Disability Pension – Armed Forces – Attributability to Military Service – Requirement of Reasoned Opinion by Medical Board – Petitioner, an Indian Air Force Corporal invalided out of service due to Type-I Diabetes assessed at 20% disability for life, was denied disability pension on the ground that the disease was “not connected with service” – Medical Board merely stated that the disease was an endocrine disorder not related to military service without assigning reasons – Held: Recording of reasons by the Medical Board is crucial and mandatory since its opinion forms the basis for pension sanctioning authority – Absence of reasons renders the denial unsustainable – Petitioner entitled to disability pension [Paras 10-13].

Service Law – Presumption of Sound Health at Entry into Service – When a serviceman is enrolled without any medical note regarding pre-existing disease, he is presumed to be in sound physical and mental condition – Burden lies on the employer to establish that the disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service – Soldier cannot be compelled to prove that the disease originated from service conditions [Paras 7, 14].

Disability Pension – Beneficial Interpretation – Pension provisions governing disability benefits for armed forces personnel are beneficial in nature and must be interpreted liberally in favour of the serviceman who is invalided out before completion of tenure – In absence of convincing material displacing presumption of service connection, disability must be treated as attributable to or aggravated by service [Paras 8, 15].

Judicial Review – Opinion of Medical Board – Courts ordinarily refrain from interfering with expert medical opinions; however, where such opinion lacks reasons or fails to comply with statutory requirements, judicial review is permissible – A bare conclusion without supporting reasoning cannot form the basis for denial of disability pension [Paras 9, 13].

Decision: Writ Petition allowed – Order of the Armed Forces Tribunal rejecting disability pension set aside – Respondents directed to issue corrigendum PPO granting disability pension to the petitioner within three months – Failure to comply will render arrears payable with interest at 7% per annum.

document (38)

Criminal Writ - Child Custody – Habeas Corpus – Petition filed by father seeking direction to produce minor child and return him to Canada – Child presently residing in Delhi with mother – Held: Custody with biological mother cannot ordinarily be termed illegal detention so as to justify issuance of writ of habeas corpus – Petition not maintainable in such circumstances [Paras 19–21, 26].

Habeas Corpus – Scope in Child Custody Disputes – Habeas corpus is an extraordinary remedy meant to address illegal or unlawful detention – It is not intended to adjudicate complex custody disputes between parents involving disputed facts – Such matters ordinarily require detailed enquiry under statutory guardianship laws [Paras 20, 23–24].

Paramount Consideration – Welfare of Child – In custody disputes, welfare and best interest of the child override legal rights of either parent – Courts must independently evaluate the child’s welfare rather than mechanically enforcing parental claims or foreign orders [Paras 21, 34].

Foreign Custody Orders – Limited Enforceability in India – Orders of foreign courts regarding custody are relevant but not conclusive – Indian courts must independently assess whether enforcement of such orders would serve the welfare of the child – Habeas corpus jurisdiction cannot be used as an executing mechanism for foreign decrees [Paras 24–25, 32].

Jurisdiction of Family Court – Guardians and Wards Act – Where guardianship proceedings are already pending before a competent Family Court, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked – Family Court exercising parens patriae jurisdiction is the appropriate forum to determine custody issues after detailed examination of evidence [Paras 27–30].

Child Welfare – Stability and Continuity – Minor child residing with mother in Delhi and attending school for a considerable period – Abrupt removal and relocation to another country without detailed enquiry into welfare would not be appropriate – Matter requires full adjudication before Family Court [Paras 33–34].

Parallel Proceedings – Writ Jurisdiction – Entertaining habeas corpus petition when guardianship petition is pending may lead to parallel proceedings and prejudice adjudication before competent court – High Court declined to interfere [Para 35].

Decision: Writ petition dismissed – No case made out for issuance of writ of habeas corpus – Parties relegated to pursue remedies before the Family Court where guardianship proceedings are pending – Family Court directed to decide the matter expeditiously on its merits.

Negotiable Instruments Act – Dishonour of Cheque – Vicarious Liability of Directors – Complaints filed against Managing Director/Directors for dishonour of cheques issued by company – Company itself not made an accused in the complaint – Held: Prosecution under Sections 138 and 141 N.I. Act cannot be maintained against directors in absence of arraigning the company as an accused – Proceedings quashed [Paras 13–15, 21].

Corporate Criminal Liability – Requirement of Arraigning Company – Section 141 N.I. Act creates vicarious liability of persons in charge of company only when the company itself is prosecuted for offence under Section 138 – Commission of offence by company is a condition precedent for fastening liability on its officers – Without impleading company as accused, prosecution against directors is legally unsustainable [Paras 13–14].

Vicarious Liability – Strict Construction of Penal Statutes – Liability of directors or officers arises only by virtue of statutory deeming fiction – Such liability must be strictly construed – Words “as well as the company” in Section 141 make it mandatory that the company must be prosecuted along with persons responsible for its business [Paras 13–14].

Distinction Between Filing Complaint Through Managing Director and Prosecution of Company – Judgment in Bhupesh Rathod distinguished – In cases where company authorises Managing Director through board resolution to institute complaint, the complaint may proceed – However, where company itself is accused but not impleaded as a party, proceedings against directors alone cannot be sustained [Paras 16–19].

Section 138 N.I. Act – Cheques Issued by Company – Where dishonoured cheques were issued from company account and signed by authorised signatory on behalf of company, criminal liability primarily lies upon company – Directors cannot be prosecuted in their personal capacity unless statutory conditions of Section 141 are fulfilled [Paras 18–21].

Decision: Applications allowed – Entire criminal proceedings in Complaint Case Nos. 41 of 2012, 1109 of 2012, 28 of 2012, 3044 of 2011, 40 of 2012, 29 of 2012, 372 of 2012, 347 of 2012, 30 of 2012, 5424 of 2017 and 5425 of 2017, including summoning orders, quashed – Liberty granted to complainant to pursue appropriate legal remedies for recovery of amount in accordance with law.

Motor Vehicles Act – Motor Accident Compensation – Liability of Insurance Company – Gratuitous Passengers – Tribunal had exonerated insurer on ground that vehicle was allegedly used for hire contrary to policy terms – No issue framed or evidence produced to show passengers were not covered under policy – Insurance policy admitted and negligence of driver established – Held: Insurer cannot be completely absolved – Insurance Company directed to pay compensation to claimants first with liberty to recover amount from vehicle owner – Principle of “pay and recover” applied to protect victims under beneficial legislation [Paras 5–6, 8–9].

Motor Accident Claims – Welfare Legislation – Protection of Victims – Court emphasized that motor accident compensation law is a beneficial legislation intended to ensure timely payment of compensation to victims or their dependents – If victims are forced to recover compensation from vehicle owners directly, realization may become difficult and defeat object of statute – Hence insurer directed to satisfy award first and thereafter recover from owner through execution proceedings [Paras 6–7].

Motor Accident Compensation – Determination of Income and Future Prospects – Tribunal assessed income of deceased at Rs.6,000 per month but failed to add future prospects – High Court held that addition of 40% future prospects appropriate – After applying multiplier of 17 and deducting one-third for personal expenses, dependency compensation recalculated – Court awarded consolidated compensation of Rs.11,00,000 as just and reasonable amount [Para 9].

Motor Accident Claims – Awareness Regarding Insurance Coverage – Court observed that disputes frequently arise due to non-coverage of passengers in insurance policies – Directed that awareness programmes be undertaken for vehicle owners and general public regarding insurance coverage and consequences of travelling in vehicles not meant for passengers [Para 10].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Tribunal award modified – Compensation enhanced to Rs.11,00,000 with interest @6% per annum from date of filing claim petition – Insurance Company directed to deposit compensation within eight weeks and granted liberty to recover the amount from the vehicle owner through appropriate proceedings.

Criminal Law – Transfer of Investigation – Allegations of custodial assault against ED officers – FIR lodged by accused in money laundering case – Petitioners sought quashing of FIR or transfer of investigation to CBI – Court found that informant was accused in siphoning of ₹23 crores public funds and ED was investigating several high-profile cases involving senior political and bureaucratic officials – State police treated ED office as crime scene soon after FIR – Held: Considering allegations against central agency officers and apparent haste by State police, exceptional circumstances existed warranting transfer of investigation to CBI to ensure fair and impartial probe – FIR not quashed but investigation transferred [Paras 45-47, 61-62].

Quashing of FIR – Scope of judicial interference – Allegation that informant sustained injury after allegedly hitting his head with a water jug while interacting with ED officers – Informant alleged custodial assault – Medical record indicated superficial injury and noted it as self-inflicted – Held: At the stage of investigation, disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated – Allegations in FIR did not fall within parameters of Bhajan Lal guidelines for quashing – FIR cannot be quashed merely because defence version appears plausible – Matter requires investigation [Paras 57-58].

Transfer of Investigation to CBI – Principles governing exercise of power under Article 226 – Court reiterated that direction for CBI investigation must be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances – Such power may be invoked where investigation by State police may lack credibility or where circumstances indicate bias or influence – In present case ED officers were investigating sensitive cases involving high-ranking State officials and FIR was lodged by accused in those investigations – State police acted with unusual haste – Held: To maintain public confidence and ensure impartial investigation, case transferred to CBI [Paras 51-52, 61-62].

Fair Investigation – Importance in criminal justice system – Investigation must be impartial, unbiased and free from external influence – If investigation appears to be carried out with object of helping a particular party or undermining rule of law, Court can intervene – Fair investigation is essential both for accused and victim and forms backbone of rule of law [Paras 46-49].

Protection to Public Servants under PMLA – Scope of Section 67 PMLA – Provision grants protection against prosecution or proceedings for acts done in good faith under the Act – Whether act was done in good faith is a matter that can only be determined after proper investigation – Therefore issue cannot be conclusively determined at threshold stage [Paras 53-54].

Judicial Discipline – Recusal and roster objections – Objection raised by State regarding lack of roster for the Bench to hear the matter – Court held that roster clearly included criminal writ petitions relating to CBI and PC Act – Recusal cannot be forced by litigants to choose a Bench and courts should not succumb to attempts at forum hunting – Objection rejected [Paras 13-19].

Decision: Petition partly allowed – FIR not quashed – Investigation in Airport P.S. Case No. 5 of 2026 transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation – Jharkhand Police directed to hand over entire case records to CBI – CBI directed to register case and investigate in accordance with law.

POCSO Act – Child Victims – Vulnerable Witnesses – Bailable Warrants – Petition by minor victims – Three minor girls aged approximately 15 years, allegedly subjected to repeated sexual assault by five accused persons – Bailable warrants issued against petitioner no. 1 (PW-2) for non-appearance, set aside by this Court on 28.05.2025 – Petition thereafter taken up for framing of broader guidelines on protection of child victims during trial – Petition disposed of with directions consolidating legal principles governing vulnerable witnesses [Paras 1-4].

"The Trauma of Repeated Summoning" – Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act – Prohibition Against Repeated Testimony – Section 33(5) mandates that the Special Court shall ensure that the child is not called repeatedly to testify in court – Legislative intent is to shield the child from having to narrate traumatic incidents multiple times – In the present case, petitioner no. 1 was summoned on nine occasions, petitioner no. 2 on four occasions, and petitioner no. 3 on six occasions before their testimony could be fully recorded – Victims expressed distress and reluctance to appear – Held: Whenever a child victim is summoned for recording of testimony, the Special Court should fix specific dates and ensure examination-in-chief and cross-examination are conducted without unnecessary adjournments [Paras 16-26].

Vulnerable Witnesses – Scope and Judicial Evolution – Section 311 Cr.P.C. vs. Section 33(5) POCSO Act – The concept of "vulnerable witness" has evolved through judicial pronouncements to include victims of sexual offences, children, persons with mental illness, persons with disabilities and witnesses under threat perception – Applying the principle of generalia specialibus non derogant, the special protection under Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act must prevail over the general power of recall under Section 311 Cr.P.C. – Once the child witness has been extensively examined, recall should not ordinarily be permitted – Discretion to recall must be exercised with circumspection, caution and utmost sensitivity [Paras 11-23].

"Evidence Without Fear" – Video Conferencing and Testimonial Aids – Section 36, POCSO Act – Guidelines of the High Court of Delhi for Recording of Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses, 2024 – Section 36 mandates that the child shall not be exposed to the accused while giving testimony and specifically permits use of video-conferencing, single-visibility mirrors, curtains or other suitable devices – The said Guidelines recognise the concept of a "live link" for remote evidence and permit any party, prosecutor or guardian to apply for evidence to be recorded outside the courtroom through live-link television – In appropriate cases, and particularly where requested by the victim, video-conferencing or live-link testimony must be utilised – No further guidelines are required in view of existing comprehensive directions by the Supreme Court and this Court [Paras 27-41].

"Bail Hearings Must Not Become a Punishment" – Presence of Victim During Bail Hearings – Coordinate Bench Directions in XXXX v. State (Crl.A. 198/2020, order dated 11.01.2023) – Victims in the present case were called to appear on about eleven occasions solely for bail hearing arguments – Such repeated presence is psychologically harmful and contrary to the directions in XXXX v. State – Held: The objections of the victim to grant of bail may be recorded at the first instance itself – Once victim's views are noted, the bail application may be contested by her counsel or authorised representative – Insistence on repeated physical or virtual presence of the victim on every date of hearing ought to be avoided [Paras 42-46].

Decision: Petition disposed of – Bailable warrants against petitioner no. 1 already set aside vide order dated 28.05.2025 – Court consolidates legal principles governing protection of vulnerable witnesses and child victims – Directions issued :

Special Courts must avoid repeated summoning of child victims without effective progress;

video-conferencing and live-link testimony must be utilised where appropriate;

victim's presence during bail hearings should not be insisted upon repeatedly once her views have been recorded;

practice directions and judicial precedents governing vulnerable witnesses must be followed in letter and spirit

Copy of judgment to be circulated to all Trial Courts/Special Courts and Judicial Officers in Delhi [Paras 47-51].

Default Bail – Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. – Indefeasible Right – Duty of Magistrate to Examine Applicability of Offences – The right to statutory bail is a constitutional guarantee flowing from Article 21 and becomes indefeasible once default in filing charge-sheet within the stipulated period is demonstrated – Magistrate is not expected to mechanically order detention based on offences invoked in the FIR or remand report – It is the bounden duty of the Magistrate to examine prima facie whether a particular offence is made out, as the authorised period of detention and entitlement to bail hinge on such determination – Mere invocation of a section by the Investigating Agency cannot be the be-all and end-all of the matter [Paras 13-14].

Section 409 IPC – Criminal Breach of Trust by Agent – Trustee as Agent – Applicability – Petitioner was trustee and secretary of a public charitable trust, entrusted with obtaining sanction of Charity Commissioner for sale of trust property and receiving sale consideration – Allegedly sold larger area than resolved, opened a new bank account by forging signatures of trustees, and diverted sale proceeds to his own trust – Held: Section 409 IPC is not restricted to professional agents; the term "agent" includes any person entrusted with property in the ordinary course of his duty, habitual occupation or specific engagement – Payment of consideration to petitioner was by way of entrustment in his capacity as agent of the trust – Acts prima facie fall within Section 409 IPC – 90-day period under sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of the proviso to Section 167(2) applicable [Paras 17-29].

Trustee and Agent – Distinction – Property of Trust Vests in Trustee – Trustee Not Absolute Owner – Under Section 3 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, the trustee is the legal owner of the trust property but holds it for the benefit of the beneficiaries and not on their behalf – Expressions "for the benefit of" and "on behalf of" are not synonymous – However, for purposes of Section 409 IPC, where the trustee is specifically entrusted with a task such as execution of a sale and receipt of consideration, such entrustment amounts to an agency for that purpose – Property received in such capacity is held in trust for the beneficiaries, and dishonest misappropriation thereof attracts Section 409 [Paras 22-29].

Decision: Writ Petition dismissed – Rule discharged – Prima facie Section 409 IPC attracted to the facts; authorised period of detention correctly held to be 90 days – However, observations confined to determination of the prayer for statutory bail; learned Magistrate not to be influenced by the same in further proceedings [Para 30-31].

Municipal Law – Building Plan Sanction – Security Zone – Imposition of Non-Statutory Conditions – Petitioners sought sanction for construction of G+4 residential building of height 15.49 metres situated within 500 metres of Nabanna declared as Security Zone – Municipal Commissioner granted conditional approval imposing several conditions based on police inputs including erection of view cutter, prohibition of windows/balconies facing security zone and police verification of residents – Held: Where building proposal conforms to statutory requirements including height restriction under Section 244 of Howrah Municipal Corporation Act, additional conditions lacking statutory basis cannot be imposed merely on perceived security concerns – Executive inputs cannot override statutory scheme [Paras 42–47].

Municipal Regulation – Scope of Power to Impose Conditions – Statutory Limits – Municipal Commissioner empowered to regulate construction and impose conditions relating to safety and planning under Act – However such power must be traceable to statute – Conditions imposed solely at instance of police authorities without statutory backing held ultra vires – Administrative or executive directions cannot curtail property or development rights absent legislative authority [Paras 46–48, 51].

Building Regulation – View Cutter and Restriction on Windows/Balconies – Conditions Nos. 4 and 5 – Condition requiring ten-foot-high “view cutter” and prohibition on windows or balconies facing security zone examined – Held: Such restrictions contradict mandatory building norms relating to ventilation and habitability and are not contemplated under Sections 243 or 244 of the Act which only regulate building height in notified security zones – Conditions disproportionate and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution [Paras 49–57].

Municipal Law – Police Verification of Residents – Condition Beyond Scope of Building Regulation – Condition No. 16 requiring verification of “character antecedents” of all existing and future occupants held wholly alien to building sanction regime – Municipal authorities cannot impose surveillance-oriented obligations unrelated to structural regulation – Requirement amounts to intrusion into privacy and liberty under Article 21 and lacks statutory foundation [Paras 58–62].

Constitutional Law – Property Rights – Proportionality – While security concerns surrounding strategic installations are legitimate, restrictions on development must be proportionate and supported by statutory authority – Blanket architectural restrictions and mandatory occupant verification based on speculative security apprehension constitute arbitrary exercise of power offending Articles 14 and 300A [Paras 54–57, 64–66].

Decision: Writ petitions partly allowed – Condition Nos. 4, 5 and 16 imposed in building sanction order dated 24.09.2024 quashed as ultra vires and unconstitutional – Remaining conditions upheld – Authorities directed to process and finalise building plan sanction without insisting upon quashed conditions within twelve weeks.

Writ Law - Pension Computation - Average Emoluments - Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations 1995 - Regulations 2(d), 2(s), 35 and 38 - Petitioners were employees of Punjab National Bank sent on deputation to sponsored Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) - During last ten months prior to retirement petitioners drew basic pay in RRBs which served as basis for Provident Fund contribution - Bank computed pension based on notional substantive pay petitioners would have drawn in parent bank instead of actual pay drawn in RRBs - Petitioners challenged communications rejecting their claim for fixation of pension on actual last drawn pay - Held - Statutory scheme under Regulation 2(d) read with Regulation 38 mandates that average emoluments be calculated on pay drawn during ten months preceding retirement - Since pay drawn in RRBs was subject to Provident Fund contribution it falls squarely within definition of pay under Regulation 2(s) - Bank cannot ignore actual pay to compute pension on a lower notional figure - Statutory pension rights cannot be diluted by administrative instruments or unilateral understandings - Impugned communications quashed - Bank directed to re-compute pension on actual pay drawn including deputation period - [Paras 1-16, 18-19].

Writ Law - Delay and Laches - Continuing Cause of Action - Pensionary Benefits - Bank pleaded that writ petition suffered from unexplained delay as petitioners retired long before approaching Court - Held - Wrong complained of is a continuing under-payment of pension in breach of statutory Regulations - Pension is a recurring benefit and partakes character of a continuing cause of action - Mere passage of time in absence of prejudice should not stand in way of rectifying ongoing statutory infraction - Plea of delay and laches cannot defeat petitioners' claim - [Para 17].

Writ Law - Statutory Rules vs Executive Instructions - Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations 1995 - Bank relied on Ministry of Finance clarification dated 27.11.2019 to justify calculation on notional pay - Held - Pension Regulations framed in exercise of statutory power have force of law - Regulations cannot be amended or whittled down by settlements or administrative instructions - Executive device having effect of depriving employee of pension computed on actual last drawn pay is arbitrary and unsustainable - Following ratio in Bank of Baroda v. G. Palani an executive clarification cannot operate to neutralise plain terms of Pension Regulations - [Paras 13-15].

Decision: Petitions allowed – Impugned communications quashed – Respondent-Bank directed to re-compute pension based on actual pay drawn during last ten months including deputation period – Arrears to be released within 2 weeks with 6% interest per annum.