Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 148, 166 – Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Self-employed person – Fixed salary person – Future prospects -- Addition of future prospects cannot be denied in cases of self-employed persons or those employed on a fixed salary.

(Para 14-20)

A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 11 – Appointment of Arbitrator – Scope of inquiry u/s 11 of the Act, 1996 is limited to ascertaining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement -- High Court exceeded this limited scope by undertaking a detailed examination of the factual matrix -- High Court erroneously proceeded to assess the auditor’s report in detail and dismissed the arbitration application -- Existence of the arbitration agreement not disputed by the respondent –  Question whether there exists a valid dispute to be referred to arbitration can be addressed by the Arbitral Tribunal as a preliminary issue -- Appeal allowed, impugned order passed by the High Court set aside -- Sole arbitrator appointed to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

(Para 18-23)

B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 11 – Appointment of Arbitrator – Misue of process -- Limited jurisdiction of the referral Courts u/s 11 must not be misused by parties in order to force other parties to the arbitration agreement to participate in a time-consuming and costly arbitration process -- To balance the limited scope of judicial interference of the referral Courts with the interests of the parties who might be constrained to participate in the arbitration proceedings, the Arbitral Tribunal may direct that the costs of the arbitration shall be borne by the party which the Tribunal ultimately finds to have abused the process of law and caused unnecessary harassment to the other party to the arbitration.

(Para 20)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 --Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Interference in – Permissibility of -- District Collector while appointing the appellant, had noticed that respondent no.4 was a serving Sarpanch and had been elected unanimously and he was also the Vice President of the Cooperative Society and therefore it could not be said strictly that he did not participate in the political activities -- He may be B.A pass and having more land is already 63 years old, whereas the appellant was 50 years of age -- Appellant is son of an ex-army man -- Commissioner interfered in the said appointment without recording any finding that there was any perversity in the order which is the basic criteria for interference -- Financial Commissioner dismissed the appeal -- Learned Single Judge chose to remand the matter -- Appeal allowed, setting aside of impugned orders, upholding the order of appointment of the appellant as Lambardar.

(Para 1-8)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 – Haryana Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Challenge to – Dealy and laches – Appointment was made way back in the year 2012 – Neither the Commissioner nor the Financial Commissioner chose to interfere with the order passed by the Collector – Ld. Single Judge dismissed the writ petition while noticing that there was an inordinate delay of almost four years in approaching the High Court after finalization of the proceedings upto the Financial Commissioner – LPA dismissed.

(Para 2, 3)

Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Death of appointed lambardar – Right of other candidate -- Deceased-appellant was appointed by the Collector on 11.06.1997 – LPA pending has been rendered infructuous -- For all practical purposes, the appellant continued to serve as Lambardar from 1997 before he has expired -- It is, thus, open to the authorities to initiate the process for appointment of Lambardar -- Respondent No.4 would not have a vested right to be appointed merely on account of death of the appellant as fresh candidates would have to be considered who would be fully eligible -- It would be open to respondent No.4 to apply afresh.

(Para 3-5)

A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 80, 85, 108, 3(5) -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, (28 of 1961), Section 3, 4 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Dowry death – Abetment to suicide -- Anticipatory bail -- Son of the appellant (mother-in-law) has been arrested and he is still in custody – After interim protection, despite communication sent by the appellant to investigating authority, the investigating authority has not called her for joining the investigation – Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the custodial interrogation of the appellant is not required – Anticipatory bail allowed.

(Para 2-9)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 82, 438 – Proclaimed person/ Proclaimed offender – Anticipatory bail – Maintainability of -- Consideration of anticipatory bail, in the event of the declaration u/s 82 of the Cr.P.C., it is not as if in all cases that there will be a total embargo on considering the application for the grant of anticipatory bail -- When the liberty of the appellant is pitted against, the Court will have to see the circumstances of the case, nature of the offence and the background based on which such a proclamation was issued.

(Para 8, 9)

Court Fees Act, 1870 (7 of 1870), Section 6A, 7(iv-A) – Advalorem court fee -- Suit claiming a decree for declaration to the effect that the gift deed be declared as null, void, forged and fabricated having no effect on the rights of the plaintiff and consequential information in this regard be sent to the Sub-Registrar's office -- It is not a simplicitor suit for declaration of rights and it clearly falls under section 7(iv-A) of the Act.

(Para 3, 11)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 82, 482 -- Cheque bounce complaint – Proclaimed person --  Petitioner is keen to join the proceedings -- Petition disposed of and the impugned order set aside subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to be paid to the complainant – On surrender of the petitioner with cost of Rs.10,000/- within 10 days, the Court concerned directed to admit him to bail subject to its satisfaction and decide the application for revival of the complaint in accordance with law.

(Para 4)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 21(c), 22(c), 23(c), 25, 27-A, 29 -- Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 42, 52-A – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS – Regular bail -- Recovery of 1600 grams of heroin from co-accused -- Petitioner in custody since 18.09.2023; challan was presented on 12.03.2024 followed by framing of charges on 07.06.2024 -- Till date none of the 31 prosecution witnesses examined – No recovery of any contraband or even mobile handsets was affected from the petitioner; the petitioner is being sought to be linked to the co-accused only on the basis of some mobile calls made between him and them – Bail allowed.

(Para 7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Recovery of counterfeit currency – Regular bail -- Petitioner in custody since 04.04.2024 -- Entire case of the prosecution is based on documentary evidence, which is already part of the challan -- Trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future – Bail allowed.

(Para 6)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Retail and Wholesale Drug License  -- Delay in submission of application beyond time granted by High court – Rejection on that ground – Justification of -- Ends of justice would be well served in case the applications that were filed by the petitioner beyond the time prescribed by High Court, are treated as being in compliance of order passed by High Court and adjudication thereof is done by the concerned Authority on merits of the same, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties – Petition allowed.

(Para 1-7)

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 480(6), 483 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 406, 120B – Cheating – Non-conclusion of trial within 60 days -- Bail – Right of -- Charges framed on 31.05.2024, case is triable by the Magistrate -- First date for recording evidence was 14.06.2024 and 60 days completed on 13.08.2024 -- Accused-petitioner is in custody for more than two years -- Only one prosecution witness out of total 33 prosecution witnesses examined -- Accused cannot be continued in custody for an indefinite period and that too for no fault on his bail in conclusion of the trial as per the mandate of Section 480(6) of BNSS – Bail allowed.

(Para 9, 10)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 374, 389 – Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138, 148A -- Conviction in cheque bounce complaint -- Appeal -- Suspension of sentence – Pre-deposit of 20% of compensation -- Looking at the financial condition of the petitioner, directing her to deposit 20% of the amount as per impugned order shall result in jeopardizing her appeal being dismissed on account of non-compliance of the condition of deposit -- Condition of pre-deposit of 20% of interim compensation set aside, Ld. Sessions Judge ordered to proceed with hearing of the appeal without insisting for pre-deposit and dispose of the same in accordance with law.

(Para 8, 9)

A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Truck hit scooty from back side -- Contributory negligence – Plea of -- No evidence produced in regard to allegation of contributory negligence -- Case pleaded that on being hit by the truck from the back side, the deceased had fallen and came under the front wheel of the truck, which is possible -- Contention of the insurance company that there was contributory negligence of the deceased is liable to be repelled only and accordingly repelled.

(Para 18-21)

B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Future loss of income -- Future prospects -- Compassionate appointment to dependent – Effect of – Deceased was getting Rs.34,351/- at the time of accident, son of the deceased was appointed on a remuneration of about Rs.12000-13,000/-, therefore, firstly it cannot be said that there was no loss of income to the family – Secondly, compassionate appointment cannot be equated with the future prospect – Contention that the claimants are not entitled for the future prospects on the ground of 58 years of age deceased is misconceived and not tenable because the death of bread earner of family is always loss to the family, who would have contributed to the family in future and his earnings may have increased in any manner.

(Para 22-33)

C. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 134, 149, 166 – Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Enquiry u/s 134 of MV Act – Ground of -- Grounds of section 134 (c) of the Act of 1988 is not provided u/s 149 (2), ground not available to the appellant/ Insurance Company – Even otherwise, once an enquiry has been held by the tribunal after affording sufficient opportunity to the appellant/ insurance company, the plea of the appellant that since provisions of Section 134 (c) of the Act of 1988 have not been complied, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to make the payment of compensation is misconceived and not tenable because it has no concern with the claim of the dependents and family members of the deceased.

(Para 34-38)

Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 (II of 1916), Section 3, 4, 5 – Constitution of India, Article 243-Q – Inclusion in transitional area of Nagar Panchayat – Opportunity of hearing to effected partes -- Notification u/s 3 visits the persons living in the area notified with several civil consequences that may include taxation on properties, deprivation of benefits from government programs and schemes for village areas, etc. – Opportunity of making objections and /or suggestions after publication of draft notification and due consideration of the same by the Governor, are vital and mandatory requirements of the statute -- Each person resident of such area which is subject to such notification, is a stakeholder and is conferred a right by the Act, 1916 to make suggestions and objections -- Such suggestions and objections, when duly filed, have to be accorded due consideration by the Governor, and the State Government cannot brush aside an objection by means of a general denial on the ground that it was not received within the time provided in the draft notification where it has been demonstrated by the petitioner that the objection was duly dispatched and the delivery report of the postal department reflects its delivery to the addressee -- Objections of the petitioners were never considered – Impugned notification / order quashed.

(Para 11, 19, 20)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21(b) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 397, 401, 451 -- NDPS Case – Superdari of motorcycle -- Motor cycle owned by petitioner seized by the police in criminal case under NDPS Act -- Trial will take time to conclude -- Even if the said motor cycle is a case property, it cannot be kept in the malkhana for indefinite period -- Application filed by the petitioner seeking release of his motor cycle on supurdari allowed.

(Para 7-9)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Sections 305(a), 331(4) – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – House-trespass or House breaking/ 331(4)-BNSS -- Compromise quashing of FIR -- Compromise arrived at between the parties verified and confirmed -- FIR and all consequential proceedings, quashed.

(Para 1-6)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 323(4), 324(5), 333, 191(3), 190, 305 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – House trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint/ 333-BNS – Rioting armed with deadly weapon/ 191(3)-BNS – Compromise quashing of FIR -- Compromise arrived at between the parties verified and confirmed -- FIR and all consequential proceedings quashed.

(Para 1-6)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452, 384, 506, 120-B, 216 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Murder – Conspiracy -- Regular bail -- Appellant nominated as an accused only for being part of the conspiracy to the crime in question and he was not present when the alleged murder took place -- Bail allowed.

(Para 8, 9)

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10 -- Suit for specific performance of agreement -- Evidence of attorney -- One of the purchasers and plaintiff in his suit for specific performance throughout present in the transaction held the Power of Attorney from the other plaintiffs – He was examined as PW-1 in each of the suits whether in his capacity as plaintiff or as Power of Attorney from other plaintiffs -- It was not necessary for each of the plaintiffs in separate suits to appear and prove the transaction -- Trial Court had examined this aspect and had found favour with the plaintiffs – Adverse inference drawn by the High Court for the reason that the plaintiffs did not enter the witness box to prove the Agreement to Sell, was completely misplaced.

(Para 28)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10 – Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Article 54 -- Suit for specific performance of agreement – Limitation -- Agreement to Sell dated 30.08.1990 did not mention any date for the performance, nor did owner refused at any point of time and soon after the death of owner in December 1992, the plaintiffs having come to know of the mutation proceedings by her legal heirs, they proceeded to file the suit, after giving notice in May 1995, which was well within a period of three years -- Second part of Article 54 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act would be applicable once there was no date fixed for performance in the Agreement to Sell.

(Para 27, 30)

C. Agreement to sell – Possession with original title deed – Effect of -- A purchaser who has paid the full consideration and received the original title deeds from the seller would have taken possession under normal circumstances -- Any possession taken by any other party thereafter would be unauthorised and illegal.

(Para 32)

D. Violation of Injunction order – Alienation of the property in violation of the injunction order -- Sale deed would be a void document.

(Para 33)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 , Section 304 Part I – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Benefit of doubt -- Previous enmity between the parties -- A month prior to the date of the incident, an FIR was lodged by the wife of the appellant No.1 against the deceased since he had tried to dispossess the appellants -- Place of the incident is adjacent to the field in possession of the appellants -- Weapons used by the accused persons are axe and sticks commonly used by the agriculturists -- No material to show that there is any premeditation – Possibility of offence being committed by the appellants without premeditation in a sudden fight in a heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel cannot be ruled out -- It cannot be said that the appellants have taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner -- Appellants would be entitled to benefit of doubt, conviction u/s 302 IPC needs to be altered Part I of Section 304 IPC.

(Para 18-21)

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 6A, 11(6) – Appointment of Arbitrator – Assignment of agreement – Effect of -- Existence of arbitration agreement in the license agreement and share subscription agreement is not in dispute – Court has to confine itself to the examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement, it would not be appropriate for Court to delve deep into the issue --  Matter referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre for appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties.

(Para 5, 11, 12)

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 441, 442, 452 -- House trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint – Incident at restaurant – Acquittal -- Incident had taken place in a restaurant run by the injured PW-1, which cannot be said to be either a place used for human dwelling or for worship or for the custody of the property -- Appellant could not have been convicted for the offence under Section 452 IPC – Conviction set aside -- Appellant acquitted for the offence u/s 452 IPC.

(Para 10-12)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 441, 442, 452 -- House trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint -- The “house trespass” being an essential ingredient for convicting a person under Section 452, it has to be proved by the prosecution that the accused committed the house trespass and criminal trespass by entering into or unlawfully remaining in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or any building used as a place for worship, or as a place for the custody of property, as contemplated in Section 442 IPC.

(Para 9)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 389(1) -- Suspension of fine -- While convicting an accused, if a direction is issued against him to pay a fine, such a direction can be suspended in the exercise of power under sub-section (1) of Section 389 of the CrPC.

(Para 6)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 389(1) – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Suspension of sentence/ fine -- While suspending the sentence, especially the sentence of fine, the Appellate Court can impose conditions -- Court has to keep in mind that if a condition of deposit of an amount is imposed while suspending the sentence of fine, the same should not be such that it is impossible for the appellant to comply with it, defeating his right of appeal against the order of conviction, which may also violate his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

(Para 8)

Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, Rule 9(4)(5) – Auction sale by bank – Sale certificate -- Non-deposit of auction amount within 15 days – Extension of time -- Respondents/ auction purchaser sought extension of time for the reason that the appellant-Bank itself was not in a position to accept the amount as there was a complaint to the CBI, an advisory of the ED and a stay from the High Court -- Silence on part of the appellant-Bank in either immediately revoking the sale confirmation or refusing to extend the time, impliedly amounted to extension of time in writing with consent.

-- Respondents were always ready and willing to deposit the balance auction amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- and had rather submitted a bank draft dated 15.10.2022 of the said amount and had requested for the issuance of the sale certificate and possession of the auction property – It establishes the bona fide of the respondents and it was only the appellant-Bank who had avoided the issuance of the sale certificate.

-- Non-issuance of the sale certificate is solely attributable to the appellant-Bank and that there were no latches, negligence or default on part of the respondents in offering to deposit the balance auction amount.

Non-deposit of the said amount within the stipulated period would not be fatal within the meaning of sub-Rules (4) and (5) of Rule 9 of the Rules.

(Para 16-19)

Constitution of India, Article 30(1) – Minority educational Institution – Legislative/ Administrative Power to change -- Article 30(1) can be classified as both an anti-discrimination provision and a special rights provision -- A legislation or an executive action which discriminates against religious or linguistic minorities in establishing or administering educational institutions is ultra vires Article 30(1).

-- Religious or linguistic minorities must prove that they established  the educational institution for the community to be a minority educational institution for the purposes of Article 30(1);

-- The right guaranteed by Article 30(1) is applicable to universities established before the commencement of the Constitution;

-- The right under Article 30(1) is guaranteed to minorities as defined upon the commencement of the Constitution. A different right-bearing group cannot be identified for institutions established before the adoption of the Constitution;

-- The incorporation of the University would not ipso facto lead to surrendering of the minority character of the institution. The circumstances surrounding the conversion of a teaching college to a teaching university must be viewed to identify if the minority character of the institution was surrendered upon the conversion. The Court may on a holistic reading of the statutory provisions relating to the administrative set-up of the educational institution deduce if the minority character or the purpose of establishment was relinquished upon incorporation; and

The following are the factors which must be used to determine if a minority ‘established’ an educational institution:

i. The indicia of ideation, purpose and implementation must be satisfied. First, the idea for establishing an educational institution must have stemmed from a person or group belonging to the minority community; second, the educational institution must be established predominantly for the benefit of the minority community; and third, steps for the implementation of the idea must have been taken by the member(s) of the minority community; and

ii. The administrative-set up of the educational institution must elucidate and affirm (I) the minority character of the educational institution; and (II) that it was established to protect and promote the interests of the minority community.

The view taken in Azeez Basha’ case AIR 1968 SC 662 that an educational institution is not established by a minority if it derives its legal character through a statute, is overruled -- The question of whether AMU is a minority educational institution must be decided based on the principles laid down in the judgment.

(Para 160, 161)

Reference answered with majority opinion

Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (39 of 1987), Section 22C – Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003), Section 42 -- 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.

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Younger in age – Non-consideration of other factors – Effect of -- Petitioner was appointed as Lambardar by Collector, only on the ground that she is younger than the other candidates; whereas, the other factors, as envisaged under Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, have not been taken into consideration – Commissioner remanded back the case, which order was upheld by the Financial Commissioner --  Case requires a fresh look at the level of District Collector is correct and does not call for any interference.

(Para 8.1-9)

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10, 16 -- Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Article 54 – Suit for specific performance – Limitation -- Limitation prescribed by Article 54 sets in from the date when the petitioner received the reply refusing performance.

(Para 31)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10, 16(c) – Specific performance of agreement – Readiness and willingness – Purchaser paid a sum of Rs.11,30,00 as earnest money and paid Rs.13,00,000 on the same day by cheque and paid another Rs. 5,00,000 by Demand Draft -- If the petitioner was unwilling to perform the contract, he would not have paid nearly 75 percent of the sale consideration -- Petitioner with the payment of the additional sum above the earnest money, has proved his readiness and willingness to perform the contract -- Fit case for to exercise discretion to direct specific performance.

(Para 42)

C. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 52 – Lis panders -- Doctrine of lis pendens that Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act encapsulates, bars the transfer of a suit property during the pendency of litigation -- The only exception to the principle is when it is transferred under the authority of the court and on terms imposed by it -- Where one of the parties to the suit transfers the suit property (or a part of it) to a third-party, the latter is bound by the result of the proceedings even if he did not have notice of the suit or proceeding.

(Para 47)

D. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 52 – Object of doctrine of lis pendens -- Purpose of lis pendens is to ensure that the process of the court is not subverted and rendered infructuous --  In the absence of the doctrine of lis pendens, a defendant could defeat the purpose of the suit by alienating the suit property.

(Para 49)

E. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 52 – Lis pendens – Review -- Pendency means -- Review proceedings were “instituted” within the period of limitation of thirty days –  Doctrine of lis pendens kicks in at the stage of “institution” and not at the stage when notice is issued by this Court -- Argument of the respondents that the doctrine of lis pendens does not apply because the petition for review was lying in the registry in a defective state cannot be accepted.

(Para 49)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 427, 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 379 – Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003), Section 136 – Conviction in 21 case – Concurrent running of sentence – All cases decided on the same day -- Total period of sentence awarded to petitioner would come to 21 years in respect of the period of convictions so awarded -- Petitioner is entitled for benefit of discretion contained in Section 427 of Cr.P.C. and the same deserves to be exercised to meet the ends of justice.

(Para 4, 6)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 427, 482 – Conviction in 21 case – Default sentence – Concurrent running of sentence – Permissibility of -- For default sentences, the provisions of Section 427 of Cr.P.C. did not direct for concurrent running of the sentences -- Default Sentences in default of payment of fine shall run consecutively if he does not pay the fine.

(Para 7)

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (III of 1949), Section 13B, 15 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 41 Rule 27 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 90 -- 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.

(Para 9-12)

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 151 – Additional evidence -- Not a single averment in the application as to the relevancy of the documents -- In the absence of any explanation, the application has rightly been rejected.

(Para 8)

Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 124, 124A -- Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (54 of 1987), Section 16 -- Compensation in railway accident case – Fixed deposit for major claimant – Permissibility of -- 90% of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal ordered to be kept in fixed deposits even though appellant No.1 is major -- Amount awarded to the claimants apart from that awarded to the minors ordered to be released -- Amount of award in favour of the minors/ appellants shall remain invested in the Fixed Deposits till they attain age of majority.

(Para 1, 2)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 3(5), 108 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Abetment to suicide – Anticipatory bail -- Deceased-employee was disturbed since about 2 weeks, his seniors/ petitioner at Bank were harassing during duty – Prosecution failed to provide specific allegations or instances demonstrating the petitioner’s role in prompting or instigating the deceased to commit suicide -- Primafacie basic ingredients of Section 108 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 not met out -- It would be a futile exercise to send the petitioner behind the bars for custodial interrogation – Anticipatory bail allowed.

(Para 2-5)

A. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Promotion of employee – Departmental proceedings – Effect of -- Departmental proceedings can be said to have been initiated only upon issuance of the charge-memo/ charge-sheet and not prior thereto -- In case of initiation of departmental proceedings against an employee as on date of consideration of his case for promotion by the DPC, the sealed covered procedure is required to be adopted -- Said sealed cover is to be opened after culmination of the departmental proceedings.

(Para 4(ii))

B. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Departmental proceedings – Withdrawal of promotion – Permissibility of -- Charge-memo issued to the petitioner on 01.04.2023, whereas, the DPC had already recommended petitioner’s name for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector on 21.03.2023 -- Formal order promoting the petitioner on accrual of vacancies was passed on 02.08.2023 – Order dated 24.08.2023, withdrawing petitioner’s promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector is not in consonance with law.

(Para 4(iii))

C. Central Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 11, 14, 16 – Departmental proceedings for minor punishment – Withholding of promotion – Permissibility of -- Charge-memo was not issued to the petitioner for imposition of major penalties under Rule 14 -- Promotion cannot be withheld on account of employer’s intention to initiate departmental proceedings for imposition of minor penalty upon an employee.

(Para 4(iv))

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Excise matter -- Regular bail – Direction to furnish bail bonds after 6 months – Sustainability of -- High Court ordered to release the petitioner on bail subject condition that “the petitioner shall furnish his bail bonds after completion of six months in custody from today” – Held, no valid reason for the High Court to impose the condition – Condition set aside, Trial Court directed to release the petitioner on bail forthwith on furnishing bail bonds to its satisfaction.

(Para 1-4)

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, Section 210 – Maintainability of revision -- In order for a revision to be entertainable the impugned order must amount to a 'suit or proceeding decided'.

(Para 30)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 498A, 504 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – Cruelty against wife -- Compromise quashing of FIR – Settlement took place and Respondent No.2/ complainant now started residing with petitioner/ husband, in the matrimonial home -- Sincere efforts, which they had made, must be recognized by the Court – FIR as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto quashed.

(Para 13-19)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 294 – Formal proof of documents -- Where the genuineness of any document is not disputed, such document may be read in evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code without proof of the signature of the person to whom it purports to be signed -- If the authors of such documents does not enter the witness box to prove their signatures, the said documents could still be read in evidence -- Court has the jurisdiction in its discretion to require such signature to be proved.

(Para 15)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 294 – Formal proof of documents – Requirement of -- Documents filed by the investigating agency were all public documents duly signed by public servants in their respective capacities either as Investigating Officer or the doctor conducting the autopsy or other police officials preparing the memo of recoveries etc. -- As such the Trial Court had rightly relied upon the same and exhibited them in view of the specific repeated stand taken by the defence in admitting the genuineness of the said documents -- However, if the evidence was not credit-worthy and worthy of reliance, the accused could be given benefit of doubt or clean acquittal.

(Para 15, 16)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 378 – Acquittal in cheque bounce complaint -- Bribe money – Legally enforceable liability -- A payment made as a bribe, being an illegal and immoral transaction, does not constitute a legally enforceable liability -- Cheque issued in furtherance of an unlawful act cannot give rise to criminal liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act – Acquittal order, upheld.

(Para 7-9)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 143 -- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (104 of 1956), Section 3, 4, 5 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 483 -- Trafficking of person – Regular bail -- Police raided a hotel and the applicant was found in a room with a woman -- Co-accused was running a brothel in the hotel -- Applicant was customer in the hotel -- Fit case for bail – Bail Allowed.

(Para 3-7)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Transfer policy of Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank, Clause 19 – Superannuation due in two years -- Transfer of employee made 350 km away – Sustainability of – Non-performance of employee – Effect of -- In terms of the Transfer Policy, the petitioner was to be adjusted either at a station of his choice or at a place nearer to his home town -- Even if, transfer of the petitioner was on account of non-performance, then also the same cannot be used as a tool to punish the petitioner by transferring him to a station of more than 350 kilometers away as the petitioner was entitled for the benefit of Clause-19 of the Transfer Policy – Author of the Policy cannot be allowed to go behind the Policy and use and abuse the Policy as per its own whims and fancies – Impugned transfer order set aside.

(Para 7-10)

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 3, 4 -- Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 -- Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 45 -- Punjab Jail Manual, Para 607 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Unauthorised possession of mobile phone in jail – Denial of Parole – Ground of:

– It is oppressive, till an accused is declared guilty, through a verdict becoming passed by the court of competent jurisdiction, thus thereupto rather he is presumed to be innocent

– It would create an unreasonable classification against inmated prisoners, who merely unauthorizedly possess mobile phones.

– Principle of fair trial, quartered within the domain of Article 21 of the Constitution of India -- Said constitutional norm cannot be breached even in respect of a prisoner.

-- Home Secretaries of the State of Haryana and Punjab to forthwith install STD facilities in the jails concerned, so that therebys the inmates prisoners can communicate with their friends and relatives, but, on payment of relevant charges.

Parole is not to be denied in a mechanical manner, without application of mind -- District Magistrates/ competent authority directed to apply their mind objectively to the relevant material furnished by the police, local Panchayats and only in cases where they receive cogent, tangible and concrete evidence indicating that the inmated prisoner, if released on parole, would be an imminent threat to the security and peace of the area concerned, thus thereupon they may well consider to, on good reasons, reject his/ her application for parole -- In the event of the competent authorities not objectively applying their mind they would be liable for censure/ disciplinary action for theirs prompting frivolous and avoidable litigation.

(Para 25-30, 43, 45)

U.P. Excise Act, 1910 (IV of 1910), Section 11(1)(2) – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appellate order challenged in writ – Alternative remedy of revision -- The questions raised in writ can be gone into by the revisional authority in the revision filed by the petitioner u/s 11(2) of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 -- Writ petition disposed of, with a liberty to file a revision before the State Government within seven days and the revisional authority shall pass order in accordance with law -- Till filing of the revision, impugned order stayed.

(Para 4, 6)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302, 210, 120B – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Murder – Regular bail – Allegation that the petitioner along with her co-accused had committed the murder of her younger son as he had seen the petitioner and her co-accused in a compromising position – Petitioner in custody since 18.09.2020 -- Trial is not likely to be concluded in near future -- Nothing on record to suggest that the delay in trial is attributable to the petitioner -- Prosecution has cited total 38 witnesses, out of which only five have been examined till date -- Petitioner does not have any criminal history – Bail allowed.

(Para 4, 7, 19)

Constitution of India, Article 226 – Conversion of residential property to commercial -- Show cause notice – Challenge to – Writ jurisdiction -- Show cause notice to the petitioner calling upon to show cause as to why the property be not sealed and demolished -- Petitioner can show the reasons to the competent authority why show cause notice be discharged and can get appropriate orders -- Writ petition is not maintainable against a show cause notice, dismissed in-limine.

(Para 1-4)

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 16 -- Suit for specific performance -- Agreement to sell/ Document -- Onus to prove -- When the question before the court is as to "whether the transaction in question was a bona fide and genuine one", it is for the party/plaintiff relying on the transaction, who has to first of all prove its genuineness and only thereafter would the defendant be required to discharge the burden in order to dislodge such proof and establish that the transaction was sham and fictitious.

(Para 21)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 16 -- Suit for specific performance -- Agreement to sell – Proof of -- Readiness and Willingness – Non-reply to legal notice by defendant – Effect of -- Question of readiness and willingness on the part of plaintiffs will arise only in case the valid execution of agreement to sell is proved on record -- Once the agreement to sell is not proved to be validly executed any readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff loses its significance -- Simply because defendants did not respond to the legal notice will not mean that they admitted the agreement to sell or they were bound to execute the sale deed.

(Para 49)

C. Punjab Courts Act, 1918 (6 of 1918), Section 41 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 100 – Regular Second Appeal -- Concurrent finding of facts of two courts -- Scope to interfere by the High Court – High Court is not to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below but it is not an absolute rule -- There are some exceptions for interference by the High Court, when it is found that:

-- When finding of fact by the Courts below is vitiated by non-consideration of material evidence or erroneous approach.

-- The Courts have drawn wrong inferences from the proved facts by applying the law erroneously.

-- The Courts have wrongly cast the burden of proof.

-- When decision is based upon no evidence, which would mean that not only there is total dearth of evidence but also, where is the evidence taken as a whole, is not reasonably capable of supporting the finding.

-- When the judgment of the final Court of fact is based on misinterpretation of documentary evidence or on consideration of inadmissible evidence or ignoring material evidence.

(Para 60)

D. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 16 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 9 Rule 1 -- Suit for specific performance -- Non-joinder of necessary party -- Effect of -- Co-owners in the suit property to the extent of 1/25th share each at the time of filing of the suit were necessary party to the suit -- Legal heirs of one of the executants of the agreement to sell, were not brought on record -- Suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties and on this ground alone, the suit was liable to be dismissed.

(Para 64-69)

E. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 12, 16 – Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (27 of 1952), Section 5, 22 -- Chandigarh (Sale of Sites and Buildings) Rules 1960, Rule 14 – Agreement to sell -- Part performance of contract – Fragmentation, division, bifurcation and apart-mentalization of residential unit in Phase-I of Chandigarh are prohibited -- Suit property falls in this category – By permitting part performance of the contract, fragmentation cannot be allowed by Court, as it will be in clear violation of law.

(Para 74, 75)

F. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 16 – Suit for specific performance -- Absence of clause in the agreement for seeking specific performance -- Contract provides for the alternative in case of default – It cannot be a reason to decline the relief of specific performance.

(Para 79)

G. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 16 – Suit for specific performance -- Escalation of price – Effect of -- Escalation in prices cannot be a ground to decline the relief of specific performance nor the hardship on the part of vendors be a ground but still the Court is required to look into all the facts and circumstances in order to see as to whether the equity lies in favour of the plaintiff to grant the relief of specific performance -- Discretion is to be exercised based upon the sound judicial principles.

(Para 81, 82)

A. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 3(1)(r)(s) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Offence under SC/ST Act – Quashing of FIR -- Conversation on telephone -- Utterance of word in public view -- No offence is made out by a conversation on a telephone as the telephone is not a public place – FIR show that when the words were used by the petitioner, the informant had heard them over the phone and the incident does not satisfy the requirement of using the words in a public place within the public view -- Hence, even if the allegations in the FIR are assumed to be correct, no case for the commission of offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC&ST Act is made out against the petitioner.

(Para 21-23)

B. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 3(1)(r)(s) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Section 3(1)(r)(s) – Offence under SC/ST Act – Quashing of FIR -- Conversation on telephone -- FIR does not state that the words were used to humiliate the informant -- It was only said that the words used by the petitioner over the phone call amounted to insulting a member of a scheduled caste community in a public place -- Police had also not found any material to file the charge sheet against the petitioner and had prepared a cancellation report -- Thus, in these circumstances, the continuation of the proceedings would be an abuse of the process of the Court – FIR and consequential proceedings arising out of the same quashed.

(Para 26-28)

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (2 of 2016), Section 12, 18 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 363, 366, 376, 376(3) -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Section 3, 4 – POCSO – Rape -- Bail to Child in conflict with law (CIL/ Tried as an adult) -- Victim not supported the prosecution case -- For a CIL, every offence is bailable -- The law commands that CIL shall be released on bail -- Section 12 of the Act makes provision in this regard -- According to it, bail may be denied to a CIL if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to any moral, physical or psychological danger, or his release would defeat the ends of justice -- Riders, as given in the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Act are not attracted in the case -- CIL ordered be given into the custody of his father.

(Para 5-10)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Quashing of FIR – Locus standi of informant / victim -- Informant set the criminal law in motion and she cannot be aggrieved from the continuation of the proceedings and does not have any locus standi to file a petition for quashing the FIR.

(Para 1, 8)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 376 – Compromise quashing of FIR – Rape -- Offence punishable u/s 376 of IPC is not only non-compoundable but cannot be quashed based on the compromise in the exercise of the power u/s 482 of Cr.P.C.

(Para 14)