Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: March 11 – March 15, 2024
|1) Celebratory firing during marriage ceremonies an unfortunate yet prevalent practise: SC modifies conviction of accused from S 302 IPC to S 304 Part II IPC
The Court modified conviction of an accused for causing the demise of a person by opening celebratory firing from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC. It said that the said practice is "unfortunate yet prevalent."
During a marriage ceremony, the accused had opened celebratory firing without taking reasonable measures for safety, which led to the demise of a person. The trial court convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine under Section 302 IPC. The Allahabad High Court affirmed this order.
Cause Title- Shahid Ali v. The State of Uttar Pradesh (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 191)
Date of Judgment- March 11, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
2) Judiciary must avoid unnecessary intervention qua executive decisions involving specialised expertise in absence of malafide/prejudice
The Court observed that the judiciary must exercise restraint and avoid unnecessary intervention qua administrative decision(s) of the executive involving specialised expertise in the absence of any mala-fide and / or prejudice. It said that a High Court should not have ventured into a specialised domain of the Executive by evaluating the competency of an Indian Administrative Services (IAS) Officer.
An IAS Officer (Mr. Ashok Khemka) had challenged the grading awarded in his annual performance appraisal report. The Health Minister of Haryana (Reviewing Authority) had upgraded the Officer's overall grade, but the Chief Minister of Haryana (Accepting Authority) downgraded it.
Cause Title- The State Of Haryana v. Ashok Khemka & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 190)
Date of Judgment- March 11, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
3) Right to dignity & personal liberty not to be put to jeopardy based on half-baked evidence: SC acquits school teachers in POCSO case
The Court acquitted two teachers in a sexual harassment case. It said that the right to live with dignity and personal liberty should not be jeopardised by half-baked evidence.
The victim, a minor 8th-standard student, had complained to her parents about being subjected to sexual harassment in her classroom by her school teacher. The special court convicted the two school teachers under Section 12 of the POCSO Act and Section 506 of the IPC respectively. The Madras High Court did not interfere with the findings of the special court.
Cause Title- Nirmal Premkumar & Anr. v. State (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 193)
Date of Judgment- March 11, 2024
Coram- Justice Dipankar Datta, Justice K.V. Viswanathan, and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
4) Writ petition filed claiming title on disputed plot taken up in hot haste: SC quashes Allahabad HC order
The Court quashed an order of the High Court saying that the writ petition filed claiming title on the disputed plot of land was taken up in hot haste and was allowed without issuing formal notice to all the respondents.
The Court was deciding an appeal filed by a woman who was aggrieved by the order of the Allahabad High Court by which a writ petition was allowed and the resolution/proposal issued by the Land Management Committee and its approval by the State authorities was quashed.
Cause Title- Suneeta Devi v. Avinash and Others (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 194)
Date of Judgment- March 11, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta
5) Supreme Court agrees to return original documents by tomorrow 5pm to ECI; issues notice to SBI for non-disclosure of electoral bond numbers
The Court agreed to return the original documents to the Election Commission of India by tomorrow (March 16), 5 pm in the Electoral Bonds case.
The Court was hearing an Application filed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) seeking modification of the operative portion of its March 11, 2024, order in the electoral bonds case. ECI in its application has stated that the order had noted that copies of the documents submitted by it to the Apex Court in sealed cover during the course of hearing be maintained at the office of the Election Commission. The EC also said it did not keep any copies of the documents and added that they may be returned so that it can comply with the Court directions.
Cause Title- Association For Democratic Reforms and Anr. v. Union Of India And Ors. & Connected Matters (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 209)
Date of Judgment- March 11, 2024
Coram- Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra.
6) Section 482 CrPC| High Court must not hesitate to quash criminal proceedings which are essentially of a civil nature
The Court reiterated that a civil dispute which is cloaked as a criminal offence can be quashed by the High Courts by exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC.
The appellants, the managers of a bicycle manufacturing company, had contracted the complainant to assemble bicycles. The complainant filed an FIR due to non-payment, alleging criminal breach of trust and cheating under Sections 406, 420, and 506 of the IPC against the appellants.
Cause Title- Naresh Kumar & Anr. v. The State Of Karnataka & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 196)
Date of Judgment- March 12, 2024
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
7) Non-compliance of S.173(2) Cr.P.C. gives rise to many legal issues: Supreme Court issues guidelines on police report procedure
The Court directed strict compliance with the procedure for submitting a police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. holding that non-compliance thereof gives rise to many legal issues.
The directions were issued in an appeal filed by an accused against the decision of the Jharkhand High Court that denied him bail in a murder case. The Supreme Court too denied bail to the accused stating that the trial was its “fag end.”
Cause Title- Dablu Kujur v. The State Of Jharkhand (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 197)
Date of Judgment- March 12, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal
8) A case of wrongful denial of employment for no fault of workmen: SC denies company’s plea seeking restriction on wages
The Court refused to entertain an appeal filed by a company seeking restriction on wages of its workmen saying that it is a case of wrongful denial of employment for no fault of workmen.
The company Mahandi Coalfields Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. had preferred an appeal against the Brajrajnagar Coal Mines Workers’ Union.
Cause Title- Mahandi Coalfields Ltd. v. Brajrajnagar Coal Mines Workers’ Union (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 199)
Date of Judgment- March 12, 2024
Coram- Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Sandeep Mehta
9) Scope of judicial review of transfer orders: Supreme Court explains
The Court explained the scope of judicial review of Transfer Orders. It observed that in absence of (i) pleadings regarding malafide, (ii) non-joining the person against whom allegation are made, (iii) violation of any statutory provision (iv) the allegation of the transfer being detrimental to the employee who is holding a transferrable post, judicial interference is not warranted.
The Court set aside the order of the Division Bench of Gauhati High Court which had reversed the findings of a Single Judge. The Single Judge upheld the government official's transfer, stating that a transfer based on an MLA's UO Note couldn't vitiate it without an allegation of malafide exercise of powers by the government authorities.
Cause Title- Sri Pubi Lombi v. The State Of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 200)
Date of Judgment- March 13, 2024
Coram- Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Karol
10) Mere pendency of anticipatory bail plea does not bar trial court from issuing proclamation against absconding accused u/s 82 CrPC
The Court held that mere pendency of an application for anticipatory bail does not bar a trial court from issuing steps for proclamation against absconding accused under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Despite the charge sheet initially only including one accused, the Trial Court later found sufficient evidence to proceed against other accused for offences under Sections 341, 323 and 504 IPC. Despite efforts by the accused to seek anticipatory bail, the Trial Court proceeded with proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.PC, resulting in the dismissal of the bail application.
Cause Title- Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 202)
Date of Judgment- March 14, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar
11) Supreme Court dismisses appeal filed by Watandar heirs; ends six decade old dispute over Watan land
The Court dismissed an appeal filed by Watandar heirs thereby ending a six decade old dispute over a 'Watan' land. It observed that Watan Lands cannot be alienated without the prior approval of the Government of India and Government of Maharashtra in case the same is reserved for defence purposes.
The Court observed thus in an appeal that entailed correlation of three vintage legislations requiring not only their interpretation but also their harmonious construction. The oldest of the three statutes is the Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act, 1874; next is the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948; and the third is the Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Offices) Act, 1962.
Cause Title- Baban Balaji More (Dead) by LRs. & others v. Babaji Hari Shelar (Dead) by LRs. & others (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 203)
Date of Judgment- March 14, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar
12) Power to grant interim compensation in cheque bounce cases u/s 143A NI Act discretionary: SC issues guidelines
The Court held that the exercise of power to grant interim compensation in cheque bounce cases under sub-section (1) of Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I. Act) is discretionary and not mandatory.
The complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act against the appellant, alleging dishonour of a cheque made towards payment of agreed amounts in various business ventures. Subsequently, the complainant sought interim compensation under Section 143A of the NI Act, which was granted by the trial court and upheld by the Jharkhand High Court.
Cause Title- Rakesh Ranjan Shrivastava v. The State Of Jharkhand & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 205)
Date of Judgment- March 15, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
13) No prescribed period of limitation for passing an order u/s 129A (2) Customs Act
The Court observed that there is no prescribed period of limitation for passing an order in the exercise of the power under sub-section (2) of Section 129A of the Customs Act.
The Court reiterated that even if the law does not provide for a specific period for taking a particular action, the authority vested with the power to take action must take the action within a reasonable time. However, considering the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Court held that “it cannot be said that the Committee of Commissioners has taken an unreasonably long time to decide.”
Cause Title- M/s Global Technologies and Research v. Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (Import) [Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 204]
Date of Judgment- March 15, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
14) In absence of proper identification parade being conducted, identification for first time in court can’t be said to be free from doubt
The Court held that in the absence of proper identification parade being conducted, the identification for the first time in the court cannot be said to be free from doubt.
The Court held thus in an appeal against the judgment of the Kerala High Court by which an appeal of the accused was dismissed and his conviction was confirmed for the offence punishable under Section 397 read with Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Cause Title- Jafar v. State of Kerala (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 207)
Date of Judgment- March 15, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta
15) Section 141 NI Act | Complaint must contain specific averments about how and in what manner accused-director was responsible for conduct of company’s business
The Court reiterated that, for making a Director of a Company liable for the offences committed by the Company under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, there must be specific averments in the complaint against the Director showing as to how and in what manner the Director was responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company. It said that merely reproducing the words of section without a clear statement of fact will not ipso facto make the director vicariously liable.
The Court was dealing with a batch of appeals filed against the judgment passed by the Madras High Court by which it rejected the prayer for quashing of cases in connection with the offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I. Act).
Cause Title- Susela Padmavathy Amma v. M/s Bharti Airtel Limited (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 206)
Date of Judgment- March 15, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta
16) Supreme Court dismisses SBI's plea seeking extension of time for disclosure relating to electoral bonds, directs SBI to furnish data by March 12 and ECI to publish data by March 15
The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court dismissed the State Bank of India's (SBI) plea seeking an extension of time to disclose details of Electoral Bonds in compliance with the judgment of the Constitution Bench.
The Bench held that the SBI has admitted that donor and redemption details are available with it, albeit in separate silos. The Court noted that the purchaser had to submit KYC information each time it made a purchase of a Bond. The Court held that the details of purchased Bonds are "readily available". The Court held that information about Electoral Bonds is stored only in 29 branches which can easily be accessed.
Cause Title- Association For Democratic Reforms and Anr. v. Union Of India And Ors. & Connected Matters (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 195)
Date of Judgment- March 15, 2024
Coram- Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra.
17) SC remands three decades old land acquisition cases to Karnataka HC; directs it to decide expeditiously
The Court remanded three decades old land acquisition cases to Karnataka High Court.
The Court was deciding a batch of appeals preferred against the judgments of the High Court by which compensation for an acquired land was enhanced.
Cause Title- The Executive Engineer, KNNL v. Subhashchandra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 208)
Date of Judgment- March 12, 2024
Coram- Justice Surya Kant and Justice K.V. Viswanathan