Writ Law - Right to Trade - Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act 2003 - Section 4 - Rules 2008 - Rule 4(3) - Petitioners claimed fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) to operate hookah bars in designated smoking areas - State argued prohibition based on public health and non-applicability of earlier precedents - Court held that amendment to Rule 4(3) in 2017 substituted no other service with no service thereby imposing absolute prohibition on all services including hookah in designated smoking areas - Court clarified that hookah preparation involves human intervention and service which is impermissible - Court rejected arguments regarding self-service models and rental nature of hookah apparatus - Petitions dismissed - [Paras 1-59].

Constitutional Law - Right to Life - Constitution of India - Article 21 and 47 - Fundamental right to breathe clean air - Conflict between commercial interest and public health - Court reiterated that right to breathe smoke-free air is paramount and fundamental right of non-smokers - State has constitutional duty to protect public health and discourage tobacco use - Fundamental right to trade under Article 19(1)(g) must yield to larger public interest and health obligations - [Paras 57-58].

Writ Law - Jurisdiction - Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 - Municipal Laws - Police Powers - Petitioners challenged authority of authorities to regulate hookah bars - Court held that Food Safety Department and Municipal Corporations lack jurisdiction to license hookah bars as they are not food products under FSSA - However Court clarified that police authorities possess power under COTPA Sections 12, 13 and 15 to ensure compliance with smoking prohibitions and enforce penalties - [Paras 33-35].

Evidence Law - Precedent - Interpretation of Judgments - Court noted that Narinder S. Chadha v. Municipal Corpn. of Greater Mumbai is no longer applicable post-2017 amendment to Rule 4(3) - Court held that amendment specifically removed ambiguity by creating absolute prohibition - [Paras 40-46].

Decision: Writ petitions dismissed – Court observed that hookah service is absolutely impermissible in Designated Smoking Areas under the amended 2017 Rules – Direction issued to circulate judgment to Chief Secretary and DGP for compliance.

Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 - Section 69 - Deceitful means - Suppression of identity - Accused induced the victim into sexual intercourse by suppressing a pre-existing live-in relationship and paternity of a child while presenting himself as a prospective groom - Court held that suppression of such a vital fact constitutes deceitful means under Section 69 BNS - Custodial interrogation including potency test and recovery of evidence is essential for investigation - Held - Anticipatory bail denied - [Paras 8-9].

Criminal Law - SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 - Section 18 - Statutory Bar - Applicability - Prosecution alleged offences under BNS that correspond to scheduled offences - Court held that since the ingredients of Section 69 BNS are prima facie satisfied the bar under Section 18 SC/ST (PoA) Act against granting anticipatory bail is squarely attracted - Held - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 7-9].

Criminal Law - Interpretation of Statutes - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 - Section 69 - Meaning of deceitful means - The explanation to Section 69 explicitly includes marrying by suppressing identity as a deceitful act - Court held that suppression of prior marriage and existence of a child while entering into a marriage fixation ceremony falls within the ambit of deceitful means - Held - Prima facie case established - [Paras 6-8].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Impugned order of the Special Court affirmed – Appellant directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer forthwith failing which the police is at liberty to arrest the appellant.

Civil Law - Specific Relief - Specific Relief Act 1963 - Section 14 and 41 - Contract of personal service - Plaintiff neurosurgeon filed suit seeking specific performance of an oral agreement and injunction against termination notice issued by defendant hospital - Trial Court granted ex parte ad interim injunction - High Court observed that contract for professional medical services is determinable by its nature and cannot be specifically enforced - Held - Suit for specific performance of a determinable contract is barred under Section 14 and consequently no injunction can be granted under Section 41(e) - Impugned order set aside - [Paras 20-23, 32-35].

Civil Law - Injunction - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 4 - Ex parte ad interim injunction - Plaintiff suppressed the fact of having acceded to the termination notice via email and failed to establish a prima facie case - Appellate Court held that trial court failed to consider the maintainability of the suit which is a prerequisite for grant of injunction - Held - Impugned order passed without considering statutory bars against specific performance - Appeal allowed - [Paras 27-29, 40-43].

Civil Law - Evidence - Contractual interpretation - Plaintiff sought injunction based on alleged oral agreement but failed to provide specific particulars or date of agreement - Conduct of plaintiff in requesting three months' time after receiving termination notice contradicts the claim of an illegal termination - Held - Plaintiff failed to establish prima facie case or balance of convenience - [Paras 19, 27-28].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Impugned order dated 18/08/2026 set aside – Trial Court directed to dispose of the injunction application expeditiously after written objections are filed by defendants.

Civil Law - Possession - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XII Rule 6 - Suit for possession decreed on admissions - Appellant admitted taking suit premises for commercial use, paying security deposit, and carrying out extensive fitments - Appellant contended that keys were with plaintiff's watchman and lease was not registered - Court held that once possession and occupation for commercial purposes are admitted, the owner is entitled to a decree of possession regardless of the formal status of the lease - Held - Decree under Order XII Rule 6 was rightly passed - appeal dismissed - [Paras 70-79].

Civil Law - Tenancy - Transfer of Property Act 1882 - Section 107 - Unregistered lease - Oral agreement - Appellant argued tenancy non-existent due to lack of registered instrument - Following Anthony v. K.C. Ittoop & Sons - Court held that a lease can be created by oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession or by implication - Where parties agree to rent and physical possession is handed over, a jural relationship of lessor-lessee exists - Held - Absence of registered deed does not bar decree for possession - [Paras 80-83].

Civil Law - Res Judicata - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order II Rule 2 - Suit for possession filed after suit for arrears of rent - Appellant claimed suit barred under Order II Rule 2 - Court held that claim for possession and claim for rent are distinct causes of action - Held - Suit for possession is not barred by the pendency of a separate suit for recovery of rent - [Para 84].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Impugned judgment and decree dated 17.12.2024 affirmed – Pending applications disposed of.

Civil Law - Motor Accident Claims - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 173 - Recovery rights - Tribunal granted right of recovery to insurer against owner without evidence of policy violation - High Court held that in the absence of any proof of breach of policy conditions or evidence supporting the plea of a planted vehicle the direction for recovery is legally unsustainable and must be set aside - Held - Tribunal order granting recovery rights to insurer is set aside - [Paras 5-8].

Civil Law - Quantum of Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166 - Settlement of claim - Parties agreed to a consolidated sum as full and final settlement during appellate proceedings - Relying on Taslim Parvin vs Usha Devi 2018 TAC 22 (SC) the Court exercised its discretion to fix the total compensation at Rs. 1,50,000/- to serve the interest of justice - Held - Appeal disposed of with directions for payment of consolidated amount - [Paras 6-8].

Decision: Appeal allowed in part – The direction for recovery of compensation from the owner is set aside – The Respondent No. 2 is directed to pay a consolidated sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the appellant within eight weeks as full and final settlement.

Civil Law - Testamentary Succession - Indian Succession Act 1925 - Section 276 - Caveatable Interest - Appellant claiming interest as the niece of the testator's wife challenged the grant of Letters of Administration - Respondents as the son and daughter of the testator were primary heirs - Court held that as the appellant would not inherit even in the absence of the Will under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 she lacked a caveatable interest to contest the probate proceedings - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 13-17].

Civil Law - Execution of Will - Indian Succession Act 1925 - Section 63 - Proof of Execution - Trial court granted Letters of Administration - Appellant alleged suspicious circumstances including variation in signatures - Court found execution was not denied in written statement and attesting witness evidence met statutory requirements - Held - Mere allegations of suspicious circumstances without evidence of coercion or undue influence cannot invalidate a Will - [Paras 18-21].

Civil Law - Suspicious Circumstances - Indian Succession Act 1925 - Will validity - Testator bequeathed property to son while providing pension benefits to wife - Court held that disinheriting a wife is not inherently suspicious if alternative provisions are made for her - Held - No material or vital suspicious circumstances established to warrant interference with the trial court's order - [Paras 19-22].

Decision: Appeal dismissed - Order of the Learned Single Judge confirmed - Parties to bear their own costs.

Law - Partition - Hindu Succession Act 1956 - Section 8 - Intestate succession - Property originally belonged to Kanjamalai Achari who died intestate leaving behind his wife son and daughter - Each heir entitled to 1/3 share in the self-acquired property - Son subsequently executed sale agreement for entire property in favor of third party and died during pendency of specific performance suit - Lower appellate court erroneously granted 1/2 share to plaintiff ignoring son's 1/3 share already alienated - Held - Plaintiff is entitled only to 1/3 share and decree in previous suit is not binding on her share - [Paras 11-12].

Civil Law - Limitation - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Limitation Act 1963 - Suit for partition - Plaintiff filed suit after decree in O.S. No. 112 of 1986 was executed - Defendant failed to provide proof of delivery of possession to substantiate plea of time-bar - Plaintiff's contention of discovering previous suit during delivery attempts accepted - Held - Suit filed within limitation - [Para 12].

Civil Law - Specific Performance - Binding nature of decree - Decree obtained against some legal heirs in respect of entire property without impleading all co-heirs - Held - Such decree is only binding to the extent of the share of the executant and the impleaded heirs who did not challenge the proceedings - [Para 11.1].

Decision: Second Appeal is partly allowed – The judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court are modified to the extent that the plaintiff is entitled to 1/3 share in the suit property – The decree in O.S. No. 112 of 1986 is declared not binding upon the plaintiff’s 1/3 share.

Civil Law - Review Jurisdiction - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 47 Rule 1 - State seeking review of appellate order enhancing compensation on ground of cancellation of land diversion - Petitioner failed to demonstrate due diligence in bringing facts to notice of Court during initial proceedings - Court held that review jurisdiction is not an appeal and must be confined to grounds of discovery of new evidence or error apparent on face of record - Mere negligence of State counsel in not producing available documents does not constitute a ground for review - Held - Petition dismissed - [Paras 1-12].

Civil Law - Scope of Review - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 - Mandatory nature of review grounds - Relying on S. Tirupathi Rao Vs. M. Lingamaiah (2024) 20 SCC 188 - Court reiterated that review is not an inherent power and must be specifically conferred by law - Third ground of sufficient reason must be analogous to discovery of new evidence or error apparent on face of record - Held - Applicant failed to establish that non-production of evidence was despite due diligence - [Paras 10-12].

Civil Law - Procedural Fairness - Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code 1959 - Section 51 - Requirement of notice in review proceedings - Referring to Shaheed Anwar and Govind Vs. Settlement Commissioner - Held - Principles of natural justice mandate that any order affecting rights of parties through review requires prior notice and opportunity of hearing - Attempt by State to bypass these requirements or rely on suppression of facts is legally untenable - [Paras 7-9].

Decision: Review petition dismissed as misconceived and meritless.

Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 482 - Absence of aggrieved party - Petitioner trust allegedly collected donations for Covid-19 relief but diverted funds to an LLP and fixed deposits - Prosecution initiated on secret information of an informant-police officer - No complaint received from any donor - Court held that in the absence of an aggrieved person who has been cheated or whose property was entrusted and misappropriated, the foundational elements for Sections 406 and 420 IPC are absent - Proceeding held to be an abuse of process - FIR quashed - [Paras 10-14, 30-31].

Criminal Law - Criminal Breach of Trust - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 406 - Essential ingredients - Entrustment of property - Nature of donations - Donations are voluntary gifts divesting the donor of ownership and beneficial interest - Held - A donor cannot retain ownership after donation and hence there is no entrustment for the purpose of Section 406 IPC - Misutilization of donation does not constitute criminal breach of trust in the absence of entrustment - [Paras 15-23].

Criminal Law - Cheating - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 420 - Deception at inception - Dishonest intention - Soliciting donations via emotional appeals does not constitute deception - Failure to honor specific utilization promises, without evidence of dishonest intention from the inception of the transaction, does not satisfy the requirements of Section 420 IPC - [Paras 24-29].

Evidence Law - Documentary evidence - Transfer of Property Act 1882 - Section 122 - Definition of Gift/Donation - Donation is a voluntary transfer without consideration - Donor ceases to have any right or interest in the property upon acceptance by the donee - [Paras 20-22].

Decision: Petition allowed - FIR No. 18/2022 dated 22.01.2022 registered at PS Special Cell and all consequential proceedings quashed.