Supreme Court Monthly Digest- September 2024 With Statute And Subject Wise Index

Advocate

Advocates-on-Record can mark the appearances of only those advocates who are authorized to appear and argue the case on a particular day of hearing. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722

Legal professionals are not immune from prosecution for criminal misdeeds. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722

Strict compliance with online appearance marking protocols for advocates - Certain respondents were found absent both in person and online, despite having marked his presence through the online portal. The Court criticized this practice, emphasizing that marking presence without actual participation undermines the integrity of proceedings. The Court referenced a Supreme Court Registry circular dated 30th December 2022, which allows online presence marking only for advocates genuinely participating in hearings. To uphold procedural sanctity, the Court ordered that only advocates who are present in person or through video conferencing should be marked as attending. The Supreme Court Bar Association and the Advocates-on-Record Association were requested to ensure compliance and inform their members of this directive. Baidya Nath Choudhary v. Dr. Sree Surendra Kumar Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 645

The Court expressed its concern over the increasing number of false statements in cases involving premature release, urging the legal community to uphold the integrity of the judicial process. Virender Singh v. State, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 695

The Court underscored the duty of Public Prosecutors handling cases involving Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly in Special Courts, stating that these Prosecutors should fully recognize the responsibilities of their role, which includes acting as officers of the Court. The Court found no basis, as of the present date, to question the competence of the appointed Public Prosecutor and thus denied the request to appoint a special Public Prosecutor. Y. Balaji v. Assistant Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 652

The legal profession has an important role to play in the process. Any proceeding or application which prima facie lacks merit should not be instituted in a court. We are constrained to observe this because of late we notice that pleadings/petitions with outrageous and ex facie unbelievable averments are made with no inhibition whatsoever. This is especially so in some family law proceedings, both civil and criminal. Reading some of the averments therein, we are left to wonder whether at all the deponents were conscious of what has been written purportedly on their behalf, before appending their signatures. These misadventures directly impinge on the rule of law, because they add to the pendency and the consequential delay in the disposal of other cases which are crying for justice. It is time that such frivolous and vexatious proceedings are met with due sanctions in the form of exemplary costs to dissuade parties from resorting to such tactics. (Para 46) K. Vadivel v. K. Shanthi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 757

The Supreme Court allows all final year law students to appear in All India Bar Exam 2024. Nilay Rai v. Bar Council of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 734

The Supreme Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation to carry out a probe into a case where the petitioner denied filing any special leave petition and claimed ignorance of advocates who represented him. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

An arbitration agreement is not necessarily non-binding on a non-signatory party. Such a party, though not a signatory, may have intended to be bound through its conduct or relationship with the signatory parties. A referral court must determine the issue from a prima facie perspective; although, ultimately, it is the arbitral tribunal which shall decide the same based on evidence. Ajay Madhusudan Patel v. Jyotrindra S. Patel, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 727

Courts at referral stage must not enter into contested questions involving complex facts. Cox & Kings Ltd. v. Sap India Pvt. Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 676

Section 29A (4) r/w. (5) - Application for extending the time for passing of an arbitral award can be filed even after the expiry of the twelve-month or the extended six-month period. Rohan Builders v. Berger Paints, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 693

Section 34 and 37 - Unless the arbitral award suffers from the illegality mentioned under Section 34 of the Act, no award can be interfered with or set aside by the Appellate Courts under Section 37 of the Act. The award cannot be set aside merely for the reason that the view of the Appellate Court is a better view than the one taken by the arbitral tribunal. The award as such cannot be touched unless it is contrary to the substantive provision of law; any provision of the Act or the terms of the agreement. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. v. Sanman Rice Mills, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 754

Section 34 - Mere violation of law won't make arbitral award invalid - fundamental policy of law must be violated. OPG Power Generation v. Enexio Power Cooling Solutions, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 738

Armed Forces

Civilian Killings - FIR and subsequent proceedings quashed due to absence of mandatory sanction under Section 6 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958. Rabina Ghale v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 707

Atomic Energy Act, 1962

The petitioner, a physicist and Indian citizen residing in the US, sought a license for his technology designed to trigger nuclear fission for clean energy production with reduced radioactive waste compared to traditional fusion reactors. The petitioner contended that the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, unduly restricts the involvement of private entities in the licensing process for nuclear power. The relevant provision, Section 14 of the Act, prohibits the acquisition, production, possession, use, or disposal of prescribed substances and equipment related to atomic energy without a license, which is generally granted only to government bodies or institutions. Held, the provisions of the 1962 Act were enacted for the welfare of the people of India and to ensure strict control over nuclear energy to prevent misuse and accidents. These provisions were not arbitrary and did not infringe upon the petitioner's fundamental rights. Sandeep T.S. v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 711

Bail

Accused in custody can seek anticipatory bail for another case. Dhanraj Aswani v. Amar S. Mulchandani, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 675

Bail cannot be denied on the ground that trial is expedited. Rup Bahadur Magar @ Sanki @ Rabin v. State of West Bengal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 656

Higher thresholds for granting bail in stringent penal statutes like the PMLA, UAPA, and NDPS Act cannot be a tool to keep an accused incarcerated without trial. V. Senthil Balaji v. Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 750

If an accused approaches the High Court directly without first seeking relief from the Trial Court, it is generally appropriate for the High Court to redirect them to the Trial Court at the threshold. Nevertheless, if there are significant delays following notice, it may not be prudent to relegate the matter to the Trial Court at a later stage. Bail being closely tied to personal liberty, such claims should be adjudicated promptly on their merits, rather than oscillating between courts on mere procedural technicalities. (Para 45) Arvind Kejriwal v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 694

Imposition of a condition for the petitioner to close his YouTube channel as a prerequisite for bail which involved allegations under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, and the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Court found this condition to be unwarranted and extraneous to the bail decision. Felix Jerald v. State, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 761

Travesty of justice if a prisoner can't get benefit of bail order due to inability to furnish local surety. Ramchandra Thangappan Aachari v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 715

Long custody will enure to benefit of accused for bail when delay in trial isn't his fault. Modh. Enamul Haque v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 740

Once a court concludes that an accused is entitled to bail, the implementation of the bail order cannot be postponed. Such a postponement would violate the accused's fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Jitendra Paswan Satya Mitra v. State of Bihar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 655

Pre-trial process itself shall not become a punishment - the Supreme Court set aside a bail condition to the effect that the bail bonds be furnished by the accused after completion of 6 months in custody from the date of the order. The condition in effect put on hold the implementation of the bail order for six months. Vikash Kumar Gupta v. State of Bihar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 688

To avoid trial process itself being the punishment' : Supreme Court grants bail to undertrial; reaffirms right to speedy trial. Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 680

Bifurcation

Employees of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), who were appointed at regional levels in areas which formed part of the State of Telangana, will continue as employees of the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC), which is the successor corporation following the bifurcation of the State of AP. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. V.V. Bramha Reddy, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 665

CBI Investigation

The High Court while exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution can entrust investigation to the CBI. However, for doing so, it has to come to a reasoning as to why it finds that investigation by State police is not fair or is partisan. Merely, on the basis of some letters, such exercise is not warranted. Such an exercise of entrusting the investigation by the High Court has to be done in very rare cases. A perusal of the order passed by the learned single judge would reveal that there is not even a whisper as to why it finds the investigation by the state to be unfair or impartial so as to find it necessary to direct an enquiry to be conducted by CBI. For the very same reasons, the order passed by the learned Division Bench is also not sustainable in law. State of West Bengal v. Jashimuddin Mondal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 759

The petitioners, mother and brother of the deceased, who died in 2016 under suspicious circumstances, contended that her death was not a simple case of suicide, as initially reported by the local police. They alleged that respondent No. 7, her husband and a senior judicial officer, influenced the investigation to avoid the registration of an FIR. The appellants sought a fresh investigation, citing six ante-mortem injuries on the deceased's body and suggesting the respondent's influence compromised the initial inquiry. The High Court had dismissed their plea, directing them to pursue alternate remedies under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. However, the appellants argued that, given respondent No. 7's judicial position, they had no hope of an impartial inquiry if overseen by a subordinate magistrate. The Supreme Court, recognizing the serious nature of the allegations and the need to maintain public confidence in judicial impartiality, allowed the appeal. It ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct an independent and thorough investigation, including filing an FIR if warranted, and to submit its report expeditiously. The Court clarified that it had not commented on the merits but emphasized that its observations should not influence the CBI's investigation. The appeal was allowed. Mandakini Diwan v. High Court of Chhattisgarh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 672

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Courts cannot prepone the date of hearing without giving notice to the other party. Ranjit Singh v. State of Uttarakhand, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 737

Defendant can cross-examine plaintiff even if suit is proceeding ex-parte against him and written statement isn't filed. Ranjit Singh v. State of Uttarakhand, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 737

Order VI Rule 17 - By way of an amendment to the Plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC, the plaintiff can introduce certain aspects that are necessary to determine the issues between the parties. Delay occurred in preferring the application to amend the plaint post-commencement of the trial would not have an effect if due diligence was taken. If the aspect introduced by the plaintiff remained undecided, which ought to be decided to determine the issues between the parties, then the delay that occurred in filing an amendment application would not have much relevance. Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu Versus Suman Agarwal (Bindal), 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 739

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Age of the convict at the time of the commission of an offence would be of relevance along with other mitigating circumstances while commuting the sentence of the death penalty. Rabbu @ Sarvesh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 730

Court cannot convict one accused and acquit another when similar or identical evidence is pitted against two accused persons. Yogarani v. State by the Inspector of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 731

Courts should refrain from ordering further investigation when the party requesting further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC has not whispered about anything new in its evidence and has based its application for further investigation without averring fresh materials. K. Vadivel v. K. Shanthi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 757

Criminal cases cannot be allowed to proceed based on vague and obscure complaints. Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 753

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a Transfer Petition seeking to transfer certain criminal proceedings from the State of West Bengal. During the hearing, it was observed that the petition contained disparaging allegations against the judiciary of West Bengal, suggesting a hostile environment in the state's courts. The Court expressed disapproval of such remarks from a central investigative agency. Central Bureau of Investigation v. State of West Bengal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 732

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order declaring the appellant's petition to quash the First Information Report (FIR) as infructuous following the appellant's arrest. The Court criticized the High Court's approach, stating that the writ petition for quashing the FIR should have been addressed on its merits, regardless of the appellant's detention status. Vidhu Gupta v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 735

There is no prohibition against quashing criminal proceedings even after the charge sheet has been filed. Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 753

While deciding an appeal against the acquittal, it would be impermissible for the Appellate Courts to reverse a well-reasoned judgment rendered by the trial court. A clear finding ought to be recorded by the Appellate Court while reversing the trial court's judgment. Ramesh v. State of Karnataka, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 718

Section 160 - The proceedings arose from remarks made by the petitioner on social media regarding her exclusion from a decision-making process despite being invited by the Manipur State Transgender Welfare Board. Upon the petitioner expressing regret for her remarks and undertaking not to make similar comments in the future, the Court encouraged the respondent State to show leniency. The Advocate General for Manipur agreed to quash the proceedings, acknowledging the incident as a one-time, bona fide mistake. Consequently, the Court quashed the notice issued under Section 160 Cr.P.C. and all subsequent proceedings. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly, with the Court appreciating the State's magnanimity. Thangjam Santa Singh @ Santa Khurai v. State of Manipur, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 752

Section 195 Cr.P.C. bar not applicable when forgery was committed on document before it was given as evidence in Court. Arockiasamy v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 717

Section 319 - Order to summon additional accused passed after acquittal/conviction of co-accused is unsustainable. Devendra Kumar Pal v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 687

Section 401 - Under Section 401 (3) Cr.P.C., the High Court lacks the authority to convert an acquittal into a conviction in revision proceedings. Instead, the High Court should have remitted the matter to the appellate court for re-evaluation. C.N. Shantha Kumar v. M.S. Srinivas, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 660

Section 464 - Conviction cannot be challenged based on conversion of charges unless 'failure of justice' is proved. Baljinder Singh @ Ladoo v. State of Punjab, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 748

Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005

A statutory body like the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) cannot invoke Article 32 to seek a writ petition for enforcement of fundamental rights, as Article 32 is primarily intended for citizens. Reliefs sought by the petitioner were dismissed as they were deemed vague and beyond the scope of the statutory functions of the NCPCR under the 2005 Act. National Commission for Protection of Child Rights v. State of Jharkhand, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 763

Companies Act, 2013

Company Law Tribunals can exercise powers of rectification of the register of members under Companies Act 2013 if the applicant was a victim of an 'open-and-shut' case of fraud by his opponents. Chalasani Udaya Shankar v. Lexus Technologies, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 681

Constitutional Conduct

The Court emphasized the responsibility of all Constitutional functionaries to respect each other's roles and discouraged unwarranted comments, stressing the importance of mutual respect among the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary. Guntakandla Jagadish Reddy v. State of Telangana, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 733

Consumer

Flat possession offered without completion and firefighting certificates - Supreme Court asks developer to compensate buyer. Dharmendra Sharma v. Agra Development Authority, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 703

Revocation of power of attorney executed between landowners and builder for developing their land would not absolve the landowners from being jointly and severally liable along with the builder in a consumer case for deficiency of service. Akshay v. Aditya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 658

Right to file written statement couldn't be foreclosed if the complaint's copy wasn't supplied to the opposite party. Ricardo Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Ravi Kuckian, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 744

Contempt

Enforcement of Judicial Orders - Willful Disobedience - Deliberate non-compliance with a judicial directive to vacate premises following an eviction order. The petitioner, landlord of the premises, had secured a decree for eviction on grounds of bona fide need and non-payment of rent, which was upheld at the appellate levels. Despite the Supreme Court granting nine months' time for compliance upon dismissal of the respondent's Special Leave Petition, the respondent failed to vacate or submit an undertaking as ordered. The Court observed repeated attempts by the contemnor to delay compliance, including filing unwarranted review petitions and obstructing warrant service through misleading conduct. The Court held that willful non-compliance erodes judicial authority, diminishes public confidence, and undermines the rule of law. Recognizing the respondent's deliberate disregard for its order, the Court found him guilty of contempt but, in the interest of justice, allowed a final extension of one week to vacate the premises. Sitaram Enterprises v. Prithviraj Vardichand Jain, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 702

Supreme Court accepts Magistrate's apology for remanding accused violating sc order - Imposes Rs. 25k fine on police officer. Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah v. State of Gujarat, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 673

Supreme Court “showing magnanimity” closes contempt proceedings against an official for false affidavit, imposes Rs. 5 lakh cost on State. Ashok Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 768

Court Martial

When reasons aren't recorded to appoint a junior officer as judge advocate, court martial proceedings stand invalidated. Union of India v. Lt. Col. Rahul Arora, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 677

Custodial Death

Supreme Court delivers split verdict on police officers' convictions in decades-old custodial death case. Manik v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 747

Customs

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleged that between 2001 and 2004, the Appellant-Company colluded with Kandla Special Economic Zone (KASEZ) officials to evade countervailing duty (CVD) by declaring the invoice value instead of the maximum retail price (MRP), causing an alleged loss of 8 crore to the government. The Appellant-Company contended it had complied with legal requirements, paid refundable amounts, and received immunity from the Settlement Commission. However, the Special Judge (CBI) and the High Court rejected the company's discharge applications. The company appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing immunity and lack of fiscal liability. The Supreme Court ruled in the company's favor, stating that the prosecution was improper since immunity had been granted and no fiscal liability was established. The Court noted that the Customs Appeals Commissioner had already confirmed CVD on invoice value, not MRP, entitling the company to a refund. Consequently, the Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, labeling further prosecution as an abuse of process. Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 667

Debts Recovery

Supreme Court criticizes finance ministry for treating debts recovery tribunal as “subordinate department”, seeks explanation. Superwhizz Professionals Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 764

Demolition

Alleged involvement in crime no ground to demolish legally constructed property, such demolitions against rule of law. Javedali Mahebubmiya Saiyed v. State of Gujarat, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 691

Disability

Supreme Court directs centre to pay interest on arrears of disability pension to 1971 indo-pak war veteran who lost his right leg. Colonel Mahinder Kumar Engrs (Retd.) v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 769

Education

MBBS - Supreme Court asks medical students to make deposit towards fee arrears to get original certificates from college. Sahil Bhargava v. State of Uttarakhand, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 712

MBBS - Supreme Court allows candidate with speech and language disability to pursue medical education. Omkar Ramchandra Gond v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 770

'National Medical Commission expected to act fairly' - Supreme Court imposes Rs.10 lakh cost on NMC for challenge to medical college's approval. National Medical Commission v. Principal KMCT Medical College, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 704

NEET-UG 24 - Supreme Court rejects plea for retest by candidate suffering from hyper sweating who wasn't allowed handkerchief in exam. Talluri Srikar v. National Testing Agency, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 696

Primary School Teachers - The Supreme Court affirmed the Chhattisgarh High Court's ruling which quashed the appointments of B.Ed. degree holders as primary school teachers, reiterating that the essential qualification is a Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed). (Para 11) Navin Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 653

The Supreme Court directs IIT to admit dalit student who lost admission due to delay in paying fee. Atul Kumar v. Chairman, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 760

The Supreme Court directed all State Governments and Union Territories to implement the “Guidelines on School Safety and Security, 2021” issued by the Union Government to fix responsibility of school management to protect children from natural disasters, health hazards, abuse, violence, and accidents. Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 765

Election

Candidate duly elected in democratic process can't be stopped from assuming office. Sandeep Kumar v. Vinod, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 708

Election petition should not be rejected at threshold where there is “substantial compliance” of Representation of the People Act, 1951 provisions. Kimneo Haokip Hangshing v. Kenn Raikhan, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 698

Enemy Property Act, 1968

The petitioner challenged an order of the High Court, which had directed that no coercive action be taken until the Municipal Building Tribunal was constituted. The Supreme Court stayed this order and directed the Municipal Corporation and Custodian of Enemy Property to proceed with the identification and demolition of unauthorized constructions. Custodian of Enemy Property for India v. Md. Yakub @ Md. Yakub Ansari, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 719

Environment

If a Government Department fails to comply with an order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), the Head of the Department shall be deemed liable for such failure as per section 28 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. Katiya Haidarali Ahmadbhai v. Sanjeev Kumar IAS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 713

The Supreme Court quashed the National Green Tribunal's order to shut down a Garbage Processing Plant observing that shutting it down will be detrimental to public interest. Pune Municipal Corporation v. Sus Road Baner Vikas Manch, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 692

Evidence

A witness who gives an incriminating statement cannot take a shield under proviso of Section 132 of the Evidence Act to claim immunity from prosecution if there exists other substantial evidence or material against him proving his prima facie involvement in the crime. Raghuveer Sharan v. District Sahakari Krishi Gramin Vikas Bank, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 686

Don't accept black and white photographs without permission of court - Supreme court directs registry. Savita Rasiklal Mandan v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 682

The investigating officer had inspected the house and found no direct material, except some make-up articles. Admittedly, another woman was also residing in the same portion of the house. The High Court did take note of this fact but explained it away by observing that since that woman was a widow, the make-up articles could not have belonged to her as there was no need for her to put on make-up being a widow. In our opinion, the observation of the High Court is not only legally untenable but also highly objectionable. A sweeping observation of this nature is not commensurate with the sensitivity and neutrality expected from a court of law, specifically when the same is not made out from any evidence on record. Be that as it may, mere presence of certain make-up articles cannot be a conclusive proof of the fact that the deceased was residing in the said house, especially when another woman was admittedly residing there. (Para 27 & 28) Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma v. State of Bihar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 746

Family

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage can't be used to the advantage of the party responsible for collapse of marriage. Prabhavathi @ Prabhamani v. Lakshmeesha M.C., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 643

Supreme Court urges advocates not to file baseless petitions, flags outrageous averments in family law cases. K. Vadivel v. K. Shanthi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 757

Farmer

Shambhu Border Blockade - Supreme Court forms committee to negotiate with protesting farmers. State of Haryana v. Uday Pratap Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 642

Foreign Policy

The Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking the suspension of military exports from India to Israel amidst the ongoing war against Gaza. The Court said that it was beyond its jurisdiction to direct the Government of India to not export materials to any country, as it was a matter which was completely within the domain of foreign policy. Ashok Kumar Sharma v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 678

Guardians and Wards Act, 1890

'Parties' rights can't override child's welfare' : Supreme Court sets aside High Court Order giving father toddler's custody from maternal relatives. Somprabha Rana v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 666

Income Tax Act, 1961

Section 80DD - Deduction in respect of maintenance including medical treatment of a dependent who is a person with disability - Recent amendment to Section 80DD effective from April 1, 2023, which allows for the discontinuation of certain payments to dependents with disabilities upon the attainment of 60 years by the subscriber, as per the provisions outlined in the Finance Act, 2022. The petitioner argued for retrospective application of this amendment to benefit existing policyholders. However, the Court denied this request, stating that the amendment's intent aligns with ensuring benefits posthumously for disabled persons, thus upholding the integrity of the insurance contract. The Court concluded that the concerns of the petitioner had been adequately addressed through legislative action, and the writ petition was disposed of without further relief. Ravi Agrawal v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 650

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016

Auction-purchaser entitled to benefit of Covid limitation extension. V.S. Palanivel v. P. Sriram CS Liquidator, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 662

Free copy of NCLT Order and copy of Order obtained on paying cost are 'certified copies' for filing NCLAT appeal. State Bank of India v. India Power Corporation Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 766

In relation to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Coastal Energen Private Limited, the Supreme Court directed that the status quo which existed when the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) passed the order on September 6 will continue to operate till the NCLAT finally decided the appeal. Dickey Alternative Investment Trust v. Ahmed Buhari, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 709

Timeline to pay balance sale consideration by auction purchaser in liquidation proceedings mandatory. V.S. Palanivel v. P. Sriram CS Liquidator, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 662

Interpretation

Where the language used in an instrument/document is clear and unambiguous, only that clear expression of words is to be considered for the interpretation of the instrument, not the surrounding circumstances. Kamal Kishore Sehgal v. Murti Devi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 721

Judiciary

High Court Chief Justice cannot individually reconsider judges' appointment, must be collectively done by collegium. Chirag Bhanu Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 664

When a party is relegated to the High Court to pursue its remedies, it would not be proper, in the normal course, to bind the said High Court with directions in relation to the proceedings to be impugned before such Court. Ordinarily, this Court would leave all issues open for the party so relegated to raise and pursue before the High Court. Gagan Banga v. State of West Bengal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 736

Land

Compensation for surrendering land for public purpose once determined is payable without formal request, failure violates Article 300-A. Kukreja Construction Company v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 701

State must ensure timely payment of land acquisition compensation even if a private company is ultimately liable - Delay violates Article 300A. Ultra Tech Cement LTd v.Mast Ram, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 724

The Supreme Court set aside a judgment of the Karnataka High Court which directed HMT Ltd. and Union of India to either return land in Bangalore's Jarakabande Kaval village to heirs of a previous owner from whom it was requisitioned in 1941 or to compensate them by paying the present market value. The Court noted that the writ petition filed in the Karnataka High Court in 2006 was barred by delay and laches. The Court also noted that the petitioner had suppressed several crucial facts. HMT Ltd. v. Rukmini, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 743

The Supreme Court sets aside the grant of land acquisition compensation share to persons who purchased sites from party having no title. Lakshmesh M. v. P. Rajalakshmi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 699

The Supreme Court set aside the interim order passed by the High Court, which had directed the maintenance of status quo regarding the land acquisition and rehabilitation process for the proposed expansion of an Airport. The High Court's order had imposed a blanket stay, halting the acquisition of land and demolition of structures, pending the disposal of a writ petition filed by families affected by the expansion project. The Court vacated the interim order, taking into account the potential delays and cost overruns caused by such blanket stays on infrastructural projects. Principal Secretary v. Gaggal Airport Expansion Affected Social Welfare Committee, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 684

Labour

In this case, the Court examined whether employees in the Public Works Department, categorized under the Converted Temporary Establishment (CTE) as per the Kalelkar Award, are entitled to public holidays, including holidays on the second and fourth Saturdays of each month. The Court observed that the Kalelkar Award clearly entitles non-daily-wage employees, including CTE employees, to the government-sanctioned public holidays. Additionally, they are eligible for overtime allowances as stipulated. The appellants (employers) argued that a government circular from May 27, 1996, restricted these benefits. However, the Court found this argument baseless, noting that the circular did not apply to employees under the CTE status granted by the Kalelkar Award. The Court affirmed the Industrial Court's and High Court's rulings, which had granted the respondent-employees these benefits. Consequently, the Court dismissed the employer's appeal, directing compliance with the Industrial Court's order within eight weeks. Public Works Department v. Tukaram Pandurang Saraf, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 725

Mesne Profit

Inquiry about mesne profits continuation of original suit; application for such inquiry not barred by limitation. Choudappa v. Choudappa, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 671

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

Guidelines issued by the Legal Services Authority for deciding the disability compensation in motor accident claims ought not to be made applicable for determining just and reasonable compensation in the cases where the proof of earning has been brought on record. The guidelines would be made applicable where the proof of earning is not available and to settle such disputes in Lok Adalat. Even in the absence of evidence regarding earning, the guidelines of the Legal Services Authority are not binding on the High Court and the Supreme Court and can be used only for guidance. Hans Raj v. Oriental Insurance Company, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 714

Legal heirs of the deceased who died in the road accident can't be denied their rightful compensation on the ground that the driver of the car contributed to the accident. Sushma v. Nitin Ganapati Rangole, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 720

'Ownership' is determined by control and possession of the vehicle, especially at the time of an accident. Vaibhav Jain v. Hindustan Motors Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 649

Section 136A - Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989; Rule 167A - Implementation of - Electronic Monitoring and Enforcement of Road Safety - Section 136A requires State Governments to implement technologies like speed cameras, closed-circuit television cameras, and wearable body cameras on national and state highways, and in urban areas with populations prescribed by the Central Government. Rule 167A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, further specifies operational standards for these devices, defining "electronic enforcement devices" and setting conditions for issuing electronic challans. The Court highlighted the innovative potential of Section 136A for enhancing road safety and ensuring compliance with traffic laws. It emphasized the utility of electronic monitoring devices for real-time data collection, which aids in prosecuting traffic violators and maintaining road discipline. Effective implementation of these provisions would provide a streamlined mechanism for capturing and penalizing traffic offenses, reducing the dependency on police observations alone. The Court directed relevant authorities to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements, including the installation of electronic monitoring devices in high-risk areas, as specified in Rule 167A. It underscored the need for visible signage, physical road markings, and adherence to procedural requirements for issuing electronic challans. S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 669

Notary

Notary's omission to make entry in notarial register misconduct. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722

Partition

Co-owner whose share in the joint property remained undetermined cannot transfer the entire suit property to another person without its partition being completed by metes and bounds. Golam Lalchand v. Nandu Lal Shaw, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 705

Penal Code, 1860

Section 148, 302, and 324 - The case was based on the testimony of the deceased's widow who claimed to have identified the assailants in dim moonlight during a power cut. However, the Court found significant inconsistencies and contradictions in her deposition, particularly when compared to her earlier complaint. These contradictions raised reasonable doubts regarding the reliability of her testimony. The Court further noted that the assault occurred in a chaotic environment, complicating the identification of the attackers. Given the dubious nature of the evidence and the appellants' prolonged incarceration, the Court granted the benefit of doubt to the appellants and acquitted them of all charges. Saheb v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 716

Section 149 - Accused presence and active role within the assembly, despite a lack of direct assault or recovery of the weapon, was sufficient for his conviction. Constructive liability under Section 149 does not require personal commission of an offence; mere membership in an assembly with a shared unlawful intent suffices. Nitya Nand v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 659

Section 304A and 338 - For conviction under Section 304(A) and Section 338 of the IPC, there is no minimum sentence prescribed but the term of sentence may extend to 2 years. The sentence can also be limited to fine without any term of imprisonment. George v. State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 661

Section 304B - For a conviction under Section 304-B IPC, mere allegations of dowry demand are insufficient. There must be credible evidence of harassment or cruelty directly linked to dowry demands and occurring “soon before” the death, fulfilling the essential ingredients required to invoke Section 113-B of the Evidence Act. Shoor Singh v. State of Uttarakhand, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 726

Section 304B - When dowry demand isn't established, conviction for dowry death under S.304B IPC is unsustainable. Chabi Karmakar v. State of West Bengal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 679

Section 308 and 354B - Bail - The petitioner, a former Private Secretary to the Chief Minister of Delhi, faced allegations of assault against a Member of Parliament. While noting the investigation's completion and the petitioner's 100-day custody, the Court addressed concerns over witness influence due to the petitioner's political standing. Balancing the right to liberty with a fair trial, the Court granted bail with specific conditions to ensure witness protection and trial integrity. Key conditions included restrictions on the petitioner's official assignments, entry into the Chief Minister's residence, and public commentary on the case. The petition was disposed of, with instructions for the trial court to expedite the examination of vulnerable witnesses. Bibhav Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 646

Section 364, 302 r/w. 34 - Murder – Appeal Against Conviction – Reversal of Acquittal – Standard of Proof – Testimony of Eyewitnesses – Interested and Chance Witnesses – Circumstantial Evidence – High Court's Approach in Reversing Acquittal – Requirements for Sustaining Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence - The charge of abduction was based on direct evidence, while the charge of murder was based on circumstantial evidence. The Court scrutinized the credibility of the testimonies of eye witnesses (PW-2, PW-4, PW-5, and PW-18), who were challenged by the appellants as being interested and chance witnesses. It was observed that there was no satisfactory explanation for their presence at the crime scene, and inconsistencies were found in their accounts, particularly regarding crucial details such as the existence of a pistol allegedly used by the accused. The investigation conducted by PW-21 was found to be questionable, especially when considered against the statements of defence witnesses (DW-3 and DW-4), who were senior police officers supervising the investigation. The Court noted the non-examination of natural witnesses and the improbable conduct of the eye witnesses, which cast doubt on their testimonies. Additionally, the Court held that the High Court's approach in reversing the acquittal of A-6 and A-7 was flawed, as it did not identify any illegality, perversity, or complete unsustainability in the Trial Court's findings. The reversal of acquittal should meet a higher threshold, recognizing the presumption of innocence reinforced by the initial acquittal. The prosecution failed to provide convincing evidence of the residence of the deceased, and the post-mortem report raised doubts about the time of death, which was inconsistent with the prosecution's case. Held, the conviction by the High Court was unsustainable due to unreliable evidence and an improper approach in reversing the acquittal. The presumption of innocence in favor of the appellants was not displaced. Appeal allowed; acquittal restored. Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma v. State of Bihar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 746

Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 - Need for clear and specific allegations to proceed in criminal cases, especially in matrimonial disputes. The Court reiterated its concern over the abuse of criminal processes through general and omnibus allegations, noting that such claims, without specific details or evidence, can lead to the misuse of legal provisions intended to protect against genuine harm. When criminal proceedings are used as instruments of harassment or revenge, the judiciary has the power to intervene and prevent the miscarriage of justice by quashing such proceedings. Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 753

Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994

Section 30 - Search and seizure operation must be authorised by all three members of the District Appropriate Authority under the Act collectively, and any decision by a single member is illegal. Ravinder Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 710

Preventive Detention

Each day's delay matters in cases of personal liberty - representation against preventive detention must be decided soon. Jaseela Shaji v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 690

Failure to furnish documents relied on by detaining authority violates Article 22(5). Jaseela Shaji v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 690

Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002

Here the accused is lodged in jail for a considerable period and there is little possibility of trial reaching finality in the near future. The liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution does not get abrogated even for special statutes where the threshold twin bar is provided and such statutes, in our opinion, cannot carve out an exception to the principle of bail being the rule and jail being the exception. The cardinal principle of bail being the rule and jail being the exception will be entirely defeated if the petitioner is kept in custody as an under-trial for such a long duration. This is particularly glaring since in the event of conviction, the maximum sentence prescribed is only 7 years for the offence of money laundering. (Para 12) Vijay Nair v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 644

Section 197(1) of CrPC, which provides that prior sanction from the government is required to prosecute public servants and judges for offences alleged while discharge of public duties, will apply to cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Directorate of Enforcement v. Bibhu Prasad Acharya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 670

Provisions of PMLA will prevail over Cr.P.C. in relation to the summoning of a person. Abhishek Banerjee v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 674

Property

No transfer of title in absence of registered document - Supreme Court rejects tenant's claim for ownership based on settlement with landlord. Beena v. Charan Das, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 706

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

Create awareness about the POCSO act among children, implement sex education programs. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Desire to sexually exploit children inherent in the act of watching child sexual exploitative materials. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Don't use the term 'child pornography', instead use 'child sexual exploitative & abuse material'. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Governments have the obligation to impart sex education and create awareness among the general public about the statute. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Knowingly watching child pornography over the internet without downloading amounts to 'possession' under POCSO act. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Section 4 and 6 - Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 376 (2) and 506 - Continued use of the "two-finger test" on rape survivors, despite previous rulings condemning the practice - Referred to its earlier decisions in Lillu alias Rajesh v. State of Haryana, (2013) 14 SCC 643 and State of Jharkhand v. Shailendra Kumar Rai, (2022) 14 SCC 299, which decried the test as regressive and invasive. A circular issued by the Government of Meghalaya on June 27, 2024, prohibiting the test and mandating disciplinary action for non-compliance, was noted and placed on record. The circular directs all government doctors and medical practitioners in Meghalaya to cease conducting the test immediately, with strict disciplinary actions, including suspension and penalties, to be imposed for non-compliance. It also mandates adherence to medico-legal guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare and emphasizes the importance of compassionate care for sexual assault survivors. After reviewing the case, found no merit to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts. The Court dismissed the petition on merits, upholding the conviction, and urged full compliance with the circular. (Para 4 - 8) Sunshine Kharpan v. State of Meghalaya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 654

Sex education is not a western concept, misconception that it encourages promiscuity among youth. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Storage of child pornography without deletion or reporting indicates intention to transmit, constitutes POCSO Act offence. Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Alteration / modification / revocation of an order passed under Section 12 of the DV Act can be sought through Section 25(2) only on the basis of change of circumstances which took place subsequent to the passing of the order. S. Vijikumari v. Mowneshwarachari C., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 745

The Act is a piece of Civil Code which is applicable to every woman in India irrespective of her religious affiliation and/or social background for a more effective protection of her rights guaranteed under the Constitution and in order to protect women victims of domestic violence occurring in a domestic relationship. S. Vijikumari v. Mowneshwarachari C., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 745

Reasoning

Judgment cannot be sustained in absence of reasoning. State Project Director, UP Education for all Project Board v. Saroj Maurya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 647

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016

Disability assessment boards must apply mind - Disability assessment boards are not just monotonous automation to just look at the quantified benchmark disabilities as set out in the certificate of disability to cast aside a candidate. Such an approach would be antithetical to Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and all canons of justice, equality and good conscience. The Disability assessment boards are obliged to assess the further question as to whether the candidate, in the opinion of the experts, would be eligible to pursue the course or in other words whether the disability will or will not come in the way of the candidate pursuing the course in question. (Para 46) Omkar Ramchandra Gond v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 770

Government and private sector should focus on how to accommodate, not disqualify, candidates with disabilities. Omkar Ramchandra Gond v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 770

Mere existence of a benchmark disability is not a reason to bar a person from pursuing medical education unless there is a report by the disability assessment board that that candidate is incapacitated from studying the MBBS course. Mere quantification of the disability will not disbar a candidate and the capacity to pursue the course has to be examined by the disability assessment board. The negative opinion of the disability assessment board is not final and can be reviewed by the judicial bodies till appellate forums are created. (Para 50) Omkar Ramchandra Gond v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 770

Service

Changes to government order cannot be applied retrospectively to alter established seniority rankings. V. Vincent Velankanni v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 762

Limiting candidates for interview necessary to enhance efficiency and transparency of the selection process. Sukhmander Singh v. State of Punjab, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 749

Once the termination order is set aside and judgment of the High Court dismissing the writ petition challenging the said termination order has also been set aside, the natural consequence is that the employee should be taken back in service and thereafter proceeded with as per the directions. Once the termination order is set aside then the employee is deemed to be in service. Anantdeep Singhv v. High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 683

Mere grant of prosecution sanction against a Central Government employee is not a reason to put the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) in a sealed cover. Union of India v. Doly Loyi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 742

Resignation is not final until its acceptance is communicated to the employee. S.D. Manohara v. Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 700

The appellant, a retired IAS officer appointed as the State Vigilance Commissioner, challenged the pay scale offered to him upon his appointment, contending it was lower than that accorded to his predecessors who were granted pay parity with the Chief Secretary. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court, which was initially allowed by a Single Judge. However, this decision was reversed on appeal by the Division Bench, which upheld the original terms of the appellant's pay. Whether the appellant, who accepted the terms of his appointment unreservedly, is entitled to a pay scale equivalent to that of the Chief Secretary. Held, the appellant, having voluntarily accepted the terms of his appointment, could not later claim a higher pay scale. The Court also rejected the invocation of the "equal pay for equal work" principle, noting it was inapplicable as the post of State Vigilance Commissioner was unique with no comparable positions during the appellant's tenure. Appeal dismissed. Metongmeren Ao v. State of Nagaland, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 657

The appellant challenged a censure penalty imposed for gross negligence and indifference in the performance of his duties, asserting that he had not been afforded an opportunity to show cause prior to the imposition of the penalty, thus breaching the Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, and the principles of natural justice. The Court found that a notice had been issued by the Circle Officer seeking the appellant's explanation regarding pending investigations, and his response was deemed unsatisfactory by the senior police officials. The censure, as a minor penalty under Rule 4, was properly imposed by the Superintendent of Police, who acted within the jurisdiction conferred by the Rules. The High Court had correctly dismissed the writ petition and appeal of the appellant, upholding the validity of the censure entry in his service record. Sub Inspector Sanjay Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 758

There cannot be a discrimination amongst the homogenous class of the candidates based on their date of admission who secured admission to the same course through the same process in the same academic session while determining their eligibility for getting an appointment to a particular position. Manilal v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 685

Supreme Court imposes 1 lakh cost on man for repeated litigations to change birth date in service records. Balbir Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 689

Supreme Court upholds quashing of disciplinary proceedings against professor who couldn't join duty due to covid. Kerala Agricultural University v. T.P. Murali @ Murali Thavara Panen, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 663

When recruitment for public posts is being done, authorities shall preserve answer scripts of candidates until the process is complete, to obviate any allegations of wrong-doing. Khunjamayum Bimoti Devi v. State of Manipur, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 756

Specific Relief Act, 1963

An application under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, can be filed before the trial court even if the decree for specific performance was passed by the appellate Court. Ishwar v. Bhim Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 651

Execution Court can entertain application under Section 28 provided it's the Court which passed the decree in terms of Section 37 CPC. Ishwar v. Bhim Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 651

In the present case, the Court found substantial irregularities in the findings of the courts below concerning an agreement to sell agricultural land. The appellant-defendant challenged the authenticity of the agreement, arguing that his thumb impression had been obtained on blank stamp paper, with the agreement being transcribed later. Additionally, the respondent-plaintiff, a police constable, failed to seek departmental permission for a high-value purchase, raising further doubts about the transaction's legitimacy. After examining evidence, the Court concluded that the respondent-plaintiff's claim of a valid agreement and payment of Rs.16,00,000 as earnest money was unsubstantiated, indicating a fraudulent and concocted case. The lower courts overlooked critical factual discrepancies, warranting the Supreme Court's intervention. The Court allowed the appeal, quashing the judgments of the trial court, first appellate court, and High Court, holding them perverse and unsustainable. Lakha Singh v. Balwinder Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 755

Section 31 - It is not mandatory for a third party, against whom a sale deed is void, to seek its cancellation. Golam Lalchand v. Nandu Lal Shaw, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 705

Stamp

Insufficiently stamped document not admissible merely because it was exhibited unless deficiency is cured. Bidyut Sarkar v. Kanchilal Pal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 723

Stamp Act, 1957 (Karnataka) - Procedure for admitting insufficiently stamped instruments - Explained. Seetharama Shetty v. Monappa Shetty, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 648

Stamp Act, 1957 (Karnataka) - Levy of ten times penalty on deficit stamp duty to admit document in evidence - Approved. N.M. Theerthegowda v. Y.M. Ashok Kumar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 668

When an agreement for sale consists of a clause to hand over possession of the property, then it has to be treated as "conveyance" for the purpose of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. Therefore, the liability to pay stamp duty will arise at the time of the execution of such an agreement for sale. The fact that a sale deed was ultimately executed in pursuance of the agreement for sale and that stamp duty was paid on such sale deed will not absolve the primary liability of paying the appropriate stamp duty at the time of execution of the sale agreement. Because, in such a case, the agreement for sale is the principal document, the Court stated, referring to Explanation 1 to Article 25 of Schedule-I of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. Shyamsundar Radheshyam Agrawal v. Pushpabai Nilkanth Patil, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 741

Suppression of Facts

Such litigants have no place in Court - Supreme Court imposes Rs. 10 lakh fine on litigant company for suppression of facts. Shristi Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited v. Avishek Gupta, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 767

Tax

Technological impediment cannot be a reason to harass an assessee. Sunil Bakht v. Asst. Director of Income Tax, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 751

Temple

Supreme Court dismisses Guru Manicka Prabhu temple head's claim over Chennai's Arulmighu Kamakala Kameshwarar temple property. Siddaraja Manicka Prabhu Temple v. Idol of Arulmighu Kamakala Kameshwarar Temple, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 697

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967

The validity of sanction should be challenged at the earliest instance available, before the Trial Court. If such a challenge is raised at an appellate stage it would be for the person raising the challenge to justify the reasons for bringing the same at a belated stage. Such reasons would have to be considered independently so as to ensure that there is no misuse of the right of challenge with the aim to stall or delay proceedings. Fulleshwar Gope v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 729

The timelines mentioned in Rules 3 & 4 of the 2008 Rules are couched in mandatory language and, therefore, have to be strictly followed. This is keeping in view that UAPA being a penal legislation, strict construction must be accorded to it. Timelines imposed by way of statutory Rules are a way to keep a check on executive power which is a necessary position to protect the rights of accused persons. Independent review by both the authority recommending sanction and the authority granting sanction, are necessary aspects of compliance with Section 45 of the UAPA. Fulleshwar Gope v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 729