201. Appointment of Lambardar – Acquittal in criminal case – Appellant/ ex-serviceman acquitted in criminal case -- Private respondent, who was aged 32 years and passed BA-II was having 5 acres of agricultural land found more suitable -- It is settled principle of law that though a person might have been acquitted but he is supposed to have clean antecedents should be no taint – Appeal dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 01.08.2024

202. Suit for permanent injunction – Co-sharer in possession -- Exclusive possession of the defendants since the time of their forefathers, is made out on the suit land -- Evidence does not establish that plaintiff had planted the trees in question on the suit land and nurtured them -- Plaintiff cannot be said to be clothed with the legal right to restrain the defendants from using or cutting the trees, standing on their land -- It is well established principle of law that where a co sharer who is in possession of the separate parcels of the property is entitled to the enjoyment of its possession, and it is not open to anyone to disturb the possession – Suit dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 31.07.2024

203. Appointment of Lambardar – Recommendation by Revenue authorities – Land ownership – Consideration of -- Not much difference in the age of petitioner (24 years) and respondent No.4 (30 years) and both are equally educated -- Respondent No.4 (appointed by Collector) owns land in his own name and his name was recommended by Tehsildar as well as Sub Divisional Magistrate – Although, the recommendation made by the lower Revenue Authorities may not be binding on the District Collector, however, due consideration is to be accorded to such recommendation as they are in a position to assess the suitability of a candidate and such recommendation would have some persuasive value – Order of Collector restored. (P&H HC) Decided on: 30.07.2024

204. Automatic cancellation of bail -- Review of order -- Court is barred from reviewing or altering its own order under Section 362 of Cr.P.C./ 403 of B.N.S.S., 2023 -- Both sections are pari materia -- While recalling a judgment Court has to apply its mind and has to look into the facts of the case, therefore, bar u/s 362 of Cr.P.c. or new Section 403 of B.N.S.S., 2023 will be operative, but there are certain exceptions when Court can recall/relook into the judgment and violation of fundamental rights is one of the said exceptions -- If condition of automatic cancellation of bail order is hit by Article 21 of the Constitution of India, then order will be revived and Court can consider the application for modification also. (MP HC) Decided on: 30.07.2024

205. Divorce – Decree of restitution of conjugal rights – Appellant did not agree to cohabitation – Upon failure of cohabitation for a period of one year after grant of decree of restitution of conjugal rights, the respondent held entitled to dissolution of the marriage. (Allahabad HC) Decided on: 30.07.2024

206. FIR under Drugs Act -- Quashing of FIR -- Police did not have the powers to register an FIR or even conduct an investigation concerning offences u/s 27 of the 1940 Act -- FIR quashed. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 19.07.2024 Decided on: 29.07.2024

207. NRI landlord – Bonafide need -- Multiple ejectment petition for different shops forming part of one unit – Permissibility of -- Landlord has got possession of two shops, one shop is lying vacant for seven years and another shop from three months -- Rent petition filed in 2006, there is specific pleading as well as evidence on the part of the landlord that his wife has already retire and that he was also going to retire within a year in 2007 – After coming back to India, landlord intends to convert the entire building into one unit, which he requires for his residence as well as occupation -- It has been testified that he has four sons who are married and has also the grandchildren and they can be able to visit him only once if he settles here permanently -- Said testimony of landlord cannot disputed by the tenant, once he had deposed about his bonafide necessity – Ejectment order, upheld. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 18.07.2024 Delivered on: 29.07.2024

208. Outraging modesty of women – Female accused – Quashing of criminal proceedings -- A female cannot be an accused under Section 354A of the IPC -- This offence is gender specific and only a male can be prosecuted under this offence – Proceedings against petitioner quashed. (Calcutta HC) Decided on: 26.07.2024

209. Appointment as constable – Denial of appointment due to pregnancy – Legality of – Now non-availability of post – Ground of -- Motherhood should never and can never be the basis for denying public employment opportunities to women – Maternity should not be seen as a barrier but as a fundamental human right of every woman -- Respondent’s plea that the vacancies of Constable in 2016 and 2018 already stand filled and therefore, the petitioner cannot now be appointed – Held, respondents having acted in a most illegal and arbitrary manner in rejecting the petitioner’s request for deferment of PET cannot now be permitted to urge that she cannot be appointed – Writ petition allowed with costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- -- Arrears of backwages will however, as volunteered by the petitioner, restricted to 50%. (Delhi HC) Decided on: 25.07.2024

210. Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P. Act No. 20 of 1959), Section 257(f), (m) – Jurisdiction of civil court -- Dispute is to the effect as to whether the plaintiff is bhumiswami or the defendant 1 is bhumiswami of the land in question -- Suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction or for restoration of possession is maintainable before Civil Court only – Provisions of section 257 (f) & (m) have no relevance to the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction. (MP HC) Decided on: 25.07.2024

211. Dowry death – Presumption – Onus of proof -- Deceased subjected to harassment and cruelty and death occurred within seven years of marriage sustaining 100% burn injuries inside her matrimonial home -- Onus was on the appellants/ accused to establish that it was not a dowry death -- Section 106 of the Evidence Act also put burden on the appellant no.1-husband who went to sleep with her in the same room, but escaped unscathed to explain as to how the death had occurred -- High Court arrived at the rightful conclusion reversing the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court and in convicting and sentencing the appellants. (SC) Decided on: 24.07.2024

212. NDPS Case -- Suspension of sentence -- Recovery of 18.17 grams of heroin – Conviction for 4 years – Appeal against conviction – Appeal raises arguable issues -- The applicant has undergone an actual sentence of 06 months and 10 days and there is no other case registered against him -- Hearing of the appeal is likely to take some time -- Sentence suspended. (P&H HC) Decided on: 24.07.2024

213. Drawer – Cheque bounce complaint – Interim compensation u/s 143A of NI Act -- Liability of Directors of Company -- Interpretation of -- High Court's interpretation accurately identified the "drawer" as the individual who issues the cheque -- Drawer u/s 143A refers specifically to the issuer of the cheque, not the authorized signatories -- Primary liability rests on the drawer, emphasizing the drawer's responsibility for maintaining sufficient funds -- Section 141 of the NI Act extending liability to the company's officers for the dishonour of a cheque -- Appellants' attempt to extend this principle to Section 143A, to hold directors or other individuals personally liable for interim compensation, is unfounded -- Authorized signatories act on behalf of the company but do not assume the company's legal identity. (SC) Decided on: 24.07.2024

214. Sex-determination – Regular bail -- Petitioner acted as a mediator between the decoy witness and the co-accused for the purpose of sex determination test -- Petitioner nominated on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused, who has been granted concession of regular bail -- Petitioner was arrested in this case on 27.03.2024, challan has already been presented -- Prosecution has cited 28 witnesses and none of them has been examined -- Conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time – Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 24.07.2024

215. Cheque bounce complaint – Withdrawal of complaint -- Quashing of FIR u/s 174A IPC -- Proceedings u/s 138 and 142 of the N.I. Act read with Section 420 IPC have culminated in a settlement with the withdrawal of the aforesaid complaint -- Petition allowed subject to a deposit of Rs.25,000/- as costs -- FIR u/s 174-A IPC and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 24.07.2024

216. Repudiation of Insurance claim – Voter I Card as date of birth proof -- While a Voter ID card is a widely recognized identification document for civic duties, it is often deemed to be a non-standard proof of date of birth within the insurance industry -- Insurance Company erred in rejecting the petitioner’s claim solely on the ground that the deceased insured’s date of birth, as recorded in the voter ID/voter list, differed from the date of birth stated in his other documents – Insurance company ordered to correct the identified error and reassess the Petitioner's claim and directed to disburse the insured amount to the Petitioner within one week. (Orissa HC) Date of Hearing: 17.05.2024 Decided on: 24.07.2024

217. Cheque bounce complaint – Examination of Handwriting expert – Application for -- Holder in due course -- Burdon of proof -- A burden lies heavy on the person issuing the cheque particularly the accused who does not dispute the authenticity of the signatures to furnish a justifiable explanation as to how such cheque came into the hands of the complainant -- Mere fact that body writing on the cheque in question has not been made by the accused would not offer any kind of defence to the accused – Trial court declined application -- No infirmity in the impugned order, and the same is upheld. (P&H HC) Decided on: 23.07.2024

218. NDPS Case – Commercial quantity – Regular bail -- Petitioner has already incarcerated 2 years and 11 days in custody and not involved in any other case -- Probability of his false implication cannot be ruled out particularly in the light of the fact that police party was in a private vehicle, details of which have not been mentioned – Charges framed on 13.2.2023, wherein out of 9 prosecution witnesses, only 2 have been examined so far, meaning thereby the trial will take long time which tantamount to violation of right to life and liberty as has been enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India even including the right to speedy trial -- “Bail is a rule, jail is an exception” is the basic principle of criminal jurisprudence – Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail. (P&H HC) Decided on: 23.07.2024

219. Probation -- Maternity leave -- Once, an employee completes the period of probation during the maternity leave, she is entitled for fixation of actual salary, which she gets upon confirmation. (P&H HC) Decided on: 23.07.2024

220. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Future prospects -- Perquisites/ allowances -- House rent -- Flexible benefit plan -- Company contribution to provident fund -- Components of house rent allowance, flexible benefit plan and company contribution to provident fund have to be included in the salary of the deceased while applying the component of rise in income by future prospects to determine the dependency factor. (SC) Decided on: 23.07.2024

221. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Unmarried major sister claimant – It is not a case where the sister is stated to be staying separately -- Sister, though major, was admittedly staying with her brother and in the claim petition it has specifically been mentioned that the deceased was the sole breadwinner of the family -- No evidence to the contrary has been produced by the appellant/ Insurance company -- Argument that unmarried sister of deceased could not be treated as a dependent on the deceased deserves to be rejected. (P&H HC) Decided on: 23.07.2024

222. NDPS – Commercial quantity – Regular bail – Trial delayed due to the repeated and continuous non-appearance of the prosecution witnesses, the State cannot justifiably oppose the prayer of the petitioner for bail -- Petitioner in custody since 13.09.2022, there is no foreseeable conclusion to the trial in the near future -- Court deemed it appropriate to allow the petition by dispensing with the conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act -- Petitioner admitted to bail. (P&H HC) Decided on: 23.07.2024

223. Cheating – Regular bail -- Complainant had been cheated of an amount of Rs.3 lacs -- Amount of Rs.1,50,000/- received in the account of the petitioner – He is a first time offender, in custody since 15.12.2023 but only 02 of the 09 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far -- Trial of the case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon -- Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 22.07.2024

224. Daily wagers – Regularisation of services – Natural justice -- If the competent authority takes a policy decision within the permissible framework, its benefit must be extended to all those who fall within the parameters of such a policy -- Authorities cannot be permitted to pick and choose in such circumstances -- Eligibility of respondent no.1 for the post he holds has not been controverted -- The fact that he initially entered through the process in conformity with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution is not a serious issue – High Court directed the petitioners to confer the status of a regular employee on respondent No.1 – No reason to interfere, SLP dismissed -- Petitioners/ State directed to grant all the benefits, including arrears of pay and seniority, to respondent No.1 from the due date. (SC) Decided on: 22.07.2024

225. Corruption case -- Cognizance by trail court – Sanction from competent authority – Requirement of -- Trial Court was not justified and correct in law in taking cognizance in the absence of sanction by the competent authority -- Order taking cognizance set aside qua the appellant. (SC) Decided on: 22.07.2024

226. Examination of witness u/s 311 Cr.P.C. -- Interlocutory Order – Maintainability of revision -- Order rejecting the application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order -- Revision petition is not maintainable against the dismissal order. (P&H HC) Decided on: 22.07.2024

227. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Award beyond claim amount -- There is no restriction upon the court to award compensation exceeding the amount claimed -- It is the duty of the Tribunal or Court under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to award just compensation -- Since the Act is a beneficial legislation a “just compensation” is one which is fair and reasonable on the basis of the evidence adduced irrespective of the amount claimed. (SC) Decided on: 22.07.2024

228. Right to challenge – Compliance of impugned order passed in writ – Effect of -- Judgment sought to be challenged in the Writ Appeal was already complied with under threat of contempt – Held, compliance of an order under threat cannot take away the right of a party as available to challenge the same. (SC) Decided on: 19.07.2024

229. Eviction of tenant -- Bonafide need – Resjudicata -- Earlier petition filed for bona fide requirement by the husband of the petitioner was dismissed -- However, present petition has been filed by the landlady after the death of her husband and therefore, in case she wants the demised shop for starting her business by opening a showroom by converting the entire ground-floor into a hall, for her livelihood, a fresh cause of action has arisen in favour of the landlady. (P&H HC) Reserved on : 16.07.2024 Decided on: 19.07.2024

230. Suit against dead person – Maintainability of – Rejection of plaint -- Suit against deceased dismissed with liberty to institute a fresh suit in accordance with law against the LRs. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.07.2024

231. Right to bail – Right to Life and liberty – Restrictions imposed by Statute – Effect on Constitutional Court -- Right to life and personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is overarching and sacrosanct -- A constitutional court cannot be restrained from granting bail to an accused on account of restrictive statutory provisions in a penal statute if it finds that the right of the accused-undertrial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been infringed -- In that event, such statutory restrictions would not come in the way. (SC) Decided on: 18.07.2024

232. Public Utility service – Electricity billing dispute – Alternative dispute redressal mechanism -- Prima facie the dispute does not pertain to ‘supply of electricity and rather it is a ‘billing dispute’ – Being the technical dispute the legislature provided for the dispute redressal mechanism under the Act – Dispute essentially and primarily required to be raised before the forum so prescribed under the Statute – Proceedings before Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) not maintainable. (P&H HC) Decided on: 18.07.2024

233. Agreement to sell – Registration of – Requirement of – Suit for specific performance -- First Appellate Court held that for the purpose of filing the suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell, the registration of the agreement to sell is not necessary – No ground to interfere is made out – Appeal dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.07.2024

234. Criminal breach of trust – Cheating -- Charge-sheet u/s 420 of IPC cannot be framed simultaneously along with offence u/s 406 of IPC. (P&H HC) Decided on: 16.07.2024

235. Divorce -- Adultery -- Adulterer as party – Requirement of -- Rejection of plaint -- Alleged adulterer is not a necessary party as a decree can be passed in his/ her absence -- Likewise, the adulterer is not a proper party since the issue concerning adultery can be adjudicated without making the adulterer a party to the cause -- Proof of adultery need not be conflated with who should be arrayed as a party to a divorce action – Application for rejection plaint dismissed. (Delhi HC) Decided on: 16.07.2024

236. Certified copy of registered lease deed – Admissibility in evidence – Certified copy of the Lease Agreement will fall under the category of secondary evidence – Certified copy of the Lease Agreement is a Public Document, as contemplated u/s 74 and in terms of the 3rd Proviso to Section 65(e) or 65(f) the certified copy is admissible in evidence -- Sub Section 5 of Section 57 of the Registration Act provides that certified copy given u/s 57 of the Registration Act shall be admissible for the purpose of proving the contents of its original document -- Rightly relied while decreeing the Suit. (Allahabad HC) Reserved on: 18.01.2024 Decided on: 16.07.2024

237. Specific performance of contract -- Relief of specific performance of contract is a discretionary relief -- As such, the Courts while exercising power to grant specific performance of contract, need to be extra careful and cautious in dealing with the pleadings and the evidence in particular led by the plaintiffs -- The plaintiffs have to stand on their own legs to establish that they have made out case for grant of relief of specific performance of contract -- The Act, 1963 provides certain checks and balances which must be fulfilled and established by the plaintiffs before they can become entitled for such a relief -- The pleadings in a suit for specific performance have to be very direct, specific and accurate -- A suit for specific performance based on bald and vague pleadings must necessarily be rejected -- Section 16(C) of the 1963 Act requires readiness and willingness to be pleaded and proved by the plaintiff in a suit for specific performance of contract -- The said provision has been widely interpreted and held to be mandatory. (SC) Decided on: 15.07.2024

238. Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Registered owner – Subsequent owner – Liability of -- Learned Tribunal did not commit any error in holding the registered owner to be responsible for paying the compensation, though he has been given liberty to take appropriate steps to effect the recovery from the subsequent owner concerned. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 12.07.2024 Decided on: 15.07.2024

239. NRI Landlord – Ownership – Proof of – Additional evidence – 30 year old sale deed – Presumption -- Registered sale deed of 1937 produced from proper custody and being more than 30 years old document carries presumption in terms of Section 90 of Indian Evidence Act and its veracity cannot be impeached at the hands of tenant – Application to lead additional evidence in the shape of sale deed allowed – Matter remanded back to Rent Controller with liberty to tenant for rebuttal if any. (P&H HC) Decided on: 15.07.2024

240. Interim maintenance – Loan upon husband – Ground of -- Petitioner/husband paying Rs. 5,000/- to wife and daughter u/s 12 of DV Act -- Court by the impugned order increased the maintenance to Rs. 7,500/- -- No detailed discussion made as to why the amount has been increased, but it, per se, does not invalidate the order -- After deduction, the salary of the revisionist is Rs. 28,241/- -- Taking loan may not be a ground, per se, to reduce the amount of maintenance – Held, the amount of interim maintenance is not excessive – Revision dismissed. (UK HC) Decided on: 15.07.2024

241. Coparcenary property -- Mutation was sanctioned in accordance with Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 -- The property can no longer be claimed to be a coparcenary. (P&H HC) Reserved on : 05.07.2024 Decided on: 12.07.2024

242. NDPS Case – Regular bail – Commercial quantity -- Petitioner is in custody since 08.09.2021 i.e. for the last more than 2 years and 10 months -- Out of 16 witnesses cited by the complainant, statement of only one witness has been concluded -- Charge framed way back on 18.07.2022 -- Conclusion of the trial is likely to take long time -- Petitioner is the first offender and has not been found to be involved in any other case -- Rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS is required to be balanced with Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which provides fundamental right to life and liberty -- Right to speedy trial forms a facet of Article 21 -- Petitioner admitted to regular bail. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 10.07.2024 Decided on: 12.07.2024

243. Murder – Acquittal -- Prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence as there is no eye witness – Statement of PW2/ mother of the deceased is based on suspicion -- She has not seen the deceased going to the house of the accused – No other evidence available on the file connecting the accused with the offence -- Dead body of deceased was recovered from the house of the accused which is not sufficient to connect all the accused with the offence -- Prosecution case is also doubtful as the prosecution has withheld the best evidence -- No reason to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment of acquittal – Revision dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 12.07.2024

244. Demand of cash post marriage – Whether qualify as dowry -- Demands of cash would qualify to be termed as ‘demand of dowry’ and that any such demand even if made post marriage would not lose the character of ‘demand of dowry’. (P&H HC) Decided on: 12.07.2024

245. Employment agreement -- Lock-in period of three years -- Covenants in employment contracts -- Lawful and reasonable covenants which are operative during the term of employment are valid and enforceable -- Such covenants are not in violation of the fundamental rights as provided in the Constitution of India -- Reasonable lock-in periods in employment contracts that apply during the term of employment are valid in law and do not violate Fundamental Rights as enshrined in the Constitution of India -- Disputes relating to lock-in periods that apply during the subsistence of employment contracts, are arbitrable in terms of the Act, 1996. (Delhi HC) Decided on: 11.07.2024

246. Procedure in criminal cases after BNSS (w.e.f. 01.07.2024): I. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 stands repealed w.e.f. 01.07.2024. Ergo; no new/fresh appeal or application or revision or petition can be filed under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on or after 01.07.2024. II. The provisions of Section 4 and Section 531 of BNSS, 2023 are mandatory in nature as a result whereof any appeal/ application/ revision/ petition/ trial/ inquiry or investigation pending before 01.07.2024 are required to be disposed of, continued, held or made (as the case may be) in accordance with the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In other words; any appeal/ application/ revision/ petition filed on or after 01.07.2024, is required to be filed/ instituted under the provisions of BNSS, 2023. III. Any appeal/ application/ revision/ petition filed on or after 01.07.2024 under the provisions of Cr.P.C., 1973 is non-maintainable & hence would deserve dismissal/ rejection on this score alone. However, any appeal/ application/ revision/ petition filed upto 30.06.2024 under the provisions of Cr.P.C., 1973 is maintainable in law. To clarify; in case any appeal/ application/ revision/ petition is filed upto 30.06.2024 but there is defect (Registry objections, as referred to in common parlance) and such defect is cured/ removed on or after 01.07.2024, such appeal/ application/ revision/ petition shall be deemed to have been validly filed/ instituted on or after 01.07.2024 and, therefore, would be non- maintainable. IV. Section 531 of BNSS shall apply to "revision", "petition" as also "petition of complaint" (ordinarily referred to as complaint before Magistrate) with the same vigour as it is statutorily mandated to apply to "appeal/ application/ trial/ inquiry or investigation" in terms of Section 531 of BNSS. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.07.2024

247. Cheque bounce complaint -- Re-examination of complainant/ witness – FIR by complainant for same transaction as well -- Complainant’s cross-examination was completed on 21.11.2019 -- However, challan in criminal case was filed in year 2022 – It is the case of the petitioner that certain new facts having bearing on the present case, surfaced in the said report submitted by the police u/s 173 Cr.P.C and it is necessary to put the said new facts to the complainant in his cross examination -- Application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. allowed subject to cost of Rs.5,000/-. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.07.2024

248. First Appeal – Stay of decree – Right of -- Suit for specific performance decreed – Appeal was filed, but no order relating to the stay was granted and after about a period of 11 months, the application was dismissed -- The Court, ought to take into consideration that it is the statutory right exercised by the petitioner-defendant, by filing appeal -- Creation of third party rights, may lead to multiplicity of litigation – Revision allowed, impugned order set aside -- Operation of the judgment and decree stayed, till the decision of First Appeal. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.07.2024

249. Appointment of Additional District and Sessions Judge – Eligibility criteria -- Continuous practice as an advocate – Minimum period of 7 year of practice – Exclusion of judicial service period – Practicing Advocate at the Bar of a minimum period of seven years as on the last date fixed for receipt of the applications -- There is no requirement that such practice as an Advocate must be continuous as on the date of making application for the said post -- Respondent no. 4 has cumulatively more than 7 years of active practice, thus he is eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Additional District Judge as per Rule 5 (c) – Rule 5(c) upheld, “Note” below clause (c) of Rule 5 (permitting counting of Judicial service of a candidate towards counting of 7 years practice as Advocate for being eligible to be appointed as Additional District Judge), declared unenforceable and struck down. (HP HC) Reserved on: 24.06.2024 Decided on: 11.07.2024

250. Suit for specific performance – Impleadment as defendant -- Rights or interest of petitioners to the extent of their shares in suit land, are neither the subject matter of suit nor of the agreement to sell – Petitioners are neither necessary nor proper parties to the suit -- Petitioner cannot claim to be impleaded as party in the suit, where no relief is claimed against them – Law is settled that any decree against a stranger is nullity, therefore, any decree passed in the suit will have no effect on the rights of the petitioners. (P&H HC) Decided on: 10.07.2024