Criminal Law – Conviction under Sections 364-A, 342, 307 r/w.511, 506(ii) IPC – Appeals partially allowed by High Court – Challenge against trial court’s decision convicting accused for abduction for ransom, wrongful confinement, attempt to murder, and criminal intimidation – Court found prosecution failed to establish threat to cause death or hurt to secure ransom – Convictions for offences under Section 364-A set aside, replaced with convictions under Section 365 for some appellants – Insufficient evidence to uphold other charges due to lack of corroborative call data and proper identification of recovered cash – Convictions under Sections 342 and 506(ii) IPC also set aside [Paras 1-43].

Evidence Evaluation – High Court examined prosecution’s evidence including witness testimony, police report, and investigation records – Found discrepancies in recovery of ransom amount, lack of call data records, and inadequate corroboration of threats to cause death or hurt – Concluded essential ingredients of Section 364-A IPC not proved – Conviction under Section 365 IPC sustained for wrongful confinement with intent for ransom [Paras 22-38].

Decision – Appeals partially allowed – Held – Conviction and sentence for offences under Section 364-A IPC set aside – Conviction under Section 365 IPC affirmed for A-4, A-5, and A-6, sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine – Convictions under Sections 342, 307 r/w.511, 506(ii) IPC not sustainable due to insufficient evidence – A-3, A-1, A-2, and A-7 acquitted – Appeal outcomes varied with specific instructions on release and refund of fines where applicable – Substantial sentences imposed to run concurrently [Paras 40-45].

Tenancy Law - Eviction Proceedings – Delhi Rent Control Act – Grounds for Eviction – Eviction sought under Section 14(1)€ of the Delhi Rent Control Act for bona fide requirement – Petitioners challenge eviction order claiming absence of bona fide need and alternate accommodation availability for landlords – Held, eviction order valid with bona fide requirement sufficiently established by respondents, who are senior citizens with medical conditions, needing ground floor accommodation for residential and commercial purposes. [Paras 1, 4, 8, 12, 13]

Tenant’s Right to Contest – Delhi Rent Control Act – Summary Proceedings – Tenant’s right under Section 25B(8) of the Act to contest eviction not absolute – Leave to contest granted by Rent Controller based on prima facie triable issues – Held, mere permission to contest does not automatically invalidate eviction order; tenants must substantiate their contesting claims with cogent evidence. [Paras 2.2, 2.3, 7, 8, 9, 10]

Provision of Accommodation for Landlord’s Family – Landlord’s requirement for ground floor accommodation for senior citizens with health issues – Tenants contest availability of alternative accommodation on first floor – Held, impracticable for landlords to use first floor due to medical conditions and lack of privacy; need for ground floor accommodation justified. [Paras 2.1, 11, 12]

Revisional Jurisdiction under Delhi Rent Control Act – Scope of High Court’s power under proviso to Section 25B(8) – Limited to ensuring decision making process and compliance with legal procedures by Rent Controller – High Court not to undertake extensive fact-finding or re-evaluation of evidence – Upheld Rent Controller’s order on finding it in accordance with legal norms. [Paras 5, 5.3, 8, 13]

Decision – Upholding of eviction order by High Court – Eviction of tenants from subject premises ordered, finding no substantial ground to interfere with Rent Controller’s decision; petition dismissed. [Para 13]

Trustees' Compensation for Relinquishing Trusteeship - Amounts received by trustees of Carmel Educational Trust for relinquishing their trusteeship not considered capital receipts for tax purposes - These amounts treated as individual income and assessed under appropriate head - Trust deed does not authorize trustees to relinquish positions for consideration [Para 8].

Construction Work Compensation - Tribunal's findings on construction compensation to Gracy Babu and Jose Thomas upheld - Reliance on audited balance sheet of Believers Church and TDS payments made to Department [Para 12].

Donations to St. Thomas Education Trust - Donations received by St. Thomas Education Trust not treated as income for individual trustees - Tribunal's decision upheld [ITA No.6/2021, Para 13].

Decision: Appeals ITA Nos. 54/2020, 55/2020, 56/2020, 68/2020, and 6/2021 dismissed, favoring the assessee.

Appeals ITA Nos. 46/2020, 48/2020, 49/2020, and 51/2020 partly allowed by remand, except for remanded questions, answered against the revenue.

Appeal ITA No. 47/2020 allowed by remand.

Bail Application under Section 439 CrPC - Petitioner seeking bail in connection with FIR under Sections 22(C) and 27-A/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) - Petitioner not found in possession of contraband, implicated based on disclosure statement of co-accused - Interim bail previously granted by Coordinate Bench - Prosecution relying on disclosure statements and recovery of contraband - Petitioner's counsel argues lack of recovery from petitioner and absence of misuse of interim bail - Referring to precedent, counsel asserts petitioner's entitlement to bail - Prosecution opposes bail citing disclosure statements and involvement of petitioner - Court notes prima facie evidence linking petitioner to offense but considers duration of custody and lack of grounds to dismiss petition - Bail granted with conditions - Petitioner directed to surrender weapons, firearms, ammunition, and restrict mobile phone usage to one prepaid SIM - Compliance mandated within specified timeframe - Precedent cited for imposition of similar condition - Petition allowed.

Decision: Bail granted to petitioner under Section 439 CrPC in connection with NDPS Act case - Petitioner directed to comply with specified conditions including surrendering weapons and restricting mobile phone usage.

Motor Vehicle Accident - Compensation - Appeal against quantum of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) - Deceased, a 1.5-year-old child, fatally injured in a road accident caused by rash and negligent driving of the respondent - Award of compensation of ₹8,00,000/- granted by MACT - Insurance company, the appellant, sought reduction in compensation amount - Tribunal assessed notional income of deceased at ₹50,000/- per annum and applied multiplier of 15 - Appellant contended for reduction of notional income to ₹25,000/- per annum - Held, losing a child in an accident is an incomprehensible tragedy for parents - No amount of money can adequately compensate for such a loss - Compensation should be assessed based on the potential happiness and support the deceased child would have provided to the claimants - Tribunal's determination of notional income at ₹50,000/- per annum upheld - Appeal dismissed.

Decision: The appeal against the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) is dismissed. The Tribunal's assessment of the notional income of the deceased child at ₹50,000/- per annum and the consequent grant of compensation are upheld.

Service Law - Promotion Dispute - Validity of Diploma - Writ Petition under Article 226 - Promotion to the post of Junior Engineer sought by petitioner based on Diploma in Civil Engineering obtained from 'Institute of Advanced Studies in Education Deemed University, Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan' - Respondents withheld promotion citing non-recognition of University for distance education by All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) - Petitioner contends diploma is valid as per precedents - Respondents argue diploma obtained through distance education from unrecognized institution - Court examines precedents including Kartar Singh case and Jasvir Singh case - Upholds respondents' decision, dismisses petitions, finds no merit in petitioner's claim for promotion. [Paras 1-16]

Validity of Diploma - Precedents - Court refers to Division Bench judgments in Kartar Singh case and Jasvir Singh case - Kartar Singh case held degrees awarded by deemed universities through distance education mode illegal, relied on by Supreme Court for validity of engineering degrees - Jasvir Singh case denied promotion based on diploma obtained through distance learning from non-recognized institution - Court distinguishes Swaran Singh case cited by petitioner, holds no merit in petitioner's claim. [Paras 9-13]

Dismissal of Petitions - Court dismisses petitions, finds no merit in petitioner's claim for promotion, upholds respondents' decision citing non-recognition of diploma obtained through distance education from unrecognized institution - Precedents including Kartar Singh and Jasvir Singh cases considered - No document provided proving approval of Diploma certificate by State of Punjab. [Paras 14-16]

Quashing of Summons and Warrants – Private Limited Company and Directors as Accused – Accused challenge summons and consequential warrants issued for offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – High Court quashes summons and warrants, directs fresh enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. [Para 1-10]

Applicability of Section 202 Cr.P.C. in Negotiable Instruments Act Cases – Analysis – Held – Inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. not conducted, no affidavit filed by complainant, process issuance vitiated – Court emphasizes need for materials on record to satisfy issuance of process, absence of affidavit leading to wrong cognizance. [Paras 7-9]

Directive to Lower Court – Criminal Proceedings in C.C. No.996/2021 – Court orders fresh enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C within one month, with liberty to complainant to file affidavit in lieu of enquiry. [Para 10]

Case Law Reference – Reliance on Supreme Court Judgments – Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881 and Sunil Todi's Case – Supreme Court's observations on affidavit evidence and necessity of enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C discussed. [Paras 5-6]

Decision – Quashing of Summons and Warrants – Court quashes summons and warrants against petitioners, citing procedural impropriety in their issuance without proper enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. – Orders fresh proceedings in the Magistrate Court with specific directives. [Para 10]’

Communal Hatred and Murder Case – Involvement of the applicant, Syed Asim Ali, in a brutal daylight murder, motivated by extreme communal hatred, involving multiple assailants and a larger conspiracy - Applicant accused of providing legal aid to main assailants - Case under Sections 302, 120B IPC and Section 66 of IT Act [Paras 1-3, 5-6, 8-9].

Bail Application Analysis – Bail application considered in light of jurisprudence principles and relevant factors such as the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, risk of absconding, accused's character, likelihood of reoffending, potential influence on witnesses, and progress of the trial - Reference to various Supreme Court rulings [Para 10].

Denial of Bail – Bail denied based on the brutal nature of the crime, applicant's significant role in the conspiracy, and electronic evidence linking him to the main assailants - Concerns about influencing witnesses and ongoing trial proceedings - Comparisons made with co-accused's bail situations [Paras 10(a)-10(g)].

Direction for Expeditious Trial – Trial Court instructed to expedite the trial, with an observation on the current status of witness examination [Paras 11-12].

Declaration of Ownership - Validity of Sale Certificate - Challenge against Financial Commissioner's Order - Appellant's suit seeking declaration of ownership of land dismissed by lower courts - Appeal filed against concurrent findings - Plaintiff claimed ownership based on sale certificate dated 03.01.2005 - Allegations of illegalities in auction process and subsequent procedures - Financial Commissioner's order setting aside auction challenged - Courts below relied on previous judgments dismissing appellant's claims - Appellant argued lack of independent assessment of evidence by lower courts - Allegations of minor status of appellant at time of auction disputed - Voter list presented as evidence of age - Appellant's claim of clerical error in sale certificate rejected by authorities - Previous court orders highlighting defects in auction process upheld - Lack of substantial question of law raised in appeal - Appeal dismissed.