Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: September 23 – September 27, 2024
|1) SC sets aside order holding that downloading and watching child porn is not offence; suggests Parliament to replace term "child pornography" with "child-sexual exploitative and abuse material"
In a landmark judgment, the Court set aside a Madras High Court's ruling, which said that mere downloading and watching child pornography is not an offence under the POCSO Act and the Information Technology Law.
The Bench suggested to the Parliament to bring around an amendment to the POCSO Act for substituting the term "Child Pornography" with "Child-Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material" (CSEAM).
Cause Title- Just Rights for Children Alliance and Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 716)
Date of Judgment- September 23, 2024
Coram- Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala
2) Validity of sanction must be challenged at earliest instance available before Trial Court: SC dismisses plea of PLFI member in UAPA case
The Court held that the validity of a sanction must be challenged at the earliest instance available before the Trial Court.
The Court dismissed the appeal of Fuleshwar Gope, an associate of the People’s Liberation Front of India (PLFI) being alleged to have criminally conspired and formed an unlawful association.
Cause Title- Fuleshwar Gope v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 718)
Date of Judgment- September 23, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
3) Court cannot convict one accused & acquit the other when there is similar or identical evidence pitted against them
The Court reiterated that courts cannot convict one accused and acquit the other when there is similar or identical evidence pitted against two accused persons.
The Court acquitted the appellant who was convicted of abetment in procuring a second passport for a person under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 12(2) of the Passports Act, 1967 (the Act). The prosecution had alleged that the appellant had forwarded the application for a second passport.
Cause Title- Yogarani v. State By The Inspector Of Police (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 721)
Date of Judgment- September 23, 2024
Coram- Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Aravind Kumar
4) "Our legal system acknowledges fallibility of judges": Supreme Court says it can entertain clarification or modification petitions in disposed cases if necessary
The Court observed that when the individual facts of a particular case so warrant, there can be no bar to entertaining a clarification/modification petition in a disposed-of case.
The Court observed thus while disposing a miscellaneous petition in a Writ Petition.
Cause Title- Gagan Banga v. State of West Bengal (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 722)
Date of Judgment- September 23, 2024
Coram- Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Aravind Kumar
5) Nothing on record to establish that there was any pre-meditation: Supreme Court alters murder conviction to Part-I of Section 304 IPC
The Court altered murder charges against the accused to Part-I of Section 304 of the IPC observing that there is nothing on record to establish that there was any pre-meditation.
In this case, the Trial Court had convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and the Delhi High Court had upheld the decision of the Trial Court.
Cause Title- Sunil @ Sonu Etc. v. State NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 727)
Date of Judgment- September 24, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
6) Process of succession cannot go forward without determination of dispute over a will challenged by parties who will be affected by if it comes into effect
The Court observed that when a party affected by a Will challenges it, the succession process cannot go forward without a determination of the dispute regarding the Will.
The Court upheld the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which allowed the amendment of pleadings in a civil suit regarding the partition of ancestral property and the validity of a Will. The Court noted that determination of the genuineness of the Will is the necessary course of action in determining the issues inter se the parties.
Cause Title- Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu v. Suman Agarwal (Bindal) & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 726)
Date of Judgment- September 24, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
7) Writ petition should be dismissed without considering merits of the claim if there is no candid disclosure of relevant & material facts
The Court reiterated that if there is no candid disclosure of relevant and material facts or the petitioner is guilty of misleading the Court, his petition should be dismissed at the threshold without considering the merits of the claim. It also observed that a writ petition should be preferred within reasonable time, the reasonableness of which would depend on the facts and circumstances of the case and the relief prayed for.
In this case, an appeal was filed before the Court, assailing a judgment passed by the Karnataka High Court allowing a writ appeal and directing HMT Ltd. to vacate and to hand over an identified land to the respondents.
Cause Title- HMT Ltd. v. Smt. Rukmini and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 728)
Date of Judgment- September 24, 2024
Coram- Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar
8) Departmental promotion committee can follow "sealed cover procedure" only after filing of chargesheet
The Court observed that the “sealed cover procedure”, while considering the promotion of a government employee facing a criminal investigation, should be followed only after the chargesheet is submitted. It said that the pendency of the investigation is not sufficient to enable the authorities to adopt the procedure.
In this case, an Appeal was filed challenging the judgment passed by the Delhi High Court whereby the writ petition preferred by the Appellant i.e., the Union of India, was dismissed, and the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (‘Tribunal’) was upheld.
Cause Title- Union of India and Ors. v. Doly Loyi (Neutral Citation:2024 INSC 729)
Date of Judgment- September 24, 2024
Coram- Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice R Mahadevan
9) Maharashtra Stamp Act| Sale agreement concluding in sale deed do not absolve primary liability for paying stamp duty on sale agreement when it is the principal document
The Court observed that, under Maharashtra Stamp Act, the sale agreements ultimately concluding in the sale deed would not absolve the primary liability of paying the appropriate stamp duty at the time of execution of the sale agreement when it is the principal document.
The Court dismissed the challenge against the decision of the Bombay High Court which upheld the decision of the trial court allowing an application under Sections 33, 34, and 37 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (the Act) for impounding sale agreements for adjudication of stamp duty and penalty.
Cause Title- Shyamsundar Radheshyam Agrawal & Anr. v. Pushpabai Nilkanth Patil & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 730)
Date of Judgment- September 24, 2024
Coram- Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice R. Mahadevan
10) Absence of evidence regarding homicidal death: Supreme Court delivers split verdict in 1995 custodial death case
The Court delivered a split verdict in a custodial death case in which the police officers were convicted under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Court was dealing with appeals filed by the accused police officers who were convicted by the Trial Court and the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench had confirmed the same.
Cause Title- Manik & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 734)
Date of Judgment- September 25, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar
11) Minor nature of injuries is not sufficient reason to not frame a charge u/s 307 IPC for attempt to murder
The Court observed that the minor nature of injuries is not sufficient reason to not frame a charge under Section 307 IPC for an attempt to murder.
The Court set aside the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which acquitted the accused holding that there was no basis for an offence under Section 307 of the IPC since the injury caused by the accused or the act done by them was not likely to result in the death of the victim.
Cause Title- Shoyeb Raja v. State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 731)
Date of Judgment- September 25, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
12) Motive has bearing only when evidence is sufficient to prove ingredients of alleged offences: Supreme Court acquits 7 men in 1985 murder case
The Court, while acquitting seven men in a murder case of the year 1985, observed that, motive has a bearing only when the evidence on record is sufficient to prove the ingredients of the offences under consideration.
The Court observed thus in a batch of criminal appeals filed against the judgment of the Patna High Court by which it upheld the conviction of five accused and set aside the acquittal of the other two.
Cause Title- Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma v. The State of Bihar (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 735)
Date of Judgment- September 25, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
13) 'Common intention' can arise even moments before: Supreme Court upholds conviction in murder case
The Court observed that there cannot be a fixed timeframe for formation of common intention and it is not essential for the perpetrators to have had prior meetings to conspire or make preparations for the crime. It said that common intention can be inferred from the conduct of the perpetrators immediately before, during, and after the commission of the act.
The Court was hearing an Appeal challenging the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which dismissed a Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC and upheld the conviction and life sentences of A-1 to A-4 under Sections 148, 302, and 307 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Cause Title- Baljinder Singh v. State of Punjab (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 738)
Date of Judgment- September 25, 2024
Coram- Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih
14) Chargesheet simply reproduces wordings of complaint; vague & unclear allegations: SC quashes FIR u/s 498A IPC against in-laws
The Court quashed an FIR and chargesheet filed against the in-laws under Section 498A of the IPC while observing that the said chargesheet and FIR simply reproduced the wording of the complaint.
The Court stayed the criminal proceedings against four family members (appellants) in a case involving allegations of cruelty, physical assault, threats, and a dowry demand. The Court noted the tendency to make general, vague, and omnibus allegations in the cases of matrimonial disputes.
Cause Title- Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel & Ors. v. State Of Maharashtra & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 737)
Date of Judgment- September 25, 2024
Coram- Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Pankaj Mithal
15) Cases of 'clean acquittal' after accused suffered long incarceration as undertrial may give rise to a claim of compensation
The Court observed that the cases of clean acquittal after the accused suffered long periods of incarceration as undertrial may give rise to claims for compensation. It clarified that the 'clean acquittal' does not include cases where the witnesses have turned hostile or there is a bona fide defective investigation.
The Court was hearing an Appeal challenging the decision of the Single Judge of the High Court who rejected the Bail Application preferred by the Tamil Nadu Ex-Transport Minister Senthil Balaji under Section 439 of the CrPC, 1973.
Cause Title- V. Senthil Balaji v. Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 739)
Date of Judgment- September 26, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
16) Writ courts do not encourage pleas from indolent, tardy & lethargic litigants
The Court observed that a writ court does not encourage petitions from indolent, tardy and lethargic litigants.
While upholding the auction sale to the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (Committee), the Court said that outstanding dues were recoverable from the Mula Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. (a cooperative society) and invoked its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice between the parties.
Cause Title- The Ahmednagar District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 741)
Date of Judgment- September 27, 2024
Coram- Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
17) Scope of Section 37 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act is more summary in nature and different from an ordinary civil appeal
The Court reiterated that the scope of Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is more summary in nature and different from an ordinary civil appeal.
The Court set aside the impugned judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the exercise of powers under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) which had set aside the order passed under Section 34 of the Act as well as the arbitral award by the arbitrator. It explained that an arbitral award cannot be disturbed only because instead of the view taken by the arbitral tribunal, the other view which is also a possible view is a better one according to the appellate court.
Cause Title- Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited & Anr. v. M/S Sanman Rice Mills & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 742)
Date of Judgment- September 27, 2024
Coram- Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Pankaj Mithal
18) Perverse on the face of the record: SC sets aside concurrent judgments of High Court, First Appellate Court & Trial Court to dismiss a civil suit
The Court set aside the judgments of the High Court, First Appellate Court, and the Trial Court to dismiss a civil suit. It reiterated that the jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution should not be exercised unless the findings suffer from perversity or are based on omission to consider vital evidence.
The Court was deciding a civil appeal filed against the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court by which the second appeal of the defendant was dismissed and the judgment of the Additional District Judge was affirmed.
Cause Title- Lakha Singh v. Balwinder Singh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 744)
Date of Judgment- September 27, 2024
Coram- Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Sandeep Mehta