Public Interest Litigation – Biomedical Waste Management – Enforcement of statutory framework – PIL filed highlighting indiscriminate dumping and improper handling of biomedical waste by healthcare institutions in Jharkhand – Court monitored matter since 2012 noting administrative inaction, lack of coordination and absence of treatment infrastructure – During pendency, State established multiple Common Bio-Medical Waste Treatment Facilities and improved compliance mechanisms – Held: Proper biomedical waste management is integral to protection of public health and environmental safety under Article 21 – After substantial institutional improvements and operational statutory framework under BMW Rules 2016, continuing judicial supervision no longer required – Matter disposed of with comprehensive directions to ensure effective enforcement and coordination among authorities [Paras 1-6, 25-29, 41-44].

Environmental Law – Biomedical Waste – Hazard to public health and ecology – Biomedical waste contains infectious and hazardous materials capable of spreading diseases and contaminating soil, water and air – Improper disposal in public spaces or municipal waste streams poses serious risks to human life and environmental balance – Strict adherence to statutory protocols under Environment (Protection) Act and BMW Rules mandatory [Paras 5-6].

Environment (Protection) Act – Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules – Evolution of regulatory framework – Earlier Bio-Medical Waste Rules 1998 proved ineffective due to administrative lapses – Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules 2016 introduced comprehensive “cradle-to-grave” regulatory regime including segregation, barcoding, pre-treatment, tracking and centralized treatment facilities – Effective enforcement requires institutional coordination and monitoring by authorities [Paras 8-16].

Constitutional Law – Right to Life – Environmental protection – Right to pollution-free environment, clean air and water recognised as part of Article 21 – Improper biomedical waste management directly affects public health and ecological safety and therefore falls within constitutional protection – State authorities under constitutional obligation to ensure effective implementation of environmental laws [Paras 30-31].

Judicial Review – Continuing Mandamus – Scope – Constitutional courts may issue structural and monitoring directions where statutory authorities fail to discharge obligations affecting fundamental rights – However courts cannot assume permanent administrative control where statutory framework exists – Once institutional mechanisms become operational, primary responsibility must revert to statutory authorities [Paras 36-40, 41-43].

Environmental Governance – Institutional accountability – Court issued directions for appointment of State-level nodal officer, district-wise inventory of healthcare facilities, digital traceability through barcoding, periodic inspections, enforcement actions, capacity-building programmes and functioning of district monitoring committees – Directions intended to facilitate implementation of existing statutory framework rather than create new obligations [Paras 45(a-s)].

Public Health Administration – Biomedical waste disposal – State authorities directed to ensure that healthcare facilities obtain valid authorisation, are linked to authorised Common Bio-Medical Waste Treatment Facilities, and do not mix biomedical waste with municipal waste – Regulatory compliance to be monitored through inspections, digital dashboards and grievance redressal mechanisms [Paras 45].

Decision: Public Interest Litigation disposed of – Court held that statutory framework for biomedical waste management in Jharkhand is now operational – Comprehensive coordination and enforcement directions issued to State Government, Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board and district authorities – Parties granted liberty to seek remedies in case of future violations.

Suo Motu PIL – Child Deaths – Electrocution – Anganwadi Centre – Illegal Live Wire Fencing – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Section 105 – High Court took suo motu cognisance upon newspaper reports of deaths of two minor children due to electrocution — one a 2½-year-old inside an Anganwadi Centre in Kondagaon due to a live damaged wire, and another a 6-year-old in Pendra-Marwahi district who touched illegally fenced live wires in an agricultural field — Court monitored State accountability and preventive measures — Held: State having taken departmental and penal action, disbursed compensation and issued statewide safety directions, no further judicial direction warranted — PIL disposed of [Paras 9, 10, 11].

"Unsafe Electrical Infrastructure in Anganwadi Centres — State Accountability and Systemic Preventive Action Required"

Public Interest Litigation – Child Safety – Anganwadi Centres – Electrical Safety – In the first incident, a 2½-year-old child died inside an Anganwadi Centre, Village Padeli, District Kondagaon, after coming into contact with a live wire — enquiry revealed that a damaged power supply line caused electrification of the channel gate — Anganwadi Worker and Assistant were dismissed and the Sector Supervisor placed under suspension for failure of supervision — Court noted that repeated complaints about exposed wires and unsafe fittings had gone unaddressed — State filed affidavit through Chief Secretary confirming action taken, issuance of statewide safety directions for inspection of electrical installations in all Anganwadi Centres, and disbursement of ex-gratia of Rs.1,00,000/- to the bereaved family [Paras 3, 7].

"Illegal Live-Wire Fencing of Agricultural Fields — Grave Public Danger and Criminal Liability"

Electrocution – Agricultural Fields – Illegal Electric Fencing – Section 105 BNS – In the second incident, a 6-year-old child died in Village Kargikala, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi, after coming in contact with a live wire connected directly to field fencing by a landowner to protect crops from cattle — instead of a shock-based fence, a direct live current supply was connected, constituting dangerous negligence — FIR registered under Section 105 of the BNS — Power Distribution Company issued directions against illegal connections — Ex-gratia of Rs.4,00,000/- sanctioned to the mother of the deceased [Paras 4, 8].

"Electrocution Incidents — Pattern of Negligence — State Directed to Formulate Comprehensive Preventive Roadmap"

Judicial Concern – Systemic Negligence – Preventive Measures – Court observed with serious concern that electrocution incidents caused by unauthorised live connections to field fencing and by immersion of live wires in water bodies for illegal fishing are being reported with alarming frequency, resulting in loss of human lives, cattle, and wildlife — absence of warning signs and seasonal flooding adding to the danger — Court held that isolated action would not suffice and directed the State to formulate a comprehensive roadmap for prevention of electrocution deaths in government premises and agricultural fields — Court consigned the matter to records upon being informed that no fresh incident of a similar nature had come to its notice and that compensation had been disbursed [Paras 6, 9, 10, 11].

Decision: PIL disposed of — Matter consigned to records — No further directions found necessary in view of action taken by the State [Para 11].

Bail – POCSO Offences – Right of Victim to be Heard – Bail granted to accused in case involving penetrative sexual assault on minor without issuing notice to victim – Section 40 POCSO Act read with Rule 4(13) to (15) of POCSO Rules, 2020 and Section 483(2) BNSS mandate intimation and participatory rights of victim – Held: Victim is entitled to notice and opportunity of hearing at the stage of bail – Bail order set aside for non-compliance – Accused directed to surrender – Sessions Court to reconsider bail after hearing victim [Paras 6-14].

Victimology – Participatory Rights – Scope and Evolution – Supreme Court in Jagjeet Singh v Ashish Mishra recognised substantive and enforceable right of victim to be heard at every crucial stage including bail – Presence of State does not substitute hearing of victim – Denial of opportunity amounts to violation of statutory and human rights of victim – Courts obligated to ensure effective participation of victim in heinous offences [Paras 11-12].

POCSO Act – Statutory Scheme – Duty to Inform and Facilitate Representation – Section 40 confers right on child’s family/guardian to engage counsel of choice – Rule 4 imposes obligation on SJPU/local police to keep victim informed of arrest, applications and bail status – Bombay High Court in Arjun Kishanrao Maige held that notice to victim in bail proceedings under POCSO is mandatory – Non-compliance vitiates bail proceedings [Paras 9-10, 13].

Cancellation of Bail – Grounds – Bail can be cancelled where granted without affording hearing to victim and in disregard of statutory mandate – Court need not examine merits of bail when order suffers from procedural illegality affecting victim’s rights – Fresh consideration directed [Paras 13-14].

Decision: Criminal Miscellaneous Case allowed – Bail order passed by Sessions Judge set aside – Bail bonds cancelled – Accused directed to surrender within seven days – Sessions Court directed to reconsider bail application afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to victim within one month.

Criminal Law – Dowry Death – Section 304B IPC – Conviction based solely on dying declaration – Deceased sustained 85–90% burn injuries – Doctor admitted no written certificate issued regarding fitness of deceased to give statement – Evidence discloses administration of painkillers, sedatives, analgesics and IV fluids – Hospital case sheet and treatment records not produced – Material witnesses including parents and relatives turned hostile – Held: Prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that deceased was in a fit state of mind and that cruelty in connection with dowry demand was inflicted soon before death – Conviction unsustainable [Paras 17, 23, 24].

Evidence – Dying Declaration – Section 32(1) Evidence Act – Though medical certification is rule of prudence and not mandatory, Court must be satisfied about voluntariness and mental fitness – Absence of written certification coupled with 90% burn injuries and administration of sedatives creates serious doubt – MLC (Ex.P37) mentions history as “suicidal attempt” and does not name accused – Failure to produce best evidence vitiates reliance solely on dying declaration [Paras 17–22].

Dowry Death – Essential Ingredients – Requirement of proof of cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demand soon before death – No independent corroboration – Majority of prosecution witnesses turned hostile – Inconsistencies regarding time of admission and recording of dying declaration – Prosecution failed to collect call details of alleged phone call made by deceased – Ingredients of Section 304B IPC not established [Paras 19–22].

Criminal Jurisprudence – Best Evidence Rule – Accused presumed innocent until guilt proved beyond reasonable doubt – Prosecution bound to adduce best available evidence – Withholding hospital records and material inconsistencies create reasonable doubt – Benefit of doubt to accused [Paras 22–23].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17/18.08.2012 in SC No.27/2011 set aside – Appellant acquitted of offence under Section 304B IPC – District Legal Services Authority directed to award compensation to minor sons of deceased within three months.

Disciplinary Proceedings – Summary Security Force Court – Scope of Judicial Review – Appellant, BSF Constable, dismissed from service after SSFC found charges of misconduct and act prejudicial to good order proved – Six witnesses examined – Appellant declined to cross-examine – Findings based on material on record – Held: High Court under Article 226 cannot reappreciate evidence or act as appellate authority – Interference permissible only on grounds laid down in P. Gunasekaran – None attracted – Appeal dismissed [Paras 11–12, 20–21].

Parity in Punishment – Discrimination – Unequals Cannot Be Treated Equally – Appellant claimed discrimination as co-delinquent Head Constable Gyani Ram awarded lesser punishment of reversion – Appellant had four prior convictions in service whereas co-delinquent had none – Held: Prior convictions constitute relevant distinguishing factor – Doctrine of equality does not mandate equal treatment of unequals – No discrimination made out [Paras 13–16].

Departmental Enquiry – Non-Examination of Informant – Distinguishing Precedent – Appellant relied on Robert Xess case to contend non-examination of informant vitiated proceedings – In present case, six witnesses examined and evidence recorded in presence of appellant – No violation of mandatory procedure or Rule 158 shown – Robert Xess distinguishable – Proceedings not illegal [Paras 17–18].

Confession – Allegation of Duress – Even assuming confession discarded, six unimpeached depositions remained – Confession signed without contemporaneous objection – Held: No merit in plea of involuntariness – Charges independently supported by evidence [Para 19].

Judicial Review – Armed Forces – High Standard of Discipline – Appellant earlier convicted four times in service – Disciplinary authority considered recurrent delinquency while awarding dismissal – No mala fides, no incompetence of authority, no perversity – Punishment does not shock conscience – Interference unwarranted [Paras 14, 20–21].

Decision: Intra-court appeal dismissed – Order of learned Single Judge dated 04.08.2023 in W.P. 7572(W) of 2009 upheld – Punishment of dismissal from service affirmed – No interference warranted.

Real Estate – Enforcement of RERA Order – Recovery as Arrears of Land Revenue – Petitioner allotted housing unit and paid substantial consideration – RERA allowed complaint and directed refund with 9.3% interest – Recovery certificate issued under Section 40(1) RERA – District Collector declared amount recoverable as arrears of land revenue under Section 103 H.P. Land Revenue Act – Recovery proceedings stalled on ground that project land vested in State under Section 118 H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act – Held: Vesting of subject land does not defeat enforceability of monetary recovery order – Authorities bound to proceed in accordance with statutory modes of recovery – Recovery to be taken to logical conclusion expeditiously [Paras 3-4].

RERA – Section 40 – Scope and Effect – Where promoter fails to comply with refund order, amount recoverable as arrears of land revenue – Recovery certificate validly issued – Finality of RERA order not disputed – Enforcement cannot be frustrated by subsequent change in asset profile of debtor – Statutory mechanism under Land Revenue Act must be invoked in entirety [Para 4].

Land Revenue Recovery – Statutory Procedure – Sections 74 to 83 H.P. Land Revenue Act provide multiple modes including writ of demand, arrest and detention, distress and sale of movable property, attachment and sale of immovable property and proceedings against other properties of defaulter – Authorities cannot halt proceedings merely because one property has vested in State – Statute mandates strict adherence to prescribed recovery mechanism – No deviation permissible [Para 4].

Administrative Inaction – Impermissibility – Tehsildar (Recovery) failed to proceed with recovery since 15.09.2023 – Such inaction contrary to statutory duty – Legislative intent of RERA and Land Revenue Act would be frustrated if recovery is stalled – Direction issued to District Collector to ensure expeditious completion of recovery proceedings [Para 4].

Decision: Writ petition disposed of – District Collector, Solan directed to ensure that recovery proceedings pursuant to RERA order dated 26.02.2021, recovery certificate dated 17.10.2022 and Demand Order dated 14.11.2022 are taken to their logical conclusion expeditiously in accordance with law – Pending applications, if any, disposed of.

Criminal Law – Recall of Witness – Section 348 BNSS (Section 311 Cr.P.C.) – Investigating Officer recalled to prove disclosure statements and connected documents – Trial Court found that certain material documents relating to ownership of vehicle, lease deed of hospital and inspection report were not put to PW-4 during examination-in-chief – Held: Power under Section 348 BNSS can be exercised at any stage if evidence appears essential to just decision of case – Recall not to fill lacuna but to place complete link evidence on record – No illegality in order permitting recall [Paras 19-21, 24].

Scope of Section 348 BNSS – “Essential to the Just Decision of the Case” – Expression covers holistic adjudication and not confined only to prejudice or benefit of accused before Court – Court empowered to summon or recall witness to ascertain truth even if documents are already on record but not duly proved through concerned witness – Power to be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily [Paras 21-23].

NDPS Act – Disclosure Statements under Section 27 Evidence Act – Disclosure statements of accused recorded by Investigating Officer referred to involvement of hospital owner and use of vehicle registered in name of hospital – Though other witnesses proved disclosure memos, IO failed to depose about relevant facts during examination – Recall justified to complete chain of evidence – Objection that prosecution seeks to implicate discharged person held speculative [Paras 16-20].

Filling Lacuna – Distinction – Mere recall of witness to formally prove documents or clarify omissions does not ipso facto amount to filling lacuna – Unless serious prejudice is demonstrated, recall permissible – Reliance placed on principles laid down in Rajaram Prasad Yadav and Mannan Sk. [Paras 23-24].

Fair Trial – Balancing Interests – Section 348 BNSS serves object of discovery of truth – Fair trial entails rights of accused, victim and society – Court must ensure evidence essential for just decision is not shut out on technicalities [Para 23].

Decision: Petition dismissed – Order dated 21.05.2025 allowing recall of PW-4 (Investigating Officer) upheld – No illegality or infirmity found.

Caste Certificate – OBC (Tanti, Tantubaya) – Panchayat Election – Post of Pradhan Reserved for OBC – Sub-Divisional Officer upon Court’s direction conducted re-enquiry and found that certificate holder did not belong to OBC community – However no formal cancellation order passed – Held: Once finding recorded that incumbent does not belong to OBC category, authority is duty-bound to take consequential steps for cancellation – Direction issued to cancel certificate within one week [Paras 6, 23, 31–33].

Power of Certificate Issuing Authority – Section 9(1) of 1994 Act read with Rule 3 of 1995 Rules – Whether SDO competent to initiate cancellation – Held: Certificate issuing authority may suo motu or on complaint initiate proceedings for cancellation upon prima facie satisfaction of fraud/misrepresentation – Supervisory jurisdiction of State Scrutiny Committee under Section 8A(3) does not denude such power – Harmonious construction of Sections 8A and 9 applied [Paras 24–27].

State Scrutiny Committee – Scope of Jurisdiction – Committee empowered to verify social status and examine contravention of Act – However absence of prior report of Committee not condition precedent for initiation of proceedings by certificate issuing authority – Aggrieved party may invoke supervisory jurisdiction of Committee against illegal cancellation [Paras 25–26].

Fraudulent Claim of Reserved Status – Constitutional Scheme of Reservation – Person not belonging to reserved category obtaining certificate by misrepresentation amounts to fraud – No leniency permissible – Immediate corrective action necessary to prevent subversion of constitutional purpose [Paras 10, 26, 29].

Enquiry Report – Absence of Supporting Documents – Field enquiry revealed locality predominantly Mahishya sub-caste – Clan (Gotra) Sandilya – Rituals and customs aligned with Mahishya community – No documentary proof establishing OBC (Tanti, Tantubaya) status – Affidavit alone insufficient – Conclusion that claimant failed to establish OBC status upheld [Paras 22, 28–31].

Maintainability – Alternative Remedy – Though order appealable under statutory framework, writ petition entertained in facts where earlier direction of Court required remedial action and issue pertained to fraudulent occupation of reserved public office – WPA 21813 of 2025 allowed – WPA 20033 of 2025 dismissed [Paras 20, 31–34].

Decision: WPA No. 21813 of 2025 allowed – Sub-Divisional Officer directed to take immediate steps for cancellation of OBC certificate of Smt. Khukurani Mondal Ghorai within one week – WPA No. 20033 of 2025 dismissed – Parties permitted to act on server copy – Urgent certified copies directed to be supplied upon compliance of formalities.

Negotiable Instruments Act – Dishonour of Cheque – Appeal against Acquittal – Trial Court convicted accused under Section 138 NI Act and awarded 2 years’ RI with compensation – Appellate Court reversed conviction holding complainant failed to prove financial capacity and doubted issuance of cheque – High Court held reasoning of appellate court flimsy and based on assumptions not forming part of defence – Signature on cheque admitted and proved – Statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 attracted – Accused failed to rebut presumption by cogent evidence – Acquittal set aside and conviction restored [Paras 13, 18, 22, 25].

Presumption under Sections 118 & 139 NI Act – Scope and Rebuttal – Once execution of cheque is admitted, presumption arises that it was issued in discharge of legally enforceable debt – Accused must rebut by leading credible evidence – Mere suggestions in cross-examination insufficient – No defence evidence adduced – Defence of lost cheque book neither pleaded in cross-examination nor substantiated – Presumption remained unrebutted [Paras 12, 14-16, 22].

Financial Capacity of Complainant – Cash Loan – Burden of Proof – Complainant explained availability of funds from agricultural income and furniture business – Failure to reflect loan in income tax return not fatal in attending circumstances – In absence of rebuttal evidence, finding of appellate court on lack of financial capacity unsustainable – Law laid down in Sanjabij Tari, Bir Singh and APS Forex Services applied [Paras 17, 19-23].

Statutory Notice – Non-reply – Adverse Inference – Notice under Section 138 duly served and acknowledgement proved – Accused neither replied nor initiated proceedings disputing cheque – Failure to reply strengthens presumption that cheque was issued towards discharge of liability – Defence of financial incapacity held to be afterthought [Paras 16, 23].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment of acquittal dated 01.02.2012 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa set aside – Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 01.10.2011 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khandwa restored – Trial Court directed to take accused into custody and execute sentence – Record to be sent back for compliance.