***

Dishonour of cheque -- Conviction -- Plea of guilt -- Admission of issuance and signatures on cheque not amounting to unqualified, unambiguous and voluntary admission of guilt -- Mandatory procedure under Sections 251 and 252 Cr.P.C. not complied with -- Conviction unsustainable.

***

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 251, 252 and 375 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Conviction -- Plea of guilt -- Statement of accused under Section 251 Cr.P.C. -- Accused admitting issuance and signatures on cheque but stating that cheque was given as security in connection with business transaction -- Such statement not constituting unqualified, unambiguous, clear and voluntary admission of guilt -- Magistrate required to state particulars of offence to accused and record plea as nearly as possible in words used by him -- Strict compliance with Sections 251 and 252 mandatory -- Mere admission of issuance of cheque and signatures thereon, without admission of legally enforceable debt or unconditional liability, insufficient to record conviction on plea of guilt -- Essential ingredient of offence relating to service of statutory demand notice not put to accused while recording plea -- Alleged admission, therefore, not sufficient to sustain conviction -- Payment of Rs.50,000 during pendency of complaint not amounting to admission of guilt -- Appellate Court having no jurisdiction to entertain appeal against conviction recorded on plea of guilt in view of Section 375 Cr.P.C. -- Impugned judgments set aside -- Matter remanded to Trial Magistrate to proceed further in accordance with law.

(Paras 8–21)

***

Pension -- Post-retiral benefits -- Withholding of pension and gratuity -- No departmental or judicial proceedings pending -- Mere pendency of FIR/investigation insufficient -- Pension and gratuity being property protected under Article 300-A -- Employee cannot be deprived of full pension and other post-retiral benefits.

***

Constitution of India, Article 300-A -- Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations, Articles 168-A and 168-D -- Pension -- Post-retiral benefits -- Withholding of pension and gratuity -- Retired employee -- No departmental or judicial proceedings pending against employee at time of retirement -- Mere registration of FIR and pending investigation -- Insufficient to withhold pension, gratuity and other post-retiral benefits -- Pension and gratuity being hard-earned benefits in the nature of property, constitute a constitutional right under Article 300-A -- Such benefits cannot be taken away except by authority of law -- Unless departmental or judicial proceedings are instituted under Article 168-A, resort cannot be had to Article 168-D to grant only provisional pension or withhold gratuity -- Tribunal rightly directed release of pension and other post-retiral benefits with interest -- Petition dismissed.

(Paras 12–15)

***

Complaint -- Dismissal for non-appearance -- Pre-cognizance stage -- Petition under Section 528 of BNSS maintainable -- Dismissal before issuance of process does not amount to acquittal -- Complaint restored.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Sections 279, 419(4) and 528 -- Complaint -- Dismissal for non-appearance of complainant -- Pre-cognizance stage -- Maintainability of petition under Section 528 -- Section 279 can be invoked only after issuance of process against accused -- Dismissal of complaint under Section 279 results in acquittal of accused and is appealable under Section 419(4) after obtaining leave of High Court -- Such order cannot be challenged under Section 528 or by invoking revisional power -- Dismissal of complaint at pre-cognizance stage does not amount to acquittal and is not appealable -- Petition under Section 528 maintainable where dismissal has resulted in failure of justice -- Non-appearance of complainant not deliberate but due to circumstances beyond his control -- Failure to restore complaint would cause grave prejudice and result in failure of justice -- Impugned order set aside and complaint restored to its original position.

(Paras 3–8)

***

Habeas Corpus -- Major woman -- Alleged illegal detention -- Corpus voluntarily residing with respondent -- Writ of Habeas Corpus cannot be issued for production of corpus.

***

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Habeas Corpus -- Major woman -- Alleged illegal detention -- Voluntary stay with respondent -- Earlier proceedings before co-ordinate Bench -- Statement of corpus recorded and she permitted to reside with respondent -- No material brought on record to show that statement was made under undue influence or coercion -- Seeking another statement before Court would indirectly amount to reviewing earlier proceedings, not permissible in law -- Dispute regarding validity of marriage between corpus and respondent can be agitated before competent civil Court -- Corpus being major and having made an informed choice to live with respondent, her stay in his company does not amount to detention against her wishes or commission of any offence -- Writ of Habeas Corpus cannot be issued for production of corpus -- Petition dismissed.

(Paras 8–11)

***

Bail – Murder -- Prolonged incarceration -- Successive bail petition -- Petitioner in custody for about five years, with only 14 of 25 prosecution witnesses examined and delay not attributable to him -- Continued incarceration -- Right to speedy trial under Article 21 -- Bail granted.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 483 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 -- Regular Bail -- Successive bail petition -- Maintainability -- Murder -- Prolonged incarceration -- Speedy trial -- Article 21 of Constitution -- Successive bail petition maintainable where there is drastic change in circumstances -- Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy trial not in consonance with Article 21 -- Petitioner in custody for about five years in murder case based on circumstantial evidence, with only 14 out of 25 prosecution witnesses examined and delay not attributable to him -- Gravity of offence cannot by itself justify continued incarceration -- Bail not to be withheld as punishment -- Trial not likely to conclude shortly -- Bail granted.

(Paras 7–8)

***

GST Assessment -- Extended period of limitation -- Section 74 -- Show Cause Notice -- Mere allegation of fraud, wilful misrepresentation or suppression insufficient -- Foundational facts must be evident from notice itself -- Mechanical recital of statutory expressions cannot justify extended limitation -- SCN and consequential order set aside.

***

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017), Sections 73 and 74 -- Assessment -- Extended period of limitation -- Show Cause Notice -- Mechanical invocation of Section 74 without foundational facts -- Proceedings under Sections 73 and 74 require independent, subjective satisfaction of the Proper Officer; an audit objection cannot automatically substitute such satisfaction -- To invoke the extended five-year limitation under Section 74, foundational facts evidencing fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression must appear on the face of the notice itself -- Mere mechanical incantation or bland recitals of statutory terms cannot justify bypassing the normal three-year limitation period -- Show Cause Notice and consequential Order quashed -- Liberty granted to the Department to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 74 supported by foundational facts within the remaining extended limitation period.

(Paras 5, 7–16)

***

MACT -- Compensation -- Deduction -- Employer-provided group insurance -- Amount received under group insurance scheme cannot be deducted from compensation under Motor Vehicles Act.

***

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation -- Deduction -- Group insurance -- Pecuniary advantage -- Claimants received benefits under employer-provided group insurance scheme -- Tribunal deducted such amount from compensation -- Held, amounts received by dependants under employer-provided group insurance or other contractual or social security benefits cannot be treated as “pecuniary advantages” liable to be deducted from compensation awarded under the Act -- Such benefits arise out of independent contractual relationship and lack requisite nexus with statutory compensation payable for death in motor vehicle accident -- Deductions made by Tribunals set aside -- High Court rightly set aside the deductions and reassessed the compensation -- Appeals dismissed.

(Paras 10, 13 to 18)

***

Electricity Theft -- Civil Court jurisdiction -- Assessment of civil liability -- Civil Court has jurisdiction where statutory provisions and principles of natural justice are not complied with -- Appeal dismissed.

***

Electricity Act, 2003, (No.36 of 2003) Sections 126, 135, 145, 151 and 154 -- Civil Suit -- Theft of electricity -- Assessment -- Jurisdiction of Civil Court -- Plaintiff challenged notices imposing penalty for theft of electricity -- Defendants failed to prove alleged checking and theft -- No respectable person from locality associated, no site plan prepared, alleged recovered PVC not produced, LL-I report not signed by consumer and videography not proved in accordance with Section 65-B of Evidence Act -- Assessment of civil liability made without following procedure under Section 126, including provisional assessment, service thereof, opportunity to file objections and hearing -- Resort to Section 135 instead of Section 126 rendered impugned notices null and void -- Bar under Section 145 does not totally oust jurisdiction of Civil Court -- Civil Court can examine whether provisions of Electricity Act and fundamental principles of judicial procedure have been complied with -- Jurisdiction barred only where complaint regarding theft is lodged by competent authority and the Special Court has taken cognizance -- In absence of FIR or complaint before Special Court, consumer entitled to approach Civil Court -- Second appeal dismissed.

(Paras 9 to 19)

***

Service Law -- Compassionate appointment -- Battle Casualty -- Dependent of Army Officer -- Once death of Armed Forces personnel is declared as “Battle Casualty” by Defence Authorities, State cannot contend otherwise for grant of benefit -- Policy requires beneficial and liberal interpretation -- Compassionate appointment granted.

***

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Service Law -- Compassionate appointment -- Battle Casualty -- Haryana Government Policies dated 28.09.2018 and 14.08.2023 -- Petitioner, son of serving Army Officer, whose death during “Operation Snow Leopard” was declared “Battle Casualty” by Army Authorities -- Policy dated 28.09.2018 clearly and unambiguously includes dependents/family members of deceased martyrs/battle casualty where deceased was Class I or Class II Officer -- Petitioner squarely covered under Policy, being son of “Battle Casualty” Class I Officer -- Objection of State that policy applies only to dependents of “martyrs” and not “battle casualty” contrary to its own stated policy -- Once death has been treated as “Battle Casualty” by Defence Authorities, it does not lie in the mouth of State to contend otherwise -- Battle Casualty need not be a death arising out of active hostilities or bomb blasts -- Policy needs to be interpreted liberally and beneficially -- Rejection of petitioner's claim factually erroneous and bad in law -- Rejection letters quashed -- Respondents directed to consider petitioner eligible under applicable policies and grant compassionate appointment.

(Paras 8 to 14, 16, 18 to 20)

***

Bail -- Arrest -- Grounds of arrest -- Mandatory communication in writing in language understood by arrestee -- Arrest memo not substitute for grounds of arrest -- Non-compliance renders arrest and remand legally unsustainable -- Regular bail granted.

***

Constitution of India, Article 22(1) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 483 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 21(c), 29, 37 and 52(1) -- Bail -- Grounds of arrest -- Communication of -- Mandatory constitutional safeguard -- Grounds of arrest are required to be furnished in writing and in a language understood by the arrestee, sufficiently prior to production before Magistrate for remand -- Mere intimation of arrest or preparation of arrest memo does not constitute compliance -- Written grounds are distinct from arrest memo and must be communicated to nominated relative/friend as well -- Magistrate is under independent and affirmative obligation to ascertain compliance with Article 22(1) and statutory safeguards before authorising further detention -- Violation renders arrest constitutionally infirm and legally unsustainable -- Doctrine of substantial compliance and absence of prejudice cannot be invoked to dilute mandatory safeguard -- In case of non-compliance, accused entitled to appropriate relief including release on bail -- Petitioner not named in FIR, no contraband recovered from her conscious possession, implicated on disclosure statements of co-accused, remained in custody for more than nine months and trial at nascent stage -- Bail granted.

(Paras 5, 5.1, 5.2, 6, 6.3, 7.1, 8)

***

MACT -- Compensation -- Use of motor vehicle -- Causal link -- Merely because there was a car somehow involved in a chain of circumstances that led to death, provisions of MVA would not apply -- Some link whatsoever between car and death has to be established.

***

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Sections 165, 166 -- Compensation -- Death -- Arising out of use of motor vehicle -- Causal link -- Phrase ‘arising out of’ has to be understood in context of ‘accident’ and ‘motor vehicles’ -- Liability under MVA cannot be fastened merely because there was an accident involving a motor vehicle -- ‘Arising out of’ constitutes the causal link -- In absence of such causal link, liability under MVA cannot be fastened -- Claimants need not establish the particular manner in which injuries were sustained by injured or deceased, but that does not mean that merely because a car was somehow involved in a chain of circumstances leading to death, provisions of MVA would apply -- Some link whatsoever between car and death has to be established -- No causal link established between death of deceased and motor vehicle -- No liability under MVA.

(Paras 5, 8, 13 and 14)

***

MACT -- Compensation -- Contributory negligence -- Bolero standing on road unauthorisedly and wrongly parked without any driver -- Fault on part of owner of Bolero also -- Insurance Company to pay and recover from owner of Bolero.

***

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation -- Right of recovery -- Contributory negligence -- Finding of fact of contributory negligence coupled with fact that Bolero was standing on road which is unauthorised -- Bolero was wrongly parked and there was no driver -- Fault on part of owner of Bolero also -- Right to recover should also have been extended to appellant-Insurance Company vis-a-vis owner of Bolero -- Appellant-Insurance Company given liberty to recover amount of compensation fastened on it to be paid to claimants from owner of Bolero.

(Paras 4, 5, 8 and 9)

***

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)

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Vegetable Vendor -- Better merits of candidate cannot be brushed aside merely on ground that candidate is a vegetable vendor.

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Business or vocation -- Taking up business or trade or vocation which is a bread-earner for candidate and his family cannot be taken as a disqualification.

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Scheduled Caste Lambardar -- Services rendered to State by candidate or his family -- Personal influence, character, ability and freedom from indebtedness to be considered.

***

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 19-B(i) -- Appointment of Scheduled Caste Lambardar -- Relevant considerations -- Services rendered to State by candidate or his family -- Personal influence, character, ability and freedom from indebtedness -- Regard shall be had to such matters while appointing Headman.

(Para 9)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 19-B(i) -- Lambardar -- Comparative merits -- Vegetable Vendor -- Respondent more educated and younger than petitioner -- Better merits of respondent completely brushed aside by Collector merely observing that respondent was a vegetable vendor -- Order of Collector apparently perverse -- Taking up business or trade or vocation which is a bread-earner for candidate and his family cannot be taken as a disqualification.

(Paras 9 to 11)

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Hereditary claim -- Merely because father of candidate worked as Lambardar, merit of rival candidate cannot be ignored.

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Choice of Collector -- Appellate authority ought not interfere in choice made by District Collector in absence of perversity.

***

A. Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 17 -- Lambardar -- Appointment -- Hereditary claim -- Merely for the reason that father of respondent worked as Lambardar, merit of petitioner cannot be ignored -- Hereditary claim cannot prevail to the exclusion of comparative merits of rival candidates.

(Para 4)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Sections 13, 16 -- Appointment of village Headman/Lambardar -- Choice of Collector -- Interference by appellate authority -- Choice of Collector should not be interfered with unless and until same is found to be perverse or having suffered with extraneous consideration or result of misreading of material evidence -- Appellate Court cannot substitute its own perception as to merits of candidate when two views are possible -- Financial Commissioner ought not have interfered with choice made by District Collector in absence of perversity.

(Paras 5 and 6)

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Comparative merits -- Commissioner having himself found both candidates equal in merit, could not interfere with choice made by District Collector.

***

Lambardar -- Appointment -- Government employee -- Respondent being in Government service, his availability for discharge of Lambardar duties is relevant consideration.

***

A. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13 -- Lambardar -- Appointment -- Comparative merits -- Commissioner having himself found both candidates equal in merit, could not interfere with choice made by District Collector that too by relying upon 3% reservation to be given to the handicapped persons -- Financial Commissioner also erred in affirming order of Commissioner -- Orders set aside.

(Paras 7 to 10)

B. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13 -- Lambardar -- Appointment -- Availability of candidate -- Government employee -- Respondent being in Government service, his availability to residents of village was in issue -- Collector had considered petitioner’s permanent residence in village and his ability to remain available for discharge of Lambardar duties -- Relevant consideration overlooked while interfering with Collector’s choice – Order passed by the Commissioner as well as Financial Commissioner cannot be sustained.

(Paras 3, 8-10)

***

Registered sale deed -- Non-payment of balance sale consideration does not render sale deed invalid -- No deemed cancellation.

***

Declaration – Possession with defendant -- Mere suit for declaration would not be maintainable.

***

Mutation -- Challenge to mutation -- Civil Court jurisdiction might as well be barred.

***

Regular Second appeal -- Punjab and Haryana -- No substantial question of law required to be framed.

***

A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Sections 54 and 55 -- Sale deed -- Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), Section 17 -- Non-payment of sale consideration -- Even if some amount of sale consideration or balance sale consideration is not paid, sale deed would not become invalid -- Title would pass under the transaction -- Real test is intention of parties, to be gathered from recital in sale deed, conduct of parties and evidence on record -- Vendor has remedies in law for recovery of balance sale consideration.

(Paras 27 and 28)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 34 -- Declaration -- Possession with defendant -- Plaintiff should have sought relief of possession also -- Mere suit for declaration would not be maintainable.

(Para 26)

C. Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (17 of 1887), Section 158 -- Mutation -- Challenge to mutation -- Remedy before revenue authorities -- Civil Court jurisdiction might as well be barred.

(Para 25)

D. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963) -- Clean hands -- Suppression of material facts -- Plaintiff concealed police complaint and two compromises from plaint -- Party who does not approach Court with clean hands does not deserve any relief -- Litigation initiated by it can be thrown out only on this ground.

(Para 18)

E. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) -- Punjab Courts Act, 1918 (6 of 1918), Section 41 -- Second appeal -- Punjab and Haryana -- Second appeals to be treated as appeals under Section 41 of Punjab Courts Act, 1918 and not under Section 100 CPC -- No substantial question of law required to be framed.

(Para 13)

***

Dishonour of cheque -- Cash transaction in violation of Section 269SS, Income Tax Act, does not render transaction unenforceable under Section 138 of NI Act.

***

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Sections 118(a), 138 and 139 -- Dishonour of cheque -- Presumption -- Execution of cheque admitted -- Presumption that cheque was drawn for consideration and received in discharge of legally enforceable debt or liability arises against accused -- Presumption rebuttable, but mere denial not sufficient.

(Paras 13 and 14)

B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Sections 118(a), 138 and 139 -- Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), Sections 269SS and 271D -- Dishonour of cheque -- Cash transaction -- Violation of Section 269SS -- Such violation attracts penalty under Section 271D but does not render transaction illegal, invalid or statutorily void or unenforceable under Section 138 of N.I. Act or rebut presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 -- View that transaction in cash above Rs.20,000 is illegal and void and does not constitute legally enforceable debt cannot be countenanced -- Appeal dismissed.

(Paras 13 to 16)

***

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)

***

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)

***

Mutation -- Civil Court -- Rights of parties to be ultimately decided by Civil Court, whose decision would bind revenue authorities.

***

Mutation -- Civil Court -- Civil Court would ultimately decide rights of parties in relation to subject property -- Decision of Civil Court binding upon revenue authorities -- Parties directed not to continue to agitate their respective claims in relation to mutation -- Authorities concerned directed to maintain status quo insofar as existing mutation entries are concerned, without prejudice, and await decision of Civil Court in pending suit.

(Paras 5 to 9)

***

Mutation -- Unregistered Will -- Genuineness of Will falls within jurisdiction of civil Court.

***

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (17 of 1887), Section 34 -- Mutation -- Unregistered Will -- Revenue Courts -- Mutation sanctioned on basis of natural succession -- Petitioner having already approached competent civil Court seeking declaration of title on basis of alleged Will -- Jurisdiction to pronounce upon genuineness or otherwise of Will vests with civil Court -- No compelling reason to interfere with orders passed by revenue authorities -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Paras 7 to 9)

***

Execution -- Executing Court cannot go beyond decree or vary its terms.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908) -- Execution -- Executing Court -- Scope of jurisdiction -- Executing Court is circumscribed by decree under execution -- Cannot go beyond decree or vary terms thereof -- Can only construe decree to ascertain its true meaning and determine whether it is capable of execution -- Issues already settled by judgment and decree cannot be reopened in execution proceedings.

(Paras 12-14)

***

Land Acquisition -- Inordinate delay in filing appeals -- Liberal approach to condonation -- Delay not a reason to deny just, fair and reasonable compensation.

***

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), Section 54 -- Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Section 5 -- Condonation of delay -- Land acquisition matter -- Landowners seeking compensation at par with similarly situated landowners -- Inordinate delay of 4417 days in filing appeals -- Liberal, justice-oriented approach warranted in land acquisition matters -- Cases of landowners not to be treated at par with other cases -- Delay irrespective of number of years ought to be condoned -- However, appellants not entitled to interest for delayed period and other statutory benefits -- Appeals allowed, however appellants shall not be entitled to interest for the delayed period i.e. 4417 days and other statutory benefits.

(Paras 5-12, 17)

***

MACT -- Gratuitous passenger -- Risk not covered under policy -- Insurer directed to pay compensation first and recover from owner and driver.

***

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation -- Gratuitous passenger -- Agricultural tractor -- Deceased travelling on bonnet of tractor as gratuitous passenger -- Risk not covered under insurance policy -- Insurer not liable to indemnify insured, but can be directed to satisfy award in first instance and thereafter recover amount from owner and driver -- “Pay and recover” principle applicable.

(Paras 3, 17-20)

***

Mutation -- Registered Will -- Revenue authorities have right to conduct summary inquiry when a document is produced for mutation but have no jurisdiction to comment upon the validity of a registered document.

***

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (6 of 1887), Sections 34, 36 -- Mutation -- Registered Will -- Summary inquiry -- Revenue authorities are required to update annual records with respect to inheritance, sale and other transfers and have right to conduct summary inquiry when a document is produced for mutation -- However, they have no jurisdiction to comment upon the validity of a registered document -- Validity and legality of Will to be agitated before Civil Court.

(Paras 6-8)

***

Ancestral nature of property must be proved by cogent evidence; mere revenue entries showing devolution upon sons, without producing the mutation or underlying document/Will, do not establish ancestral or coparcenary character, and a son cannot challenge his father’s sale of property proved to be his personal property.

***

A. Hindu Law -- Ancestral property -- Proof -- Burden on plaintiff -- Plaintiff claiming suit land to be ancestral and coparcenary property was required to lead cogent evidence, including relevant revenue excerpts and documents showing the mode of devolution -- Jamabandi entries showing mutation in favour of sons, without production of the mutation or document on the basis of which mutation was sanctioned, insufficient to establish ancestral nature of property -- Where oral evidence itself disclosed that property had been mutated on the basis of some document, withholding such mutation/document warranted adverse inference against plaintiff -- Finding that plaintiff failed to prove ancestral nature of property, upheld.

(Paras 14-16)

B. Sale deed -- Challenge by son -- Personal property of father -- Once plaintiff failed to establish that suit land was ancestral or coparcenary property and property was held to be personal property of defendant No.1, plaintiff could not challenge sale deed executed by his father -- Sale deed having been executed for consideration duly mentioned therein, no ground made out for setting aside the same -- Concurrent findings of Courts below disclosed no infirmity or illegality warranting interference in second appeal.

(Paras 15-16)

***

MACT -- Fake driving licence -- Insurer cannot recover from owner without proving owner's knowledge of fake licence -- Knowledge of owner sine qua non for insurer's recovery rights.

***

MACT -- Just compensation -- Compensation enhanced to grant just compensation despite no appeal or cross-objections by claimants.

***

A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Fake driving licence -- Burden of proof -- Knowledge of owner -- Fundamental breach of insurance policy -- Insurance Company seeking exoneration or recovery rights must plead and prove that owner willfully and knowingly handed over vehicle to person not holding a valid and effective driving licence -- Mere proof that driving licence was fake does not establish breach -- Knowledge of fake licence is sine qua non for fastening liability upon owner -- In absence of proof that owner was aware of invalidity and despite such knowledge permitted driver to drive, insurer cannot avoid liability or recover compensation from owner -- Pay and recover direction set aside.

(Paras 22 to 25, 32, 38 to 41)

B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 149(2)(a)(ii), 166 -- Driving licence -- Duty of owner -- Owner required to verify that driver possesses a driving licence which prima facie appears genuine and is competent to drive -- Owner is not expected to make enquiries with licensing authorities all over the country to ascertain veracity of licence unless there is cause to believe otherwise -- Insurance Company remains liable unless it proves that owner/insured was aware or had notice that licence was fake or invalid and still permitted person to drive.

(Paras 39 to 40)

C. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 149(2)(a)(ii), 166 – Fake Driving license -- Evidence -- Report regarding fake driving licence -- Tribunal relied upon report and notarized affidavit of District Transport Officer without affording opportunity to owner and claimants to rebut or cross-examine -- Though strict rules of evidence may not govern MACT proceedings, Tribunal cannot collect and rely upon evidence in violation of principles of natural justice -- Deposition of summoned witness subjected to cross-examination has evidentiary value; report submitted in response to summons cannot substitute oral testimony -- Approach held unknown to law.

(Paras 26 to 36)

D. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Sections 166 and 168 -- Compensation enhancement without appeal of claimant -- Just compensation -- Claimants had neither filed appeal nor cross-objections for enhancement -- Court nevertheless required to determine whether compensation awarded falls within definition of 'just compensation' -- Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial piece of legislation, endeavour of Court/Tribunal while deciding claim petition should be to grant just compensation -- Award enhanced by granting loss of consortium to both parents.

(Paras 42, 44 to 49)

A. Stamp duty -- Industrial property -- Manufacturing activity coupled with sale of manufactured goods -- Sale, including retail sale, of goods manufactured in premises does not change character of use of property from industrial to commercial.

(Para 7)

B. Stamp duty -- Gift deed -- Residential property used for industrial purposes -- Use of property is determinative of valuation.

(Para 10)

C. Stamp duty -- Gift deed -- Property valued as residential though used for industrial purposes -- Residential valuation higher than industrial valuation -- Valuation adopted by executant voluntarily -- Excess stamp duty paid on such valuation not refundable merely because property held to be used for industrial purposes.

(Para 10)

***

SARFAESI -- Auction sale -- Shortfall in EMD, subsequently made good by immediate deposit of 25% of sale price, does not affect validity of bid -- Extended time for balance payment during pending litigation valid -- Borrower entitled to surplus sale proceeds with 7% interest where Bank failed to keep excess amount in interest-bearing account.

***

A. Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002) -- Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, Rule 9(3) -- Auction sale -- Earnest money deposit -- Shortfall in EMD -- Clause requiring deposit of EMD held to be non-statutory and incorporated with an object to filter out non-serious bidders -- Any anterior shortfall in deposit of EMD pales into insignificance the moment 25% of sale price was deposited -- Non-conformity did not result in any prejudice or injustice to other bidder or borrower -- Shortfall in EMD does not affect validity of bid.

(Paras 20, 21)

B. Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002), Section 13 -- Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, Rule 9(4) – Auction sale -- Balance sale consideration -- Payment within fifteen days or within the extended period as allowed by the Bank in writing -- In view of pendency of court proceedings, Bank agreed to extend time for deposit of balance sale consideration -- Auction-purchasers paid balance amount immediately after borrower's appeal was dismissed by Tribunal -- Contention that sale stood vitiated on account of delayed payment does not deserve acceptance.

(Para 22)

C. Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002), Section 13 -- Surplus sale proceeds -- Bank left with excess amount after appropriation of sale proceeds -- Bank ought to have kept the balance amount in an interest-bearing account -- For failure of Bank to do so, borrower cannot be penalized -- Borrower entitled to refund of excess amount along with interest @ 7% per annum from date when surplus amount was kept in non-interest-bearing account till payment.

(Paras 23, 24)

***

Domestic Violence -- Settlement -- Waiver of claims -- Wife voluntarily relinquished all monetary claims, including maintenance -- Revival of such claims through subsequent proceedings cannot be permitted -- Proceedings constitute abuse of process, quashed.

***

Settlement -- Adult daughter -- Not party to Settlement Agreement -- Cannot be said that she had waived her right to monetary claims -- Liberty granted to initiate fresh proceedings seeking monetary reliefs, in accordance with law.

***

A. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (43 of 2005) -- Settlement Agreement -- Voluntary relinquishment of claims -- Wife voluntarily relinquished all monetary claims, including maintenance, under Settlement Agreement and reiterated waiver before Family Court -- Domestic violence complaint pertained to alleged acts predating Settlement Agreement -- No fresh cause of action arising post-divorce pleaded -- Revival of such claims through subsequent proceedings cannot be permitted -- Proceedings constitute abuse of process -- Mere averments of coercion, absent any legal challenge to Settlement Agreement or decree of divorce, cannot suffice.

(Paras 8 to 13)

B. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (43 of 2005) -- Settlement Agreement -- Adult daughter -- Daughter had attained majority and was not a party to Settlement Agreement -- Cannot be said that she had waived her right to monetary claims -- Settlement executed between husband and wife could not bind daughter -- Liberty granted to initiate fresh proceedings seeking monetary reliefs, in accordance with law.

(Paras 14 and 15)

***

Appointment of Lambardar -- Higher educational qualification alone not decisive.

***

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887) -- Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Comparative merit -- Petitioner claimed preference on ground of being B.A. LL.B. whereas selected candidate was 10+2 pass -- Rule 15 requires candidate to be literate, preferably middle pass -- Selected candidate, having studied upto 12th class, could not be said to be ineligible for appointment -- Petitioner being a practising advocate may not be available in village at all times to attend duties of Lambardar -- Collector considered age, educational qualification, landholding and recommendations of Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) while appointing selected candidate -- Choice of Collector cannot be lightly interfered with, even if two views are possible, unless there is patent illegality or perversity -- No such illegality or perversity pointed out -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Paras 5.1-8)

***

Appointment of lambardar -- Recommendations of lower revenue officers not binding on Collector.

***

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 28 -- Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rules 15, 17 -- Appointment of Lambardar -- Comparative merits -- Collector appointed petitioner primarily on basis of recommendations of lower revenue officers, despite rival candidate being younger and more educated -- Recommendations of lower revenue officers are not binding on Collector -- Collector required to apply his own judicious mind and consider comparative merits of all candidates in terms of Rules 15 and 17 for appointment of most suitable candidate.

(Paras 5-7.1)

***

Mutation proceedings -- Disputed title -- Pendency of civil suit -- Revenue authorities justified in keeping mutation proceedings in abeyance till final adjudication of title by competent Civil Court.

***

Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 34 -- Constitution of India, Articles 226 and 227 -- Mutation proceedings -- Disputed title -- Registered will -- Proceedings kept in abeyance -- Mutation arising on death of landowner -- Registered Will propounded by sons, while one of them had already instituted civil suit challenging validity of Will and claiming ownership -- Assistant Collector adjourned mutation proceedings sine die awaiting decision of Civil Court -- Where title over property is disputed and matter is pending before Civil Court, mutation entries in revenue records must remain in abeyance till title is finally adjudicated -- Plea that mutation proceedings cannot be kept in abeyance held without merit -- Writ petition dismissed.

(Paras 1-9)

***

Recall of order -- Change in legal position -- Basis of earlier dismissal having ceased to exist, order recalled and writ petition restored.

***

A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 151 -- Recall of order -- Subsequent change in legal position -- Writ petition had been dismissed on basis of Supreme Court judgment subsequently reviewed -- Foundation of earlier order having ceased to exist, order of dismissal recalled and writ petition restored to its original number.

(Paras 1-4)

B. Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (18 of 1961), Section 13-A -- Disputed questions of fact -- Writ jurisdiction -- Land recorded as “Jumla Malkan Wa Digar Hakdaran Araji Hasab Rasad Rakba Khewat” -- Petitioners challenged carving out of plots/Baras and change in nature of land without payment of compensation -- State raised objection that disputed questions of fact were involved and statutory remedy under Section 13-A was available -- Petitioners fairly sought withdrawal of writ petition with liberty to institute suit before Competent Court -- All parties left free to raise all pleas -- Competent Court to decide matter independently in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation made by High Court -- In case stay application is filed along with suit, same directed to be considered within three weeks from date of filing.

(Paras 5-9)

***

Writ petition -- Withdrawal -- Earlier writ petition withdrawn without liberty to file fresh petition -- Subsequent writ petition on same cause not maintainable.

***

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Writ petition -- Withdrawal without liberty -- Subsequent petition on same cause of action -- Withdrawal of writ petition without permission to file a fresh writ petition does not amount to res judicata, but remedy under Article 226 of Constitution should be deemed to have been abandoned by petitioner in respect of cause of action relied upon in writ petition -- Subsequent writ petition on same cause not maintainable.

(Paras 2 to 5)

Maintenance to minor -- Enhancement -- Right of minor to claim enhancement cannot be curtailed on basis of agreement between parents at time of divorce.

***

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 125 and 127 -- Minor -- Maintenance -- Enhancement -- Petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. preferred on behalf of minor daughter -- Rs.1,500/- per month maintenance ordered to be paid in judgment and decree for dissolution of marriage made basis for disposal of petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and, therefore, deemed to have been passed in a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. -- Petition for enhancement was and is maintainable -- Right to claim maintenance or enhancement of maintenance cannot be curtailed only on basis of mutual agreement arrived at between parents at time of divorce -- In changed circumstances, daughter receiving maintenance amount from father entitled for enhancement thereof, depending upon facts and circumstances and increasing expenses to have basic amenities -- Enhancement of monthly maintenance amount from Rs.1,500/- to Rs.2,000/- reasonable and justified -- Revision dismissed.

(Paras 10, 13, 16 and 21 to 24)

***

Senior Citizens Act -- Coram of Maintenance Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal -- Haryana Government notification dated 17.11.2016 -- Tribunals required to comprise three members -- Impugned orders passed in absence of second and third members -- Orders coram non judice and nullity in eyes of law -- Set aside.

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007) -- Maintenance -- Restoration of possession -- Maintenance Tribunal -- Appellate Tribunal -- Coram -- Respondent instituted application seeking maintenance, restoration of possession of shop and restraint against interference in possession -- Maintenance Tribunal partly allowed application and directed petitioner to pay maintenance -- Statutory appeal allowed and transfer deed cancelled -- Haryana Government notification dated 17.11.2016 prescribed composition of Maintenance Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals -- Both Tribunals required to comprise three members, with Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Deputy Commissioner/District Magistrate acting as respective Chairmen -- Both impugned orders passed in absence of second and third members -- Orders rendered without mandated coram -- Orders were vitiated as passed coram non judice -- Orders are nullity in the eyes of law and could not be sustained -- Impugned orders set aside -- Matter remanded to Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication.

(Paras 2 to 6)

***

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)

***

Regular bail – Murder -- Prolonged custody -- Speedy trial -- Appellant in custody for about 2 years and 7 months -- Fatal/grievous injury not attributed to him and only simple injury attributed to him -- Only 2 out of 34 prosecution witnesses examined and trial not likely to conclude shortly -- Appellant ordered to be released on bail.

***

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 483 -- Constitution of India, 1950, Article 21 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302, 396, 323, 406, 307, 148, 149 -- Regular bail – Murder -- Appellant linked to acts attributed with aid of Section 149 -- Appellant alleged to have reached spot being accompanied by co-accused and to have opened an attack upon victim, complainant and his brother -- Fatal/grievous injury on person of victim not attributed to appellant -- Only simple injury on shoulder/person of injured attributed to him -- Though allegations made out a prima facie case, appellant had been in custody for a period of about 2 years and 7 months -- Only 2 out of 34 prosecution witnesses examined so far and chances of conclusion of trial in near future bleak -- Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy trial not in consonance with right guaranteed under Article 21 -- Howsoever serious a crime may be, accused has a right to speedy trial -- Bail is not to be withheld as a punishment -- Impugned order set aside -- Appellant ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to satisfaction of Court concerned.

(Paras 7 to 9)

***

Land acquisition -- Petitioner withdrew challenge to acquisition notifications and award and sought liberty to invoke Section 101-A -- Permitted to file representation -- Respondents directed to consider and decide same, after affording opportunity of hearing, in accordance with law.

***

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013), Sections 24(2) and 101-A -- Land acquisition -- Lapse of acquisition proceedings -- Representation -- Petitioner had challenged notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and award dated 28.02.1996 and sought declaration that acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of 2013 Act -- During pendency of writ petition, petitioner submitted that it would not challenge acquisition proceedings and award and sought liberty to move representation requesting respondents to invoke power under Section 101-A on plea that acquisition of land was not viable -- Petitioner permitted to withdraw writ petition qua challenge to notifications and award and to file representation under Section 101-A within one month -- Respondents directed to consider and decide representation independently, in accordance with law, within four months from receipt thereof.

(Paras 3 to 7)

***

Cease to occupy -- Once landlord establishes prima facie case, onus shifts to tenant to prove actual occupation or reasonable cause for non-occupation -- Failure to rebut -- Ejectment restored.

***

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (3 of 1949), Section 13(2)(v) – Cease to occupy -- Ejectment -- Tenant ceased to occupy demised premises for continuous period of four months without reasonable cause -- Possession and occupation are not synonymous -- Actual occupation and useful use of tenancy premises are material -- Initial burden lies upon landlord, but onus remains shifting -- Once landlord establishes foundational facts and raises a prima facie case of cessation of occupation, onus shifts to tenant to rebut same or establish reasonable cause for non-occupation -- Tenant specifically asserted that Karyana business was being carried on from demised shop but failed to produce electricity bills, account books, purchase or sale invoices or other material indicating actual business activity -- On cumulative assessment of evidence, landlord established prima facie case and tenant failed to rebut same -- Order of ejectment order passed by Rent Controller restored -- Revision allowed.

(Paras 10 to 29, 47 to 56)

***

Striking out of written statement -- Mere inconsistency with earlier written statement or introduction of additional plea does not attract power under Order VI Rule 16 -- Statutory conditions must be satisfied.

***

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 6 Rule 16 -- Striking out pleadings -- Amended plaint -- Amended written statement -- Plaintiff's plaint was amended and defendant filed fresh written statement -- Written statement struck off on ground that defendant had changed his earlier defence and introduced plea of limitation -- Power under Order VI Rule 16 not available merely because pleading contains defence inconsistent with or different from earlier pleading -- Court must record finding that matter sought to be struck out is unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious, prejudices, embarrasses or delays fair trial, or is otherwise abuse of process of Court -- None of statutory parameters satisfied -- Mere omission of earlier plea or introduction of additional plea does not furnish lawful basis for striking off entire written statement -- Impugned order set aside -- Petition allowed.

(Paras 9, 15 to 18 and 20)

***

Default bail -- Valid extension of time granted before expiry of 180 days -- No indefeasible right to default bail accrued.

***

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 36-A(4) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 187(3) -- Default bail -- Extension of investigation period -- Before expiry of 180 days, prosecution sought extension supported by Public Prosecutor's report setting out progress of investigation and reasons for further time -- Accused produced through video-conferencing and informed of prayer for extension -- Extension validly granted for two months -- Right to default bail does not accrue where statutory period stands validly extended before its expiry -- Revision dismissed.

(Paras 7 to 11)

***

Electronic record -- Secondary evidence -- Certificate under Section 63(4) of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 is a strict legal requirement for admissibility of secondary electronic evidence, unless the original electronic record itself is produced before the Court.

***

A. Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (47 of 2023), Sections 63 and 63(4) -- Electronic record -- Secondary evidence -- Certificate -- Requirement of certificate under Section 63(4) is a strict legal requirement which is a precondition for admissibility of secondary evidence of information contained in an electronic record -- In absence of certificate under Section 63(4), information contained in an electronic record would be inherently inadmissible as evidence -- Certificate is unnecessary if electronic record contained in computer/device on which original information is first stored is itself produced before Court by owner thereof who proves that said computer/device is owned and/or operated by him.

(Paras 4-9)

B. Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (47 of 2023), Section 63(4) -- Secondary evidence -- Computer-generated invoices -- Invoices being secondary evidence of electronic record require certification under Section 63(4) in order to admit same in evidence -- In absence of Section 63(4) certification, there is no question of invoices being admitted in evidence and relied upon.

(Paras 12-13)

***

Default bail -- Cannot be claimed on account of non-filing of additional copies of chargesheet once the chargesheet has been filed within the prescribed statutory period.

***

A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Sections 187(3), 193(3) and 193(8) -- Default bail -- Chargesheet -- Non-filing of additional copies -- Non-filing of additional copies of chargesheet/police report as required under Section 193(8) would not entitle accused to default bail -- Right to default bail stood extinguished on filing of chargesheet.

(Paras 15, 21, 23, 26-29)

B. Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Default bail -- Right to default bail is an indefeasible right flowing from Article 21 of Constitution -- Grant of default bail is not release from custody on merits, but on failure of investigating agency to file chargesheet within prescribed period -- Object is to ensure expeditious investigation and prevent laxity therein.

(Para 20)

***

Remission policy -- Premature release -- Policy dated 12.04.2002 framed under Article 161 of Constitution of India -- Subsequent Policy dated 13.08.2008 framed under statutory powers could not override constitutional power -- Convict entitled to benefit of lesser time served under 2002 Policy.

***

Constitution of India, Article 161 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 432 and 433 -- Premature release -- Applicability of remission policy -- Policy dated 12.04.2002 clearly contemplated cases of premature release being put up before Governor for orders under Article 161 of Constitution of India -- Policy dated 13.08.2008 specifically stated to have been framed in exercise of powers conferred under Sections 432 and 433, Cr.P.C. -- Both policies, thus, operate in different fields and source of power for framing 2002 Policy being Article 161, subsequent Policy dated 13.08.2008 could not supersede same -- 1993 and 2002 Policies identical in so far as source of power is concerned -- 2008 Policy could not deter effect of 2002 Policy -- Appellant entitled to benefit of lesser time served under 2002 Policy, thereby making him eligible for remission -- Findings to apply prospectively and not reopen remission applications already decided -- State directed to take decision on appellant's remission application consistent with judgment.

(Paras 9 to 18)

***

Artificial intelligence -- Fake and hallucinated material -- Decision based on such material is no decision in eyes of law and liable to be set aside.

***

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (31 of 2016), Section 7 -- Artificial intelligence -- Fake and hallucinated precedents -- NCLT relied upon non-existent, fake and hallucinated material generated through Artificial Intelligence as if it were precedent in support of its judgment -- Some judgments cited were non-existent and AI-generated paragraphs were wrongly attributed to genuine citations -- Courts to adopt zero-tolerance mode for producing, citing or using AI-generated precedents without verification -- It is misconduct on part of advocate to cite such judgments without verification and serious lapse if Judge relies upon such fake or hallucinated AI-generated material as precedents -- Decision based on such material is no decision in eyes of law, irrespective of whether material had direct or indirect bearing on decision-making -- NCLT and NCLAT judgments set aside -- Section 7 application restored to original number for consideration in accordance with law.

(Paras 1, 7, 15 to 19)

***

Senior Citizens Act -- Death of senior citizen -- Proceedings under Act, 2007 rendered infructuous on death of senior citizen, parties left to avail remedies available under law

***

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (56 of 2007) -- Appeal -- Death of senior citizen during pendency -- Proceedings initiated under Act intended to secure welfare of senior citizens during their lifetime -- Once senior citizen, at whose instance proceedings were initiated, ceases to survive, very substratum of proceedings stands extinguished -- Mere circumstance that proceedings incidentally involved validity of family settlement or arbitral award affecting proprietary rights would not alter their essential character -- Appellate Tribunal committed no error in holding appeal to have become infructuous -- Parties left to avail such remedies as may be available in law for adjudication of respective civil and proprietary rights.

(Paras 6 to 10)

***

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)