Service Law - Maintainability of Writ Petition – Recruitment Process of Central/Delhi Government – Jurisdiction under Article 226 barred by Section 14 of Administrative Tribunal Act, 1965 – Petition not maintainable in High Court .

Petitioner's Circumstances – Cleared Tier-I and Tier-II examinations – Missed deadline for renotified examination following Supreme Court order dated 03.03.2021 in Sachin Kumar and Others vs. DSSSB and Others – Request for transfer to Central Administrative Tribunal to avoid delay.

Transfer of Petition – High Court considers appropriate to send the petition to Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi – Re-identification as an original application in accordance with regulations – Request for expedited hearing on 23.01.2024 . Disposal of Petition – With directions, petition disposed of by the High Court

Maintenance and Domestic Violence – Wife filed a complaint under Section 12 of DV Act against Husband alleging domestic violence – Trial Court granted maintenance of Rs.1,00,000/month and Rs.5,00,000 compensation – Appellate Court set aside this, remanding the case back to the Trial Court for re-trial without specific findings on key issues – High Court found this approach erroneous and set aside the remand order. [Paras 1-3, 11-12, 26-33, 36-37]

Remand Justification and Interim Maintenance – High Court held remand by Appellate Court unjustified, lacking in reasons or justification – Appellate Court failed to address key issues raised and did not fix interim maintenance, contrary to the objective of DV Act providing immediate relief – High Court directed the Appellate Court to adjudicate the appeal on merits, considering specific flagged issues. [Paras 32-37, 38-39]

Income Consideration for Maintenance – For interim maintenance calculation, High Court considered Husband's net average income (Rs.2,00,000/month) based on income tax returns from 2009-2010 to 2019-2020 – Directed 25% (Rs.50,000/month) as interim maintenance to Wife from December 2009 to November 2019, accounting for Rs.10,00,000 already paid – Arrears to be paid in six equal monthly installments starting March 2024. [Paras 40-43]

Anticipatory Bail Application - Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail in FIR No. 486/2023 for offences under Sections 354/ 354A/ 354D/509 IPC and Sections 8/12 of POCSO Act - Alleged inappropriate gestures and physical assault by the petitioner towards a minor victim - Petitioner’s contention of false implication and evidence of absence from the crime scene [Paras 1, 2, 4].

Prosecution's Argument - Strong opposition to bail by the APP for the State - Allegations considered grave and serious - Concerns about the petitioner threatening the victim and evading investigation - Reference to the petitioner's past criminal involvement [Para 5].

Victim's Statement and Evidence - Victim’s statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. supporting allegations against the petitioner - Confirmation of victim's minor status at the time of the incident - CCTV footage confirming victim's presence near the incident site, but not the exact place of offence [Paras 6, 7].

Court's Decision - Bail denied due to serious nature of allegations, the minor status of the victim, the petitioner’s evasion of investigation, and non-cooperation in an ongoing investigation - NBW issued against the petitioner - Observations made without prejudicing merits of the case [Paras 7, 8, 9].

Quashing of FIR – Section 306 IPC – Abetment of Suicide - Application under Article 226 and Section 482 CrPC for quashing FIR alleging abetment of suicide – FIR lodged by deceased's wife against applicant for harassment and pressurizing deceased, leading to his suicide – Allegations in FIR constituting cognizable offence under Section 306 IPC. [Paras 1, 2, 12]

Delay in Filing Complaint – Impact on Credibility of FIR - FIR lodged after an 8-day delay – Applicant’s contention that delay raises doubt over allegations – Respondent’s explanation of delay due to wife’s shock and depression – Court finds no unusual delay affecting FIR’s credibility. [Paras 7, 10]

Ingredients of Abetment – Analysis of FIR Allegations - Court’s examination of FIR allegations against requirements of Sections 107 and 306 IPC – Determination that FIR discloses prima facie case of abetment of suicide by applicant. [Paras 11, 12]

Suicide Note – Relevance in Establishing Abetment - Suicide note found on deceased implicating applicant in harassment and pressure – Note considered significant evidence in assessing abetment charge. [Para 13]

Court’s Power under Section 482 CrPC – Limitations in Quashing FIR - Court’s refusal to quash FIR under Section 482 CrPC – Observations on limited scope of judicial intervention at FIR stage – Importance of not impeding police investigation or trial process. [Paras 14, 19]

Judicial Precedents – Guiding Principles for Quashing of FIR - Reference to Apex Court judgments outlining principles for exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC – Emphasis on allowing police investigation in cases where FIR discloses cognizable offence. [Paras 16-19]

Decision – Application Dismissed, FIR Upheld – The application for quashing the FIR dismissed due to the prima facie establishment of offence under Section 306 IPC – Rule discharged and interim relief vacated. [Para 20-21]

Criminal Law - Supardari - Factual Background and Claims – Petitioner Menaka, owner of “Sarathy Krishnan” business, challenged the Magistrate's return docket order concerning the seizure of oil from the petitioner's factory – Oil alleged to be non-edible and used for lamp oil, conflicting with the second respondent's claim of it being edible oil – Seizure followed a complaint of misappropriation at Sri Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited – Petitioner sought interim custody under Section 451 Cr.P.C. [Para 2-3, 5-6]

Forensic and Food Analyst Reports – Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) and food analysts provided differing reports on the nature of the oil – FSL indicated the oil as non-edible, while food analysts stated it was not fit for edible purposes due to its condition at the time of testing [Paras 5, 8]

Judicial Decision – High Court held that criminal courts lack jurisdiction in determining rival claims over seized goods, citing Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Suryanarayanan (2020 12 SCC 637) – Directed both parties to establish ownership in civil court and claim damages in criminal proceedings – Ordered destruction of the seized oil and allowed for reimbursement of its value to the succeeding party in the civil suit [Paras 10-14]

Vehicle Seizure and Interim Custody Request – Petitioner's vehicle seized for involvement in Crime No. 87 of 2023 under Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act – Petitioner seeks interim custody citing damage risks and financial obligations – Original application rejected by Trial Court [Paras 1-3]

Legal Argument and Opposition – Petitioner claims vehicle misused without her knowledge, ready to provide guarantee and security – Respondent objects, citing ongoing confiscation proceedings [Paras 3-4]

Court's Analysis and Decision – Citing Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, court considers vehicle's deteriorating condition if kept idle – Criminal Revision Case allowed, Trial Court's order set aside, vehicle to be returned under certain conditions [Paras 6-9]

Decision: Petition allowed – Vehicle to be returned to petitioner under specific conditions, including bond execution, undertaking against illegal use, and provision for evidence and future requirements [Para 9]

Criminal Law - Acquittal - Conviction Under POCSO Act – Challenged by Appellant – Convicted for offenses under Section 5(l) r/w 5(J)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act for sexually exploiting a minor under false marriage promises – Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine [Para 1].

Prosecution Case – Sexual Exploitation of Minor – Appellant, a married man with children, accused of having a sexual relationship with a minor girl resulting in pregnancy – Based on the victim's complaint, appellant charged under relevant sections of POCSO Act [Para 2].

Trial Proceedings – Evidence and Witnesses – Prosecution presented P.W.1 to P.W.15 and documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.16 – Accused examined D.W.1 and presented Ex.D.1 in defense [Para 3].

Defense Argument – Victim's Age Disputed – Defense counsel contested the proof of the victim's age, citing a lack of evidence to authenticate the birth date – Relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Yuvaprakash Vs. State [Para 5.1].

Judgment Analysis – Age of Victim Not Proven – Court found prosecution failed to establish the victim's age convincingly as per the guidelines in Yuvaprakash Vs. State – Entry in school records not sufficiently authenticated [Paras 8-9].

Decision – Appellant Acquitted – Court acquitted the appellant due to failure in establishing the victim's age – Conviction and sentence set aside, but compensation to the victim upheld [Para 11].

Cheque Dishonor and Cause of Action – Multiple presentations of cheque within validity period – Last dishonor establishes cause of action – Applicant's cheque dishonored multiple times, final cause of action arose on last dishonor [Paras 2, 9].

Notice of Dishonor – Legal requirements – Statutory presumption of deemed service when notice is sent by post and miscarries – Compliant with Section 94 of the Act [Paras 10-11].

Objective of Section 138 – Focus on securing payment, not retribution – Punishment in cheque bounce cases aims at ensuring recovery of money [Para 13].

Sentence Modification – Considering deposited compensation, jail sentence set aside, fine maintained – Applicant's deposited compensation justifies modifying the sentence [Paras 12, 14-15].

Decision: Revision partly allowed – Jail sentence set aside, fine amount maintained, respondent allowed to withdraw deposited compensation [Para 16].

Cheque Bounce - Petitioner's Challenge to Trial Court and ASJ's Decision – Conviction under Section 138 of the NI Act for dishonoring cheques worth Rs. 16,00,000/- in a property sale transaction – Appeals dismissed by ASJ, conviction upheld by the High Court. [Paras 4-5, 14, 24-31]

Facts and Allegations – Petitioner (Mohd Akil) alleged to have issued dishonored cheques to respondent (Mohd Fareed) for property sale – Property dispute involving 300 sq. yards, with partial sale and execution of Power of Attorney. [Paras 6-9]

Trial Court's Observations and Conviction – Petitioner's admission of issuing cheques and execution of agreements – Conviction based on failure to honor cheques as per agreement, leading to legal consequences under Section 138 of the NI Act. [Paras 10-13]

ASJ's Findings and Dismissal of Appeal – Confirmation of Trial Court's decision – No credible evidence to overturn Trial Court's findings – Agreement terms and cheque dishonor crucial to judgment. [Paras 14, 35-42]

High Court's Analysis – Limited revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 Cr.P.C – No jurisdictional error or miscarriage of justice found in lower courts' decisions – Upholding of conviction and sentence by High Court. [Paras 20-23, 24, 30-31]

Sentencing and Compliance – Sentences of simple imprisonment and fines upheld – Directives regarding deposit amounts and adjustment against fines – Accused directed to surrender. [Paras 31-36]