1) Reasonable opportunity of being heard should be given before a borrower's account is classified as fraud
The Court held that before a borrower’s account is classified as fraud, a reasonable opportunity of being heard and representation should be provided by the Banks. The Court also held that an accused cannot claim to have a right of hearing before the registration of an FIR and that the principles of natural justice are not applicable at the stage of reporting a criminal offence.
In this case, the pleas were moved before the Telangana High Court to challenge the directions issued under the Reserve Bank of India (Frauds Classification and Reporting by Commercial Banks and Select FIs) Directions 2016 on the ground that no opportunity of being heard was envisaged to borrowers before their accounts were classified as fraudulent
Cause Title- State Bank of India & Ors v. Rajesh Agarwal & Ors
Date of Judgment- March 27, 2023
Coram- CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli
2) Consumer Protection Act- In summary proceedings, commission can’t entertain complaints of highly disputed questions of facts
The Court held that when proceedings before the Commission under the Consumer Protection Act is summary in nature, the complaints involving highly disputed questions of facts or the cases involving tortious acts or criminality like fraud or cheating, cannot be decided by the Forum/Commission.
The Court made the observation while deciding the issue of whether the Commission/Forum under the Act could have entertained the complaint involving highly disputed questions of facts or involving allegations of tortious acts, the proceedings before the Commission/Forum being summary in nature.
Cause Title- The Chairman & Managing Director, City Union Bank Ltd. & Anr. V. R. Chandramohan
Date of Judgment- March 27, 2023
Coram- Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Bela M. Trivedi
3) Multiple Murders: SC releases man after 28 years on ground of being juvenile during offence, invalidates his death penalty
The Court released a man who was awarded the death penalty for killing five women (one of whom was pregnant) and two children in the year 1994. The Court after 28 years of such an incident released him on the ground that he was a juvenile at the time of offence being committed.
The applicant, along with two other offenders was tried for the commission of offences under the aforesaid provisions of the IPC. The appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of death sentence made by the applicant was dismissed by the Apex Court in the year 2000 and he was detained for more than 28 years.
Cause Title- Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary v. The State of Maharashtra
Date of Judgment- March 27, 2023
Coram- Justice K.M. Joseph, Justice Aniruddha Bose, and Justice Hrishikesh Roy
4) Wild Life (Protection) Act| Declarants of exotic live species immune from prosecution under future laws & amendments-
The Court held that the declarants of exotic live species of animals and birds in India are immune from prosecution under any future laws and amendments incorporated in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
The Court clarified that declaration of the ownership of such species with regard to the advisory issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change via notification in the year 2020 is immune from action under the aforesaid Act.
Cause Title- Swetab Kumar v. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 27, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Sanjay Karol
5) Benefit of doubt: Possible that it was a complete set-up by police- SC acquits persons in murder case
The Court acquitted persons who were convicted in a murder case providing them the benefit of doubt. The Court said it is quite possible that it was a complete set-up by the police and they committed the murder in the process of arresting the deceased and then set up a false case against the accused.
In this matter, thirteen residents of the village came to a woman’s house, cordoned off her house without any reason, and caused grievous injury on the head of her brother-in-law by giving blows with sharp weapons and three of the accused persons, committed murder of a man by assaulting him with sharp cutting weapons. Hence, four of such accused persons preferred an appeal before the Apex Court.
Cause Title- Pulen Phukan & Ors. v. The State of Assam
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Vikram Nath, and Justice Sanjay Karol
6) Application U/S. 12A Of IBC for withdrawal of CIRP is maintainable prior to constitution of committee of creditors
The Court observed that application under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is maintainable prior to the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
The Court also observed that Regulation 30A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2018 is binding upon the National Company Law Tribunal.
Cause Title- Abhishek Singh v. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. & Anr.
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath
7) Principle of sentencing recognises corrective measures but there are occasions when deterrence is imperative necessity
The Court in a rash and negligent driving case has held that the principle of sentencing recognizes the corrective measures but there are occasions when deterrence is an imperative necessity depending upon the facts of the case. The Court reiterated that the principle of just punishment is the bedrock of sentencing in respect of a criminal offence.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court though upheld the conviction of the respondent for the offence under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, it reduced the sentence from two years to eight months, subject to a prior deposit of Rs. 25,000/- towards compensation to be paid to family/legal heir of the deceased. The State being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of the High Court, preferred an appeal before the Apex Court.
Cause Title- State of Punjab v. Dil Bahadur
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar
8) Independent overt act is no ground to release accused once found to be part of unlawful assembly
The Court observed that the independent overt act cannot be a ground to release the accused once they are found to be part of the unlawful assembly. The Bench said that when the accused persons are facing the trial under Sections 147, 148, 307, 302, and other offences of the IPC, which can be said to be very serious offences, the High Court ought to have given cogent reasons while releasing the respective accused on bail.
In this case, the orders were passed by the Allahabad High Court wherein it directed the release of the respective accused persons, on bail in connection to the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 427, 441, 323, 506, 447, 307, 302, and 34 of the IPC. The appellant being aggrieved with this approached the Apex Court.
Cause Title- Yashpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar
9) Twin conditions of section 37 NDPS Act not satisfied- SC sets aside bail granted to alleged kingpin & organiser of illicit trade in ganja
The Court set aside the High Court's Order granting bail to the alleged kingpin and the organiser of the illicit trade in ‘ganja’. The Court noted that when a person was accused of committing offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) which involved trade in commercial quantity of narcotics, it was pertinent upon the Court to consider the twin conditions laid down under Section 37 of the NDPS Act while considering the bail application.
In this case, the appeal was preferred against the order of Allahabad High Court whereby the respondent accused was granted bail on the ground of the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution and for the reason that the accused persons had already been enlarged on bail.
Cause Title- Union of India v. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Justice Pankaj Mithal
10) Even in cases where death sentence is not imposed, constitutional courts can award fixed-term life sentence without remission
The Court observed that the Constitutional Court can award fixed-term life sentence without remission even in cases where death sentence was not imposed and even if the case did not fall within the category of ‘rarest of rare’ case, to warrant death penalty.
In this case, the appellant- a cab driver was convicted for the rape and murder of an IT employee in Bengaluru, while taking her home from her office in the middle of the night. The Trial Court had directed the appellant to undergo imprisonment for the rest of his life.
Cause Title- Shiva Kumar @ Shiva @ Shivamurthy v. State of Karnataka
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
11) Candidates cannot challenge interview process simply because result was not palatable: SC in appointment of drug inspectors in J&K
The Court held that a candidate cannot challenge the interview process after attending it simply because they believe that more marks should have been granted to them. In that context, it was said that "simply because the result of the selection process is not palatable to a candidate, he cannot allege that the process of interview was unfair or that there was some lacuna in the process."
In this case, the batch of appeals was concerned with the selection process conducted for the appointment of drug inspectors in the State of Jammu Kashmir. The selection was challenged on several grounds, including that the authorities had acted arbitrarily while granting marks in the interview process.
Cause Title- Tajvir Singh Sodhi & Ors. v. The State of Jammu Kashmir & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice KM Joseph and Justice BV Nagarathna
12) Equivalence of qualification is a matter to be determined by expert bodies being recruiting authority & not courts
The Court reiterated that Courts cannot prescribe the qualification or declare the equivalency of a course. It added that equivalence of qualification was a matter to be determined by the expert bodies i.e., the State, being the recruiting authority.
In this case, the appellants were claiming promotion to the post of Superintendent BR Grade-I and Assistant Engineer as per Column 11 of General Reserve Engineer Force Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ Recruitment Rules, 1982 (‘GREF Rules, 1982’). The High Court had rejected the petition on the ground that the appellants were not possessing requisite qualification and therefore were not eligible for promotion as per Rule 11 of the GREF Rules, 1982.
Cause Title- Unnikrishnan CV and Ors. V. Union of India & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Manoj Mishra and Justice Aravind Kumar
13) Incarceration has deleterious effects where accused belongs to weakest economic strata- SC grants bail to man in jail for 7 years
The Court while granting bail to a man who was in jail for over seven years said that the incarceration has deleterious effects where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata.
The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by the accused who was booked for committing offences punishable under Sections 20, 25, and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
Cause Title- Mohd Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Date of Judgment- March 28, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta
14) Supreme court allows disbursal of 5000 crores from SEBI-sahara fund to depositors of sahara group
The Court allowed an application to allocate Rs. 5,000 crores out of Rs. 24,979 crores deposited by the Sahara group with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to repay the legitimate dues of the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperatives Society.
In this case, an application was filed by the Centre in a PIL whereby directions were sought to pay the amount to the depositors, who had invested in several chit fund companies and Sahara Credit firms.
Cause Title- Pinak Pani Mohanty v. Union of India & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar
15) Suit will not be abated on death of one defendant if estate is fully & substantially represented by other defendants
The Court held that a suit cannot be held to be abated due to the death of one of the defendants, when the estate was being fully and substantially represented in the suit jointly by the other defendants on record. h
In this case, a civil appeal was preferred before the Supreme Court where the primary issue was whether the suit was abated on account of the non-joinder of all legal representatives of a deceased defendant. It was contended that the suit ought to have been held as abated against all the defendants owing to the non-substitution of all the legal representatives of the deceased defendant upon his death.
Cause Title- Shivshankara & Anr. v. H.P. Vedavyasa Char
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice BR Gavai and Justice CT Ravikumar
16) Classification of goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975 shall be in accordance with heading which provides more specific description
The Court reiterated that the classification of goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (CTA) should be in accordance with the heading which provided more specific description than general one.
It was contended by the revenue that the goods imported were LCD devices, which meant principally to be used in television sets and the same was not specifically classifiable under its heading. Therefore, by virtue of Note 2 (b) to Chapter 85, the goods were to be classified based on their principal or sole use.
Cause Title- CCE, Aurangabad v. M/s Videocon Industries Ltd. Thr. Its Director
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
17) Hindu Succession Act | Daughters are entitled to one-third of properties of their father
The Court reiterated that under the Hindu Succession Act, daughters are entitled to 1/3rd share in all the properties of their father.
In this case, the litigation related to the partition of ancestral properties between the appellants and the respondents. The Supreme Court deemed it appropriate to analyse the position of Hindu Law and the subsequent position taken by the Hindu Succession Amendment Act 2005. The Court also analysed the dictum laid down by the Apex Court in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma and Others.
Cause Title- Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. v. Charulata Sahu & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice AS Bopanna and Justice JB Pardiwala
18) Powers under Order 17 Rule 3 CPC are drastic, to be used sparingly in exceptional cases
The Court held that power under Order 17 Rule 3 CPC is drastic and can be used sparingly in exceptional cases.
Before the Court was an appeal impugning the decree by which the plaint filed by the appellant's father in an eviction petition was rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 on the ground of being barred by the principle of res judicata. The moot question before the bench was whether the eviction petition was dismissed for default which dismissal would certainly bar a fresh suit if instituted on the same cause of action.
Cause Title- Prem Kishore & Ors. v. Brahm Prakash & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice JB Pardiwala
19) Evidence of injured witness cannot be discarded lightly: SC enunciates principles for appreciation of evidence of injured eye-witness
The Court in its recent judgment has enunciated certain legal principles for appreciation of the evidence of an injured eye-witness. The Court held that suggestions made to the witness by the defence counsel and the reply to such suggestions would definitely form part of the evidence and can be relied upon by the Court along with other evidence on record to determine the guilt of the accused.
The two appellants had approached the Supreme Court who were convicted by the Trial Judge for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and were sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each with the stipulation that in default of payment of the fine they would undergo rigorous imprisonment for further six month.
Cause Title- Balu Sudam Khalde & Anr. v. The State of Maharashtra
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice JB Pardiwala
20) Discrepancies In FIR, material witness not produced & guilt not proved beyond reasonable doubt- SC sets aside conviction
In an FIR pertaining to the year 1994, which resulted in the trial convicting and passing the order of the sentence against the Appellant Anwar@Bhurga under Sections 394 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act, the Supreme Court recently observed that the guilt of the appellant having not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, conviction and sentence cannot be upheld.
The Supreme Court found significant discrepancies in the FIR and improvement in the statement and allowed the appeal. The bench found significant discrepancies in the FIR and the evidence of the complainant Jahid (PW-4), which led the Court to set aside the conviction of the appellant.
Cause Title- Anwar@Bhurga v. State of Haryana
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
21) Supreme court upholds expulsion of member from housing society for default in payment of dues
The Court dismissed a plea challenging expulsion of the late husband of the appellant from a housing society for making default in payment of dues of the society. It upheld the decision of the High Court and dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed before it saying that a dispute was raised regarding the “cost of construction” and default in payment of the amount due to the society goes “unrebutted”.
The appellant approached Apex Court against the Division Bench of Delhi High Court’s decision dismissing the writ petition challenging the order passed by the Financial Commissioner passed in 1994. The High Court upheld the order passed by the Joint Registrar (II), Cooperative Societies, Delhi whereby the membership of the late husband of appellant no.1 was expelled.
Cause Title- Geeta & Ors. v. Financial Commissioner Govt. of NCT Delhi & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 29, 2023
Coram- Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Aravind Kumar
22) No violation of a free & fair election: SC dismisses plea challenging open ballot system for rajya sabha elections
The Court rejected a writ petition that challenged the open ballot system for the Rajya Sabha elections saying that it does not violate a free and fair election. The Bench said that the elector having evinced an intent not to disclose the vote to the agent of their political party, it would be far-fetched to still sustain the vote by casting the burden on the Presiding Officer to disclose the vote to the authorised representative of the political party.
In this case, a petition was filed by Lok Prahari i.e., a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 challenging the Rule 39-AA of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, and the proviso to Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The said Rule 39-AA was challenged on the ground that it was ultra vires Article 80(4) of the Constitution, violative of Article 14, and contrary to the provisions of Section 123(2) of the 1951 Act.
Cause Title- Lok Prahari v. Union of India & Ors.
Date of Judgment- March 27, 2023
Coram- CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice P.S. Narasimha, and Justice J.B. Pardiwala