***

Bail -- Earlier bail cancelled by Supreme Court -- High Court granted bail without considering earlier cancellation order, CCTV evidence, eyewitness accounts, recovery of country-made pistol and conduct of accused after cancellation of bail -- Bail cancelled.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439, 82 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504, 506 and 307 -- Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Sections 3, 25 and 27 --  Cancellation of bail -- Earlier bail granted to accused cancelled by Supreme Court -- Accused failed to surrender after cancellation of bail, necessitating issuance of non-bailable warrants and initiation of proceedings under Section 82 CrPC -- High Court subsequently granted bail without adverting to reasons recorded in earlier cancellation order or identifying any changed circumstances -- High Court also failed to consider CCTV evidence, eyewitness accounts and recovery of country-made pistol at instance of accused -- Impugned order held unsustainable and set aside -- Bail cancelled and accused directed to surrender forthwith.

(Paras 23 to 37)

***

Written statement -- File remained unavailable before Trial Court during transfer proceedings -- Defence not liable to be struck off.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 8 Rule 1 -- Written statement -- Application for striking off defence dismissed -- File remained unavailable before Trial Court during period when matter was pending before District Judge in connection with transfer of case -- Written statement filed after file was received back by Trial Court -- Written statement taken on record and application for striking off defence dismissed -- No illegality, perversity or jurisdictional infirmity in impugned order.

(Paras 5 to 5.3)

***

Mesne profits -- Location of demised premises, substantial escalation in price of gold since inception of tenancy and nature of business being conducted from premises taken into consideration -- Assessment at Rs.10,000/- per month upheld.

***

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (3 of 1949), Section 13, 15 -- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 2(12) -- Mesne profits -- Appeal against eviction order -- Admitted rent Rs.700/- per month -- Appellate Authority directed tenant to pay mesne profits at Rs.10,000/- per month from date of eviction order -- No documentary evidence produced regarding prevailing rent of similarly situated shops -- Appellate Authority considered location of demised premises, substantial escalation in price of gold since inception of tenancy and nature of business being conducted from premises -- Assessment of mesne profits held neither arbitrary, unreasonable nor excessive.

(Paras 6 to 6.4)

***

Execution proceedings -- Appeal against judgment and decree pending before first Appellate Court -- Appeal directed to be decided expeditiously and execution proceedings stayed till disposal thereof.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Sections 96 and 107, Order 21 – Execution of decree -- First appeal pending – Effect of -- Execution proceedings initiated during pendency of appeal -- First Appellate Court directed to decide appeal expeditiously, preferably within six months -- Further proceedings in execution application stayed till disposal of appeal.

(Paras 6 and 7)

***

Impleadment as party -- Plaintiffs assigned and transferred their rights in suit property during pendency of suit -- Petitioner impleaded as plaintiff No.9 under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC and permitted to pursue suit from existing stage.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 22 Rule 10, Order 1 Rule 10 -- Impleadment as party -- Plaintiffs assigned and transferred their rights in suit property in favour of petitioner by registered sale deeds during pendency of suit -- Trial Court dismissed application for impleadment -- Impugned order set aside -- Relief not granted under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and petitioner ordered to be impleaded as plaintiff No.9 under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC and allowed to pursue suit from the stage at which it was pending.

(Paras 8, 11 and 12)

***

Execution of decree for possession -- Pendency of first appeal against decree -- Appellate Court directed to decide appeal expeditiously, preferably within six months, execution proceedings stayed.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Sections 96 and 107, Order 21 – Execution of decree -- First appeal pending – Effect of -- Executing Court dismissed objections and issued warrants of possession -- Execution proceedings stayed during pendency of appeal -- Impugned order set aside -- Appellate Court directed to dispose of appeal expeditiously, preferably within six months.

(Paras 6 and 7)

***

Defence struck off – Non-filing of written statement -- Overly strict approach had been adopted by Trial court -- One effective opportunity granted subject to costs.

***

Constitution of India, Article 227 -- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 8 Rule 1 -- Written statement -- Defence struck off for non-filing of written statement -- Application seeking opportunity to file written statement dismissed -- Overly strict approach had been adopted by Trial court -- Impugned orders set aside subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- -- One effective opportunity granted to file written statement -- No further opportunity to be granted. (Paras 7 and 8)

(Paras 6 to 8)

***

Evidence -- Closure of evidence -- Opportunity to examine party as witness -- Matters should be decided on merits rather than technicalities -- Orders closing evidence and refusing recall set aside subject to payment of costs.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) -- Evidence -- Closure of evidence -- Opportunity to examine party as witness -- One effective opportunity to lead and conclude evidence ought to be granted where party seeks to examine himself as a witness -- Matters should be decided on merits rather than technicalities -- Orders closing evidence and dismissing application for recall set aside subject to payment of costs.

(Paras 7 to 9)

***

Rejection of plaint -- Existence of cause of action has to be examined solely from averments in plaint -- Defence of defendant cannot be considered at that stage.

***

Rejection of plaint -- Specific performance -- Whether writing constitutes a valid and enforceable agreement is a matter requiring evidence and adjudication at trial -- Plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on that ground.

***

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 7 Rule 11 -- Rejection of plaint -- Cause of action -- Whether cause of action is disclosed has to be determined only from averments contained in plaint -- Defence raised by defendant cannot be taken into consideration while deciding application for rejection of plaint.

(Para 4)

B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 7 Rule 11 -- Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10 -- Specific performance -- Agreement to sell -- Whether writing constituted a valid and enforceable agreement can be determined only after parties lead evidence and Court appreciates such evidence -- Plaint not liable to rejection at threshold on plea that no valid agreement came into existence.

(Para 5, 6)

***

Court fee -- Refund of excess court fee -- Issue of court fee is a matter between plaintiff and Court -- Issuance of notice to defendants and affording them opportunity of hearing not necessary.

***

Court Fees Act, 1870 (7 of 1870), Sections 10 and 11 -- Refund of court fee -- Excess court fee -- Issue of court fee is a matter between plaintiff and Court -- Defendants have no role to play in adjudication of claim for refund of excess court fee -- Issuance of notice to defendants and affording them opportunity of hearing not necessary.

(Para 9, 10)

***

Co-sharer property -- Purchaser from co-sharer acquires only such rights and possession as vendor himself possessed and cannot claim exclusive possession unless vendor was in exclusive possession of specific khasra numbers.

***

Permanent injunction -- Joint property -- Co-sharer in joint possession is not entitled to injunction restraining other co-sharers from alleged interference on basis of claim of exclusive possession not proved.

***

Revenue record -- Exclusive possession -- Burden of proof -- Failure to produce revenue record showing vendor's exclusive possession prior to sale deed is fatal to claim of exclusive possession by vendee.

***

Additional evidence -- Relevancy -- Sale deed relating to different khasra numbers and executed by a person not party to suit is neither relevant nor necessary for adjudication of dispute and cannot be permitted in appeal.

***

A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 8 -- Co-sharer property -- Sale by co-sharer -- Vendor being co-sharer in joint property could transfer only such rights and possession as he himself possessed -- Purchaser cannot claim exclusive possession unless vendor was established to be in exclusive possession of specific khasra numbers at time of sale.

(Paras 13 to 16)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 38 -- Permanent injunction -- Joint possession -- Vendor not proved to be in exclusive possession of suit land -- Purchaser held only a co-sharer in joint possession -- Not entitled to injunction restraining other co-sharers from interference with suit property.

(Paras 14 to 16)

C. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 34 -- Revenue record -- Khasra Girdawari -- Exclusive possession -- Khasra Girdawari reflected possession of different co-sharers and joint possession of suit land -- Absence of any revenue record showing exclusive possession of vendor prior to execution of sale deed negatived purchaser's claim of exclusive possession.

(Paras 14 and 15)

D. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 41 Rule 27 -- Additional evidence -- Additional evidence sought to be produced related to different khasra numbers and purchase of share from a person not party to suit -- Evidence neither relevant nor necessary for adjudication of appeal -- Application rightly dismissed.

(Para 16)

***

Ancestral property -- Estate inherited by unmarried and issueless brother from common ancestor attained character of self-acquired property in his hands.

***

Ancestral property -- Father could not suffer consent decree in favour of one son to exclusion of other son having a right by birth in the property.

***

Ancestral property -- Property in which plaintiff had a right by birth could not be subjected to family settlement excluding him.

***

A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 6 -- Property inherited from ancestor -- Nature of property -- Estate inherited by unmarried and issueless brother from common ancestor attained character of self-acquired property in his hands.

(Para 15)

B. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 6 -- Ancestral property -- Consent decree -- Father had no authority to suffer consent decree in favour of one son to exclusion of other son in respect of ancestral property -- Plaintiff acquired right in property by birth -- Decree not binding to extent of plaintiff's share.

(Para 16)

C. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 6 -- Ancestral property -- Family settlement -- Subject matter of family settlement being ancestral property in which plaintiff had a right by birth could not be subjected to family settlement excluding plaintiff.

(Para 16)

***

Execution proceedings -- Conditional warrants of arrest -- Where decree provides recovery by sale of mortgaged property, arrest of judgment-debtor cannot be resorted to without first proceeding against mortgaged property.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Section 51, Order 21 Rule 37 -- Execution of decree -- Arrest of judgment-debtor -- Decree directing recovery of amount through sale of mortgaged property first -- Execution Court is required to proceed against mortgaged property before resorting to coercive arrest of judgment-debtor -- Conditional warrants of arrest held unsustainable.

(Paras 4 to 6)

***

Withdrawal of suit -- Suit for injunction based on alleged construction is disputed by defendant and material on record shows no such construction -- Withdrawal with liberty to refile cannot be permitted.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 23 Rule 1 -- Withdrawal of suit with liberty to institute fresh -- Suit for injunction based on alleged construction is disputed by defendant and material on record shows no such construction -- Withdrawal with liberty to refile cannot be permitted -- Dismissal of application upheld.

(Paras 6 to 9)

***

Status quo order -- Allegation that respondents/plaintiffs violated status quo by starting business/working in shops -- Even then, petitioner/defendant cannot unilaterally seal shops during subsistence of status quo order.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 -- Status quo order -- Allegation that respondents/plaintiffs violated status quo by starting business/working in shops -- Even then, petitioner/defendant cannot unilaterally seal shops during subsistence of status quo order -- Such action held unsustainable and direction for de-sealing upheld.

(Paras 2 and 3)

***

First appeal -- Substantial compliance with Order 41 Rule 31 CPC -- Detailed reappreciation by First Appellate Court sufficient to sustain reversal of Trial Court decree.

***

Fraud -- Registered GPA-based sale transactions – Plaintiff failed to establish that transactions were mere loan-security arrangements or were vitiated by fraud – Burden of proof remains on plaintiff; in absence of foundational facts, presumption of genuineness of registered sale transactions stands.

***

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. V of 1908), Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 31 – First Appellate Court, being the final court on facts, is required to independently reappreciate entire evidence and assign reasons while reversing Trial Court decree – Requirement is of substantial compliance and not mere technical formality – Detailed reappreciation of oral and documentary evidence, including loan transactions, Exs. B7 and B9, possession, mutation entries, limitation and conduct of parties, held sufficient compliance – Judgment not liable to be interfered with on ground of alleged non-compliance with Order XLI Rule 31 CPC.

(Para 40-42)

B. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (Act No. IV of 1882), Sections 53A, 54 and 55 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act No. 1 of 1872), Sections 101 to 103 – Registered GPA – Execution of sale deeds pursuant to GPAs – Fraud alleged -- Burden of proof – Appellant executed registered GPAs in favour of respondents; original title deeds were handed over and registered sale deeds executed followed by mutation entries and subsequent transfers – Burden to prove that transactions were only loan-security arrangements and not genuine sale transactions lies upon the plaintiff – Mere allegation of fraud or fiduciary misuse is insufficient without foundational facts – Burden does not shift to respondents unless foundational facts are first established.

(Paras 43, 44)

C. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (Act No. IV of 1882), Sections 54 and 55 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act No. 1 of 1872), Sections 101 to 103 and 114 – Registered sale deeds pursuant to GPA – Fraud alleged – Delay and conduct – Appellant executed registered GPAs and sale deeds in 1998; mutation entries continued for several years and multiple subsequent transactions were effected – No cancellation of GPAs or legal action for nearly a decade – Explanation of delayed knowledge rejected in view of appellant and PW-1 being engaged in real estate business – Non-examination of appellant and attesting witnesses to receipts and GPAs – No expert evidence of forgery or interpolation – Plea of forgery of Exs. B7 and B9 rejected – Appeal dismissed.

(Paras 45-58)

***

Lambardar -- Appointment upheld as proclamation was duly conducted and petitioner failed to apply in time; Collector’s choice found non-perverse -- Writ petition dismissed.

***

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 – Constitution of India, Articles 226/227 – Appointment of Lambardar – Mustri munadi/proclamation – Challenge to appointment – Record showing due proclamation in village including entry in rojnamcha and statements of Panchayat members – Petitioner failed to apply within prescribed time and thus has no locus standi – Financial Commissioner upheld Collector’s order after comparative assessment of candidates and found no perversity in Collector’s decision – Choice of Collector in Lambardar appointment not to be interfered with unless perverse – Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 not to be exercised to re-appreciate merits – Writ petition dismissed.

(Paras 7 to 9)

***

Partition of land -- Challenge to concluded partition proceedings under Haryana Land Revenue Act -- No objection raised at stage of mode of partition/Naksha Bey/Naksha Jeem -- Tubewell land already allotted and landlocked khasra not entitled to separate Rasta -- Partition upheld as involving equitable adjustment and not mathematical precision -- Writ petitions dismissed.

***

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (Act No. XVII of 1887), Sections 111, 114, 116, 118, 121, 122 and 125 -- Constitution of India, Articles 226/227 -- Partition proceedings -- Mode of partition -- Clause providing that partition will be carried out while maintaining possession -- Petitioners challenging partition on ground of violation of mode of partition, non-allotment of tubewell land, absence of Rasta and unfair partition -- Petitioners already allocated area where tubewell installed has been allotted to them -- No reasonable basis to claim entire Killa number -- Claim for separate Rasta rejected as land found landlocked and not abutting any existing revenue passage -- No occasion for providing Rasta to land locked area -- Petitioners did not raise objections to mode of partition or Naksha Bey and Naksha Jeem at relevant stage -- Partition proceedings completed with Sanad Taksim -- Partition cannot be carried out with mathematical precision and adjustments are required depending upon various factors including possession, location, nature and value of land and passage -- Writ petitions dismissed.

(Paras 7 to 12)

***

Circumstantial evidence -- Murder -- Last seen together theory, extra-judicial confession and recoveries failed to establish a complete chain of incriminating circumstances linking accused to the murder -- Conviction set aside and accused acquitted.

***

Circumstantial evidence -- Last seen together theory -- Where time gap is large and possibility of intervening circumstances exists, last seen circumstance cannot be treated as an incriminating circumstance against accused.

***

Extra-judicial confession -- Weak piece of evidence -- Exculpatory statement implicating co-accused and made while accused were detained by villagers lacks credibility and cannot form basis of conviction.

***

Recovery of weapon -- Recovery from an open and accessible place without proof of concealment does not satisfy requirements of Section 27.

***

Murder -- Circumstantial evidence -- Motive -- Absence of motive assumes significance where chain of circumstances is not complete and raises a reasonable doubt.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302 and 34 -- Murder -- Circumstantial evidence -- Last seen together theory, extra-judicial confession and recoveries failed to constitute a complete chain of incriminating circumstances pointing only to guilt of accused -- Conviction set aside and accused acquitted.

(Paras 18 and 20)

B. Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Sections 3 and 114 -- Circumstantial evidence -- Last seen together theory -- Proximity between last seen circumstance and death is essential -- Where time gap is large and possibility of intervening circumstances exists, last seen circumstance cannot be treated as an incriminating circumstance against accused.

(Paras 7 to 9)

C. Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Sections 24 and 30 -- Extra-judicial confession -- Weak piece of evidence -- Exculpatory statement absolving maker and implicating co-accused is inherently unreliable -- Alleged confession made while accused were detained by villagers under accusation of murder lacked credibility and could not form basis of conviction.

(Paras 10 and 11)

D. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 27 -- Recovery of weapon -- Concealment and knowledge of accused are crucial ingredients of discovery under Section 27 -- In absence of any statement regarding concealment, recoveries made from an open and accessible place do not qualify as recoveries under Section 27 -- Recoveries are of no avail.

(Paras 12 to 15)

E. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 -- Murder -- Circumstantial evidence -- Motive -- Though motive is not imperative where chain of circumstances is so complete as to establish only a hypothesis of guilt, absence of motive assumes significance where prosecution case raises a reasonable doubt.

(Para 17)

***

Attempt to murder -- No material suggesting prior planning, preparation or concerted intention to cause death -- Incident having occurred suddenly when complainant intervened in ongoing altercation, prosecution failed to establish requisite intention or knowledge under Section 307 IPC -- Conviction altered from Section 307/34 IPC to Section 325/34 IPC.

***

Attempt to murder -- Ingredients of offence -- Intention or knowledge to commit murder coupled with an overt act towards its commission are essential -- Nature of injury is not decisive and even simple injuries may attract Section 307 IPC where requisite mens rea is established.

***

Grievous hurt -- Ocular version corroborated by medical evidence -- Participation of accused in causing injuries proved beyond reasonable doubt -- Fractures in both parietal bones near midline with neurological complications and prolonged hospitalization constituted grievous hurt -- Conviction under Section 325/34 IPC justified.

***

Attempt to murder -- Intention -- Words "such intention" in Section 307 IPC refer to intention contemplated under Section 300 IPC -- In absence of proof of intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, conviction under Section 307 IPC cannot be sustained, though such intention may be inferred from weapon used, motive, part of body targeted, nature of injuries and surrounding circumstances.

***

Attempt to murder -- Injury dangerous to life -- Gravity of injury by itself is not determinative of offence under Section 307 IPC and intention to commit murder cannot be presumed merely because injuries were opined to be dangerous to life.

***

Attempt to murder -- Weapons used were ordinary lathis which, in facts of case, could not be regarded as inherently deadly weapons -- No conduct indicative of determined effort to cause death -- Offence held to fall under Section 325 IPC and not Section 307 IPC.

***

Sentence -- Conviction altered from Section 307 IPC to Section 325 IPC -- Accused having undergone substantial period of imprisonment and remained on bail for long period, sentence reduced to period already undergone -- Fine of Rs.50,000/- each directed to be paid to injured, with six months' simple imprisonment in default.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 307 and 325 -- Attempt to murder -- Voluntarily causing grievous hurt -- No material suggesting prior planning, preparation or concerted intention on part of accused to cause death of complainant -- Incident occurred suddenly when complainant intervened in ongoing altercation -- Assault arose in heat of moment and as spontaneous reaction rather than pursuant to any pre-conceived intention to eliminate complainant -- Prosecution failed to establish requisite intention or knowledge necessary to attract Section 307 IPC -- Conviction altered from Section 307/34 IPC to Section 325/34 IPC.

(Paras 33 to 38)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 307 -- Attempt to murder -- Ingredients of offence -- To constitute offence under Section 307 IPC, prosecution must establish both intention or knowledge to commit murder and an overt act towards commission thereof -- Conviction can be sustained only where, had death ensued from such act, offence of murder punishable under Section 302 IPC would have been made out -- Nature of injury not determinative -- Accused cannot be acquitted merely because injuries inflicted were simple in nature, intention or knowledge being the decisive factor.

(Paras 26 and 27)

C. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 320 Seventhly, 320 Eighthly and 325, 34 -- Grievous hurt – Common intention -- Injured witness and eyewitness consistently attributed specific roles to accused -- Ocular version corroborated by medical evidence -- Participation of accused in causing injuries proved beyond reasonable doubt -- Fractures in both parietal bones near midline accompanied by neurological complications and prolonged hospitalization -- Conviction under Section 325/34 IPC justified.

(Paras 29, 36, 37)

D. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 307 and 300 -- Attempt to murder -- Intention -- Words "such intention" occurring in Section 307 IPC refer to intention contemplated under Section 300 IPC -- Intention to cause death, intention to cause such bodily injury as offender knows to be likely to cause death, or intention to cause bodily injury sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death must be established -- In the absence of proof of intention, a conviction under this provision cannot be sustained -- Intention, however, can be inferred from surrounding circumstances, such as the type of weapon employed, the words spoken by the accused at the time of the incident, the motive behind the act, the parts of the body targeted, the nature and extent of the injuries inflicted, as well as the force and manner in which the blows were delivered.

(Paras 31 and 32)

E. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 307 -- Attempt to murder -- Injury dangerous to life -- Gravity of injury by itself cannot be determinative of offence under Section 307 IPC -- Intention to commit murder cannot be presumed merely because injuries were ultimately opined to be dangerous to life.

(Para 35)

F. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 307 and 325 -- Attempt to murder -- Weapons used were ordinary lathis -- Though capable of causing grievous hurt depending upon manner of use, could not in facts of case be regarded as inherently deadly weapons -- No conduct indicative of determined effort to cause death -- Offence held to fall under Section 325 IPC.

(Paras 34 and 38)

G. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 325 -- Sentence -- Conviction altered from Section 307 IPC to Section 325 IPC -- Accused had undergone substantial period of imprisonment and remained on bail for long period -- Sentence reduced to period already undergone -- Fine of Rs.50,000/- each imposed payable to injured, with six months' simple imprisonment in default.

(Paras 40 to 42)

***

Anticipatory bail -- Complainant induced to part with Rs.3.55 crores towards purchase of property and thereafter property transferred to third party -- Civil remedy no ground to dilute criminal allegations -- Anticipatory bail, cancelled.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B and 34 -- Anticipatory bail -- Cancellation of -- Allegation of inducing complainant to part with Rs.3.55 crores towards purchase of property and thereafter transferring property to third party -- High Court granted anticipatory bail on grounds that agreement to sell was unregistered, entire sale consideration had not been paid and complainant had sought refund of amount paid -- Criminal antecedents of accused, seriousness of allegations, magnitude of economic offence and requirements of investigation not considered -- Mere availability of civil remedy or demand for refund does not efface allegations of cheating and fraud -- Grant of anticipatory bail held to be an improper exercise of discretion -- Anticipatory bail, cancelled.

(Paras 14 to 22)

***

Dishonour of cheque -- Vicarious liability -- Complaint must be read as a whole -- Participation in antecedent financial transactions and execution of documents constitutes sufficient foundation for prosecution under Section 141 N.I. Act -- Mere status as office-bearer, without specific role in transaction, insufficient to attract liability.

***

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Sections 138, 141 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 482 -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Vicarious liability -- Society -- Office-bearers -- Quashing of complaint -- High Court quashed proceedings against Vice-President, Treasurer, Executive Member and Manager of borrowing Society on ground of absence of specific averments -- Complaint alleging respondents were in-charge of and responsible for affairs of Society -- MoU, promissory notes and allied financial documents showing participation of Vice-President, Treasurer and Manager in underlying borrowing transaction -- Treasurer also signatory to dishonoured cheque -- Complaint required to be read as a whole and not in isolated fragments -- Participation in antecedent financial transactions and execution of documents constituted sufficient foundational material for continuation of prosecution against Vice-President, Treasurer and Manager -- No specific role, document or material connecting Executive Member with transaction -- Mere status as office-bearer, without specific role in transaction, insufficient to attract liability -- Quashing set aside qua Vice-President, Treasurer and Manager and upheld qua Executive Member.

(Paras 27 to 43)

***

Further investigation -- Third round of further investigation without leave of Magistrate -- Civil dispute given criminal colour -- Abuse of process of law -- FIR and chargesheet quashed.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 173(8) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 193(9) -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 and 34 -- Further investigation -- Permission of Magistrate -- Requirement of -- Closure reports filed twice recording dispute to be civil in nature -- Third round of further investigation undertaken and chargesheet filed without obtaining leave of Magistrate -- Permissibility of -- Business dispute relating to alleged joint venture, investment and sharing of profits -- Allegations arising out of commercial relationship between parties -- No satisfactory explanation for delayed allegations of forgery -- Held, obtaining leave of Magistrate for further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C./Section 193(9) BNSS is a necessary requirement -- Chargesheet founded on unauthorized further investigation unsustainable -- Dispute predominantly civil in nature and continuation of criminal proceedings amounted to abuse of process of law -- FIR, chargesheet and all consequential proceedings quashed.

(Paras 8 to 15)

***

Appeal against acquittal -- Reversal of acquittal -- Conviction by appellate court -- Sentencing -- Appellate court cannot remit matter to trial court for hearing on sentence and imposition of sentence after recording conviction.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 235(2), 386(a) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Sections 258, 427 -- Appeal against acquittal -- High Court reversed acquittal and convicted appellant under Sections 376 and 312 IPC -- Instead of hearing appellant on question of sentence, High Court directed trial court to take appellant into custody and impose sentence after hearing him -- Permissibility of -- Appellate court convicting accused for first time after reversing acquittal is itself required to hear him on question of sentence and thereafter pass sentence according to law -- Judicial function of sentencing cannot be delegated to trial court -- Direction remitting matter to trial court for imposition of sentence set aside -- Matter remitted to High Court for hearing appellant on sentence and passing appropriate sentencing order.

(Paras 12 to 22)

***

Promotion -- Non-communication of ACRs -- Destruction of service records during pendency of litigation -- Award of fractional marks without enabling provision -- Adverse inference against employer -- Prejudice in consideration for promotion -- Entitlement to notional promotion and pensionary benefits.

***

Constitution of India, Articles 14, 16 -- Service Law – Promotion -- Non-communication of ACRs -- Destruction of service records -- Appellant's ACR entries were never communicated despite specific request -- Relevant service records/ ACRs weeded out during pendency of judicial proceedings though required to be preserved till conclusion of litigation -- Selection Committee awarded appellant 19.5 marks though promotion policy contemplated only whole-number grading and no provision for fractional marks existed -- Adverse inference liable to be drawn against respondents -- Cumulative effect of non-supply of ACRs, destruction of service records and unexplained award of fractional marks established prejudice in consideration for promotion -- Appellant held entitled to notional promotion to HAG grade and consequential refixation of pensionary benefits -- Arrears of salary for period prior to retirement declined.

(Paras 13 to 19)

***

Cruelty -- General and omnibus allegations -- Letters allegedly written by deceased -- Handwriting not proved and contents vague -- No reliance can be placed thereon -- Conviction cannot be sustained in absence of specific instances, particulars or reliable evidence.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 498-A and 304-B -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), Section 4 -- Cruelty -- Dowry demand -- Suicide by wife -- Acquittal -- Trial Court acquitted accused under Section 304-B IPC holding that demand of dowry was not proved -- Conviction under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act recorded on basis of oral testimony and letters allegedly written by deceased -- Allegations of dowry demand and cruelty found general and omnibus without specific instances, particulars or identification of persons making demands -- Alleged letters not proved in accordance with law, handwriting of deceased not established and contents did not disclose any definite harassment or cruelty -- Held, evidence fell short of establishing cruelty or unlawful demand within meaning of Section 498-A IPC -- Conviction unsustainable -- Judgments of Trial Court and High Court set aside -- Appellant acquitted.

(Paras 2, 5 to 12)

***

Rejection of plaint -- Cause of action -- Res judicata -- Plaint disclosed cause of action challenging sale deed on grounds of fraud and absence of consideration -- Plea of res judicata held premature at stage of Order VII Rule 11 CPC -- Revision dismissed.

***

Constitution of India, Article 227 -- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 7 Rule 11 -- Rejection of plaint -- Cause of action -- Res judicata -- Defendant sought rejection of plaint on grounds that no cause of action was disclosed and suit was barred by principle of res judicata due to pendency of another suit and counter-claim -- Plaintiff sought declaration that sale deed was null and void on account of fraud and absence of consideration -- Held, plaint clearly disclosed cause of action and truthfulness of averments cannot be examined at stage of Order VII Rule 11 CPC -- Whether suit is barred by res judicata requires consideration of evidence and relevant judgment/decree and cannot be decided at preliminary stage before framing of issues and leading of evidence -- No ground made out for rejection of plaint -- Revision petition dismissed.

(Paras 3 to 6)

***

Civil suit -- Expeditious disposal -- Issues framed in year 2022 -- No witness examined till date -- Trial Court directed to decide suit expeditiously and avoid unnecessary adjournments.

***

Constitution of India, Article 227 -- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908) -- Civil suit -- Delay in trial -- Petitioner sought direction for time-bound disposal of civil suit -- Issues framed on 30.11.2022 -- Thereafter parties kept filing various applications resulting in no progress of suit -- No witness examined till date -- Held, continued delay likely to prolong adjudication of suit -- Trial Court directed to dispose of suit as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments -- Revision petition disposed of.

(Paras 4 and 5)

***

Consumer complaint -- Execution proceedings -- Expeditious disposal -- Execution application pending since 2020 -- State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission requested to decide execution application expeditiously in light of directions of Supreme Court regarding time-bound execution.

***

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (35 of 2019), Sections 71 and 72 -- Constitution of India, Article 227 -- Execution proceedings -- Delay in disposal -- Petitioner sought directions for expeditious decision of execution application arising out of consumer complaint -- Execution application pending since year 2020 -- Held, in view of directions issued by Supreme Court for time-bound conclusion of execution proceedings, Executing Commission obligated to make sincere efforts for expeditious disposal -- State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab requested to decide execution application as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law -- Revision petition disposed of.

(Paras 4 to 6)

***

Ex parte decree -- Setting aside of -- Limitation -- Application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC filed nearly three years after passing of ex parte decree -- Limitation in case of defendant having appeared in proceedings runs from date of decree and not from date of knowledge -- Mere engagement of counsel does not absolve litigant from duty to remain vigilant and monitor litigation -- Application rightly held barred by limitation -- Revision dismissed.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 9 Rule 13 -- Ex parte decree -- Setting aside of -- Limitation -- Petitioner sought setting aside of ex parte judgment and decree on plea that counsel ceased appearing without informing her and she acquired knowledge of decree only upon receipt of communication during execution proceedings -- Application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC filed nearly three years after ex parte proceedings and without any application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay -- Held, where defendant has appeared in proceedings, limitation for filing application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC runs from date of decree and not from date of knowledge -- Litigant cannot shift entire burden upon counsel and remains under obligation to remain vigilant and maintain contact with engaged counsel -- No sufficient cause shown for inordinate delay -- Application rightly held barred by limitation -- No illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in appellate order -- Revision petition dismissed.

(Paras 11 to 15.1)

***

Senior citizen -- Maintenance Tribunal/Appellate Tribunal -- Coram non judice -- Tribunals required to comprise three members as per Haryana Government notification -- Orders passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate alone held without proper coram -- Matter remanded for fresh decision.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007), Sections 7 and 15 -- Maintenance Tribunal -- Appellate Tribunal -- Composition of Tribunal -- Coram non judice -- Challenge to orders cancelling transfer deeds -- Haryana Government Notification dated 08.12.2020 prescribed three-member Maintenance Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal consisting of one official member and two non-official members under chairmanship of Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate respectively -- Impugned orders passed solely by Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate -- Held, orders passed without the mandatory coram and therefore void being coram non judice -- Impugned orders set aside -- Matter remanded to Maintenance Tribunal for fresh decision after affording opportunity of hearing to parties -- Tribunal directed to decide matter through complete coram in accordance with notification.

(Paras 2 to 4)

***

Senior citizen -- Transfer in favour of minor grandson -- Cancellation of transfer deed -- No obligation of maintenance could reasonably be expected from minor transferee -- Proceedings under Act found to be misuse of process arising out of matrimonial/custody dispute.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007), Sections 4, 16 and 23 -- Cancellation of transfer deed -- Transfer in favour of minor grandson -- Petitioner sought cancellation of transfer deed executed in favour of minor grandson on ground that her son was not maintaining her and there was apprehension of alienation of property -- Transfer deed executed when transferee was about 7-8 years of age -- Held, no obligation of maintenance could reasonably be expected from a minor child dependent upon others for his own sustenance -- Grounds pleaded by petitioner did not satisfy requirements of Section 23 of the Act -- Proceedings under Act found to have genesis in matrimonial/custody dispute after custody of minor was handed over to his mother -- Invocation of provisions of Act amounted to misuse of process -- Petitioner, however, entitled to reside in house during her lifetime and property not to be alienated during her lifetime.

(Paras 7 to 12)

***

Life imprisonment -- Modification of sentence -- Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC and having undergone 23 years, 6 months and 3 days of actual imprisonment -- Held, sentence modified to period already undergone.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 53 and 45 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 433-A, 386 and 401 -- Murder -- Life imprisonment -- Modification of sentence -- Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC and having undergone 23 years, 6 months and 3 days of actual imprisonment -- Whether life sentence can be modified to a fixed-term sentence -- Held, life imprisonment ordinarily means imprisonment for the remainder of natural life subject to constitutional and statutory remission powers -- However, Supreme Court and High Courts are empowered to impose a modified or fixed-term sentence exceeding fourteen years and may convert life imprisonment into a specified term of incarceration -- Considering that appellant was about 21 years of age at the time of occurrence, incident was of the year 1998 and appellant had already undergone more than 23 years of actual imprisonment, sentence modified to period already undergone while maintaining conviction -- Appeal partly allowed.

(Paras 8 to 18)

***

Criminal Appeal against Acquittal -- Hostile prosecutrix -- Prosecution evidence insufficient -- Truncated trial justified -- No perversity in acquittal.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 161, 164, 378 -- Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), Section 67 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 376-D, 509, 506, 120-B, 201 -- Appeal against acquittal -- Truncated trial -- Sexual assault case -- Prosecutrix turned hostile and categorically denied rape, stating allegations were based on mistaken belief regarding fake photographs/videos -- No credible material to support charge under Section 67 IT Act as FSL report uncorroborated and electronic evidence not proved – Alleged relationship found to be consensual on record – Trial Court truncated proceedings and acquitted accused holding further trial would be an empty formality – Prosecution evidence is wholly insufficient  -- Acquittal based on appreciation of evidence calls for no interference – Acquittal upheld.

(Paras 9-20)

***

Quashing of FIR -- Multiple proceedings -- Where FIR and complaint are founded on identical substratum of facts, continuation of parallel proceedings before different fora is impermissible and amounts to abuse of process.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 156(3) -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 469, 505 -- Constitution of India, Articles 20(2) and 21 – Quashing of FIR – Multiple proceedings – Test of sameness – Abuse of process – Where FIR and complaint proceedings arise from the same substratum of facts, continuation of parallel proceedings is impermissible and amounts to abuse of process of law -- It is well settled that there cannot be multiple FIRs in respect of the same occurrence, and splitting of a single transaction by changing the nomenclature of offences is not permissible – Held, the substratum of allegations in the impugned FIR and the earlier complaint before the Ld. CJM, Srinagar, being identical and arising from the same alleged social media activity, continuation of the FIR is unsustainable -- FIR and consequential proceedings quashed.

(Paras 6, 14 to 22)

***

Anticipatory Bail -- POCSO offences – Rape with minor (S.65 BNS) -- Subsequent statement of prosecutrix before Magistrate that FIR was lodged under influence of relatives and police and that she has married the petitioner and has no objection to bail -- Bar under Section 482(4) BNSS not attracted -- Bail granted.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 482 -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Sections 4, 6, 12, 15 -- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 64, 65, 75, 351, 352 -- Anticipatory bail – Rape with minor (S.65 BNS) -- Sexual exploitation of minor by accused, serving in Indian Army -- Prosecutrix subsequently recorded statement before Magistrate stating she was in love with petitioner, FIR was lodged under influence of relatives and police officials and that she has now married the petitioner -- Prosecutrix expressed no objection to grant of bail -- Held, in view of changed circumstances and stand of prosecutrix, petitioner entitled to be released on bail in the event of arrest -- Bail granted subject to conditions -- Bar under Section 482(4) BNSS not attracted in facts of the case.

(Paras 1 to 12)

***

Quashing of FIR -- Inherent powers of High Court -- Proceedings can be quashed where they are manifestly mala fide or instituted with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance or private grudge, to prevent abuse of process of law and secure ends of justice.

***

Quashing of FIR -- Election speech -- Allegations of abusive remarks against Prime Minister of India -- Ingredients of Sections 125 of Representation of the People Act and 504 IPC not made out -- FIR and proceedings quashed.

***

A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 528 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Inherent powers of High Court – Quashing of FIR -- Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him/her due to private and personal grudge, High Court, while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.PC can proceed to quash the proceedings.

(Para 11)

B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 528 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Representation of the People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951), Section 125 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 504 -- Quashing of FIR -- Allegations that petitioner made abusive remarks against Prime Minister of India during election speech and violated Model Code of Conduct -- Final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. contains vague and omnibus allegations without specific particulars of words used -- Held, ingredients of Section 125 R.P.C. Act not satisfied as there is no material showing promotion of enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language -- Further held, essential ingredients of Section 504 IPC missing as no material to show intentional insult with intent or knowledge to provoke breach of public peace -- Complainant not the person allegedly provoked, allegations vague and unsupported by material evidence -- Powers under Section 528 BNSS/Section 482 Cr.P.C. reiterated to be exercised to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice -- FIR and consequential proceedings held to be an abuse of process of law and quashed.

(Paras 18 to 24)

***

Senior Citizen -- Three-member Maintenance Tribunal – Validity of order passed by sole Sub-Divisional Magistrate -- Held, order passed is without jurisdiction as statutory composition not followed – Matter remanded back to Maintenance Tribunal.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007), Section 7 -- Haryana Government notification dated 17.11.2016 – Three members Maintenance Tribunal -- Order passed by Maintenance Tribunal solely by Sub-Divisional Magistrate assailed -- Held, order passed coram non judice and without jurisdiction as statutory composition not followed -- Such order is a nullity in the eyes of law -- Appellate Tribunal also erred in upholding such order and dismissing appeal -- Both orders set aside -- Matter remanded to the Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

(Paras 2 to 7)

***

Physical possession of secured asset – Continued non-execution of order under Section 14 defeats very object and purpose of SARFAESI Act and is contrary to settled legal position -- Costs of Rs.50,000/- each imposed upon States of Haryana and Punjab -- Respondent No.2 directed to hand over physical possession within two months

***

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002), Sections 14 and 17 -- Constitution of India, Article 226 – SARFAESI -- Physical possession of secured asset -- Order passed by District Magistrate under Section 14 remained unexecuted for approximately nine months despite repeated notices and communications seeking police assistance -- Respondent authorities failed to implement order passed under Section 14 -- Held, role of District Magistrate under Section 14 is administrative in nature and not adjudicatory -- Any dispute or challenge raised by borrower against action of secured creditor lies within exclusive jurisdiction of Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of Act -- Continued non-execution of order under Section 14 defeats the very object and purpose of SARFAESI Act and is contrary to settled legal position -- Costs of Rs.50,000/- each imposed upon States of Haryana and Punjab -- Respondent No.2 directed to hand over physical possession within two months subject to there being no subsisting stay or prohibitory order passed by competent Court or Tribunal -- Liberty granted to petitioner to move appropriate application in case of non-compliance.

(Paras 7 to 20)

***

Senior Citizens -- Appellate Tribunal -- District Magistrates/Presiding Officers of Appellate Tribunal are not authorized to sub-delegate quasi-judicial functions and powers vested in them under Act of 2007.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007), Sections 7, 15 -- Appellate Tribunal -- Quasi-judicial powers – Delegation of – Permissibility of -- District Magistrates/Presiding Officers of Appellate Tribunal constituted under notification dated 15.07.2008 are not competent to delegate or sub-delegate quasi-judicial functions and powers to any subordinate or other officer irrespective of rank or competence -- Order passed by Additional District Magistrate set aside and matter remanded to District Magistrate-cum-Appellate Tribunal for fresh adjudication under Section 16 of Act of 2007.

(Paras 4-6)

***

Promotion -- Eligibility -- Employee already working as Junior Engineer (O&M) (Civil) prior to 2020 Amendment Rules held entitled to consideration for promotion notwithstanding non-recognition of diploma obtained through part-time/distance mode.

***

Promotion -- Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) -- Delay in holding meeting -- Right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right and employees cannot be made to suffer on account of failure of authorities to convene DPCs regularly and timely.

***

A. Punjab Municipal Corporation Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) (Amendment) Rules, 2020 -- Promotion -- Assistant Corporation Engineer (O&M) (Civil) -- Eligibility -- Petitioner promoted as Junior Engineer (O&M) (Civil) prior to coming into force of 2020 Amendment Rules -- Proviso to Rules specifically protected existing members of service notwithstanding educational qualification -- Respondents wrongly held petitioner ineligible on ground that diploma obtained through part-time/distance mode was not recognized -- Petitioner held entitled to consideration for promotion after completion of seven years’ service as Junior Engineer.

(Paras 11 to 14)

B. Constitution of India, Articles 14, 16, 226, 227 -- Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) -- Delay in holding DPC -- Right to be considered for promotion – Fundamental right -- DPCs required to be convened regularly and timely to avoid stagnation and ensure career progression of eligible employees -- Right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right under Article 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution -- Delay in convening the DPC not only causes financial loss to the concerned officers on account of delayed promotion to the next higher grade, but also adversely impacts their future career progression, as it correspondingly postpones their eligibility for further advancement – Held, respondents are mandated to hold DPCs every three months (quarterly) during every calendar year so that employees can get promotions against vacant posts in time.

(Paras 14 to 18)

***

Kidney transplantation -- Swap donation -- Near relative -- Mother-in-law held to fall within definition of “near relative” for purpose of swap transplantation.

***

Kidney transplantation -- Swap donation -- Non-near relative -- Object of 1994 Act is to prevent misuse of organs of poor persons and there is no bar on transplantation of organ of a human being into non-near relative.

***

A. Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 (42 of 1994), Sections 2(i), 9(3), 9(3-A) -- Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014, Rule 7 -- Swap donation -- Near relative -- Mother-in-law -- Authorization Committee rejected request for swap transplantation on ground that mother-in-law does not fall within definition of “near relative” -- Expression “means” used in Section 2(i) cannot be interpreted narrowly and definition cannot be treated as exhaustive -- Considering object of Act, prevailing family structure and purposive interpretation, mother-in-law held to be covered within expression “near relative” for purpose of swap donation under Section 9(3-A) -- PGIMER directed to proceed with transplantation subject to compliance of legal and medical formalities.

(Paras 7, 10 to 15, 19)

B. Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 (42 of 1994), Sections 9(3), 9(3-A) -- Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014, Rule 7(3), 7(4) -- Kidney transplantation -- Non-near relative -- Swap donation -- Donation of human organ to non-near relative permissible with approval of Authorization Committee -- Object of 1994 Act is to prevent misuse of organs of poor persons and there is no bar on transplantation of organ of a human being into non-near relative -- Matter required to be examined on parameters laid down under Rule 7(3).

(Paras 16 to 18)

***

MACT -- Negligence -- In a claim under Section 163A, negligence is not required to be proved and it is sufficient that injury is reasonably connected with motor vehicle in question.

***

MACT -- Standard of proof -- Claim petition under Act to be decided on touchstone of preponderance of probability and not proof beyond reasonable doubt and discrepancies in record cannot defeat claim when occurrence of accident and injuries sustained by claimant stand established.

***

MACT – 100% Permanent disability – Claim under section 163A -- Supreme Court in exercise of powers under Article 142 determined compensation by drawing guidance from principles governing claims under Section 166.

***

A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 163A -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Negligence -- In a claim under Section 163A, negligence is not required to be proved and it is sufficient that injury is reasonably connected with motor vehicle in question.

(Para 8)

B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 163A -- Injuries sustained in accident -- Standard of proof -- Claim petition under Act to be decided on touchstone of preponderance of probability and not proof beyond reasonable doubt -- Discrepancies in FIR, medical record, vehicle number or treatment papers not sufficient to defeat claim when police investigation, chargesheet and evidence on record establish occurrence of accident and injuries sustained by claimant -- Absence of perfect proof cannot be ground to deny compensation under welfare statute.

(Paras 7 to 19, 23)

C. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Sections 163A, 166 -- Constitution of India, Article 142 -- Permanent disability -- Claim under Section 163A -- Claimant suffered 100% permanent disability and died during pendency of proceedings -- Strict confinement to Section 163A held not to serve interests of justice -- Supreme Court in exercise of powers under Article 142 determined compensation by drawing guidance from principles governing claims under Section 166 -- Compensation of Rs.14,90,000/- with 6% interest awarded.

(Paras 20 to 28)

***

Probate of Will -- Criminal investigation -- Testamentary jurisdiction -- High Court while exercising testamentary jurisdiction does not cease to be Constitutional Court possessing inherent and plenary powers and can exercise constitutional powers to protect estate.

***

Probate of Will -- Perjury -- Section 340 of the Code held applicable to all proceedings in all Courts in criminal cases or civil cases irrespective of fact whether matter involves offence mentioned in Section 195 Cr.P.C.

***

A. Indian Succession Act, 1925 (39 of 1925), Sections 247, 269, 300 -- Constitution of India, Article 215 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 340 -- Probate of Will -- Testamentary jurisdiction -- Administrator pendente lite -- Court-monitored investigation -- Jurisdiction of High Court -- Challenge to order of High Court directing court-monitored criminal investigation into affairs of deceased -- Primary function of Probate Court is to adjudicate execution and genuineness of Will -- However, High Court while exercising testamentary jurisdiction does not cease to be Constitutional Court possessing inherent and plenary powers -- If High Court notices glaring irregularities or element of mischief played by executor, it cannot remain silent spectator and can exercise plenary and constitutional powers to protect estate.

(Paras 29 to 41)

B. Indian Succession Act, 1925 (39 of 1925), Sections 247, 269, 300 -- Constitution of India, Article 215 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 340 -- Probate of Will -- Perjury -- Exercise of powers by High Court -- Under Section 340(3)(a), where Court making complaint is High Court, an officer of that Court may be appointed to make complaint -- Since High Court was exercising testamentary jurisdiction, it was permissible for officer of High Court registry to make complaint -- Object and scope of Section 340 is to institute enquiry and ascertain whether any offence affecting administration of justice has been committed in relation to any document produced or given in evidence in Court -- Section 340 of the Code held applicable to all proceedings in all Courts in criminal cases or civil cases irrespective of fact whether matter involves offence mentioned in Section 195 Cr.P.C.

(Para 41)

***

Circumstantial evidence -- Acquittal -- High Court found prosecution failed to establish complete chain of circumstances and allowed appeal and set aside conviction --Supreme Court declined interference under Article 136.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 364, 302, 396, 201 and 120-B -- Constitution of India, Article 136 -- Circumstantial evidence -- Murder -- Appeal against acquittal -- Prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence including last seen theory, recoveries and alleged disclosure statements -- High Court found prosecution failed to establish complete chain of circumstances and allowed appeal and set aside conviction -- Non-examination of independent witness allegedly present at time of recovery of dead body created serious doubt regarding prosecution claim that recovery was made pursuant to disclosure statement of accused -- Recoveries of tape recorder, wrist watch and towel not connected with crime through legally admissible evidence -- Suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute proof -- When two views are possible and High Court adopts plausible view, Supreme Court would not interfere with acquittal unless findings are perverse or result in miscarriage of justice -- Appeals dismissed.

(Paras 24 to 43)

***

Senior citizen -- Appellate Tribunal -- District Magistrates/Presiding Officers not authorized to sub-delegate quasi-judicial functions and powers vested under Act of 2007.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007), Section 16 -- Instructions dated 27.10.2025 -- Appellate Tribunal -- Delegation of powers -- Permissibility of – Impugned order not passed by the statutory authority, i.e. District Magistrate, but by an authority exercising sub-delegated powers, i.e. Additional Deputy Commissioner – Held, District Magistrates/Presiding Officers of Appellate Tribunals not authorized to sub-delegate quasi-judicial functions and powers vested in them by statute – Impugned Order set aside and matter remitted to District Magistrate-cum-Appellate Tribunal concerned for adjudication afresh in accordance with Section 16 of Act of 2007 -- Alienation of property in question ordered to remain stayed till final decision in appeal.

(Paras 3 to 10)

***

Senior citizen -- Right to residence -- Willingness of petitioner to keep mother with him subject to condition that petitioner’s siblings would not be permitted to enter house in question -- Writ petition dismissed with costs.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007), Section 23 -- Senior citizen -- Right of entry and residence -- Maintenance Tribunal directed son to vacate one room situated on ground floor, construct a separate bathroom within period of three months and provide basic amenities -- Appellate Tribunal affirmed order -- Willingness of petitioner to keep mother with him subject to condition that petitioner’s siblings would not be permitted to enter house in question -- Petitioner unable to point out any illegality or infirmity in exercise of power by Maintenance Tribunal -- Writ petition dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/-.

(Paras 1 to 13)

***

Murder and dowry cruelty -- Deceased subjected to persistent harassment for motorcycle and cash demand -- Medical evidence proving homicidal hanging -- Husband failed to explain injuries sustained by deceased in matrimonial home -- Conviction under Sections 302 and 498A IPC upheld.

***

Burden of proof -- Murder inside matrimonial home -- Husband failed to explain homicidal death of wife -- Adverse inference rightly drawn under Section 106 of Evidence Act.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302 and 498A – Murder -- Dowry demand and cruelty -- Deceased repeatedly subjected to torture for motorcycle and cash demand -- Several panchayat meetings and resolutions effected for compromise -- Direct evidence of father and other witnesses regarding persistent cruelty and harassment -- Deceased found hanging in matrimonial home where appellant-husband was present -- Medical evidence proving simulated hanging/homicidal hanging -- Appellant failed to offer any explanation regarding injuries sustained by deceased prior to death -- Defence of suicide belied by overwhelming medical evidence -- Conviction under Sections 498A and 302 IPC upheld.

(Paras 25 to 31)

B. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 106 -- Murder inside house -- Burden of proof -- Where offence takes place inside privacy of house, corresponding burden lies upon inmates of house to give cogent explanation as to how victim succumbed -- Appellant-husband failed to discharge burden or explain homicidal death of wife inside matrimonial home -- Adverse inference rightly drawn against appellant.

(Paras 29 to 31)

***

Circumstantial evidence -- Murder -- Recovery of articles -- Recovery of empty phials of calmpose injection, clothes worn and rope at instance of appellant proved through testimony of Investigating Officer -- Viscera report showing diazepham present -- Merely because panch witnesses turned hostile cannot be ground to discard important piece of evidence if recovery is proved through Investigating Officer -- Conviction under Section 302 IPC upheld.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302 and 149 -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 27 -- Murder -- Circumstantial evidence -- Recovery of articles -- Empty phial of calmpose injection, clothes worn by appellant and rope recovered at instance of appellant -- Prosecution case that accused persons initially administered calmpose injection to deceased persons and thereafter caused injuries resulting in death -- Postmortem report showing shock due to external and internal injuries on vital parts and excessive blood loss -- Viscera report showing diazepham present -- Recovery not vitiated merely because panch witnesses failed to support prosecution case -- Recovery proved through testimony of Investigating Officer -- Recovery held proved -- Conviction upheld.

(Paras 15 to 21)

***

Criminal medical negligence -- Anaesthetist giving telephonic post-operative pain management advice after duty hours cannot be held criminally liable for subsequent procedural lapse committed by staff nurse in administering injection -- Criminal proceedings quashed.

***

Criminal negligence -- In absence of direct proximate nexus between telephonic painkiller advice and death caused by acute coronary insufficiency due to 80% coronary blockage, criminal liability of appellant-anaesthetist not sustainable.
***

Medical negligence -- Constitution of expert panel without anaesthetist in case involving epidural anaesthesia rendered medical opinion unreliable and contrary to safeguards laid down in Jacob Mathew, (2005) 6 SCC 1 -- Criminal prosecution unsustainable.

***

Criminal proceedings and civil proceedings -- Exoneration in civil proceedings -- Appellant-doctor having been exonerated on merits by Consumer Forum and such finding attaining finality, continuation of criminal prosecution on identical allegations held abuse of process of law.

***

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304-A -- Criminal medical negligence -- Rash and negligent act -- Degree of negligence -- Anaesthetist whose duty hours had concluded cannot be held criminally liable for a subsequent procedural error committed by a staff nurse -- Appellant merely suggested administration of painkiller over telephone, which constituted standard medical advice for post-operative pain management and not gross criminal recklessness -- Failure of nurse to accurately locate epidural space may at best amount to deficiency in service giving rise to civil liability, but lacked gross culpability or mens rea necessary to attract Section 304-A IPC -- Essential ingredients of criminal negligence absent -- Criminal proceedings quashed.

(Paras 19, 20, 24, 25)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304-A -- Criminal negligence -- Proximate cause -- Requirement of direct nexus (causa causans) between negligent act and death -- Painkiller advised by petitioner over telephone -- Deceased found having asymptomatic 80% coronary artery blockage -- Medical evidence proving immediate cause of death to be acute coronary insufficiency resulting in heart attack -- Chain of causation too remote to fasten criminal liability upon appellant-anaesthetist -- Criminal prosecution unsustainable.

(Para 28)

C. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Medical negligence -- Expert opinion – Requirement of independent competent medical opinion -- Case relating to administration of epidural anaesthesia -- Constitution of expert panel without anaesthetist -- Effect -- Absence of specialist in concerned branch rendered panel incompetent to evaluate technical nuances of epidural anaesthesia and catheter management -- Reliance on such flawed expert report contrary to safeguards laid down in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab -- Criminal prosecution unsustainable.

(Paras 26, 27)

D. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Criminal proceedings and civil proceedings -- Exoneration in civil proceedings -- Effect -- Consumer Forum after detailed appreciation of evidence exonerating appellant-doctor from liability -- Finding attained finality qua the appellant -- Where exoneration on merits holds allegations wholly unsustainable, continuation of criminal prosecution on identical facts amounts to abuse of process of law.

(Paras 21 to 23)