Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 864 To 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 894

SUBJECT WISE INDEX

Abortion

Foetus has no separate identity from its mother; Women can't be forced to undergo pregnancy at risk of physical and mental trauma. In the matter of Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 881

Advocate

Absence of Advocate - The order sheet of that date records that the advocate for the appellant was absent. It also notes that the arguments were heard, and judgment was reserved. The impugned judgment does not refer to any submission canvassed on behalf of the appellant. The High Court has, thus, committed illegality by deciding the appeal against the conviction preferred by the appellant without hearing the appellant or his advocate. After finding that the advocate appointed by the appellant was absent, the High Court ought to have appointed a lawyer to espouse his cause. (Para 11) Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870 : 2023 INSC 887

Advocates cannot claim right of legal representation under Industrial Disputes Act: Supreme Court answers reference. ThyssenKrupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd. v. Suresh Maruti Chougule, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 868

Acquiescence

Acquiescence would mean a tacit or passive acceptance. It is implied and reluctant consent to an act. In other words, such an action would qualify a passive assent. Thus, when acquiescence takes place, it presupposes knowledge against a particular act. From the knowledge comes passive acceptance, therefore instead of taking any action against any alleged refusal to perform the original contract, despite adequate knowledge of its terms, and instead being allowed to continue by consciously ignoring it and thereafter proceeding further, acquiescence does take place. (Para 21) Bichitrananda Behera v. State of Orissa, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883 : 2023 INSC 902

Acquiescence and Delay and Laches - Distinction between - Laches like acquiescence is based upon equitable considerations, but laches unlike acquiescence imports even simple passivity. On the other hand, acquiescence implies active assent and is based upon the rule of estoppel in pais. As a form of estoppel, it bars a party afterwards from complaining of the violation of the right. Even indirect acquiescence implies almost active consent, which is not to be inferred by mere silence or inaction which is involved in laches. Acquiescence in this manner is quite distinct from delay. Acquiescence virtually destroys the right of the person. (Para 21) Bichitrananda Behera v. State of Orissa, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883 : 2023 INSC 902

Caste of Accused

An accused has no caste or religion when the Court deals with their case. The caste or religion of a litigant should never be mentioned in the cause title of the judgment. Such practice should never be followed. (Para 15) State of Rajasthan v. Gautam Mohanlal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875 : 2023 INSC 903

Cheque

Section 141 NI Act - Only that person who was responsible for conduct of company's affairs at the time of cheque dishonour is liable. Siby Thomas v. Somany Ceramics Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 869 : 2023 INSC 890

Cheque dishonour cases - what should courts ask accused once presumption under s.139 ni act is applicable? the Supreme Court explains. Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Constitution

Article 226 - The High Court ought to relegate parties to alternate remedies when there are serious factual disputes. State of U.P. v. Ehsan, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887 : 2023 INSC 906

Contract Law

Supreme Court imposes cost of Rs. 65 lakhs on Punjab State Power Corp Ltd for instituting multiple litigations to wriggle out of payment obligations. Nabha Power Ltd. v Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 876 : 2023 INSC 883

Criminal Law

Section 149 IPC - Prosecution must prove the accused was aware of offences likely to be committed to achieve common object. Naresh @ Nehru v. State of Haryana, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 880 : 2023 INSC 889

Accused has no right to produce any material at the time of framing of charge. State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894

Distinction between 'common intention' and 'common object': Supreme Court explains while setting aside conviction in triple murder case. Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870 : 2023 INSC 887

'If convict's advocate was absent, hc should've appointed a lawyer for him': Supreme Court criticises High Court deciding criminal appeal without hearing. Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870 : 2023 INSC 887

Customs

Customs Duty - Undervaluation must be proved by evidence of prices of contemporaneous imports; else benefit of doubt goes to the importer. Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai v. Ganpati Overseas, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 864 : 2023 INSC 881

Defective Oath

Allegation that the Chief Justice of the High Court did not use the expression "I" before his name during the oath, violating the Third Schedule of the Constitution and non-invitation of government representatives to the ceremony. The petitioner does not, as he possible cannot, dispute that the oath of office was administered to the correct person. The oath having been administered by the Governor and having been subscribed to after the administration of the oath, such objections cannot be raised. The Court dismissed the petition with costs of Rs 5,00,000. (Para 4) Ashok Pandey v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 884

Delay

Court of Appeal should not ordinarily interfere with the discretion exercised by the courts below. (Para 30) Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865 : 2023 INSC 885

Liberal approach be taken regarding delay in appeals filed by state. Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865 : 2023 INSC 885

Divorce

Irretrievable break down of marriage - the husband is aged about 89 years and respondent-wife is aged about 82 years. The respondent all throughout her life has maintained the sacred relationship since 1963 and has taken care of her three children all these years, despite the fact that the husband had exhibited total hostility towards them. The respondent is still ready and willing to take care of her husband and does not wish to leave him alone at this stage of life. She has also expressed her sentiments that she does not want to die with the stigma o f being a “divorcee” woman. In contemporary society, it may not constitute to be stigma but here we are concerned with the respondent's own sentiment. Under the circumstances, considering and respecting the sentiments of the wife, the Court held that exercising the discretion in favour of the appellant under Article 142 by dissolving the marriage between parties on the ground that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, would not be doing “complete justice” to the parties, would rather be doing injustice to the respondent. Appeal dismissed. (Para 19) Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 873 : 2023 INSC 896

Electricity

Electricity Act - Captive generating plant having more than one user and fluctuating shareholding, consumption to be calculated using “weighted average” principle. Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. v. Gayatri Shakti Paper and Board Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 888 : 2023 INSC 886

Environment

Unauthorized and illegal commercial and industrial use of residential areas in Delhi - the Court appoints a Judicial Committee to address issues related to sealing, de-sealing, regularization, penalties, demolition, and encroachment. The Committee will have jurisdiction over challenges to the decisions of Monitoring Committees and Regulatory Committees. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 886

Evidence

Circumstantial Evidence - One has to be circumspect and cautious while undertaking the exercise of linking the evidence available. Courts should not lose sight of the fact that such evidence should unerringly lead and point out the accused alone, of course, on the facts of each case. (Para 22) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Double Presumption - When the view of the trial court, which had the benefit of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses, is both a possible and plausible one, it shall not be replaced by yet another one. The presumption of innocence in favour of the accused gets strengthened by the decision of the trial court when he gets an order of acquittal. (Para 23) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Non-Examination of Material Witnesses - Failure on the part of the prosecution in not examining a witness, though material, by itself would not vitiate the trial. However, when facts are so glaring and with the witnesses available, particularly when they are likely to give a different story, the Court shall take adequate note of it. When a circumstance has been brought to the notice of the Court by the defense and the Court is convinced that a prosecution witness has been deliberately withheld, as it in all probability would destroy its version, it has to take adverse notice. Anything contrary to such an approach would be an affront to the concept of fair play. (Para 24) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Effects of Absconding - Mere absconding by itself cannot constitute a sole factor to convict a person. It may be because an accused may abscond as he might fear an illegal arrest. (Para 25) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Merely because a person is educated & god fearing, it can't be said that he has a good reputation. Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Principles relating to plea of alibi & delaying in registering FIR : Supreme Court explains. Kamal Prasad v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 891 : 2023 INSC 895

EWS quota

Candidates cannot claim the EWS quota if certificates are not uploaded in the prescribed format before the cutoff date. (Para 86) Divya v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 879 : 2023 INSC 900

Family Planning

An unplanned pregnancy not only leads to the birth of an unwanted child, it is accompanied by myriad anxieties and complications that travel beyond the health of the mother, on a psychological and mental plane. It is, therefore expected of married couples to be careful in planning their families and take adequate timely precautions so that they do not end up knocking at the doors of the Court at the eleventh hour, praying for termination of pregnancies that have crossed the critical period as in the instant case, 26 weeks. (Para 16) x v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 877

Family Planning - Absence of adequate family planning measures can also result in unwanted and avoidable pregnancies. This ignorance ought to be addressed by the Central Government and the State Governments if all the schemes relating to family planning, maternal health and betterment of a child's health are given ample publicity and disseminated to all citizens in general and to married couples in particular. (Para 19) x v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 877

Family Planning - As on date, India, is the most populated country in the world, with 1.4 billion population. The nation is striving to achieve social and economic development within the limited means and resources available. When it comes to planning a family, each citizen has an equal obligation to discharge in the interest of the society and the country. (Para 18) x v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 877

Female Infanticide

This Court is also acutely mindful of the patriarchal mindset in many parts of the country and the intense desire to beget a male child sought to be validated by having a “Kuldeepak” to carry forward the name of the family. It is regrettable that even in this day and time, a girl child is not accepted by many as a 'Kuldeepika'. This regressive mindset is also responsible for female infanticide. (Para 20) x v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 877

FIR

Registration of FIR - Delay - Principles of Law - Undue unreasonable delay in lodging the FIR, inevitably gives rise to suspicion which puts the Court on guard to look for the possible motive and the explanation for the delay and consider its effect on the trustworthiness or otherwise of the prosecution version. No time duration, in the abstract could be fixed as the 'reasonable time' to give information to the police and therefore, the same is a question to be determined as per facts and circumstances of each case. Courts when faced with the question of delay in registration of FIR are duty-bound to determine whether the explanation afforded is plausible enough based on the given facts and circumstances of each case. If the prosecution attempts to 'improvise its case stage by stage and step by step' during the intervening period, it would be open for the accused to contend that the delay was fatal to the proceedings and the same was done to 'stave off proceedings against the accused'. (Para 13) Kamal Prasad v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 891 : 2023 INSC 895

Insolvency

Homebuyers who secure RERA decrees can't be treated differently from other financial creditors under IBC. Vishal Chelani v. Debashis Nanda, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 894 : 2023 INSC 913

Interpretation of Statutes

To make a statute workable by employing interpretative tools and to venture into a kind of judicial legislation are two different things. Merely because the statute does not yield intended or desired results, that cannot be reason for us to overstep and cross the Lakshman Rekha by employing tools of interpretation to interpret a provision keeping in mind its outcome. Interpretative tools should be employed to make a statute workable and not to reach to a particular outcome. (Para 33) Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

An interpretation of the relevant provision resulting in the expanded scope of its operation cannot in itself be sufficient to attribute ambiguity to the provision. (Para 32) Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

Punctuation, though a minor element, may be resorted to for the purpose of construction. (Para 26) Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

Land Law

What does `vacant land' under Section 2 of Urban Land Ceiling Act mean? The Supreme Court refers to a larger bench. Kewal Court Pvt. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 867 : 2023 INSC 884

Marriage

Marriage is considered 'pious' in Indian society: divorce on ground of 'irretrievable breakdown of marriage' is not always desirable. Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 873 : 2023 INSC 896

Institution of marriage occupies an important place and plays an important role in the society. Despite the increasing trend of filing the Divorce proceedings in the courts of law, the institution of marriage is still considered to be a pious, spiritual, and invaluable emotional life-net between the husband and the wife in the Indian society. It is governed not only by the letters of law but by the social norms as well. So many other relationships stem from and thrive on the matrimonial relationships in the society. Therefore, it would not be desirable to accept the formula of “irretrievable break down of marriage” as a strait-jacket formula for the grant of relief of divorce. (Para 18) Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 873 : 2023 INSC 896

Multiple Litigations

Contractual Dispute - Imposed cost for instituting multiple litigations to wriggle out of payment obligations. (Para 23) Nabha Power Ltd. v Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 876 : 2023 INSC 883

Narcotic Drugs

NDPS Act - If samples are drawn violating Section 52A, trial stands vitiated. Yusuf @ Asif v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890 : 2023 INSC 912

POCSO Act

Provide counselling for child victims of sexual offences, ensure their education : Supreme Court directs states. State of Rajasthan v. Gautam Mohanlal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875 : 2023 INSC 903

State must provide 'support' persons' for child victims; it can't be left to parents' discretion. We the Women of India v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 892

Presumption

Presumptions of fact are inferences logically drawn from one fact as to the existence of other facts. Presumptions of fact are rebuttable by evidence to the contrary. Presumptions of law may be either irrebuttable (conclusive presumptions), so that no evidence to the contrary may be given or rebuttable. A rebuttable presumption of law is a legal rule to be applied by the Court in the absence of conflicting evidence. Among the class of rebuttable presumptions, a further distinction can be made between discretionary presumptions ('may presume') and compulsive or compulsory presumptions ('shall presume'). (Para 32) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

The Evidence Act provides for presumptions, which fit within one of three forms: 'may presume' (rebuttable presumptions of fact), 'shall presume' (rebuttable presumption of law) and conclusive presumptions (irrebuttable presumption of law). The distinction between 'may presume' and 'shall presume' clauses is that, as regards the former, the Court has an option to raise the presumption or not, but in the latter case, the Court must necessarily raise the presumption. If in a case the Court has an option to raise the presumption and raises the presumption, the distinction between the two categories of presumptions ceases and the fact is presumed, unless and until it is disproved. (Para 33) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Frivolous PILs - Attempt to use the PIL jurisdiction to propagate some publicity - Imposition of Exemplary Costs - Frivolous PILs occupy the time and attention of the Court thereby deflecting the attention of the Court from more serious matters and consuming the infrastructure of the judicial manpower and Registry of the Court. Time has come when the Court should impose exemplary costs in such frivolous PILs. (Para 4) Ashok Pandey v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 884

Recruitment

The last date to fulfil eligibility criteria is the last date to submit applications, in the absence of any specific rule. (Para 61) Divya v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 879 : 2023 INSC 900

Reputation

A court of law cannot declare the reputation of a person based upon its own opinion merely because a person is educated and said to be God-fearing, that by itself will not create a positive reputation. (Para 17) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Service Law

Delay and laches, vital in service matters, can be seen as acquiescence. (Para 20) Bichitrananda Behera v. State of Orissa, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883 : 2023 INSC 902

A belated service-related claim will be rejected on the ground of delay and laches (where remedy is sought by filing a writ petition) or limitation (where remedy is sought by an application to the Administrative Tribunal). (Para 21) Bichitrananda Behera v. State of Orissa, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883 : 2023 INSC 902

28 years after applying, a man got a job in the postal dept at 50 years of age due to the Supreme Court's Order.  Union of India v. Uzair Imran, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882 : 2023 INSC 901

If the candidature is not rejected at the threshold and the candidate is allowed to participate in the selection process and ultimately their name figures in the merit list - though such candidate has no indefeasible right to claim appointment - they do have a limited right of being accorded fair and nondiscriminatory treatment. (Para 15) Union of India v. Uzair Imran, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882 : 2023 INSC 901

The employer, if it is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, would have no authority to act in an arbitrary manner and throw the candidate out from the range of appointment, as distinguished from the zone of consideration, without rhyme or reason. The employer-State being bound by Article 14 of the Constitution, the law places an obligation, nay duty, on such an employer to provide some justification by way of reason. (Para 15) Union of India v. Uzair Imran, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882 : 2023 INSC 901

United Commercial Bank Officers' Regulations - Disciplinary proceedings begin only after service of the chargesheet. UCO Bank v. M.B. Motwani, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 893 : 2023 INSC 908

Service Tax

Services provided to IIT and NIT exempt from service tax. Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

Service Tax - Exemption Notification - Clause 2(s) - Interpretation of “governmental authority” - the word “or” employed in clause 2(s) manifests the legislative intent of prescribing an alternative. Going by the golden rule of interpretation that words should be read in their ordinary, natural, and grammatical meaning, the word “or” in clause 2(s) clearly appears to us to have been used to reflect the ordinary and normal sense, that is to denote an alternative, giving a choice; and, we cannot assign it a different meaning unless it leads to vagueness or makes clause 2(s) absolutely unworkable. (Para 23) Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

Service Tax - Exemption Notification - Clause 2(s) - Interpretation of “governmental authority” - the word “or” between sub-clauses (i) and (ii) indicates the independent and disjunctive nature of sub-clause (i), meaning thereby that “or” used after sub-clause (i) cannot be interpreted as “and” so as to tie it with the condition enumerated in the long line of clause 2(s) which is applicable only to sub-clause (ii). (Para 24) Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

Service Tax - Exemption Notification - Clause 2(s) - Interpretation of “governmental authority” - the long line of clause 2(s) governs only sub-clause (ii) and not sub-clause (i) because of the simple reason that the introduction of semicolon after subclause (i), followed by the word “or”, has established it as an independent category, thereby making it distinct from sub-clause (ii). If the author wanted both these parts to be read together, there is no plausible reason as to why it did not use the word “and” and without the punctuation semicolon. While the Clarification Notification introduced an amended version of clause 2(s), the whole canvas was open for the author to define “governmental authority” whichever way it wished; however, “governmental authority” was re-defined with a purpose to make the clause workable in contra-distinction to the earlier definition. Therefore, we cannot overstep and interpret “or” as “and” so as to allow the alternative outlined in clause 2(s) to vanish. (Para 27) Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910

Surrogacy

Insisting that donor egg cannot be used for gestational surrogacy is prima facie against surrogacy rules. Arun Muthuvel v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 872

Tax

S.153C Income Tax Act - Preceding 6 years period as regards 3rd party to be calculated from date when documents are assigned to concerned AO. Commissioner of Income Tax 14 v. Jasjit Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 878 : 2023 INSC 882

Video Conferencing / Hybrid Hearings

Allocation of funds and infrastructure - Free and adequate internet facilities, including Wi-Fi facilities, with sufficient bandwidth - Formulation of standardized SOP – Directions issued. (Para 14) Sarvesh Mathur v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871 : 2023 INSC 891

No High Court shall deny access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through the hybrid mode to any member of the Bar or litigant desirous of availing of such a facility. (Para 14 (i)) Sarvesh Mathur v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871 : 2023 INSC 891

The links available for accessing video conferencing/hybrid hearings shall be made available in the daily cause-list of each court and there shall be no requirement of making prior applications. (Para 14 (iv)) Sarvesh Mathur v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871 : 2023 INSC 891

Placing fetters on hybrid hearings, like mandating an age criteria, requiring prior application, and frequent denial of access to virtual participants has the direct effect of discouraging lawyers and litigants to use technology. Not only does this affect the efficiency and access to courts, but it also sends out the misguided message that access to courts can be restricted at whim to those who seek justice. (Para 16) Sarvesh Mathur v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871 : 2023 INSC 891

Technology plays an essential role in securing access to courtrooms and as a result, access to justice for citizens across the country. Lawyers and litigants using electronic gadgets to access files and legal materials cannot be asked to turn the clock back and only refer to paper books. In the march of technology, the Courts cannot remain tech averse. (Para 16) Sarvesh Mathur v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871 : 2023 INSC 891

The use of technology by the Bar and the Bench is no longer an option but a necessity. Members of the Bench, the Bar and the litigants must aid each other to create a technologically adept and friendly environment. The directions must be implemented by all concerned stakeholders in letter and in spirit. (Para 17) Sarvesh Mathur v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 871 : 2023 INSC 891

Words and Phrases

'Explanation' and 'excuse' - An 'explanation' is designed to give someone all of the facts and lay out the cause for something. It helps clarify the circumstances of a particular event and allows the person to point out that something that has happened is not his fault, if it is really not his fault. An 'excuse' is often offered by a person to deny responsibility and consequences when under attack. It is sort of a defensive action. (Para 29) Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865 : 2023 INSC 885

STATUTEWISE INDEX

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 227 - The defence of the accused is not to be looked into at the stage when the accused seeks to be discharged. The expression “the record of the case” used in Section 227 Cr.P.C. is to be understood as the documents and articles, if any, produced by the prosecution. The Code does not give any right to the accused to produce any document at the stage of framing of the charge. The submission of the accused is to be confined to the material produced by the investigating agency. (Para 11) State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 227 and 228 - At the time of framing of the charge and taking cognizance the accused has no right to produce any material and call upon the court to examine the same. No provision in the Code grants any right to the accused to file any material or document at the stage of framing of charge. The trial court has to apply its judicial mind to the facts of the case as may be necessary to determine whether a case has been made out by the prosecution for trial on the basis of charge-sheet material only. (Para 8) State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 227 and 228 - The primary consideration at the stage of framing of charge is the test of existence of a prima-facie case, and at this stage, the probative value of materials on record need not be gone into. (Para 12) State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 227, 228 and 397 - The revisional court cannot sit as an appellate court and start appreciating the evidence by finding out inconsistency in the statement of witnesses and it is not legally permissible. The High Courts ought to be cognizant of the fact that trial court was dealing with an application for discharge. (Para 15) State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 397 - The power and jurisdiction of Higher Court under Section 397 Cr.P.C. which vests the court with the power to call for and examine records of an inferior court is for the purposes of satisfying itself as to the legality and regularities of any proceeding or order made in a case. The object of this provision is to set right a patent defect or an error of jurisdiction or law or the perversity which has crept in such proceedings. (Para 13) State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Sections 216 and 386 - Alteration or addition of charges - In view of the wide powers conferred by Section 386 of Cr.P.C., even an Appellate Court can exercise the power under Section 216 of altering or adding the charge. However, if the Appellate Court intends to do so, elementary principles of natural justice require the Appellate Court to put the accused to the notice of the charge proposed to be altered or added when prejudice is likely to be caused to the accused by alteration or addition of charges. Unless the accused was put to notice that the Appellate Court intends to alter or add a charge in a particular manner, his advocate cannot effectively argue the case. (Para 12) Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870 : 2023 INSC 887

Constitution of India, 1950; Article 142 – Decree of divorce - Irretrievable break down of marriage - Supreme Court can depart from the procedure as well as the substantive laws, and exercise its discretion under Article 142 for dissolving the marriage between the parties by balancing out the equities between the conflicting claims of the parties, however, such discretion should be exercised with great care and caution. This discretionary power could be exercised for dissolving the marriage on the ground of its irretrievable break down to do “complete justice,” though one of the spouses opposes the prayer for dissolution of marriage. (Para 17) Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 873 : 2023 INSC 896

Constitution of India, 1950; Article 226 - Existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar on exercise of writ jurisdiction. More so, when a writ petition has been entertained, parties have exchanged their pleadings/ affidavits and the matter has remained pending for long. In such a situation there must be a sincere effort to decide the matter on merits and not relegate the writ petitioner to the alternative remedy, unless there are compelling reasons for doing so. One such compelling reason may arise where there is a serious dispute between the parties on a question of fact and materials/evidence(s) available on record are insufficient/inconclusive to enable the Court to come to a definite conclusion. (Para 28) State of U.P. v. Ehsan, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887 : 2023 INSC 906

Constitution of India, 1950; Article 226 - No doubt, in a writ proceeding between the State and a landholder, the Court can, on the basis of materials/evidence(s) placed on record, determine whether possession has been taken or not and while doing so, it may draw adverse inference against the State where the statutory mode of taking possession has not been followed. However, where possession is stated to have been taken long ago and there is undue delay on the part of landholder in approaching the writ court, infraction of the prescribed procedure for taking possession would not be a determining factor, inasmuch as, it could be taken that the person for whose benefit the procedure existed had waived his right thereunder. In such an event, the factum of actual possession would have to be determined on the basis of materials/evidence(s) available on record and not merely by finding fault in the procedure adopted for taking possession from the land holder. And if the writ court finds it difficult to determine such question, either for insufficient/ inconclusive materials/evidence(s) on record or because oral evidence would also be required to form a definite opinion, it may relegate the writ petitioner to a suit, if the suit is otherwise maintainable. (Para 30) State of U.P. v. Ehsan, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887 : 2023 INSC 906

Constitution of India, 1950; Article 226 - The factum of possession is essentially a question of fact. Although there is no hard and fast rule that a question of fact cannot be determined in writ jurisdiction but, in the event of a serious dispute between the parties on a question of fact, a writ court ordinarily refrains from deciding it. More so, when writ petitioner has an alternative remedy where such disputed questions of fact can be decided authoritatively. (Para 23) State of U.P. v. Ehsan, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887 : 2023 INSC 906

Customs Act, 1962; Section 14 - If the department wants to allege under valuation, it must make detailed inquiries, collect material and also adequate evidence. If the charge of under valuation cannot be supported either by evidence or information about comparable imports, the benefit of doubt must go to the importer. The charge of under invoicing has to be supported by evidence of prices of contemporaneous imports of like goods. (Para 39.1) Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai v. Ganpati Overseas, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 864 : 2023 INSC 881

Electricity Rules, 2005; Rule 3(1)(a) Second Proviso - In cases where a Captive Generating Plant (CGP) has more than one user and fluctuating shareholding or any change in ownership, shareholding, or consumption occurs, the principle of “Weighted Average” should be applied to determine the proportional electricity consumption of each user. (Para 47) Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. v. Gayatri Shakti Paper and Board Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 888 : 2023 INSC 886

Evidence Act, 1872 - Burden of Proof - There are two senses in which the phrase 'burden of proof' is used in the Evidence Act. One is the burden of proof arising as a matter of pleading and the other is the one which deals with the question as to who has first to prove a particular fact. The former is called the 'legal burden' and it never shifts, the latter is called the 'evidential burden' and it shifts from one side to the other. (Para 29) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Evidence Act, 1872; Section 101 and 102 - 'legal burden' and 'evidential burden' - The legal burden is the burden of proof which remains constant throughout a trial. It is the burden of establishing the facts and contentions which will support a party's case. If, at the conclusion of the trial a party has failed to establish these to the appropriate standards, he would lose to stand. The incidence of the burden is usually clear from the pleadings and usually, it is incumbent on the plaintiff or complainant to prove what he pleaded or contends. On the other hand, the evidential burden may shift from one party to another as the trial progresses according to the balance of evidence given at any particular stage; the burden rests upon the party who would fail if no evidence at all, or no further evidence, as the case may be is adduced by either side. While the former, the legal burden arising on the pleadings is mentioned in Section 101 of the Evidence Act, the latter, the evidential burden, is referred to in Section 102 thereof. (Para 30) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Evidence Act, 1872; Section 11 - plea of alibi - It is not part of the General Exceptions under the IPC and is instead a rule of evidence. This plea being taken does not lessen the burden of the prosecution to prove that the accused was present at the scene of the crime and had participated therein. Such plea is only to be considered subsequent to the prosecution having discharged, satisfactorily, its burden. The burden to establish the plea is on the person taking such a plea. The same must be achieved by leading cogent and satisfactory evidence. It is required to be proved with certainty so as to completely exclude the possibility of the presence of the accused at the spot of the crime. In other words, a standard of 'strict scrutiny' is required when such a plea is taken. (Para 19) Kamal Prasad v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 891 : 2023 INSC 895

Evidence Act, 1872; Section 3 - “Fact” - Reputation is a fact - Facts can broadly be divided into external and internal facts. External facts are those which can be perceived by the five senses while internal facts arise through thoughts and feelings such as love, anger, fear, hatred and intention etc. A reputation has to be seen from the point of view of an identifiable group while character is what a person really is. Character is to be formed while reputation is to be acquired. Character may lead to formation of one's reputation but both are distinct and different. Reputation thus forms part of internal facts and therefore it is required to be proved in the form of opinion of persons who form it accordingly. When reputation is to be taken as a relevant fact, its evidentiary value becomes restrictive and limited. It is indeed a weak piece of evidence when becomes relatable to a fact in issue. (Para 16) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Evidence Act, 1872; Section 8 - Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct - Concept of Reputation - Character and reputation do have an element of interconnectivity. Reputation is predicated on the general traits of character. In other words, character may be subsumed into reputation. Courts are not expected to get carried away by the mere background of a person especially while acting as an appellate forum, when his conduct, being a relevant fact, creates serious doubt. In other words, the conduct of a witness under Section 8 of the Evidence Act, is a relevant fact to decide, determine and prove the reputation of a witness. When the conduct indicates that it is unnatural from the perspective of normal human behaviour, the so-called reputation takes a back seat. (Para 18) Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907

Income Tax Act 1961 - Section 153C allows the revenue department to proceed against a party other than the person who is being searched, if incriminating articles against the "other person" is found during the search. So, if any books of accounts or documents which belonged a person other than the person who is being searched is discovered during the search proceedings, Section 153C enabled the department to proceed against the "other person" if the materials indicated undisclosed income or assets. (Para 7) Commissioner of Income Tax 14 v. Jasjit Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 878 : 2023 INSC 882

Income Tax Act 1961 - Under Section 153C, a third party would only have to furnish income tax returns of preceding six years, starting from the date when the Assessing Officer assigns the third party's documents to the concerned Assessing Officer and not from the date of the original search. Section 153C does not contemplate calculation of six years period from date of search and seizure, as any delay caused by Assessing Officer in assigning documents to concerned Assessing Officer would obligate the third party to preserve the records of more than six preceding years. (Para 10) Commissioner of Income Tax 14 v. Jasjit Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 878 : 2023 INSC 882

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Advocate cannot claim the right of legal representation - No ground to revisit the well settled position of law which has prevailed for almost half a century. ThyssenKrupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd. v. Suresh Maruti Chougule, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 868

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; Section 238 - Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Section 238 of the IBC contains a non obstante clause which gives overriding effect to its provisions. Consequently, its provisions acquire primacy, and cannot be read as subordinate to the RERA Act. (Para 8) Vishal Chelani v. Debashis Nanda, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 894 : 2023 INSC 913

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; Section 5 (7) & (8) - Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016; Section 18 - Homebuyers cannot be treated differently from other "financial creditors" under the IBC just because they have secured orders from the authority under the RERA. (Para 8) Vishal Chelani v. Debashis Nanda, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 894 : 2023 INSC 913

Limitation Act, 1963; Section 5 - Condonation of Delay - A liberal approach should be taken regarding delay in appeals filed by the State. (Para 37) Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865 : 2023 INSC 885

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - A foetus is dependent on the mother and cannot be recognized as an individual personality from that of the mother as its very existence is owed to the mother. It would be incongruous to conclude that the foetus has a separate identity from the mother and in spite of the physical or mental health of a mother being under threat, she will have to continue her pregnancy until the foetus is born which would endanger her delicate health. Such a position is contrary to Article 21 and 15(3) of the Constitution of India which recognize the right to life and liberty and particularly those of a woman. (Para 7) In the matter of Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 881

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - One cannot also lose sight of the fact that reproduction is unique to women and throughout her life, a woman goes through the process of menstruation, pregnancy, delivery, post-delivery phase and ultimately menopause. Right to reproductive health being a woman's human right would also include the right to an abortion. Otherwise, a woman who is forced into an unwanted pregnancy would experience physical and mental trauma and to endure the pregnancy which may continue in the post-natal period owing to which she would have the burden of bringing up an additional child and consequently, may lose out on other opportunities in life including right to employment and contribution to the income of the family. (Para 7) In the matter of Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 881

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - The pregnant lady is not interested in continuing with the pregnancy. In such a situation whether the child to be born is viable or if the child would be a healthy child are not relevant considerations. What is to be focused upon is, whether, the pregnant lady intends to give birth to a child or not. (Para 6) In the matter of Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 881

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Section 52A – Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances - In the absence of any material on record to establish that the samples of the seized contraband were drawn in the presence of the Magistrate and that the inventory of the seized contraband was duly certified by the Magistrate, it is apparent that the said seized contraband and the samples drawn therefrom would not be a valid piece of primary evidence in the trial. Once there is no primary evidence available, the trial as a whole stand vitiated. (Para 16) Yusuf @ Asif v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890 : 2023 INSC 912

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Section 52A – Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances - No evidence has also been brought on record that the samples were drawn in the presence of the Magistrate and the list of the samples so drawn were certified by the Magistrate. The mere fact that the samples were drawn in the presence of a gazetted officer is not sufficient compliance of the mandate of sub­section (2) of Section 52A of the NDPS Act. The failure of the concerned authorities to lead primary evidence vitiates the conviction and as such in our opinion, the conviction of the accused deserves to be set aside. (Para 13, 17) Yusuf @ Asif v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890 : 2023 INSC 912

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Section 52A – Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances - When any contraband / narcotic substance is seized and forwarded to the police or to the officer so mentioned under Section 53, the officer so referred to in subsection (1) shall prepare its inventory with details and the description of the seized substance like quality, quantity, mode of packing, numbering and identifying marks and then make an application to any Magistrate for the purposes of certifying its correctness and for allowing to draw representative samples of such substances in the presence of the Magistrate and to certify the correctness of the list of samples so drawn. (Para 12) Yusuf @ Asif v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890 : 2023 INSC 912

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Section 52A (2), (3) and (4) - The aforesaid provisions provide for the procedure and manner of seizing, preparing the inventory of the seized material, forwarding the seized material and getting inventory certified by the Magistrate concerned. It is further provided that the inventory or the photographs of the seized substance and any list of the samples in connection thereof on being certified by the Magistrate shall be recognized as the primary evidence in connection with the offences alleged under the NDPS Act. (Para 10) Yusuf @ Asif v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890 : 2023 INSC 912

Negotiable Instruments Act 1881; Section 141 (1) - It is not averred anywhere in the complaint that the appellant was in charge of the conduct of the business of the company at the relevant time when the offence was committed. What is stated in the complaint is only that the accused being the partners are responsible for the day-to-day conduct and business of the company. It is also relevant to note that an overall reading of the complaint would not disclose any clear and specific role of the appellant. The appellant has also got a contention that he retired from the partnership firm much prior to the issuance of the cheque in question. Held, that the averments in the complaint filed by the respondent are not sufficient to satisfy the mandatory requirements under Section 141(1) of the NI Act. Since the averments in the complaint are insufficient to attract the provisions under Section 141(1) of the NI Act, to create vicarious liability upon the appellant, he is entitled to succeed in this appeal. The appellant has made out a case for quashing the criminal complaint in relation to him, in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.PC. (Para 17) Siby Thomas v. Somany Ceramics Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 869 : 2023 INSC 890

Negotiable Instruments Act 1881; Section 141 (1) - Only that person who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company alone shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished. (Para 16) Siby Thomas v. Somany Ceramics Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 869 : 2023 INSC 890

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Once the accused adduces evidence to the satisfaction of the Court that on a preponderance of probabilities there exists no debt/liability in the manner pleaded in the complaint or the demand notice or the affidavit-evidence, the burden shifts to the complainant and the presumption 'disappears' and does not haunt the accused any longer. The onus having now shifted to the complainant, he will be obliged to prove the existence of a debt/liability as a matter of fact and his failure to prove would result in dismissal of his complaint case. Thereafter, the presumption under Section 139 does not again come to the complainant's rescue. Once both parties have adduced evidence, the Court has to consider the same and the burden of proof loses all its importance. (Para 45) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Once the presumption under Section 139 was given effect to, the Courts ought to have proceeded on the premise that the cheque was, indeed, issued in discharge of a debt/liability. The entire focus would then necessarily have to shift on the case set up by the accused, since the activation of the presumption has the effect of shifting the evidential burden on the accused. The nature of inquiry would then be to see whether the accused has discharged his onus of rebutting the presumption. If he fails to do so, the Court can straightaway proceed to convict him, subject to satisfaction of the other ingredients of Section 138. If the Court finds that the evidential burden placed on the accused has been discharged, the complainant would be expected to prove the said fact independently, without taking aid of the presumption. The Court would then take an overall view based on the evidence on record and decide accordingly. (Para 55) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - The fundamental error in the approach lies in the fact that the High Court has questioned the want of evidence on part of the complainant in order to support his allegation of having extended loan to the accused, when it ought to have instead concerned itself with the case set up by the accused and whether he had discharged his evidential burden by proving that there existed no debt/liability at the time of issuance of cheque. (Para 62) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - When the Courts have concluded that the signature in the cheque has been admitted and its execution has been proved, then the Courts should inquire into either of the two questions: 1. Has the accused led any defense evidence to prove and conclusively establish that there existed no debt/liability at the time of issuance of cheque? 2. In the absence of rebuttal evidence being led the inquiry would entail: Has the accused proved the nonexistence of debt/liability by a preponderance of probabilities by referring to the 'particular circumstances of the case? (Para 56) Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888

Penal Code, 1860; Section 149 - Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - To convict a person under Section 149 IPC prosecution has to establish with the help of evidence that firstly, accused shared a common object and were part of unlawful assembly and secondly, it had to prove that they were aware of the offences likely to be committed is to achieve the said common object. (Para 10) Naresh @ Nehru v. State of Haryana, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 880 : 2023 INSC 889

Penal Code, 1860; Sections 34 and 149 - Distinction between 'common intention' and 'common object' – A clear distinction is made out between common intention and common object in that common intention denotes action in concert and necessarily postulates the existence of a prearranged plan implying a prior meeting of the minds, while common object does not necessarily require proof of prior meeting of minds or preconcert. Though there is a substantial difference between the two sections, they also to some extent overlap and it is a question to be determined on the facts of each case whether the charge under Section 149 overlaps the ground covered by Section 34. Thus, if several persons numbering five or more, do an act and intend to do it, both Section 34 and Section 149 may apply. If the common object does not necessarily involve a common intention, then the substitution of Section 34 for Section 149 might result in prejudice to the accused and ought not, therefore, to be permitted. (Para 17) Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870 : 2023 INSC 887

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The social environment around the victim child may not always be conducive to the victim's rehabilitation. Only the monetary compensation is not enough. Only the payment of compensation will not amount to rehabilitation in a true sense. Perhaps the rehabilitation of the girl victims in life should be part of the “Beti Bachao Beti Padhao” campaign of the Central Government. As a welfare State, it will be the duty of the Government to do so. (Para 16) State of Rajasthan v. Gautam Mohanlal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875 : 2023 INSC 903

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The State needs to ensure that the children who are the victims of the offence continue with their education. (Para 16) State of Rajasthan v. Gautam Mohanlal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875 : 2023 INSC 903

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Whenever a child is subjected to sexual assault, the State or the Legal Services Authorities should ensure that the child is provided with a facility of counselling by a trained child counsellor or child psychologist. It will help the victim children to come out of the trauma, which will enable them to lead a better life in future. (Para 16) State of Rajasthan v. Gautam Mohanlal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875 : 2023 INSC 903

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2023 – the State has the obligation to provide 'support persons' as per the POCSO Act to child victims of sexual offences and that the appointment of support persons cannot be made optional. The need for support persons should not be left to the discretion of the parents of the child victims. (Para 3) We the Women of India v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 892

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2023 - There is a need for comprehensive guidelines regarding the engagement of support persons in child welfare cases. The guidelines, to be finalized within eight weeks, are expected to consider various factors, including the establishment of a uniform standard of education for support persons. The court discourages the prevalent practice of limiting support persons' engagements to a specific time frame and emphasizes the importance of providing reasonable remuneration for support persons. Additionally, the guidelines propose the creation of an All India Portal and the maintenance of a panel of NGOs and support persons. (Para 5) We the Women of India v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 892

Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021; Section 2(1)(zg) - Surrogacy (Regulation) Rules, 2022; Rule 7 and 14(a) - Insisting that donor egg cannot be used for gestational surrogacy is prima facie against surrogacy rules. Arun Muthuvel v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 872

United Commercial Bank Officer, Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations 1976 - Disciplinary proceedings are considered to begin only after the service of a chargesheet and not show cause notice. (Para 20.1) UCO Bank v. M.B. Motwani, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 893 : 2023 INSC 908

Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 as repealed in 1999 - There was a serious dispute with regard to taking of possession of the surplus land. There was a delay of about seven years in filing the first writ petition from the date when possession was allegedly taken by the State, after publication of the vesting notification. No documentary evidence such as a Khasra or Khatauni of the period between alleged date of taking possession and filing of the first writ petition was filed by the original petitioner. In the earlier two rounds of litigation, the High Court refrained from deciding the issue of possession of the surplus land even though that issue had arisen directly between the parties. Infraction of the prescribed statutory procedure for taking possession cannot be the sole basis to discard State's claim of possession, when it is stated to have been taken long before the date the issue is raised, held, that the High Court should have refrained from deciding the issue with regard to taking of actual possession of the surplus land prior to the cutoff date specified in the Repeal Act, 1999. Instead, the writ petitioner should have been relegated to a suit. (Para 35) State of U.P. v. Ehsan, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887 : 2023 INSC 906

Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976; Section 2(q) - Meaning and import of the term 'vacant land' – the interpretation, spirit and object of the Ceiling Act, as it was envisaged at the time of its enactment, when juxtaposed against the regressive impact experienced in different States which is indicated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Repeal Act, invite an authoritative determination of all the related issues by a Larger Bench. (Para 37) Kewal Court Pvt. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 867 : 2023 INSC 884

NOMINAL INDEX

1. Arun Muthuvel v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 872
2. Ashok Pandey v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 884
3. Bichitrananda Behera v. State of Orissa, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883 : 2023 INSC 902
4. Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 870 : 2023 INSC 887
5. Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai v. Ganpati Overseas, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 864 : 2023 INSC 881
6. Customs Central Excise and Service Tax v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885 : 2023 INSC 910
7. Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. v. Gayatri Shakti Paper and Board Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 888 : 2023 INSC 886
8. Divya v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 879 : 2023 INSC 900Commissioner of Income Tax 14 v. Jasjit Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 878 : 2023 INSC 882
9. Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 873 : 2023 INSC 896
10. Harvinder Singh @ Bachhu v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 889 : 2023 INSC 907
11. In the matter of Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 881
12. Kamal Prasad v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 891 : 2023 INSC 895
13. Kewal Court Pvt. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 867 : 2023 INSC 884
14. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 886
15. Nabha Power Ltd. v Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 876 : 2023 INSC 883
16. Naresh @ Nehru v. State of Haryana, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 880 : 2023 INSC 889
17. Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 866 : 2023 INSC 888
18. Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865 : 2023 INSC 885
19. Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 865 : 2023 INSC 885
20. Siby Thomas v. Somany Ceramics Ltd., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 869 : 2023 INSC 890
21. State of Gujarat v. Dilipsingh Kishorsinh Rao, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 874 : 2023 INSC 894
22. State of Rajasthan v. Gautam Mohanlal, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 875 : 2023 INSC 903
23. State of U.P. v. Ehsan, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 887 : 2023 INSC 906
24. ThyssenKrupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd. v. Suresh Maruti Chougule, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 868
25. UCO Bank v. M.B. Motwani, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 893 : 2023 INSC 908
26. Union of India v. Uzair Imran, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882 : 2023 INSC 901
27. Vishal Chelani v. Debashis Nanda, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 894 : 2023 INSC 913
28. We the Women of India v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 892
29. x v. Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 877
30. Yusuf @ Asif v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 890 : 2023 INSC 912