Advocate’s Professional Conduct and Negligence - Petitioner, an advocate, challenged his inclusion in the “Caution List” by Indian Banks’ Association after allegations of negligence in providing Search and Title Reports for property loans - Petitioner claimed diligent performance of duties and contested the negligence accusations - Case centered around proper adherence to guidelines for property title verification and loan sanctioning. [Paras 2-4, 8, 10-14]

Guidelines and Responsibilities of Banks - Highlighted the guidelines issued by State Bank of India (SBI) for independent property inspection and obtaining notarized affidavits - Emphasized that responsibilities for verifying property details primarily lay with bank officials, not the panel advocate - Petitioner's inclusion in the “Caution List” deemed inappropriate due to lack of negligence or fraud on his part. [Paras 9-10, 14-15]

Judicial Precedents and Advocate’s Liability - Relied on similar cases (Rajan Shrivallabha Deshpande Vs. Bank of Baroda & Anr., and Mohana Raj Nair Vs. CBI) to argue against the petitioner's negligence and consequent listing - Acknowledged that no criminal proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, further supporting his non-involvement in fraudulent activities. [Paras 16-17]

Decision – Petition allowed, directing the removal of the petitioner’s name from the “Caution List” maintained by the Indian Banks’ Association - Court found no sufficient grounds for the petitioner's continued listing, considering the absence of fraud and reasonable adherence to professional duties. [Paras 17-19]

Criminal Appeal - Conviction under NDPS Act – Appeal against conviction for possession of 6 kgs of ganja under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act – Trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine – Appeal dismissal upheld by High Court. [Para 1, 44-46]

Search and Seizure Compliance - Compliance with Sections 50 and 42 of NDPS Act examined – No personal search of appellant, only bag possession searched – Section 50 compliance not applicable for non-personal search – Section 42 compliance not necessary as no information of ganja stored in any building or conveyance. [Para 17-22, 26-28]

Chain of Custody and Sample Analysis – Argument on delay in sending samples and chain of custody – Samples sent promptly and chain of custody established – Chemical analysis confirmed the substance as ganja. [Para 33-34, 42]

Presumptions under NDPS Act – Invoking Section 35 and Section 54 of NDPS Act – Prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt the recovery of ganja from appellant's possession – Appellant failed to probabalize contrary claims. [Para 39-41]

Conclusion - High Court found no merit in the appeal and confirmed the trial court's judgment – Directed appellant to surrender and trial court to carry out the sentence. [Para 44-48]

EWS Student Admission Dispute – Amitanjali Tiwari, represented by her mother Anjali Pandey, denied admission in Sovereign School despite eligibility – Case focuses on the school’s compliance with RTE Act for EWS category admissions – Dispute on carrying forward unfilled EWS/DG category vacancies from previous years [Paras 1-2, 8-9, 14-21, 45-48, 51-52, 58, 61-64]

RTE Act Provisions – Sections 3(1), 13(2), 2(c), 2(f), 4, 7, 8(a), 8(c), 12, 15 – Guaranteeing education at state expense for children in EWS category – Obligations of schools and governments outlined [Paras 3-5]

Carry Forward Principle Validated – Division Bench decision in Siddharth International Public School upheld – Principle allows carry forward of unfilled EWS/DG vacancies to subsequent academic year – However, applicable only if actual shortage exists [Paras 32-34, 38-39, 42-43, 62-63]

School’s Compliance with RTE Act – Sovereign School argued compliance in admitting EWS/DG students – DOE’s error in calculating unfilled vacancies for 2023-2024 – DOE’s waiver order for Sovereign School acknowledged [Paras 46-49, 51-53]

Final Decision – Amitanjali to continue in Sovereign School as EWS student for current academic year – DOE directed to ensure her admission in neighborhood school for next year – Court emphasizes protection of student’s interests amid legal and administrative complexities [Paras 58-61, 64]

Bail Application in Multiple Cases – Accused, a Drawing Teacher, alleged to have sexually assaulted minor girl students, filed bail applications in six different cases. [Para 1]

Allegations of Sexual Assault – Accusations of assaulting Vth standard students at Himayathul Islam School by touching their private parts on 12.12.2023. [Para 2]

Opposition to Bail by Public Prosecutor – Based on the nature of allegations, bail applications opposed. [Para 4]

Delay in Complaint and Doubtful Circumstances – Argument of delay in lodging complaint by six days – Doubt over the feasibility of assaulting six girls in a classroom setting – Petitioner in judicial custody since 20.12.2023. [Para 5]

Court Observation – Noted the delay in filing complaints and expressed doubts about the feasibility of the allegations; recognized substantial progress in investigation. [Para 6]

Bail Granted – Court inclined to release the petitioner on bail under strict conditions, including bond execution, reporting to investigating officer, restricted entry to school, non-interference with victims, witnesses, and investigation, surrender of passport, restricted travel, and adherence to law. [Para 6]

Bail Conditions – Detailed conditions set for bail, including financial bonds, regular reporting, geographical restrictions, non-contact with victims and witnesses, passport surrender, and travel limitations. [Para 6(i-viii)]

Violation of Bail Conditions – Provision for cancellation of bail by trial court upon violation of any set conditions. [Para 6(ix)]

Criminal Revision – Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. – Challenge against the order of Family Court granting maintenance to wife – Revisionist contends wife capable of self-maintenance and alleges adultery – Trial court's decision upheld due to lack of evidence supporting revisionist's claims. [Paras 1, 2, 8, 10]

Family Law – Maintenance of Wife – Consideration of earning capacity of husband and wife – Husband's duty to provide maintenance irrespective of his alleged low income – No substantial evidence of wife's adultery or self-maintenance capacity. [Paras 5, 6, 7, 9]

Judgment – Dismissal of Revision – Upholding Family Court's order for maintenance – Emphasis on husband's responsibility to maintain wife – Direction for coercive action for recovery of maintenance. [Paras 10, 11, 12]

Annulment of Adoption Order – Male Minor Child – Bal Asha Trust, Mumbai sought annulment of adoption order passed on 17th August 2023 for Ganesh @ Karthik Singhal due to behavioral issues and lack of bonding with adoptive parents - [Paras 1, 5, 9, 11-13].

Post-Adoption Challenges – Adoptive parents experienced difficulties with child's behavior, leading to inability to continue with adoption – Underwent counseling sessions, revealed child’s health issues - [Paras 5-8].

Affidavit by Adoptive Parents – Expressed inability to bond with child, willingness to follow CARA regulations and court orders for dissolution of adoption - [Para 9].

Child Returned to Institution – Male minor child returned to Bal Asha Trust on 18th December 2023 by adoptive parents - [Para 10].

Court's Decision – Adoption order dated 17th August 2023 annulled - CARA directed to re-register child as ‘Free for Adoption’ - Investment of Rs.2,00,000 in child's name to be returned to adoptive parents - [Para 13].

Criminal Appeal – Dowry Death and Dowry Demand – Appellant convicted under Section 304-B IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act for dowry death of his wife – Prosecution proved harassment and cruelty for additional dowry soon before death – Sentences for both offenses to run concurrently. [Paras 1-58]

Dowry Death – Essential Ingredients – Death within seven years of marriage under abnormal circumstances – Proved consumption of poison leading to death – Presence of ante-mortem injuries indicating physical harassment – Satisfies proximity test for 'soon before her death' requirement in Section 304-B IPC. [Paras 32-36, 50-52]

Harassment and Cruelty for Dowry – Prosecution established continuous harassment for additional dowry – Demands for money to purchase lands – Evidence from relatives and mediators corroborating dowry demands and physical and mental harassment soon before death. [Paras 38-42]

Sentence – Conviction under Section 304-B IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act – Rigorous imprisonment for seven years for Section 304-B and simple imprisonment for one year for Section 4 of D.P. Act – Sentences to run concurrently. [Para 55]

Decision – High Court upheld trial court's conviction and sentence of appellant – Appeal dismissed – Directed registry to certify judgment to trial court for execution of sentence. [Paras 56-58]

Civil Procedure – Maintainability of Suit – Suit challenging alleged partition as illegal and void, questioning lawfulness of compromise in earlier suit – Earlier suit still pending, no decree based on compromise – Held, subsequent suit not barred under Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC – Dismissal of suit by Trial Court for lack of jurisdiction set aside, suit restored for adjudication on merits. [Para 13-15]

Compromise in Litigation – Suit challenging alleged partition based on compromise in prior pending suit – No decree passed in earlier suit based on compromise at time of filing subsequent suit – Held, subsequent suit maintainable, not barred under Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC – Observations made solely for decision's correctness, not to influence pending appeal in related matter. [Para 13-15]

Jurisdiction – Suit filed for declaring alleged partition in earlier suit as illegal, invalid, and void – Trial Court dismissed suit citing lack of jurisdiction due to bar under Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC – Held, dismissal incorrect as no decree based on compromise in earlier suit when subsequent suit filed – Subsequent suit restored for adjudication on merits. [Para 13-15]

Decision – Trial Court's order dismissing suit for lack of jurisdiction set aside – Suit challenging lawfulness of compromise in earlier suit restored for adjudication on merits – Held, no bar under Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC when earlier suit pending without decree on compromise – Parties to bear their own costs, pending interim applications disposed of. [Para 15]

NDPS - Violation of Sampling Procedure – Bail Granted – Accused arrested for possession of 24kg+ Ganja/Marijuana – Sampling procedure in violation of Standing Orders No.1/88 and 1/89 – Non-compliance raised reasonable doubt about guilt – Previous judgments cited for similar decisions in cases of procedural violation. [Paras 6-7, 19, 21, 28-29]

Section 37 NDPS Act – Rigorous Bail Conditions – Court must be satisfied with reasonable grounds for believing accused is not guilty – In this case, procedural non-compliance led to belief of not guilty. [Para 8, 27-29]

Impact of Non-Compliance on Trial – Non-compliance of mandatory procedures in NDPS Act raises reasonable grounds for belief of not guilty – Sampling method critical for case’s merit – Court’s decision not a comment on overall merit. [Paras 27-31]

Decision: Applications granted – Accused to be released on bail subject to conditions – Personal bond of Rs. 50,000 each with local surety – Various conditions imposed including not leaving country without court permission, appearing for hearings, maintaining working mobile numbers, and not indulging in criminal activity or contacting witnesses. [Paras 30-33]