Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: March 4 – March 7, 2024
|1) Parliamentary privileges not restricted to only law making; extends to other powers & responsibilities of MPs/MLAs
While overruling a five-Judge Bench judgment in PV Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE) (1998) 4 SCC 626, the Court observed that elections in State Legislatures to the Rajya Sabha though not a ‘law-making’ process fall within the remit of Article 194(2) of the Constitution of India.
The court observed that "parliamentary privilege” is not restricted to only law-making on the floor of the House but extends to other powers and responsibilities of elected members, which take place in the Legislature or Parliament, even when the House is not sitting.
Cause Title- Sita Soren v Union of India (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 161)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice AS Bopanna, Justice M.M. Sundresh, Justice PS Narasimha, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice Manoj Misra.
2) No evidence could be led beyond pleadings, reiterates Supreme Court
The Court reiterated that no evidence could be led beyond pleadings. A suit for a property dispute was filed in the year 1999 which primarily revolved around the ownership of a property which was claimed to not belong to a joint family and had already been allocated to a specific branch of another family. One of the defendants had asserted that the property in question was allotted to him in a partition suit in the year 1984.
The Karnataka High Court had heavily relied on an oral partition allegedly conducted in 1965, which allocated certain properties exclusively to one of the defendants. However, the Supreme Court stated that the High Court had committed a grave error in placing reliance on an oral partition which was made in 1965 between the parties. The Court noted that there was no evidence to support the partition, and neither the plaintiffs nor the defendants had initially claimed such a partition in their pleadings.
Cause Title- Srinivas Raghavendrarao Desai (Dead) v. V. Kumar Vamanrao @ Alok & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 165)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal
3) Stability of child is also of paramount importance; child cannot be treated as a chattel
The Court observed that in child custody cases, stability of the child is also of paramount importance. The court observed that a child (daughter in the case) cannot be treated as a chattel at the age of 14 years to hand over her custody to the father, where she has not lived ever since her birth.
In the matter seeking custody and not Guardianship, the bench personally interacted with the minor daughter where she was quite categoric that she wished to live with her aunt, where she lived since birth.
Cause Title- Shazia Aman Khan And Another v. The State Of Orissa And Others (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 163)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal
4) Written statement should have para wise reply to plaint; general or evasive denial not sufficient
The Court deprecated the practice of filing written statements which do not contain para-wise reply to the plaint. The Court said that this will enable the Court to properly comprehend the pleadings of the parties instead of digging the facts from the various paragraphs of the plaint and the written statement.
The bench, while it dismissed an appeal arising out of a civil suit, noted that Order VIII Rules 3 and 5 CPC clearly provides for specific admission and denial of the pleadings in the plaint.
Cause Title- Thangam & Anr v. Navamani Ammal (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 164)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal
5) 'Abuse of process of law': Supreme Court quashes criminal case against officials of Special Armed Forces over a land dispute
The Court quashed criminal proceedings against officers of the Special Armed Forces (SAF) over a land dispute.
In this case, a complaint was lodged against the officials alleging that they attempted to illegally seize the land despite a decree in the complainant's favor. The bench noted that the High Court ought to have quashed the complaint as the further prosecution of the complaint was itself an abuse of the process of law.
Cause Title- Murari Lal Chhari & Ors. v. Munishwar Singh Tomar & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 168)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
6) HDFC being an NBFC bound by its policies and procedures with regard to lending and recovery: SC dismisses home buyer's plea
The Court held that Housing Development Finance Corporation (HDFC) being an NBFC and a corporate body was bound by its policies and procedures with regard to lending and recovery.
A homebuyer had filed a loan application with the institution which indicated the ‘Rate option’ as ‘Adjustable,’ and disclosed that the ‘Adjustable Rate of Interest’ would depend on the increase or decrease of the rate of interest.
Cause Title- Rajesh Monga v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 162)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh
7) Power of suspension u/s 20(3) PC & PNDT Act has to be exercised sparingly & in exceptional circumstances in public interest
The Court observed that power of suspension under Section 20(3) of the Preconception and Pre¬Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation & Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 should be exercised sparingly, in exceptional circumstances in public interest.
In this matter, the question was on the interpretation of power of Section 20(1) & (2) and Section 20(3) of PC&PNDT Act for cancellation, suspension or suspension in public interest respectively by the appropriate authority specified in Section 17 of the PC&PNDT Act.
Cause Title- District Appropriate Authority Under The PNDT Act And Chief District Health Officer v. Jashmina Dilip Devda & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 173)
Date of Judgment- March 4, 2024
Coram- Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice K.V. Vishwanathan
8) Ghee is a product of livestock: SC upholds notification issued under Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act
The Court upheld the decision of the Full Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court holding that ghee is a product of livestock under the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 (the Act).
In 1968, the Andhra Pradesh Government labelled ghee as a livestock product under Section 3(3) of the Act but took it off the list in 1972. However, in 1994, it re-included ghee in the list of regulated products through a general notification for all notified markets in the state.
Cause Title- Sangam Milk Producer Company Ltd. v. The Agricultural Market Committee & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 174)
Date of Judgment- March 5, 2024
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti
9) Date of birth certificate from school at highest pedestal for determination of age under JJ Act; ossification test kept at the last rung to be considered
The Court held that Section 94(2) of the JJ Act prioritises the date of birth certificate from a school at the highest pedestal whereas the “ossification test has been kept at the last rung to be considered” for determination of age.
The petitioner was arraigned as an accused for the offence of murder with three co-accused who were convicted by the trial Court under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The Allahabad High Court had suspended the sentence awarded to the petitioner and released him on bail. However, upon appeal, the decision of the trial Court was affirmed and the petitioner was taken into custody.
Cause Title- Vinod Katara v. State of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 171)
Date of Judgment- March 5, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta
10) Cannot expect a party to retain books of accounts after 13 years of transaction & repaying loan
The Court observed that once the transactions are completed and the loans are repaid, there is no reason for a party to entertain a belief that after a period of about 13 years, they would be required to present the account books pertaining to transactions.
The genesis of the matter lies in promulgation of the Special Court (Trial of Offences relating to transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, which aimed to address large-scale irregularities in securities transactions. These irregularities involved collusion between share brokers and employees of Banks and Financial Institutions (FIs), leading to the diversion of funds from banks/FIs to individual broker accounts. The Act established a Special Court to ensure speedy recovery of diverted funds, punish wrongdoers, and restore public confidence in security transactions and financial institutions' integrity.
Cause Title- Suman L. Shah v. The Custodian & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 170)
Date of Judgment- March 5, 2024
Coram- Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Sandeep Mehta
11) Merely because recruitment agency cannot satisfy court, relief cannot be extended to candidate deprived as it will have cascading effect on numerous others
The Court held that merely because a recruitment agency is not in a position to satisfy the Court, relief cannot be extended to a candidate deprived as it will have a cascading effect not only on the said candidate but also on numerous others.
The Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board (recruitment agency) issued a notification for the recruitment to the post of junior lecturers in Residential Educational Institutions Societies. The notification had clearly mentioned that “no candidate will be considered to any other zone not opted for and therefore such consideration is confined among the ones preferred.” A Division Bench of the Telangana High Court set aside the recruitment made by the recruitment agency in favour of the candidate and ordered for redrawing of the merit list.
Cause Title- The Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board v. Saluvadi Sumalatha & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 176)
Date of Judgment- March 5, 2024
Coram- Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice M. M. Sundresh
12) 'True & voluntary' dying declaration can be sole basis for conviction
The Court observed that if the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary, it can be made sole basis for conviction without any further corroboration.
In the matter, the appellant-accused were convicted by the trial court, and the High Court had upheld the conviction on the basis of a deceased-widow’s dying declaration, stating that the accused poured kerosene on her and had set her ablaze.
Cause Title- Naeem v. State Of Uttar Pradesh (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 169)
Date of Judgment- March 5, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta
13) Suicide note clearly shows deceased was frustrated due to work pressure; but that is not sufficient to attract offence of abetment of suicide u/s 306 IPC
The Court quashed criminal proceedings against a person who was working as District Savings Officer accused of abetting suicide of a Senior Clerk in the office.
The court said that though the suicide note clearly showed that the deceased was frustrated due to work pressure, that alone is not sufficient to proceed against the accused. In the present matter, the suicide note was the only foundation of the charge-sheet filed against the accused-appellant.
Cause Title- Prabhat Kumar Mishra @ Prabhat Mishra v. The State Of U.P. & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:INSC:172)
Date of Judgment- March 5, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta
14) SC forms committee to examine issue of safaris in tiger reserves; existing safaris to remain unaffected
The Court instructed the formation of a committee to address the matter of establishing zoos or safaris within tiger reserves, national parks, and wildlife sanctuaries. It specified that existing safaris, like the one in Jim Corbett National Park under discussion, will remain unaffected, contingent upon the recommendations of the soon-to-be-appointed committee.
Last year, controversy arose over construction activities in Jim Corbett National Park, including alleged illegal buildings and water bodies. The issue was brought before the Court through applications in the TN Godavarman Thirumulpad case, a forest protection matter where the Court issued continuous orders since 2002. Amicus curiae presented evidence of unauthorized constructions, including concrete and iron enclosures for safaris, raising concerns about endangered species like tigers.
Cause Title- TN Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 178)
Date of Judgment- March 6, 2024
Coram- Justice BR Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
15) Granting anticipatory bail to police officer accused of manipulating investigation would send out wrong signal in society
The Court held that granting the relief of anticipatory bail to a police officer facing allegations of manipulating an investigation would send out a wrong signal in society.
The police officer who was the investigating officer in a criminal case was accused of allegedly making a wrongful arrest by making interpolations in the FIR filed for the case. The anticipatory bail petition filed by the police officer was rejected by the trial court on the ground that “interpolations in the FIR were clearly visible to the naked eye and that there were sufficient materials indicating the involvement of the respondent in the alleged offence.”
Cause Title- The State of Jharkhand v. Sandeep Kumar (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 179)
Date of Judgment- March 6, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sanjay Kumar
16) Prosecutrix intelligent enough to understand consequences of moral & immoral acts consented during subsistence of earlier marriage: SC quashes FIR alleging rape by false promise of marriage
The Court quashed an FIR alleging rape on false promise of marriage holding that the complainant was mature and intelligent enough to understand the consequences of the moral and immoral acts for which she consented during the subsistence of her earlier marriage.
The complainant had filed an FIR under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC alleging that her tenant (accused) maintained physical relations with her on a promise to marry her.
Cause Title- XXX v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 181)
Date of Judgment- March 6, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal
17) Assessment of compensation cannot be done with mathematical precision: SC grants enhanced compensation to dependents of deceased
The Court, while granting enhanced compensation to the dependents of a deceased, observed that the assessment of compensation cannot be done with mathematical precision.
The dependants (old mother, wife, daughter and son) of the deceased had filed an insurance claim petition pleading that the deceased was the sole bread earner of the family. The dependents were aggrieved by the grant of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), therefore, they preferred an appeal before the Madras High Court. The High Court on the contrary reduced the compensation granted by the Tribunal.
Cause Title- Vethambal & Ors. v. The Oriental Insurance Company & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 180)
Date of Judgment- March 6, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal
18) Wishing Happy Independence Day to Pakistan, terming abrogation of Article 370 A black day for J&K are protected under Article 19(1)(A): Apex Court quashes FIR u/s. 153A IPC against Kashmiri professor
The Court quashed an FIR registered against a Kashmiri Professor in Maharashtra under Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for posting on social media, “14th August–Happy Independence Day Pakistan” with a picture of “Chand” and posting that August 5 (date of abrogation of Article 370) is a Black Day for Jammu and Kashmir and also saying that “Article 370 was abrogated, we are not happy”.
The Bench allowed an SLP filed by the Kashmiri Professor challenging an order of the Bombay High Court that refused to quash the FIR. The Appellant Javed Ahmad Hajam was a Professor at Sanjay Ghodawat College in District Kolhapur, Maharashtra and was a permanent resident of District Baramulla, Kashmir. The allegation of commission of offence is based on what was seen on his WhatsApp status in August, 2022.
Cause Title- Javed Ahmad Hajam v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 187)
Date of Judgment- March 7, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
19) Filing of suit for asserting rights of parties does not amount to contempt of court
The Court observed that filing of a suit for asserting the rights of parties does not amount to contempt of the court.
The Court observed thus in an appeal preferred against the order of the Gujarat High Court by which a contempt petition was dismissed.
Cause Title- M/s Shah Enterprises Thr. Padmaben Mansukhbhai Modi v. Vaijayantiben Ranjitsingh Sawant & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 182)
Date of Judgment- March 6, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Rajesh Bindal, and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
20) Court should be cautious while interfering in tender matters when writ petitioner has been a participant in tender process
The Court observed that in cases where a party invoking writ jurisdiction has been a participant in the tender process, courts should be slow and cautious in exercising the power of judicial review.
The court upheld the Travancore Dewasom Board’s decision to locally procure cardamoms for preparation of Aravana Prasadam in Sabarimala Temple, observing that there was no illegality or arbitrariness in awarding the contract.
Cause Title- The Travancore Devaswom Board v. Ayyappa Spices & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 183)
Date of Judgment- March 6, 2024
Coram- Justice AS Bopanna and Justice PS Narasimha
21) Article 20 Constitution prohibits imposition of higher punishment but does not prohibit imposition of lesser punishment under a new law applicable for same offence
The Court held that while Article 20 of the Constitution prohibits the imposition of a higher punishment, it does not prohibit the imposition of a lesser punishment under a new law applicable to the same offence.
A shop of the appellants was inspected by a food inspector who took samples of sugar boiled confectioneries. The finding of the lab report were that while the food items were not adulterated, the packets did not show the prescribed particulars such as the complete address of the manufacturer and the date of manufacturing.
Cause Title- M/S A.K. Sarkar & Co. & Anr. v. The State Of West Bengal & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 186)
Date of Judgment- March 7, 2024
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prasanna B. Varale