Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: January 15 – January 19, 2024
|1) Supreme Court delivers split verdict in Chandrababu Naidu's plea seeking to quash FIR in 'skill development' scam
The Court delivered split verdict in the petition filed by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu seeking quashing of FIR against him in Andhra Pradesh skill development program scam case. The bench gave different interpretation of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and thus the matter stands referred to the Chief Justice of India.
The plea was filed by TDM Chief and former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu challenging the High Court's decision rejecting Naidu's request for the quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him in the Andhra Pradesh skill development program scam case.
Cause Title- Nara Chandrababu Naidu v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 41)
Date of Judgment- January 16, 2024
Coram- Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M Trivedi
2) Fabrication of records not part of official duty of public servant: SC restores criminal case against village accountant
The Court set aside an order of the Karnataka High Court which quashed criminal complaint against an accountant for fabricating official records. It addressed the question of whether a sanction is required to prosecute a public servant who was accused of creating fake documents by misusing his official position as a Village Accountant.
The accused had approached the Karnataka High Court by filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the FIR against him. The High Court observed that the accused was a public servant. The Court acknowledged that the alleged offence occurred during the discharge of official duties and that the prosecution against him could not proceed due to the refusal of sanction to prosecute.
Cause Title- Shadakshari v. State Of Karnataka & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 42)
Date of Judgment- January 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
3) Deputy Commissioner not competent to assess overall performance of SP: SC upholds Gauhati HC judgment invalidating Rule 63(iii) of Assam Police Manual
The Court upheld the judgment of the Gauhati High Court on the competence of the Deputy Commissioner to assess the overall performance of a Superintendent of Police (SP). It dismissed an Appeal challenging the judgment passed by the Gauhati High Court, that invalidated Rule 63(iii) of the Assam Police Manual (Manual) as it was conflicting with Section 14(2) of the Assam Police Act, 2007 (Act, 2007).
The Court noted that Form I in Appendix II of the Rules 2007 outlines the performance appraisal process for IPS Officers up to the rank of Inspector General of Police, including SPs. However, Clause 6 in Rule 3 limits the Deputy Commissioner's competence, as 'Law and Order' is just one of twenty domains.
Cause Title- The State of Assam and others v. Binod Kumar and others (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 44)
Date of Judgment- January 18, 2024
Coram- Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Sanjay Kumar
4) Doctor who did post-mortem deposed that death was natural: SC upholds discharge of murder accused
The Court upheld the order of discharge passed by the Sessions Court in a murder case, saying that the High Court completely ignored the deposition of the doctor who conducted post-mortem that death was natural.
The Court was deciding an appeal filed by the accused against the judgment of the Single Judge of Madras High Court by which a revision application was allowed and the case was remanded to the Additional District and Sessions Judge for holding trial.
Cause Title- Ramalingam & Ors. v. N. Viswanathan (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 45)
Date of Judgment- January 18, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
5) Pending/decided bail applications should be mentioned: Supreme Court issues directions to streamline bail proceedings
The Court issued directives on the mandatory inclusion of details of pending and decided bail applications in bail applications. This directive comes in the context of a plea dismissed by the Court, wherein an Individual faced consequences for concealing information about previous bail applications.
The Court noted that the directions were aimed at streamlining legal proceedings and preventing inconsistencies in bail applications for pending trials or sentence suspension.
Cause Title- Kusha Duruka v State Of Odisha (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 46)
Date of Judgment- January 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Rajesh Bindal
6) Children born out of void/voidable marriage entitled to share of notionally partitioned property of their parents
The Court held that children of void/voidable marriage are entitled to share of the notionally partitioned property of their parents.
A suit for partition and possession of agricultural lands treated as joint family/ancestral properties. The claim for partition in the share of the property was notionally allotted to the deceased and the claim was not pressed as coparceners but as legal heirs of the deceased.
Cause Title- Raja Gounder & Ors. v. M. Sengodan & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 47)
Date of Judgment- January 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Rajesh Bindal
7) Mere breach of contract not an offence: SC deprecates conversion of purely civil disputes into criminal cases
The Court, while granting anticipatory bail to an accused, observed that unless there is fraudulent intent at the outset of the transaction, a mere breach of contract does not amount to an offence under Sections 420 or 406 of the IPC.
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellants after an FIR was registered against them for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120B of the IPC. The Court directed that the appellants should be released on bail by the arresting/investigating officer or the trial court, subject to terms and conditions to be determined by the trial court. Additionally, the appellants were instructed to comply with the conditions specified in Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Cause Title- Jay Shri & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan (2024 INSC 48)
Date of Judgment- January 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta
8) "She was a juvenile": Supreme Court frees woman convicted in a 24 year old murder case
The Court set aside concurrent conviction of a woman accused in a 24 Year Old Murder Case as it found that she was juvenile at the time of incident.
Allowing her appeal, the Court said that the maximum action that could have been taken was of sending her to the special home. But it noticed that she has undergone incarceration for a period of more than eight years, and therefore observed that no purpose will be served by sending her before the Juvenile Justice Board.
Cause Title- Pramila v. State of Chhattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 50)
Date of Judgment- January 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan