finally terminates the statutory appellate remedy and is amenable to revisional scrutiny—In proceedings under the beneficial and welfare-oriented Domestic Violence Act, Courts should ordinarily prefer adjudication on merits rather than shut out an appeal on limitation—Procedural technicalities should not defeat substantial justice. [Paras 18, 21–25]. B. BNSS, 2023—Section 438(2)—Revision—Interlocutory Order—Condonation of Delay—Final Effect— The character of an order is not determined merely by its l...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Section 138—Dishonour of Cheque—Compounding After Conviction— An offence under Section 138 is compoundable at any stage, including after conviction and dismissal of appeal or revision—voluntary settlement between the parties can be accepted notwithstanding that no further proceedings remain pending. (Paras 12–15) B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Inherent Powers—Quashing of Conviction and Sentence— The High Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction to give effect to a settlement and compound an offence under Section 138 even after conviction and sentence have attained finality in revision—upon valid settlement, the conviction and sentenc...

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311—Criminal Trial—Defence Evidence—Fair Opportunity—The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is wide and may be exercised at any stage where the evidence of a witness is essential for a just decision of the case—the accused must be afforded a fair and reasonable opportunity to adduce defence evidence, particularly where such evidence is necessary to rebut statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act. (Paras 9–14) B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311—Closure of Defence Evidence—Recall—Last Opportunity—Where defence evidence had been closed due to the accused’s repeated absence, but denial of such evidence would prejudice a fair trial, the Magistrate’s order refusing recall was set aside&md...

A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 145 and 146—Proceedings relating to dispute over immovable property—Condition precedent for assumption of jurisdiction—Held: Jurisdiction under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. can be invoked only where the Magistrate is satisfied that a dispute concerning land or water is likely to cause a breach of peace and the question of actual possession requires determination—Where possession of the disputed property is an admitted fact, the essential jurisdictional requirement is absent and proceedings under Sections 145/146 Cr.P.C. are not maintainable. (Paras 9, 11, 13 & 14) B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 145—Determination of possession by Magistrate—Held: The Magistrate is required to determine which party was in actual possession of the dispu...

A. Service Law—Pay Scale—Additional Increments—Benefits Reserved for Scientists—An Administrative Officer employed with the Tea Research Association cannot claim the benefit of two additional increments under the CSIR communication dated 21.11.2008, which is specifically applicable to Group IV Scientists—The mere fact that Administrative Officers and Scientists draw identical pay scales does not entitle the former to benefits exclusively earmarked for the scientific cadre. [Paras 9–10] B. Service Law—Equality and Discrimination—Negative Equality Not Permissible—The allegation of discrimination between the petitioner and certain other officers was rejected, as the benefits extended to those officers were the result of discretionary decisions taken by the Chairman and were not founded...

A. Service Law—Disciplinary Proceedings—Scope of Interference under Writ Jurisdiction—Proportionality of Penalty—The Writ Court may interfere with a disciplinary penalty where the findings do not establish mala fide conduct, negligence, or wilful default on the part of the delinquent employee—A penalty of reduction to a lower stage in the time scale was set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration, the Court emphasizing that the doctrine of proportionality must be applied, particularly when the punishment adversely affects post-retirement benefits and pensionary entitlements. [Paras 19–23] B. Service Law—Promotion—Eligibility after Penalty Period—Retrospective Promotion—The mere completion of a three-year penalty period and restoration of eligibility does not automati...

A. Limitation Act, 1963—Section 5—Condonation of Delay—Sufficient Cause—An application seeking condonation of a delay of 1,163 days in preferring an appeal must disclose a bona fide and reasonable explanation constituting "sufficient cause" within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act—Mere negligence, inaction, or lack of diligence cannot be excused—Although courts adopt a liberal approach in matters of condonation, such liberality cannot override the requirements of reasonableness, bona fides, and due care. [Paras 16, 20, 25, 31] B. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order XX Rule 1—Pronouncement of Judgment—Notice to Parties—A litigant who initially participates in the proceedings but subsequently neglects to pursue the matter and fails to ascertain the date of pr...

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 115—Constitution of India, Article 227—Supervisory jurisdiction—Civil suit—Closure of plaintiff’s evidence—Interference by High Court—Held, power of superintendence and revisional jurisdiction are discretionary and are not meant to be exercised merely to correct every procedural order of the trial court. Where the plaintiff has been granted repeated opportunities to lead evidence and fails to do so without showing sufficient or exceptional cause, the order closing evidence does not warrant interference. The conduct of the litigant, delay caused, and possibility of abuse of process are relevant considerations while exercising such jurisdiction. (Paras 13 to 16) B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Evidence by affidavit—Closure of plaintiff&r...

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 125(1)(b) & (c)—Maintenance of children—High Court in revisional jurisdiction cannot grant or extend maintenance beyond age of majority except where child suffers from physical or mental abnormality or injury rendering it unable to maintain itself—Direction of Supreme Court in Chandrashekar v. Swapnil issued in exercise of powers under Article 142—Such power not available to High Courts. [Paras 9–11] ...