Building Permits – Unauthorized Construction – Petitioners constructed a building on a parking area originally designated under a valid permit – Panchayat cancelled the permit upon discovering the misuse – Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions ordered partial occupancy, which was contested – High Court held the construction illegal and upheld the Panchayat’s cancellation – Petitioners directed to either demolish the unauthorized construction or provide an equivalent parking area [Paras 1-11].

Jurisdiction and Powers – Local Self Government – Tribunal’s Order – Tribunal directed partial occupancy and numbering of building despite unauthorized construction – High Court found Tribunal’s order erroneous as it conflicted with established legal provisions – Emphasized necessity of compliance with original permit conditions and due process in construction approvals [Paras 4-9].

Property Rights and Dispute Resolution – Pending Civil Suit – Noted that a civil suit for partition was ongoing between the parties – Highlighted the importance of resolving proprietary rights through civil court – Interim relief granted to petitioners to avoid building disuse, allowing conditional numbering and occupancy subject to final civil court decision [Paras 5-10].

Decision: Writ Petitions Partly Allowed – High Court set aside Tribunal’s partial occupancy order – Upheld Panchayat’s permit cancellation – Directed Panchayat to number remaining rooms temporarily – Petitioners to bear expenses – Final occupancy subject to civil court decision in ongoing partition suit.

Criminal Law – Negotiable Instruments Act – Deposit of Compensation – The petitioner challenged the order directing him to deposit 20% of the compensation amount as a condition for the suspension of his sentence under Section 138 of the NI Act. The High Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that the order is consistent with the statutory obligation under Section 148 of the NI Act. The Court reiterated that unless an exceptional case is made out with specific reasons, the requirement to deposit compensation is mandatory, and the appellate court is justified in imposing this condition without needing to provide additional reasoning​.

Appellate Procedure – Section 148 of the NI Act – The Court highlighted that Section 148 imposes a mandatory requirement on the appellate court to direct the deposit of at least 20% of the compensation amount when considering an appeal against a conviction under Section 138 of the NI Act. The onus is on the appellant to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to avoid this deposit​.

Decision: Petition dismissed – The court upheld the lower appellate court's order directing the deposit of 20% of the compensation amount within 60 days as a precondition for suspension of sentence during appeal.

Contempt of Court – Non-implementation of Court Orders – Appellant, a Revenue Officer, was held in contempt for not complying with the order directing reinstatement of the respondent into service – The learned Single Judge sentenced the appellant to six months’ simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 – Appellant’s subsequent compliance with the court order noted – Contempt proceedings against the appellant dropped – Importance of timely compliance and accurate representation in court highlighted [Paras 1-11].

Contempt Proceedings – Compliance and Representation – Court observed that timely and proper compliance with court orders is critical – Appellant’s initial failure to mention compliance in counter affidavit led to adverse judgment – Emphasizes that accurate and prompt reporting of compliance is necessary to avoid contempt charges [Paras 6-11].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Held – Contempt order against the appellant set aside – No costs – Court underscores the need for meticulous attention by legal counsel in representing compliance to avoid unnecessary contempt proceedings [Paras 10-11].

Disciplinary Proceedings – Judicial Review Limitations – Petitioner contested disciplinary actions resulting in leave without pay – OFDC Service Rules applicable – Judicial review limited to ensuring fair procedure, not reassessment of evidence – Court unable to alter disciplinary penalties unless they shock conscience [Paras 6-16].

Unauthorized Absence – Leave Without Pay – Petitioner’s absence treated as leave without pay – Claimed accrued leave could offset absence – Court held substitution of disciplinary authority’s decision inappropriate – OFDC’s actions deemed proper under applicable service rules [Paras 14-16].

Retirement Benefits – Claim for Dues – Petitioner claimed unpaid retirement benefits due to leave without pay classification – Court acknowledged receipt of retirement benefits by petitioner – Claims for additional benefits not substantiated [Paras 5, 13].

Decision: Writ Petition Dismissed – Punishments by Disciplinary Authority upheld – Court emphasized its limited role in reviewing disciplinary decisions and affirmed penalties imposed [Paras 17-18].

Criminal Law – Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust – Petitioners accused of inducing the respondent to supply goods based on false promises and then failing to make full payment – Trial court issued summons based on prima facie evidence – High Court finds no fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the beginning of the transaction, and the disputes are purely civil in nature – Proceedings and order issuing summons quashed [Paras 1-20].

Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Quashing of Proceedings – Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of process of law – High Court emphasizes the need to distinguish between civil disputes and criminal offences – Summons issued without sufficient grounds for proceeding under criminal law – Order set aside [Paras 5-13].

Commercial Transactions – Civil vs. Criminal Liability – Transactions between parties purely commercial – Non-payment of dues constitutes a civil breach, not a criminal offence – Judicial precedent supports differentiation between breach of contract and criminal acts [Paras 10-12].

Decision – Revision application allowed – Proceedings and order issuing summons quashed – Civil remedies advised for recovery of dues [Paras 14-15].
 

Criminal Law – Culpable Homicide – Appellant convicted under Section 304(1) IPC for causing the death of Krishna Pada Rajak by stabbing with a spear – Trial court’s judgment upheld by High Court – Evidence included eyewitness testimonies and a dying declaration – Defence’s argument on discrepancies in witness testimonies and the admissibility of the dying declaration rejected – Conviction and sentence of 7 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- affirmed [Paras 1-38].

Dying Declaration – Admissibility – Recorded by treating doctor without formal certification of fitness – Court held that the doctor, being a non-interested witness and the best judge of the patient’s condition, duly recorded the declaration when the victim was in a state to make such a statement – No suspicion found in the declaration’s credibility [Paras 19-30].

Eyewitness Testimony – Reliability – Contradictory evidence from one witness (PW2) did not undermine the consistent and corroborative testimonies of PW1 and PW3 – Both witnesses provided coherent accounts supporting the prosecution’s case – Defence’s argument regarding non-hostility of PW2 dismissed [Paras 15-23].

Medical Evidence – Corroboration – Autopsy and treatment reports matched the account of the assault – Injuries described by doctors supported the testimonies of the eyewitnesses and the dying declaration – Cause of death determined as shock and haemorrhage due to penetrating injuries [Paras 17-20].

Decision: Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and sentence under Section 304(1) IPC upheld – Appellant to serve the remainder of the sentence – Court directed the appellant to surrender within a fortnight if at large, else appropriate steps to be taken by the trial court to secure custody [Paras 33-37].

Arbitration – Non-Signatory Bound by Arbitration Clause – Appellant, a purchaser of property from vendors bound by an arbitration agreement, contended that it was not bound by the arbitration clause as it was not a signatory. The court held that a non-signatory, claiming through or under a party to the arbitration agreement, is bound by the arbitration clause. The court applied the principle established in the Cox and Kings case, interpreting Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [Paras 1-18].

Lis Pendens – Application to Arbitration Proceedings – The court held that the doctrine of lis pendens applies to proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Thus, any transfer of property during such proceedings is subject to the outcome of the arbitration [Paras 19-24].

Interim Measures – Arbitration and Conciliation Act – The court modified the interim restraint order to remain in force for 45 days from the date of receipt of notice from the Arbitral Tribunal or until any interim measures are passed by the Tribunal, whichever is earlier [Paras 25-38].

Decision – Appeal allowed in part – Held – The interim measure dated 15.04.2024, in A.A.No.15002/2024 before V Additional District Judge Bengaluru Rural, shall remain in force for 45 days from the date of receipt of notice issued by the Arbitral Tribunal on the parties to the proceeding before the Arbitral Tribunal or till any interim measures/orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunal on an application by either of the parties, whichever is earlier. All contentions on merit, including whether the arbitration clause is binding on the appellant, are kept open to be decided by the Tribunal.

Criminal Law – Quashing of Proceedings – Proceedings under Sections 406/506/120B IPC sought to be quashed by petitioners – Dispute over unpaid rent for scaffolding material provided during a construction project – Petitioners argued the issue is purely civil and there is no criminal breach of trust or intimidation – Held, no prima facie case for criminal charges – Allegations do not disclose criminal intent or misappropriation – Proceedings quashed [Paras 1-19].

Ingredients of Criminal Breach of Trust – Essential ingredients under Section 405 IPC not satisfied – No dishonest misappropriation or use of property – Dispute over non-payment of rent and removal of scaffolding materials should be addressed in a civil court – Criminal proceedings inappropriate for resolving contractual disputes [Paras 10-13, 15-16].

Application of Section 482 Cr.P.C. – High Court invoked inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings – Recognized duty of magistrate to assess prima facie case before issuing summons – Summons issued without adequate basis constitutes abuse of legal process – Emphasized distinction between civil and criminal wrongs [Paras 17-19].

Decision: Petition allowed – Criminal proceedings in Complaint Case No. CN/1169/2021 before the 18th Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, quashed – Court directed to resolve disputes through appropriate civil litigation channels.
 

Wills – Validity and Proof – Dispute over the execution of multiple wills by Pohlo Ram – The trial court ruled in favor of the will dated 17.10.1997 – The appellate court allowed the appeal for the will dated 4.2.2000, finding it suspicious – High Court emphasized the need for clear proof and dismissed the appeal, reinstating the trial court’s decision [Paras 70-90].

Burden of Proof – Suspicious Circumstances – The burden lies on the propounder of the will to prove its genuineness and dispel any suspicious circumstances – Appellant failed to prove that the will dated 4.2.2000 was executed in sound mind and free of undue influence – Evidence highlighted inconsistencies and potential forgery [Paras 84-90].

Indian Succession Act – Sections 63 and 68 – Will must be attested by two or more witnesses – Evidence presented failed to confirm due attestation and mental state of the testator during execution – The appellate court’s reliance on procedural aspects without addressing core evidentiary issues resulted in the High Court overturning its decision [Paras 77-83].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Trial court’s judgment and decree reinstated – Will dated 17.10.1997 recognized as the last valid will of Pohlo Ram – Mortgage deed declared null and void [Para 74-75].