“NO LAW OR ORDINANCE IS MIGHTIER THAN UNDERSTANDING.”
NEWS – SUPREME COURT
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Wasif Haider and Ors
Benefit of doubt must go to accused when investigation is defective – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal of the accused after finding serious investigative lapses and unexplained delay in conducting the Test Identification Parade (TIP).
The Court reiterated that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace proof and defective investigation strengthens the presumption of innocence.
The appeals challenging acquittal were dismissed.
Manohar Lal Sharma v. Narendra Damodardas Modi and Ors
Supreme Court declines intervention in Rafale fighter jet procurement matter
The Supreme Court held that defence procurement contracts are subject to limited judicial review because of national security considerations.
The Court found no material indicating procedural impropriety, irrationality or illegality in the Rafale aircraft procurement process.
The petitions seeking investigation and judicial intervention were dismissed.
Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Noida v. Sanjivani Non-Ferrous Trading Pvt Ltd
Undervaluation allegations must be supported by proper evidence – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that customs authorities cannot reject declared invoice value without producing cogent evidence of contemporaneous imports at higher prices.
The Court reiterated that the burden lies upon the Department to establish undervaluation before reassessing imported goods.
The Revenue appeals were dismissed.
Prakash Chand Daga v. Saveta Sharma and Ors
Registered vehicle owner remains liable until transfer is recorded – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that transfer of ownership of a vehicle does not absolve the registered owner from liability towards third parties unless transfer is officially recorded with transport authorities.
The Court emphasized statutory obligations under Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The appeal challenging liability was dismissed.
V Ravi Kumar v. State and Ors
Criminal proceedings cannot be quashed merely because dispute has civil elements – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court restored criminal proceedings involving allegations of cheating, forgery and misuse of documents.
The Court held that existence of civil remedies does not bar criminal prosecution where allegations disclose ingredients of criminal offences.
The High Court order quashing proceedings was set aside.
Naman Singh and Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors
Executive Magistrates cannot direct registration of FIRs – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that Executive Magistrates have no authority under the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct police registration of FIRs on private complaints.
The Court clarified that only Magistrates exercising powers under Section 156(3) CrPC can issue such directions.
The FIR registered on instructions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was quashed.
NEWS – HIGH COURT AND TRIBUNALS
Naseem Kar v. Sonamarg Development Authority
Interim protection cannot revive an expired contract – Jammu & Kashmir High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court refused interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act where the underlying contract had already expired by efflux of time.
The Court held that determinable contracts cannot ordinarily be specifically enforced through interim measures.
The petition seeking status quo protection was dismissed.
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited v. CCT, Visakhapatnam GST
CENVAT credit can be claimed on debit notes – CESTAT
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal held that debit notes are valid documents for availing CENVAT credit if they contain relevant particulars.
The Tribunal observed that handwritten mention of service tax amount does not invalidate the claim.
The appeal filed by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited was allowed.
Gaodevi Utkarsh Sra Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd. and Ors v. Sudesh Darshan Aggarwal and Anr
Executing court may clarify ambiguity in decree while enforcing it – NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that executing courts may interpret ambiguous portions of a decree to give effective implementation to the original order.
The Commission clarified that specifying shop number in execution proceedings did not amount to review or recall of the earlier judgment.
The execution appeal by the housing society was dismissed.
Kailash Chandra Gupta v. Vinod Kumar Bhatia and Ors
Loss of earning capacity for drivers can amount to 100% disability – Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court held that amputation of a driver’s hand resulting in loss of employment constitutes 100% loss of earning capacity.
The Court relied upon Supreme Court principles distinguishing functional disability from physical disability percentages.
The compensation matter was remanded for fresh determination.
Raghu Hari Dalmia v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors
High Court refuses to interfere with wilful defaulter declaration – Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court upheld the decision declaring the petitioner a wilful defaulter under RBI guidelines.
The Court observed that judicial review cannot substitute appellate scrutiny when the competent authority has passed a reasoned order after considering replies.
The writ petition was dismissed.
Meghdoot Ghosh v. The State of West Bengal and Ors
Courts should not interfere with tender evaluations absent mala fides – Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court reiterated that judicial review of tender evaluation processes is limited to cases involving arbitrariness, mala fides or irrationality.
The Court refused to interfere merely because another view was possible on technical qualification assessment.
The writ petition challenging rejection of technical bid was dismissed.
Shafiq Ahmad Shah v. State of J&K and Ors
Evacuee properties must be allotted through transparent procedures – Jammu & Kashmir High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed allotment of evacuee property made without adopting a fair and transparent public process.
The Court held that distribution of public property must comply with Article 14 principles of equality and non-arbitrariness.
The impugned lease agreement was set aside.
Lakshmi Kant Patel v. The State of Bihar and Ors
Gratuity cannot be withheld without proven financial loss – Patna High Court
The Patna High Court directed release of gratuity benefits despite pendency of criminal proceedings because no proven pecuniary loss to the State had been established.
The Court observed that withholding of gratuity requires legal justification under the Bihar Pension Rules.
The appeal was allowed.
Vijay Singh Machhan v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors
Government may review earlier administrative decisions if done reasonably – Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court upheld the Government’s decision cancelling construction of a proposed PWD Rest House after policy review by the Cabinet.
The Court held that a change in Government does not prohibit review of earlier decisions if the review is reasonable and in public interest.
The writ petition was dismissed.
