***

Sentence reduced -- Petitioner faced rigors of long criminal prosecution -- Accident had taken place about 26 years back -- Sentence reduced to period already undergone.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 279, 304-A and 337 – Death by accident -- Sentence reduced -- Petitioner had already undergone custody of 29 days including remission out of awarded substantive sentence of one year -- Principle of proportionality to be borne in mind as awarding punishment is not merely retributive but also reformative -- Petitioner faced rigors of long criminal prosecution and accident had taken place about 26 years back -- In facts and circumstances of the case, sentence reduced to period already undergone.

(Paras 4, 7 to 13)

***

Abetment of suicide -- When Section 306 IPC is read with Section 107 IPC, it is clear that there must be direct or indirect instigation in close proximity to the commission of suicide, along with clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide.

***

Abetment of suicide -- Ordinary administrative directions, disciplinary supervision, adverse remarks regarding official performance, or even stern behaviour on part of superior officer cannot be elevated to status of abetment under Section 306 IPC

***

Criminal intimidation -- Alleged threats of suspension -- Appellant was not the competent authority to suspend the deceased -- Essential ingredients of Sections 504 and 506 IPC not attracted.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 306 and 107 -- Abetment of suicide -- Superior officer -- Proximity and mens rea --  Section 306 IPC read with Section 107 IPC requires direct or indirect instigation in close proximity to commission of suicide, along with clear mens rea to abet commission of suicide -- There must exist a proximate act amounting to instigation or intentional aid -- Ordinary administrative directions, disciplinary supervision, adverse remarks regarding official performance, or even stern behaviour on part of superior officer cannot be elevated to status of abetment under Section 306 IPC – There is complete absence of any proximate act of instigation immediately preceding suicide -- Prosecution failed to prima facie establish any intention to instigate, aid or abet deceased to commit suicide -- Continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process of law -- Appellant discharged.

(Para 14, 22-26, 28)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 504 and 506 -- Intentional insult -- Criminal intimidation -- Official acts performed by superior officer and alleged threats of suspension -- Allegations against Appellant pertain primarily to acts performed in his official capacity as superior officer of deceased -- Material on record does not disclose any intentional insult likely to provoke a breach of peace, nor does it reveal any criminal intimidation -- Appellant was not the competent authority to suspend deceased -- Essential ingredients of Sections 504 and 506 IPC not attracted -- Appellant discharged.

(Para 27, 28)

***

FERA -- Cognizance of offence -- Mandatory opportunity notice -- Service of an adequate and meaningful opportunity notice under the proviso to Section 61(2) is a mandatory statutory prerequisite for instituting a complaint under Section 56 or 57.

***

CrPC -- Section 482 vis-à-vis Section 397 -- In order to do substantive justice, the High Court can always treat and convert a petition filed under Section 482 as one under Section 397, and vice versa

***

Right to a speedy trial is an essential component of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21.

***

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 397 and 482 -- Inherent powers of High Court -- Maintainability of -- Quashing Petition -- Availability of an alternative remedy of revision under Section 397 of the CrPC does not, by itself, operate as a bar to the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC. -- Issuance of a summons is not an interlocutory order for the purposes of Section 397 -- The two provisions operate in distinct spheres, and the mere existence of a revisional remedy cannot be treated as ousting the jurisdiction preserved under Section 482, which is available wherever there is an abuse of the process of the court or where the ends of justice so require -- In order to do substantive justice, a High Court may always treat and convert a petition filed under Section 482 as one under Section 397, and vice versa, rather than non-suiting a party on a hyper-technical ground of maintainability.

(Paras 11, 13 and 14)

B. Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (46 of 1973), Sections 56(1), 57 and 61(2) proviso -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Cognizance of offences -- Mandatory requirement of opportunity notice -- Principle of natural justice – Quashing of summoning order -- Under the proviso to Section 61(2)(ii), where the alleged contravention consists of doing an act without permission, no complaint shall be made unless the person accused of the offence has first been given an opportunity of showing that he had such permission -- Adherence to the principles of natural justice must be read into the statute -- Service of an opportunity notice is a mandatory requirement without which no complaint under Section 56 or 57 can validly be instituted, and no Magistrate can validly take cognizance -- This opportunity must be meaningful and adequate, and not a mere technical or notional compliance -- The burden lies upon the prosecution that such notice was issued and served --  Where the complainant neither stated the date of the opportunity notice nor placed a copy or proof of service on record and the Magistrate took cognizance in a mechanical manner without recording satisfaction of compliance with Section 61(2), the order taking cognizance and issuing summons cannot be sustained in law, liable to be quashed.

(Paras 16-23)

C. Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Right to speedy trial -- Protracted delay in trial -- Unexplained inaction by prosecution -- Quashing of proceedings -- The right to a speedy and expeditious trial is implicit in the fair, just, and reasonable procedure guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, extending to every stage of a criminal proceeding including investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, and revision -- Complaint was instituted in 2002 for a transaction dating back to 1991-1992 --The prosecution failed to collect summons for service for nearly two years -- Despite express time-bound directions from the High Court to conclude the trial within one month (later extended to six months), the complainant refused to collect notices and remained absent right up to the filing of the appeals -- Such persistent and unexplained inaction spanning over 23 years reflects a complete want of diligence -- Permitting the prosecution to continue in such circumstances would unjustly leave the accused in a state of suspended animation indefinitely -- Criminal complaint and summoning order quashed.

(Paras 25, 26, 30-35)

***

Unlawful Assembly -- Mere presence at the crime scene would not ipso facto render a person member of the unlawful assembly.

***

Unlawful Assembly -- Quashing of FIR -- Where petitioners distanced themselves from the unruly mob and started helping the victims, and the chances of their conviction were very bleak, no fruitful purpose would be served in permitting the FIR to sustain and the same was liable to be quashed.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 149 -- Unlawful assembly -- Beating by mob -- Common object -- Mere presence at the crime scene would not ipso facto render a person a member of the unlawful assembly -- Liability would shift to the bystander only when he shared the common object with the unlawful assembly -- Petitioners, though part of the protest march, after having seen the conduct of persons who allegedly gave beatings to the teachers, separated themselves and attempted to save the teachers from beatings -- They cannot be said to be a part of the unlawful assembly -- The word "knew" used in the second part of the Section implies something more than possibility and positive knowledge is necessary -- There was nothing on record to suggest that petitioners were aware of the intention and object of some members of giving beatings to the staff and teachers.

(Para 18, 19, 21, 22)

B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Quashing of FIR -- Though petitioners were part of the protest march, they immediately after having seen the behaviour of the unruly mob, distanced themselves and started helping the staff and teachers -- Complainant as well as victims had specifically named persons who had allegedly given them beatings -- Chances of conviction of the petitioners were very bleak and, as such, no fruitful purpose would be served in permitting the FIR sought to be quashed to sustain -- Consequently, FIR and consequential proceedings quashed and set aside qua the petitioners.

(Para 23-25)

***

Dishonour of cheque -- Material alteration -- Cheque originally made out for Rs.10,000/-, altered to Rs.1,10,000/- -- Material alteration apparent on face of cheque -- Courts below ought not to have insisted upon any further evidence -- Conviction cannot be sustained.

***

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Material alteration -- Cheque originally made out for Rs.10,000/- altered to Rs.1,10,000/- -- Words “One Lak” inserted before “Ten Thousand only” and numerical “1” inserted before “10,000/-” -- Material alteration manifest on bare perusal of cheque -- Courts below erred in insisting upon further evidence in that regard -- Conviction of appellant for dishonour of cheque, held, cannot be sustained -- Judgments of Courts below set aside.

(Paras 4 to 8)

B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Material alteration -- Effect -- Where alteration in cheque is patently clear and manifest on the face of cheque itself, no further evidence is required to establish such material alteration -- Conviction based upon dishonour of materially altered cheque cannot be sustained.

(Paras 6 to 8)

***

Food adulteration -- Sentence -- Conviction maintained but sentence reduced to period already undergone in view of prolonged pendency of proceedings, clean antecedents and considerable lapse of time.

***

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954), Sections 7 and 16 -- Constitution of India, 1950, Article 21 -- Conviction -- Reduction of sentence -- Petitioner convicted for possessing khoya for sale and human consumption which fell short of minimum prescribed statutory standard -- Conviction maintained -- Considerable lapse of time since commission of offence and prolonged pendency of proceedings -- Petitioner not involved in any other criminal case and maintained a clean record -- Already undergone 02 months and 20 days out of total sentence of six months -- Petitioner faced agony of protracted prosecution and suffered mental harassment for a long period of 18 years -- Jail sentence reduced to period already undergone, subject to enhanced fine of Rs.5,000/-.

(Para 9, 12 to 16)

***

Section 304 Part II IPC -- Sentence -- Culpable homicide not amounting to murder -- Long lapse of time -- Period already undergone -- Conviction maintained -- Sentence modified.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 304 & 34 -- Sentence -- Alteration of sentence – Conviction under Section 304/34 IPC for causing death during a sudden altercation by pushing the deceased into a dry canal -- Evidence disclosed that fatal injuries were sustained due to the fall into the rock-bed canal and not by the alleged stone blows -- Case fell under Part II of Section 304 IPC as the act was committed with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death but without any intention to cause death or such bodily injury as was likely to cause death -- Incident occurred in 1997 -- Appellant was over 60 years of age by the time of disposal of appeal and had already undergone imprisonment for more than one and a half years -- Considering the prolonged lapse of nearly three decades, age of the appellant and overall facts and circumstances, while maintaining the conviction, substantive sentence reduced to the period already undergone.

(Paras 11 to 18)

***

Sentence -- Forgery -- Use of forged document in judicial proceedings -- Principle of proportionality -- Long lapse of time -- Absence of criminal antecedents -- Conviction maintained -- Sentence reduced to period already undergone.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 -- Sentence -- Appellant convicted for producing forged land rights document to furnish surety in bail proceedings -- Though offences involving use of forged documents before Court are serious and undermine the administration of justice, sentence must satisfy the principle of proportionality -- Occurrence of 2014 -- Appellant faced criminal proceedings for over a decade -- No criminal antecedents or subsequent involvement in similar offences -- Forged document detected at the threshold without causing irreversible pecuniary or proprietary consequences -- Appellant had already undergone more than two years' incarceration -- Conviction maintained -- Substantive sentence reduced to period already undergone -- Fine maintained.

(Paras 17 to 27)

***

Medical Negligence -- Summoning order under Section 304A IPC against doctor set aside for failure to await PGI Expert Report.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section, 223, 528 -- Quashing of summoning order -- Medical negligence -- Complaint alleging death due to negligent treatment -- District Medical Negligence Board comprising six doctors opining that treating doctor could not be held negligent -- Trial Court having directed obtaining of second expert opinion from PGI Chandigarh -- Summoning order passed without awaiting PGI report and without recalling earlier order directing procurement of expert opinion -- Procedure adopted by Trial Court held contrary to its own directions and settled norms of judicial discipline -- Summoning order under Section 304-A IPC quashed -- Trial Court directed to procure PGI report, consider the same along with other material on record and pass fresh order.

(Paras 16 to 24)

***

Reserved judgments -- Constitutional guidelines issued -- Delay in pronouncement held to affect Article 21 rights and institutional credibility of justice delivery system.

***

Reserved judgments -- Judgment to be ordinarily pronounced within maximum period of 3 months from date of reservation.

***

Bail/ Suspension of sentence/ Acquittal -- Orders granting regular bail, suspending sentence, or acquitting a convict in custody should be communicated to the jail authorities and the Trial Court on the date it is pronounced.

***

Bail applications to be pronounced preferably on same day or next day if reserved and uploaded immediately -- Communication of orders to jail authorities and trial courts mandated -- Immediate release directed subject to compliance of conditions.

***

A. Constitution of India, Articles 21, 226 and 227 -- High Courts -- Reserved judgments -- Delay in pronouncement -- Held, right to life and personal liberty includes right to timely adjudication at all stages, including pronouncement of reserved judgments -- Undue delay undermines fairness of adjudicatory process and public confidence in judiciary -- Necessity of systemic reform emphasised.

(Paras 9–11, 18–21)

B. Constitution of India, Article 142 -- Supreme Court -- Binding directions -- High Courts -- Reserved judgments -- Comprehensive framework issued governing timelines, monitoring, transparency and accountability in pronouncement of judgments -- Directions declared binding across all High Courts.

(Paras 15–17)

C. High Courts -- Reserved judgments -- Timelines for pronouncement -- Judgment to be ordinarily pronounced within maximum period of 3 months from date of reservation -- Special expedition mandated in matters involving personal liberty.

(Para 16A(i))

D. Criminal law -- Bail, suspension of sentence, acquittal -- High Courts -- Personal liberty matters -- Bail applications to be pronounced preferably on same day or next day if reserved and uploaded immediately – Orders granting regular bail, suspending sentence, or acquitting a convict in custody should be communicated to the jail authorities and the Trial Court on the date it is pronounced.

(Para 16A(c)–(e))

E. High Courts -- Reserved judgments -- Administrative monitoring -- Monthly automated reporting of pending reserved judgments to Chief Justice mandated -- Registrar General to compile and forward list of delayed matters -- Administrative oversight by Chief Justice strengthened.

(Para 16A(ii)(a), 16B, 17)

F. High Courts -- Reserved judgments -- Supervisory mechanism -- If judgment not delivered within 3 months, matter to be placed before Chief Justice -- Direction to concerned Bench to pronounce judgment within stipulated time -- In exceptional cases, matter may be reassigned to another Bench for rehearing.

(Para 16A(ii)(c)–(d))

G. High Courts -- Transparency -- Website disclosure -- Mandatory display of reserved judgments pending beyond 3 months -- Separate disclosure of cases where operative order delivered but reasoned judgment pending -- Automated email/SMS alerts to advocates introduced.

(Para 16B)

H. High Courts -- Judgments -- Operative order and reasoned judgment -- Where operative part is pronounced, reasoned judgment to be uploaded within 7–15 days -- Delay beyond prescribed period triggers administrative review and litigant remedies.

(Para 16A(i)(i), 16A(ii)(e))

I. High Courts -- Remedies to litigants -- Delay in pronouncement -- If judgment not pronounced within 3 months, party entitled to file application for early pronouncement -- If delay persists, party may approach Chief Justice for re-assignment of matter to another Bench.

(Para 16A(iii))

J. Constitution of India, Article 142 -- High Courts -- Reserved judgments – Institutional reform directed to ensure timely pronouncement of judgments and judicial accountability.

(Paras 15–17)

***

Prevention of Corruption Act -- Mere recovery of tainted money without proof of demand and acceptance cannot sustain conviction, and presumption under Section 20 does not arise.

***

A. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) & 20 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 120-B -- Illegal gratification -- Demand and acceptance -- Criminal conspiracy -- Appeal against acquittal -- Respondents acquitted by High Court of offences under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 120-B IPC -- Mere recovery of tainted money held insufficient in absence of proof of demand and voluntary acceptance of illegal gratification -- Presumption under Section 20 arises only after foundational facts of demand and acceptance are established -- Prosecution failed to prove criminal conspiracy as there was no cogent evidence of meeting of minds between accused -- Withholding of material electronic evidence justified adverse inference against prosecution -- High Court's appreciation of evidence held to be a plausible view warranting no interference under Article 136 of the Constitution -- Appeals dismissed.

(Paras 11 to 37)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 120-B -- Conspiracy cannot be inferred merely on the basis of suspicion or association and that there must be cogent material indicating meeting of minds between the accused persons -- To establish a charge of conspiracy, knowledge about indulgence in either an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means is necessary.

(Para 21)

***

Life imprisonment -- Modification of sentence -- Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC and having undergone 23 years, 6 months and 3 days of actual imprisonment -- Held, sentence modified to period already undergone.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 53 and 45 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 433-A, 386 and 401 -- Murder -- Life imprisonment -- Modification of sentence -- Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC and having undergone 23 years, 6 months and 3 days of actual imprisonment -- Whether life sentence can be modified to a fixed-term sentence -- Held, life imprisonment ordinarily means imprisonment for the remainder of natural life subject to constitutional and statutory remission powers -- However, Supreme Court and High Courts are empowered to impose a modified or fixed-term sentence exceeding fourteen years and may convert life imprisonment into a specified term of incarceration -- Considering that appellant was about 21 years of age at the time of occurrence, incident was of the year 1998 and appellant had already undergone more than 23 years of actual imprisonment, sentence modified to period already undergone while maintaining conviction -- Appeal partly allowed.

(Paras 8 to 18)

***

Cruelty -- General and omnibus allegations -- Letters allegedly written by deceased -- Handwriting not proved and contents vague -- No reliance can be placed thereon -- Conviction cannot be sustained in absence of specific instances, particulars or reliable evidence.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 498-A and 304-B -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), Section 4 -- Cruelty -- Dowry demand -- Suicide by wife -- Acquittal -- Trial Court acquitted accused under Section 304-B IPC holding that demand of dowry was not proved -- Conviction under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act recorded on basis of oral testimony and letters allegedly written by deceased -- Allegations of dowry demand and cruelty found general and omnibus without specific instances, particulars or identification of persons making demands -- Alleged letters not proved in accordance with law, handwriting of deceased not established and contents did not disclose any definite harassment or cruelty -- Held, evidence fell short of establishing cruelty or unlawful demand within meaning of Section 498-A IPC -- Conviction unsustainable -- Judgments of Trial Court and High Court set aside -- Appellant acquitted.

(Paras 2, 5 to 12)

***

Appeal against acquittal -- Reversal of acquittal -- Conviction by appellate court -- Sentencing -- Appellate court cannot remit matter to trial court for hearing on sentence and imposition of sentence after recording conviction.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 235(2), 386(a) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Sections 258, 427 -- Appeal against acquittal -- High Court reversed acquittal and convicted appellant under Sections 376 and 312 IPC -- Instead of hearing appellant on question of sentence, High Court directed trial court to take appellant into custody and impose sentence after hearing him -- Permissibility of -- Appellate court convicting accused for first time after reversing acquittal is itself required to hear him on question of sentence and thereafter pass sentence according to law -- Judicial function of sentencing cannot be delegated to trial court -- Direction remitting matter to trial court for imposition of sentence set aside -- Matter remitted to High Court for hearing appellant on sentence and passing appropriate sentencing order.

(Paras 12 to 22)

***

Compromise in criminal appeal -- Conviction under Sections 364, 323, 324 r/w 34 IPC -- Long pendency of about 22 years -- Parties settled dispute amicably and complainant not willing to pursue case -- Conviction affirmed but sentence reduced to period already undergone -- Fine maintained.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860), Sections 364, 323, 324 read with Section 34 -- Criminal appeal against conviction – Allegation of abduction and assault arising out of enmity -- Conviction upheld on merits -- During pendency of appeal, compromise arrived at between parties and report of CJM confirming settlement -- Complainant not interested in prosecution -- Custody already more than one year -- Considering long pendency of 22 years and period of custody already undergone, sentence modified to period already undergone while maintaining fine -- Appeal partly allowed.

(Paras 1–17)

***

NDPS -- Intermediate quantity (5 Kg 90 grams poppy husk) -- Custody of about 05 months and 27 days against sentence of 03 years -- Sentencing principles of reformation and proportionality applied -- long pendency -- Sentence modified to period already undergone while maintaining fine.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 415 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15(b) -- Appeal against conviction -- Recovery of 5 Kg 90 grams poppy husk from accused -- Case falls in intermediate quantity -- Trial court awarded 3 years rigorous imprisonment with fine -- Appeal confined to quantum of sentence as conviction not challenged -- Supreme Court principles of sentencing emphasising reformation and proportionality applied -- Considering custody already undergone (05 months 27 days) and long pendency, sentence reduced to period already undergone -- Conviction upheld, fine maintained -- Appellant directed to be released if not required in any other case -- Appeal partly allowed.

(Paras 6-16)

***

Criminal medical negligence -- Anaesthetist giving telephonic post-operative pain management advice after duty hours cannot be held criminally liable for subsequent procedural lapse committed by staff nurse in administering injection -- Criminal proceedings quashed.

***

Criminal negligence -- In absence of direct proximate nexus between telephonic painkiller advice and death caused by acute coronary insufficiency due to 80% coronary blockage, criminal liability of appellant-anaesthetist not sustainable.
***

Medical negligence -- Constitution of expert panel without anaesthetist in case involving epidural anaesthesia rendered medical opinion unreliable and contrary to safeguards laid down in Jacob Mathew, (2005) 6 SCC 1 -- Criminal prosecution unsustainable.

***

Criminal proceedings and civil proceedings -- Exoneration in civil proceedings -- Appellant-doctor having been exonerated on merits by Consumer Forum and such finding attaining finality, continuation of criminal prosecution on identical allegations held abuse of process of law.

***

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304-A -- Criminal medical negligence -- Rash and negligent act -- Degree of negligence -- Anaesthetist whose duty hours had concluded cannot be held criminally liable for a subsequent procedural error committed by a staff nurse -- Appellant merely suggested administration of painkiller over telephone, which constituted standard medical advice for post-operative pain management and not gross criminal recklessness -- Failure of nurse to accurately locate epidural space may at best amount to deficiency in service giving rise to civil liability, but lacked gross culpability or mens rea necessary to attract Section 304-A IPC -- Essential ingredients of criminal negligence absent -- Criminal proceedings quashed.

(Paras 19, 20, 24, 25)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304-A -- Criminal negligence -- Proximate cause -- Requirement of direct nexus (causa causans) between negligent act and death -- Painkiller advised by petitioner over telephone -- Deceased found having asymptomatic 80% coronary artery blockage -- Medical evidence proving immediate cause of death to be acute coronary insufficiency resulting in heart attack -- Chain of causation too remote to fasten criminal liability upon appellant-anaesthetist -- Criminal prosecution unsustainable.

(Para 28)

C. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Medical negligence -- Expert opinion – Requirement of independent competent medical opinion -- Case relating to administration of epidural anaesthesia -- Constitution of expert panel without anaesthetist -- Effect -- Absence of specialist in concerned branch rendered panel incompetent to evaluate technical nuances of epidural anaesthesia and catheter management -- Reliance on such flawed expert report contrary to safeguards laid down in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab -- Criminal prosecution unsustainable.

(Paras 26, 27)

D. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Criminal proceedings and civil proceedings -- Exoneration in civil proceedings -- Effect -- Consumer Forum after detailed appreciation of evidence exonerating appellant-doctor from liability -- Finding attained finality qua the appellant -- Where exoneration on merits holds allegations wholly unsustainable, continuation of criminal prosecution on identical facts amounts to abuse of process of law.

(Paras 21 to 23)

***

Circumstantial evidence -- Acquittal -- High Court found prosecution failed to establish complete chain of circumstances and allowed appeal and set aside conviction --Supreme Court declined interference under Article 136.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 364, 302, 396, 201 and 120-B -- Constitution of India, Article 136 -- Circumstantial evidence -- Murder -- Appeal against acquittal -- Prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence including last seen theory, recoveries and alleged disclosure statements -- High Court found prosecution failed to establish complete chain of circumstances and allowed appeal and set aside conviction -- Non-examination of independent witness allegedly present at time of recovery of dead body created serious doubt regarding prosecution claim that recovery was made pursuant to disclosure statement of accused -- Recoveries of tape recorder, wrist watch and towel not connected with crime through legally admissible evidence -- Suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute proof -- When two views are possible and High Court adopts plausible view, Supreme Court would not interfere with acquittal unless findings are perverse or result in miscarriage of justice -- Appeals dismissed.

(Paras 24 to 43)

***

Quashing of FIR -- Criminal proceedings arising from civil property dispute -- Subsequent FIR containing improved allegations held to be abuse of process.

***

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 154(3), 156(3), 200 and 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860), Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 384, 504, 506, 511 and 114 – Quashing of proceedings -- Long-standing civil dispute relating to title over immovable property -- FIR lodged after about 8-9 years -- Earlier complaint lodged seven months prior did not contain allegations of extortion or criminal intimidation -- Subsequent FIR lodged introducing allegation of demand of Rs.1.5 crores -- Material improvements in later FIR showing attempt to give criminal colour to civil dispute -- Held, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law -- FIR and consequential proceedings liable to be quashed.

(Paras 38 to 40, 52 to 58)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 463, 464, 465, 467, 468 and 471 -- Forgery -- False document -- Execution of Power of Attorney by persons claiming share in ancestral property -- No allegation of forged signatures, impersonation or fabrication of document -- Mere claim of title subsequently found unsustainable not amounting to making of a "false document" -- Ingredients of forgery absent -- Offences under Sections 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC not made out.

(Paras 44 and 45)

C. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420 -- Cheating -- Essential ingredients -- Deception, dishonest intention at inception and delivery of property -- No allegation that complainant delivered any property, money or valuable security pursuant to any inducement -- Section 420 IPC not attracted.

(Para 46)

D. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 384, 504, 506 and 511 -- Extortion -- Criminal intimidation -- FIR not disclosing date, place or circumstances of alleged demand -- No allegation of delivery of property or money pursuant to threats -- Vague allegations regarding intimidation and insult -- Attempt to extort also not established -- Ingredients of offences absent.

(Paras 47 and 48)

E. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 120-B -- Criminal conspiracy -- Substantive offences themselves not made out -- Charge of conspiracy cannot survive independently -- Held, offence under Section 120-B IPC also not attracted.

(Para 49)

F. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Criminal antecedents of accused -- Relevance -- Criminal antecedents cannot constitute sole or primary ground to refuse quashing of proceedings -- Court required to examine whether essential ingredients of offences alleged are made out -- Reliance on antecedents by High Court held unsustainable.

(Para 50)

***

FIR against public servants -- Direction for registration of FIR under Section 4 of SC/ST Act without recommendation of administrative enquiry held unsustainable.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 4(2) Proviso and Section 4(3) -- Public servants -- Dereliction of duty -- Direction for registration of FIR -- Sessions Judge directing registration of FIR against Circle Officer and Station House Officer under Section 4 of SC/ST Act without recommendation of administrative enquiry -- Recommendation of administrative enquiry a condition precedent and mandatory safeguard for initiation of penal proceedings against public servants -- Continuation of proceedings in absence of compliance with statutory mandate amounting to abuse of process of law -- Impugned order directing registration of FIR under Section 4 of SC/ST Act set aside qua applicants in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(Paras 5 to 10)

***

Dishonour of cheque -- Settlement -- Entire settlement amount received by complainant -- Conviction and sentence set aside and appellant acquitted.

***

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Compounding after conviction -- Settlement -- Parties having compromised and compounded the offence during pendency of Special Leave Petition -- Respondent-complainant having received entire settlement amount and agreed to cooperate for setting aside conviction -- In view of settlement, impugned order, conviction and sentence set aside -- Appellant acquitted of charge under Section 138 -- Appeal allowed.

(Paras 2 to 7)

***

Quashing of FIR -- Multiple proceedings -- Where FIR and complaint are founded on identical substratum of facts, continuation of parallel proceedings before different fora is impermissible and amounts to abuse of process.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 156(3) -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 469, 505 -- Constitution of India, Articles 20(2) and 21 – Quashing of FIR – Multiple proceedings – Test of sameness – Abuse of process – Where FIR and complaint proceedings arise from the same substratum of facts, continuation of parallel proceedings is impermissible and amounts to abuse of process of law -- It is well settled that there cannot be multiple FIRs in respect of the same occurrence, and splitting of a single transaction by changing the nomenclature of offences is not permissible – Held, the substratum of allegations in the impugned FIR and the earlier complaint before the Ld. CJM, Srinagar, being identical and arising from the same alleged social media activity, continuation of the FIR is unsustainable -- FIR and consequential proceedings quashed.

(Paras 6, 14 to 22)

***

Hostile witness -- Evidence of the hostile witness is admissible, once it gets strengthened with the help of other evidence.

***

Postmortem report -- Evidentiary value -- Postmortem report by itself not substantive evidence -- Requires corroboration by oral evidence of medical expert.

***

Independent witnesses -- Incident alleged to have occurred on public road with vehicular movement and presence of nearby persons -- Failure of prosecution to examine any independent witness assumes significance and renders occurrence doubtful.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302 and 323 -- Murder -- Conviction -- PW3 turned hostile and contradicted prosecution story -- Other witnesses did not support prosecution case regarding holding of Panchayat about the issue of elopement of the sister of the accused and the deceased. -- No other evidence which could corroborate the factum of holding of Panchayat etc. -- No independent witness examined though incident allegedly occurred on busy public road -- Medical evidence suffered from discrepancies and contradictions -- Held, prosecution failed to prove occurrence, genesis and motive of crime -- Evidence weak and unreliable -- Conviction unsustainable -- Appellant acquitted.

(Paras 5 to 10.4)

B. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Sections 145, 157 and 159 -- Hostile witness -- Admissibility and evidentiary value -- Evidence of hostile witness remains admissible and can be relied upon once corroborated by other reliable evidence.

(Paras 8.3 to 9)

C. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) -- Medical evidence -- Postmortem report -- Postmortem report by itself cannot be treated as a piece of substantive evidence -- Medical expert required to satisfactorily explain discrepancies and contradictions appearing in postmortem report -- Failure to explain inconsistencies diminishes evidentiary value of medical evidence.

(Paras 6 to 6.1)

***

Defamation -- Truthful reporting/publication of an FIR cannot be criminalised merely because it affects the reputation of the person named therein.

***

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 499, 500 & 120-B -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Criminal defamation -- Quashing of complaint -- Publication of news item based on First Information Report (FIR) -- Complaint made to police protected under Eighth and Ninth Exceptions to Section 499 -- Accurate and fair publication of contents of FIR does not constitute defamation -- Joint complaint by two complainants arising from same cause of action maintainable -- Editor not a necessary party where reporter himself authored the impugned publication -- Contents of FIR made to police protected and publication thereof by newspaper also protected -- -- Complaint, summoning order and consequential proceedings quashed.

(Paras 13 to 25)

***

Quashing of FIR -- Matrimonial dispute -- Mere matrimonial discord not sufficient to constitute offence under Section 498-A IPC -- Proceedings quashed.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 498-A, 406 & 34 -- Quashing of FIR -- Divorce by mutual consent -- Absence of allegations of dowry demand or statutory cruelty -- Mere matrimonial discord not sufficient to constitute offence under Section 498-A IPC -- Allegations that the complainant was not taken back to the matrimonial home and that the matrimonial house was subsequently sold did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC -- Parties had categorically stated before the Family Court that nothing remained due or payable inter se after dissolution of marriage -- Inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS can be exercised even after filing of the charge-sheet where continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court and would not serve the ends of justice -- Proceedings quashed.

(Paras 16 to 24)

***

Dowry harassment -- Cognizance under Section 319 Cr.P.C. -- General and omnibus allegations against sister-in-law (Jethani) -- Mere relationship with husband not sufficient to sustain cognizance in absence of specific allegations -- Cognizance quashed.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 319 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 498A, 406 & 323 -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), Sections 4 & 6 -- Cognizance -- Matrimonial dispute -- Sister-in-law (Jethani) summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. after police filed charge-sheet only against husband -- Petitioner residing separately and no material showing involvement in demand of dowry or matrimonial affairs -- Allegations against petitioner found to be general, vague and omnibus -- No specific overt act attributed showing cruelty, harassment or demand of dowry -- Mere relationship with husband not sufficient to prosecute in absence of specific allegations -- Order taking cognizance and revisional order quashed.

(Paras 9 to 13)

***

Mining Act – Ss. 21 & 22 -- Cognizance on police report impermissible -- Theft of minerals from State land constitutes distinct offence under IPC -- FIR quashed qua Mining Act offences but permitted to continue for offences under Ss. 379 and 120-B IPC.

***

Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (67 of 1957), Sections 21 and 22 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 379 and 120-B -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Quashing of FIR -- Illegal mining -- Cognizance of offences under Mining Act cannot be taken on police report and requires complaint by authorised officer -- Theft of minor minerals from State land constitutes distinct and independent offence under IPC -- Disputed questions regarding validity of mining lease and correctness of demarcation cannot be examined in proceedings for quashing -- High Court cannot conduct mini-trial or appreciate evidence while exercising inherent jurisdiction -- FIR and proceedings under Mining Act quashed -- Proceedings for offences under Sections 379 and 120-B IPC allowed to continue.

(Paras 14-26)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 473, 482 -- Insecticides Act, 1968 (46 of 1968), Section 3(k)(i), 17, 18, 29, 33 -- Insecticide Rules, 1971, Rule 27(5) -- Summoning order – Condonation of delay -- Non-speaking order – No satisfaction regarding prima facie case and no discussion of material on record – Limitation to be reckoned from date of receipt of report of Public Analyst – Complaint filed after considerable delay of several years – No application of mind to question of limitation or condonation of delay – Impugned order not sustainable – Matter remanded for fresh consideration with direction to pass speaking order after considering limitation and material on record.

(Paras 7 to 10)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Sections 138, 139 -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 438, 528 -- Cheque bounce complaint – Issuance of process – Presumption -- Dismissal of complaint at pre-trial stage – At the stage of issuance of process what is prima facie required to be seen is issuance of cheque by drawer, its dishonour on presentation, issuance of statutory notice and filing of complaint within prescribed period – Once issuance of cheque and signature are not disputed, statutory presumption u/s 139 that cheque was issued for discharge of legally enforceable debt or liability comes into play – Burden shifts on drawer to prove contrary during trial – Statutory presumption cannot be dislodged in a summary manner at pre-trial stage by contending that cheque was not issued for legally enforceable debt – Sessions Court and High Court erred in setting aside order issuing process – Complaint restored for trial on merits.

(Paras 8-12)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 88, 92, 312, 325, 426, 120-B, 406, 465, 468, 471, 501 (1) & (2) -- Quashing of criminal proceedings -- Medical negligence -- Consent for surgery – Act done in good faith -- Allegation that doctor performed Orchidectomy instead of Orchidopexy without consent – Consent form signed by father of minor patient mentioned both procedures separated by slash – Medical Review Board opined that Orchidectomy is a recognized alternative procedure in cases of undescended testicle and may be undertaken to prevent malignancy – Director, Medical and Rural Health Services found no fault in consent form – No material showing interpolation, different ink or handwriting in consent form – No allegation of malice against doctor – Continuation of criminal prosecution would amount to abuse of process of Court – Proceedings quashed.

(Para 16-21)

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 292, 294 -- Obscene words – Acquittal -- Mere use of the word ‘bastard’, by itself, is not sufficient to arouse prurient interest of a person -- More so, when such words are commonly used in modern era during heated conversations -- Conviction of the appellants for offence punishable u/s 294(b) IPC is not sustainable, set aside.

(Para 20)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 34, 324, 304 Part II – Common intention – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder -- A-1 charged on the deceased by taking an Aruval in his hand but, when PW-4 intervened, gave two blows to PW-4, which did not result in any grievous injury -- Testimony of PW-4 that A-2 took a log and gave a hard blow on the head of the deceased while uttering that all problems are because of the deceased and it is better that he dies, but this statement is not attributed to A-1 -- Besides, there is no evidence that A-1 exhorted A-2 to strike the deceased -- No reliable evidence to show that A-1 had beaten the deceased after he fell to the ground --  Not be safe to hold that A-1 shared common intention with A-2 to cause such bodily harm to the deceased as is likely to cause his death -- Conviction of A-1 u/s 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC set aside -- However, conviction of A-1 for causing injury to PW-4 and thereby committing offence punishable under Section 324 IPC is confirmed.

(Para 21)

C. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304 Part II – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder -- Section 304 Part II IPC – A-2 took a log and gave a hard blow on the head of the deceased while uttering that all problems are because of the deceased and it is better that he dies – Injury sustained by the deceased discloses fracture of the skull and there were blood clots in the brain -- No evidence that the death had occurred on account of improper treatment – Conviction of A-2 under Section 304 Part II IPC confirmed -- Having regard to the fact that the incident is of the year 2014 and was preceded by an altercation between neighbours, who are close relatives, arising from a boundary dispute, and injury was not caused by using a dangerous weapon, but by a log lying on the spot, and only a solitary blow was inflicted in the heat of the moment – Sentence reduced to 03 years from 05 years R.I.

(Para 21-28)

***

Dowry death -- Mere proof that death occurred within seven years of marriage is insufficient -- Prosecution must establish that death was caused by burns, bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances and that there existed a live and proximate link between dowry-related cruelty or harassment and the death.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 304-B and 498-A -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 113-B -- Dowry death -- Essential ingredients -- Death within seven years of marriage by itself not sufficient to attract Section 304-B IPC -- Prosecution required to prove that death was caused by burns, bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances and that deceased was subjected to dowry-related cruelty or harassment soon before death -- Post-mortem report disclosed no injuries, viscera report ruled out poisoning and cause of death remained unascertained -- Ingredient relating to unnatural death held not proved -- Conviction under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC set aside.

(Paras 12-22, 36-38)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 304-B and 498-A -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 113-B -- Dowry demand -- Mere demand for articles or valuables not amounting to dowry demand unless accompanied by cruelty or harassment connected therewith -- To invoke statutory presumption under Section 113-B, prosecution must establish a live and proximate nexus between death and dowry-related cruelty inflicted soon before death -- Vague allegations of demand unsupported by evidence of specific acts of cruelty or harassment held insufficient to sustain conviction.

(Paras 29-35)

C. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 304-B and 498-A -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 113-B -- Presumption as to dowry death -- Expression "shown" occurring in Section 304-B IPC and Section 113-B Evidence Act requires foundational facts to be proved by prosecution before statutory presumption can arise -- Burden shifts to accused only after prosecution establishes unnatural death within seven years of marriage and cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before death.

(Paras 27-30)

***

Scheduled Caste status -- Conversion to Christianity -- Person openly professing and practising Christianity as Pastor ceases to be member of Scheduled Caste within meaning of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 -- Statutory protections and benefits under SC/ST Act not available.

***

Scheduled Caste -- Conversion and reconversion -- Mere birth in Scheduled Caste not sufficient once person professes Christianity -- Reconversion claim must be established by proof of bona fide reconversion, complete renunciation of converted faith and acceptance by original caste community.

***

Quashing of proceedings -- SC/ST Act and IPC offences -- High Court justified in exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where foundational requirement of Scheduled Caste status absent and evidence collected during investigation failed to disclose ingredients of offences alleged.

***

A. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 3 -- Constitution of India, Articles 341 and 342 -- Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, Clause 3 -- Scheduled Caste -- Conversion to Christianity -- Applicability of SC/ST Act -- Appellant openly professing and practising Christianity as Pastor for more than ten years -- Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order categorically excludes persons professing religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism from Scheduled Caste status -- Upon conversion to Christianity, appellant ceased to be Scheduled Caste in law and could not invoke protections of SC/ST Act.

(Paras 35 to 61)

B. Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, Clause 3 -- Expression “professes” -- Meaning and scope -- “Profess” means open declaration and public practice of religion -- Person publicly preaching and conducting Christian religious services as Pastor clearly professes Christianity -- Irrespective of the appellant’s caste of origin, he cannot be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.

(Paras 36 to 44)

C. Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, Clause 3 -- Scheduled Caste -- Conversion to Christianity -- Reconversion -- Conditions precedent -- Claimant seeking restoration of Scheduled Caste status must establish original caste status, bona fide reconversion, complete renunciation of converted faith and acceptance by original caste community -- Mere possession of caste certificate insufficient unless in consonance with Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.

(Paras 55, 58)

D. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 341, 323, 506 and 34 -- Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Conversion to Christianity – Applicability of SC/ST Act -- Quashing of proceedings -- Allegations of assault, restraint and intimidation unsupported by independent witnesses -- Statements of material witnesses inconsistent and lacking specific attribution against accused -- Evidence collected during investigation failed to disclose essential ingredients of offences alleged -- Continuation of proceedings held abuse of process -- Appellant ceased to be member of Scheduled Caste -- High Court justified in quashing proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(Paras 60 to 69)

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 307, 326 – Attempt to murder – Compromise quashing of FIR – Court may look into the medical evidence and examine the same to see as to whether the conviction u/s 307 of the IPC was possible or not -- Mere registration of an FIR u/s 307 did not foreclose the right of the petitioner/accused to effect a compromise and get the FIR quashed -- An injury which has been “declared dangerous to life” is in fact an injury which is “endangering life” and therefore would be punishable u/s 326 IPC – Therefore, if a conviction was to be recorded, in all probability it would be one u/s 326 IPC and not u/s 307 IPC – FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom quashed.

(Para 7-12)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 190 -- Summoning of accused – Procedure – Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course – It is not sufficient that the complainant merely produces two witnesses to support the allegations in the complaint to set the criminal law in motion – Order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect due application of mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto – Magistrate must carefully scrutinize the evidence brought on record and determine whether any offence is prima facie made out – Magistrate may also put questions to the complainant and his witnesses to elicit answers so as to ascertain the truthfulness of the allegations and then examine whether any offence is prima facie committed by any of the accused.

(Para 13)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Quashing of Complaint/ FIR – Inherent powers of High Court -- When an accused seeks quashing of either the FIR or criminal proceedings on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous, vexatious or malicious, the Court is duty bound to examine the matter with greater care -- It will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not -- In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case, over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection, and try to read in between the lines – Court is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation.

(Para 14)

C. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 190, 482 -- Indian Copyright Act, 1957 (14 of 1957), Section 63, 65, 65A -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 387 -- Quashing of complaint/ summoning order --  Complaint only contains a bald and unsubstantiated allegations -- Statement of the complainant and witnesses (brother of the complainant) and (cousin of the complainant), do not identify any feature of the script allegedly copied -- Dispute Settlement Committee of SWA comprising experts found no similarity between the film and the script and dismissed the complaint -- Complainant and his witnesses concealed the aforesaid material fact and did not bring the same to the notice of the Court -- No material on record to prima facie conclude that there was any similarity between appellant’s film and complainant’s script – Summoning order held to be passed in mechanical manner and suffers from vice of non-application of mind -- Summoning order and complaint quashed.

(Para 16-20)

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420 -- Cheating – Intention to deceive – Inducement -- In order to constitute an offence of cheating the intention to deceive should be in existence when the inducement was made -- It is necessary to show that a person had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise -- Mere failure to keep the promise subsequently cannot be the sole basis to presume that dishonest intention existed from the very beginning.

(Para 13, 14)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Cheating – Quashing -- Inherent powers of High Court -- High Court may, in exercise of its inherent powers under the Code, or under Article 226 of the Constitution, upon consideration of the attending circumstances, take a decision whether the dishonest intention existed or not at the time of making the promise -- And, if it comes to the conclusion that the alleged conduct of the parties does not reflect a dishonest intention of the accused from the very beginning, it may quash the criminal complaint/ proceedings and relegate the aggrieved party to civil remedies.

(Para 15)

C. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 415, 420 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Cheating -- Breach of contract -- Money invested for making a movie on promise of sharing profits – Failure to pay returns/profits – No allegations that the movie earned profits and the accused had dishonest or fraudulent intention at the inception of transaction – Mere non-fulfilment of promise or breach of contractual obligation does not constitute cheating – By issuance of post-dated cheques, the de facto complainant was led to vacate his objection to movie’s release, even then an offence of cheating would not be made out for two reasons; First, those cheques were post-dated therefore, did not carry a representation of sufficient funds in the bank account at the time of its issuance, Second, initial agreement, as per the allegations, was to share profit on release of the movie – Allegations only disclosed a civil cause of action and the High Court fell in error in not quashing the criminal proceedings -- Impugned criminal proceedings u/s 420 IPC quashed.

(Para 16-21)

Minor offence under section 222 Cr.P.C. – Punishment for minor offence compare to charged offence -- Section 364 IPC cannot be treated as minor/cognate offence of Section 302 IPC -- Accused charged under Section 302 IPC cannot be convicted under Section 364 IPC in absence of specific charge.

***

Minor offence under section 222 Cr.P.C. – Minor offence not determined merely by lesser punishment -- Where two offences are cognate offences and main ingredients are common, offence carrying lesser sentence can be treated as minor offence vis-a-vis other offence.

***

Minor offence under section 222 Cr.P.C. – Composition of the offence under Section 304-B is vastly different from the offence of murder indicated under Section 302 IPC and hence the former cannot be regarded as a minor offence vis-a-vis the latter.

***

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 364 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 221, 222 -- Conviction for offence not charged -- Minor offence -- Scope – Murder / Kidnapping or abduction in order to murder -- Accused charged for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC -- Trial Court acquitting accused of offence under Section 302 IPC but convicting under Section 364 IPC on finding that accused had taken deceased with him on pretext of watching movie -- Validity -- Offence under Section 364 IPC is separate and distinct offence and cannot be construed as minor/ cognate offence vis-a-vis Section 302 IPC -- Ingredients of both offences not common -- In absence of specific charge under Section 364 IPC, conviction thereunder caused prejudice to accused and violated fair trial norms -- No evidence of forceful taking away or abduction of deceased by accused -- High Court justified in setting aside conviction -- Appeal dismissed.

(Paras 8 to 11)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 222 -- Minor offence -- Interpretation -- Expression “minor offence” found in Section 222 is not defined under the Code, it can be discerned from the context which is not merely that the prescribed punishment is less than the major offence -- If the two offences are cognate offences and the main ingredients are common, the offence punishable with lesser sentence can be considered as a minor offence with reference to the other offence.

(Para 9)

C. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 304B -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 221, 222 -- Murder – Dowry death -- Composition of the offence under Section 304-B is vastly different from the offence of murder indicated under Section 302 IPC and hence the former cannot be regarded as a minor offence vis-a-vis the latter.

(Para 10)

***

Quashing of FIR -- Inherent powers of High Court -- Proceedings can be quashed where they are manifestly mala fide or instituted with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance or private grudge, to prevent abuse of process of law and secure ends of justice.

***

Quashing of FIR -- Election speech -- Allegations of abusive remarks against Prime Minister of India -- Ingredients of Sections 125 of Representation of the People Act and 504 IPC not made out -- FIR and proceedings quashed.

***

A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 528 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Inherent powers of High Court – Quashing of FIR -- Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him/her due to private and personal grudge, High Court, while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.PC can proceed to quash the proceedings.

(Para 11)

B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 528 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Representation of the People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951), Section 125 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 504 -- Quashing of FIR -- Allegations that petitioner made abusive remarks against Prime Minister of India during election speech and violated Model Code of Conduct -- Final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. contains vague and omnibus allegations without specific particulars of words used -- Held, ingredients of Section 125 R.P.C. Act not satisfied as there is no material showing promotion of enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language -- Further held, essential ingredients of Section 504 IPC missing as no material to show intentional insult with intent or knowledge to provoke breach of public peace -- Complainant not the person allegedly provoked, allegations vague and unsupported by material evidence -- Powers under Section 528 BNSS/Section 482 Cr.P.C. reiterated to be exercised to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice -- FIR and consequential proceedings held to be an abuse of process of law and quashed.

(Paras 18 to 24)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B  -- Quashing of FIR -- Forgery and Cheating – Premature Exercise of Jurisdiction – High Court quashed FIR alleging forgery while the investigation was ongoing and documents were pending examination by the State Forensic Science Laboratory (SFSL) – Held: It is wholly unjustified for a High Court to quash an FIR at the threshold when the Investigating Agency is awaiting a handwriting expert’s report on disputed signatures – High Court glossed over vital aspects of investigation and prematurely concluded that ingredients of fraud were not made out –Prosecution of accused cannot be stifled when prima facie evidence of criminal misappropriation and falsification exists – Impugned order of the High Court set aside.

(Para 14-24)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 200, 202 -- Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 3(x) -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 506, 34 -- Enquiry u/s 202 Cr.P.C. – Role of -- An inquiry u/s 202 Cr.P.C. was conducted and a report was submitted – Summoning order is completely silent on the material collected during the inquiry u/s 202 Cr.P.C. and lacks any discussion of the essential ingredients of the offences alleged cannot be sustained being a non-speaking order passed without due application of mind -- Summoning of an accused is a serious matter and cannot be done in a mechanical manner and that absence of such indication amounts to non-application of mind – Summoning order set aside, matter remitted back to the learned trial Court for fresh consideration.

(Para 5-8)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B – Cheating – Forgery -- Agreement to Sell -- Quashing of FIR -- Dispute between the parties arose out of an agreement to sell executed in 2004, and during the pendency of a civil suit for specific performance the accused sold a portion of the land to a third party -- Matter was already subject matter of adjudication before civil courts, and the decree passed therein had been challenged in second appeal where execution proceedings stood stayed -- FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of about 11 years -- Not the case of the complainant that the petitioner had dishonestly induced him to part with property or money by making false representations at the very inception -- No allegations of fabrication or forgery of documents so as to attract offences u/ss 467, 468 or 471 IPC -- Allegations essentially pertained to non-execution of the sale deed and subsequent transfer of property, which would be governed by civil remedies and the doctrine of lis pendens -- Dispute is predominantly civil in nature and criminal proceedings are initiated merely to pressurize the opposite party -- FIR and all consequential proceedings quashed.

(Para 8-13)

A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 32 – Dying declaration – Evidentiary value – A dying declaration is a very important species of evidence capable of proving the crime proper and identifying the accused, an exception to hearsay having been provided by Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act -- Court should be satisfied it is made by the deceased without any prompting or tutoring or coercion or is a mere figment of imagination -- Then conviction can be based solely on the dying declaration and there is no requirement of any corroboration.

(Para 13)

B. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 32 – Dying declaration – Form of declaration -- It can be reduced to writing or can be oral, as testified by reliable witnesses -- It can be one or numerous and if more than one; exculpatory and inculpatory, it is for the Court to find out which is believable -- It can be a lengthy one or a short one, so far as the crime is spoken of and identification of the perpetrator comes through -- It can be a single narrative or in a question and answer form -- It can either have a history of the rancour between the perpetrator and the victim or can be merely the brief statement of the incident.

(Para 13)

C. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 32 – Dying declaration – Medical condition/ opinion -- The capacity of the injured to make the statement, both physical and mental, need not be necessarily certified by a doctor and would rest again on the satisfaction of the Court on an analysis of the testimony of the various witnesses and the other evidence coming forth in trial -- If the Court is satisfied of the fit state of mind of the injured from the evidence on record, a contrary medical opinion or an absence of it will be inconsequential.

(Para 13)

D. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 32 – Dying declaration – Where to made -- It can be made before a Magistrate; Executive or Judicial, a Doctor, a Police Officer, a relative or a third party whose presence is not doubtful -- The desire of the declarant to live, through the truth despite fear of imminent death cannot be easily brushed aside.

(Para 13)

E. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 313 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 32 – Murder – Son and daughter-in-law accused of murder – Acquittal – Lapses in investigation and trial – Non-compliance with Section 313 Cr.P.C. – Investigation found to be grossly deficient – Scene mahazar not drawn, no forensic examination conducted at the scene of crime and no independent witnesses examined – Cause of fire not investigated and presence of the accused near the crime scene not established – Delay in registration of FIR despite prior information received at the police station and presence of police officials at the scene constituted a serious lapse – Manner in which the FIS was recorded cast doubt on the conduct of the Investigating Officer – Dying declarations ought to have been recorded with greater caution and preferably in the presence of a doctor with certification – Incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence must be put to the accused in their entirety under Section 313 Cr.P.C., a duty cast upon both the Court and the Prosecutor – Failure to do so may vitiate the prosecution case – Acquittal recorded by the High Court upheld.

(Para 21-32)

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B --  Quashing of FIR – Cheating/ Forgery -- Civil dispute -- Allegations primarily related to return of money and alleged partnership without any written agreement -- Dispute was purely civil in nature – Criminal proceedings held to be an abuse of process of law – FIR and subsequent proceedings quashed.

(Para 10-17)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 341, 323, 498-A, 34 – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), Section 3, 4 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – General and omnibus allegations against in-laws -- High Court quashed proceedings against sister-in-law but declined similar relief to other in-laws – FIR disclosed that allegations against appellants and sister-in-law were identical – No specific overt act, date or place attributed to appellants – Mere allegation that appellants used to quarrel does not constitute ingredients of offences alleged – Applying different standards to similarly placed accused held erroneous – Where allegations against accused persons stand on identical footing, relief granted to one accused on ground of general and omnibus allegations must equally extend to others – Different standards cannot be applied -- Proceedings against appellants also quashed.

(Paras 7, 10, 11)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 341, 323, 498-A, 34 – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), Section 3, 4 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Matrimonial dispute – Delay in lodging complaint – Counter-blast to divorce proceedings --  Marriage solemnised in July 2019 – Husband filed divorce petition in March 2021 – Criminal complaint against in-laws lodged in March 2022 – Though delay alone not sufficient ground for quashing, viewed in conjunction with the absence of any specific allegations attributable to them, the delay lends credence to the submission that the criminal complaint against the in-laws may have been instituted by way of a counter-blast to the divorce proceedings initiated by the husband -- When these two considerations are read together, continuation of the criminal proceedings against the present appellants cannot be sustained.

(Para 8)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 376 (2)(n), 506 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 -- Rape on false promise of marriage -- Consensual relationship -- Quashing of FIR -- Complainant, a married woman and mother of two children, employed in a massage parlour and in charge of running the same, had a physical relationship with the appellant who visited the parlour as a customer – Relationship commenced in August 2023 and continued till March 2024 – Complainant informed appellant of pregnancy on 15.03.2024 – FIR lodged after appellant’s marriage on 12.03.2024 alleging rape on promise of marriage – No allegation that she was divorced from her husband or even separated from him – Held, there was a consensual relationship, neither inducement nor threat and no possibility of a deception luring the complainant into a physical relationship on the pretext of marriage – Even if FSL report establishes paternity, consent demolishes allegation of rape on promise of marriage – Order of High Court refusing to quash proceedings set aside and FIR quashed.

(Para 7 to 9)

A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 – Cheating – Forgery – Civil dispute -- Quashing – Inherent powers of High Court -- While considering a prayer to quash an FIR, ordinarily the allegations made therein are to be taken at their face value to assess whether prima facie commission of a cognizable offence is made out or not -- Where the cause espoused in the FIR is essentially of a civil nature, while addressing a quashing petition, the Court must have regard to the attending circumstances and assess whether it has been given cloak of criminal offence and whether proceeding further on the FIR would amount to the abuse of the process of the court/ law -- In making such assessment, the Court may consider not only the contents of the FIR but also the admitted facts / documents recited therein.

(Para 15)

B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 – Cheating – Forgery – Civil dispute -- Quashing of FIR -- Parties had entered into a Joint Venture Agreement for development of property -- Disputes regarding title to the property/land including suppression of litigation pending in respect thereof, non-fulfilment of contractual obligations, non-refund of security money and furnishing false document arose -- If there was something stark about the dishonest intention on part of one of the parties to the agreement, it would have been reported promptly and not after 10 years -- Merely because a document is not traceable in the office records after several years of its issuance, it cannot be said that the document is forged -- Recourse to appropriate civil remedy was required -- Continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law -- FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom quashed.

(Para 16-30)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 2(xv), 2(xvi), 18, 21 – Quashing of FIR – NDPS – ‘Opium’ – ‘Opium derivative’ – Morphine content detected in recovered contraband is less than the stipulated quantity of 0.2% and the medicines recovered from the spot thus cannot be termed as ‘opium’ or ‘opium derivative’ – No prima facie case made out -- Continuation of proceedings is nothing but an abuse of the process of law -- FIR and the consequential proceedings quashed.

(Para 7-11)

***

Cheque dishonour -- Complainant's right to appeal against acquittal without special leave under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. -- Divergent views -- Issue referred for authoritative pronouncement by larger Bench.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 372 and 378(4) -- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Appeal against acquittal -- Complainant -- Proviso to Section 372 -- In Celestium Financial's case, 2025 INSC 804 = (2025) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 20136, it was held that complainant in a case under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is a 'victim' who would be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to Section 372 without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) -- Present Bench unable to agree with such interpretation -- Earlier decisions holding to the contrary not considered -- Issue having far-reaching consequences -- Matter may be placed before Chief Justice for appropriate directions for authoritative pronouncement by larger Bench.

(Para 1-4)

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 106 -- Murder – Acquittal -- Circumstantial Evidence – Last seen together theory – Failure to establish proximity and reliable identification – Effect – No clear-cut time specified on which the death occurred, when it is trite that the last seen together theory projected by the prosecution should be proximate to the death of the victim – It is the roommates of the deceased who informed PW1 that they were told by a friend of the deceased that he was going to meet A1 in the evening -- The roommates of the deceased were not examined -- Identification of the accused by a witness for the first time in the police station, without holding a Test Identification Parade -- Nothing on record to indicate ownership of auto rickshaw, who was alleged to be driver of auto rickshaw, who had picked up three persons and dropped them near scene of occurrence --   Ransom calls hence remained an unsolved puzzle – Last scene theory not proved -- Conviction set aside.

(Para 13-16, 31)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 24 -- Murder – Acquittal -- Confession statement -- Confession can form a legal basis of a conviction if the Court is satisfied that it was true and was voluntarily made -- Confession allegedly made by the appellants is of no use in bringing home a conviction, especially when there was no corroboration available, of the statements made, from other valid evidence -- Admissions were only that made in the confessional statements, of the death having occurred in the presence of the accused, on the day the deceased was found missing, which is not worthy of acceptance – Conviction set aside.

(Para 29-31)

***

Criminal Appeal against Acquittal -- Hostile prosecutrix -- Prosecution evidence insufficient -- Truncated trial justified -- No perversity in acquittal.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 161, 164, 378 -- Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), Section 67 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 376-D, 509, 506, 120-B, 201 -- Appeal against acquittal -- Truncated trial -- Sexual assault case -- Prosecutrix turned hostile and categorically denied rape, stating allegations were based on mistaken belief regarding fake photographs/videos -- No credible material to support charge under Section 67 IT Act as FSL report uncorroborated and electronic evidence not proved – Alleged relationship found to be consensual on record – Trial Court truncated proceedings and acquitted accused holding further trial would be an empty formality – Prosecution evidence is wholly insufficient  -- Acquittal based on appreciation of evidence calls for no interference – Acquittal upheld.

(Paras 9-20)