Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: September 4 – September 8, 2023
1) Attempt to murder| Actions were not premeditated: SC reduces sentence of convict from 5 to 3 years rigorous imprisonment
The Court in an attempt to murder case noted that the Accused had no prior criminal record, and there was no evidence to show that the actions were pre-meditated. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Court reduced the sentence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) of the Appellant from five years to three years of rigorous imprisonment.
In this case, the Appellant was convicted of attacking a person trying to protect his crops from the Appellant and his co-accused. The High Court affirmed the Trial Court’s conviction of the Appellant.
Cause Title- Pramod Kumar Mishra v. The State of U.P.
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol
2) Supreme Court invokes Article 142 to grant promotion in UP subordinate office recruitment case
The Court while invoking Article 142 of the Constitution granted promotion to four candidates in a case that revolved around the recruitment to ministerial Group "C" posts in subordinate offices in Uttar Pradesh, governed by the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Offices Ministerial Group "C" Posts of the Lowest Grade (Recruitment by Promotion) Rules, 2001. These rules were framed under the authority of Article 309 of the Constitution.
Rule 5 of the said Rules specified that 20% of the ministerial Group "C" posts of the lowest grade should be filled through promotion from Group "D" employees. Out of this 20%, 15% is allocated for Group "D" employees who passed the High School examination and completed five years of service, while the remaining 5% is for those who passed the Intermediate examination.
Cause Title- Rajendra Prasad & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
3) Workmen Compensation Act: Appeal from commissioner's order can be entertained only if there exists substantial question of law
The Court held that an appeal under the Workmen Compensation Act (WCA) against the commissioner's order is sustainable if a ‘substantial question of law’ is to be decided or if the findings are perverse.
The Court allowed a Civil Appeal challenging the High Court's decision that overturned the Commissioner’s order. The Commissioner granted compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased employee, who died after being struck by a log while tying logs onto a trailer.
Cause Title- Fulmati Dhramdev Yadav & Anr. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol
4) Section 162 CrPC does not prevent Trial judge to examine chargesheet suo moto or asking questions from witnesses to contradict them
The Court clarified that Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) does not impede a Court’s inherent power to examine documents or engage witnesses in questioning, even when this occurs suo motu or on the Court’s own initiative.
In this case, the Court was hearing an appeal filed by an accused convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 10-year-old girl. The central issue that emerged during the trial was the glaring contradiction between the statements given by witnesses to the police during the initial investigation and their subsequent testimony in Court.
Cause Title- Munna Pandey v. State of Bihar
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice BR Gavai, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
5) "Some police officers seem to be oblivious to fundamental rights" - SC criticizes Telangana police's trend of passing illegal preventive detention orders
The Court criticized the pernicious trend prevalent in the state of Telangana of ignoring the fundamental rights of citizens and curbing their liberty while issuing preventive detention orders.
In this case, the Court was hearing a plea against the order of the High Court refusing to set aside a preventive detention order against the husband of the appellant.
Cause Title- Ameena Begum v. The State of Telangana & Ors.
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta
6) Mere living in particular house wouldn't mean that it is under ownership of person living therein in his individual capacity
The Court while validating a sale deed observed that mere living in a particular house would not by itself mean that the said house is under ownership of the person who is living therein in his individual capacity.
The Court upheld the decision of the High Court validating a sale deed done in 1983 holding that the petitioner society failed to substantiate its claims of the deceased respondent's ownership of other property in the society's area of operation or any violation of sale deed conditions or society bye-laws. The challenge in these appeals was against the common judgment arising out of multiple writ petitions filed in the High Court based on similar facts.
Cause Title- Purushottam Bagh Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. v. Shobhan Pal Singh & Anr. Etc.
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
7) If another appointment is taken up by govt servant with proper permission, it can’t be termed as resignation from public service
The Court clarified that as per Karnataka Civil Service Rules, if another appointment is taken up by a government servant with proper permission, then it cannot be termed as resignation of public service.
The Court said this in a case wherein the appellant had assailed the tenability and validity of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court, Circuit Bench at Gulbarga whereby the order passed by the Single Judge allowing the petition holding that the appellant had lien over his previous post and directing respondent-University to pay service and pensionary benefits, was set-aside.
Cause Title- L.R. Patil v. Gulbarga University, Gulbarga
Date of Judgment- September 4, 2023
Coram- Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
8) Though cross examination as in civil court is not followed in summary NCDRC procedure, it is open to file interrogatories
The Court, while upholding an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) that the Appellant-Petitioner was not able to establish the minimal evidence required to prove a preponderance of possibility of his case, held that while cross-examination similar to that in Civil Court would not be followed in summary procedures before the NCDRC, it would be permissible in normal circumstances to file interrogatories related to statements made in an affidavit. The Court, however, held that the failure on the part of the Appellant to adopt that course of action to discredit an expert opinion against him was not detrimental to his case.
The Court dismissed a Civil Appeal filed by an individual claiming that the suffered from ‘myositis’ due to an adverse reaction to the vaccine Engerix-B and challenging the order of the NCDRC. The NCDRC had dismissed his claim seeking Rs. 90 lakh as compensation from the Respondent company that formulated the Engerix-B vaccine.
Cause Title- Prakash Bang v. Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Anr.
Date of Judgment- September 5, 2023
Coram- Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
9) In absence of declaration that amount was illegally demanded, either direction to pay interest or compensate for pendente lite period would not arise
The Court denied the claim for interest on the deposited amount during the pendente lite period in these appeals, where the main issue was regarding the claim for payment of interest on the refund of an amount deposited by charitable institutions (the appellants) with the Delhi Development Authority to avail the benefit of additional floor area ratio (FAR) for construction purposes.
In this case, the Delhi Development Authority, through a notification, had specified rates for various charges related to enhanced FAR as per the Master Plan of Delhi 2021, including charges for institutional plots. The appellant in one of the appeals challenged this notification in a writ petition before the High Court.
Cause Title- Lal Bahadur Shastri Educational Society & Anr. v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.
Date of Judgment- September 5, 2023
Coram- Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
10) Burden on accused kicks in when last seen theory is established: Supreme Court while acquitting murder convict
The Court allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court in a murder case. The Court stressed the need for corroborative evidence in circumstantial cases and held that in the absence of such corroboration, it could not conclude that the chain of circumstances pointed definitively to the appellant's guilt.
In this case, the appellant and another individual were co-accused in a murder case. Both were initially acquitted by the trial court. The prosecution alleged that the appellant and the co-accused had murdered the victim due to his illicit relationship with the appellant's sister. They were also accused of attempting to destroy evidence by burning the victim's body.
Cause Title- R. Sreenivasa v. State of Karnataka
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
11) Strict adherence to Rule 142(2) of BSF rules is warranted before accepting plea of guilty- SC upholds High Court's order setting aside punishment of dismissal
The Court while upholding the High Court's order of setting aside punishment of dismissal of a constable who was accused of taking photographs of a lady doctor while she was taking a bath has observed that strict adherence to Rule 142(2) of the Border Security Force (BSF) is warranted before accepting the plea of guilty.
Finding that the High Court was justified in finding the dismissal of the original petitioner based on the plea of guilty unwarranted and liable to be set aside in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court held that that on the accused pleading guilty, before a finding of “Guilty” is recorded, the Summary Security Force Court (SSFC) is not only required to ascertain whether the accused understands the nature and meaning of the charge to which he has pleaded guilty but it must also inform the accused of the general effect of that plea and of the difference in procedure which will be made by the plea of guilty.
Cause Title- Union of India and Ors. v. Jogeshwar Swain
Date of Judgment- September 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Manoj Mishra and Justice J.B Pardiwala
12) Offence can be brought within ambit of Sec 304 part-II IPC if there was no premeditation to cause death or genesis of occurrence
Emphasizing on the absence of premeditation and the short duration of the incident, the Court find that the appellant had confronted the deceased in a fit of rage but had no intention to kill her, and therefore altered the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, resulting in appellant's release based on sentence served.
In this case, a criminal case involving the appellant, a convict-accused, challenged the judgment passed by the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court, whereby the appellant's conviction and sentence was upheld. The prosecution's case revolved around the unfortunate events leading to the demise of deceased (Sangeetha), who had been in a relationship with the appellant.
Cause Title- N. Ramkumar v. State
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat
13) Delayed filing of FIR gives opportunity for deliberation & guesswork especially when incidents occur at night in open place or public street
The Court while acquitting the murder accused observed that delay in the filing of the FIR gives an opportunity for deliberation and guesswork especially when the incidents occur at night in an open space or public street.
The Court acquitted two murder-accused appellants citing the benefit of doubt while allowing two appeals that challenged a common judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court that had upheld the conviction and sentencing of the appellants for murder.
Cause Title- Harilal Etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Date of Judgment- September 5, 2023
Coram- Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
14) It is permissible for legislature to remove defect in earlier legislation both prospectively and retrospectively in accordance with Constitution
While reminding the powers allotted by the Indian Constitution and stating that it would be permissible for the legislature to remove a defect in an earlier legislation, the Court held that such kind of defect can be removed prospectively and retrospectively by a legislative process and previous actions can also be validated.
The Court held so while deciding a question as to whether by enacting the Amendment and Validation Act of 1997, the Himachal Pradesh State Legislature has validly removed the basis of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court dated Mar 27, 1997, whereby it was held not to include within its scope, the activity of the appellants in providing gratis transport facilities for their employees and their children.
Cause Title- NHPC Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice B. V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
15) Don't adopt hyper-technical approach, no need to continue agony of mere status without living together: SC while granting divorce
The Court held that the Trial Court and High Court should avoid adopting a hyper-technical and pedantic approach when assessing a divorce decree.
The Court allowed a Civil Appeal filed by the Appellant/wife challenging the High Court's order. The Trial Court had rejected the divorce Petition filed by the Appellant on the ground of cruelty, which the High Court affirmed.
Cause Title- Smt. Roopa Soni v. Kamalnarayan Soni
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh
16) Purchaser of goods for commercial use by himself for earning livelihood by self-employment is consumer u/s. 2(d) of Consumer Protection Act
The Court while deciding a pivotal issue in the appeal revolving around the interpretation of the term "Commercial Purpose" as defined in Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 held that the appellants qualified as ‘consumers’.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission had dismissed the complaint on the grounds of maintainability, which was under appeal.
Cause Title- Rohit Chaudhary & Anr. v. M/s Vipul Ltd.
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar
17) Punjab Police Rules| SP is authorised to terminate any probationary employee failing to meet required standards
The Court noted that the probationary constable (Respondent) was not terminated due to misconduct but simply dismissed. The Court observed that the Respondent showed no interest in training and lacked a sense of responsibility. Therefore, he was discharged by the Superintendent of Police (SP) as he failed to prove himself as an efficient police officer. The Court noted that the SP, under Rule 12.21 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (PPR), has the authority to terminate any probationary employee who does not meet the required service standards.
The Court allowed a Civil Appeal filed by the State against the judgment of the High Court, which had upheld the decision of the Trial Court. The Trial Court had awarded a decree to a constable of the Punjab Police who was terminated from employment.
Cause Title- The State Of Punjab And Others v. Jaswant Singh
Date of Judgment- September 5, 2023
Coram- Justice J.K Maheshwari and Justice K.V Viswanathan
18) Complaints under Section 138 of NI Act are not time-barred: Supreme Court while setting aside High Court's order
The Court held that the complaints under Section 138 of the NI Act were not time-barred allowing an appeal challenging a judgment passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court which quashed criminal proceedings against Respondent No. 2 related to complaints filed against the accused under Section 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) for dishonoring a cheque.
Cause Title- K. Hymavathi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
19) IBC| Merely because liquidator has discretion of carrying out multiple auction it would not necessarily mean that he has power to cancel valid auction
The Court while explaining the powers of a Liquidator in the auction process observed that merely because a Liquidator has the power to carry out multiple auction, it would not mean that he can cancel or abandon a valid auction.
A company filed for insolvency against another company, leading to the initiation of the insolvency resolution process. After the corporate debtor went into liquidation, a liquidator was appointed, and an auction for its assets was announced. The appellant submitted a bid and was declared the winner, but the liquidator canceled the auction and scheduled a new one. The appellant challenged the cancellation in the Tribunal, which directed the liquidator to communicate with the appellant about the balance payment. A bank (Respondent No.1) appealed this decision to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which upheld the cancellation and ordered a fresh auction. The appellant, dissatisfied with NCLAT's decision, filed the instant appeal.
Cause Title- Eva Agro Feeds Private Limited v. Punjab National Bank & Anr.
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
20) Maximum statutory punishment under JJ Act is 3 years: SC directs release of juvenile murder convict incarcerated for 12 years
The Court directed the release of a juvenile convicted of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), who was imprisoned for 12 years.
The Court allowed a Writ Petition seeking verification of Petitioner’s claim of juvenility. The Court noted that the Petitioner was a juvenile at the time of the incident and cited Sections 15(1)(g) and 16 of the JJ Act. The Court noted that the maximum period, the Petitioner could have been in custody for a maximum of three years and therefore, could not be detained any further.
Cause Title- Makkella Nagaiah v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Date of Judgment- September 5, 2023
Coram- Justice B. R. Gavai, Justice P.S Narasimha, and Justice Sanjay Kumar
21) IRDAI Regulations 2015 prohibit levy of any fee for recording assignment of policies- SC dismisses LIC's appeal
The Court held that LIC had no right to claim fees of Rs.250/- for recording the endorsement of assignment or transfer. The issue revolved around Section 38 of the Insurance Act, of 1938, which pertained to the assignment and transfer of life insurance policies.
The Court held that as per the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (Fee for granting written acknowledgement of the receipt of Notice of Assignment or Transfer) Regulations, 2015, there is no provision in the said regulations which prescribes the levy of any fee for recording the assignment of policies.
Cause Title- Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Dravya Finance Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol
22) Being a recognized State party, request for allotment of plough symbol by J&K national conference was legitimate & bonafide
While deciding the controversy relating to non-allocation of the Plough symbol to the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (first Respondent) for its candidates to contest the then-upcoming General Elections of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Kargil (LAHDC), the Court quashed the entire election process, initiated pursuant to Notification dated Aug 02, 2023 issued by the Administration of Union Territory of Ladakh, Election Department, UT Secretariat, Ladakh, under S.O.53 published vide No.Secy/Election/2023/290-301.
Briefly, keeping in view that the upcoming General Election of LAHDC stands announced, the petitioner-party was directed to approach the office of the respondents for notifying the reserved symbol (plough) already allotted to it and respondents shall notify the symbol allotted to petitioner-party in terms of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, and allow the candidates set up by the petitioner-party to contest on the reserved election symbol (plough) already allotted to the party. The appeal against such order was dismissed.
Cause Title- Union Territory of Ladakh and Ors. v. Jammu & Kashmir National Conference and Anr.
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
23) Willful breach of assurance in form of undertaking given by counsel on behalf of his client to court would amount to civil contempt
In a notable legal case, while addressing an interconnected Contempt of Court appeals arising from deliberate disobedience of a Court undertaking recorded in 2015, the Court emphasized on the deterrent role of contempt proceedings and rejected insincere apologies where the case involved parties found guilty of contempt by the High Court of Gujarat, leading to fines and imprisonment.
The Court held that although Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 does not render a transfer pendente lite void yet the court while exercising contempt jurisdiction may be justified to pass directions either for reversal of the transactions in question by declaring the said transactions to be void or proceed to pass appropriate directions to the concerned authorities to ensure that the contumacious conduct on the part of the contemnor does not continue to ensure to the advantage of the contemnor or anyone claiming under him.
Cause Title- Balwantbhai Somabhai Bhandari v. Hiralal Somabhai Contractor
Date of Judgment- September 6, 2023
Coram- Justice J. B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra
