Criminal Law - Sexual harassment - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 354A - Appeal against acquittal - Trial Court acquitted the respondent-accused for offences under Section 354A IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act citing minor discrepancies in evidence and non-investigation of local complaints against the prosecutrix - High Court reappreciated evidence finding that the prosecutrix remained consistent regarding stalking and unwanted physical contact of the accused touching her cheeks - Held - Trial Court conclusions were erroneous - acquittal reversed - respondent-accused convicted under Section 354A(1)(i) IPC - [Paras 1-47].

Criminal Law - Age determination and POCSO Act - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Section 10 - Minority of prosecutrix not proved - Prosecution relied on birth certificate registered thirteen years after birth without supporting register entries or mandatory SDM orders - Held - POCSO Act provisions cannot be invoked when age is not satisfactorily established - [Paras 11, 16, 21].

Criminal Law - Evaluation of evidence and defective investigation - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 378 - Minor discrepancies in arrest time or place of recording complaint do not vitiate core prosecution case - Failure of investigating officer to probe irrelevant local complaints regarding clothing and lifestyle does not provide ground for acquittal - Held - Defective investigation by itself cannot override credible ocular testimony - [Paras 23-34].

Criminal Law - Propriety of cross-examination and victim dignity - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Sections 146, 151 and 152 - Irrelevant questions concerning victim attire and religion - Trial courts must not permit cross-examination to be used for character assassination or moral judgment based on clothing - Held - A woman's choice of attire is her personal choice and never a justification for unlawful conduct - [Paras 35-41, 48].

Decision: Appeal allowed - Acquittal set aside - Respondent-accused convicted under Section 354A(1)(i) IPC - Matter posted for hearing on sentence under Section 235(2) CrPC - Copy of judgment directed to be circulated to all Principal District and Sessions Judges in Delhi and Delhi Judicial Academy.

Criminal Law - Negotiable Instruments - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Quashing of complaint - Petitioner sought quashing of criminal complaint and summoning order for dishonour of cheques issued by company - Trial Court summoned accused - Petitioner argued he was not a director as per Ministry of Corporate Affairs records and cheques were only security - High Court held that foundational averments existed in complaint regarding active participation - absence of formal directorship in statutory records is not conclusive when material prima facie indicates active management and holding out as Chairman - security cheques cannot be treated as worthless if underlying liability has matured - disputed questions of fact regarding role in company and defence cannot be adjudicated in Section 482 proceedings - Held - no case made out for exercise of inherent jurisdiction - petition dismissed - [Paras 1-13].

Criminal Law - Vicarious liability - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 141 - Scope of liability - Petitioner contended no vicarious liability as name did not figure in MCA records as Director or authorized signatory - Held - liability under Section 141 is not confined only to persons holding formal designation as Director or Managing Director but extends to every person in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business - actual role performed requires evidence during trial - [Paras 7-8].

Criminal Law - Security Cheques - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Enforceable debt - Petitioner argued cheques were issued merely as security and not towards legally enforceable debt - Held - mere description of a cheque as a security cheque does not take the transaction outside the ambit of Section 138 - if the obligation for which the security cheque was issued has matured and the cheque is presented towards discharge of liability, its dishonour attracts penal consequences - [Para 10].

Criminal Law - Inherent powers - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 482 - Scope of interference - High Court reiterated that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 it does not undertake a meticulous appreciation of defence or embark upon a mini trial - inherent powers are to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection only in rare cases - [Paras 9-12].

Decision: Petition dismissed – Summoning order and consequential proceedings affirmed – Pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.

Writ Law - Attendance Requirements - Rules of Legal Education 2008 - Rule 12 - Students of ILS Law College and other institutions prevented from appearing for semester-end examinations during academic year 2025-26 due to attendance shortages ranging between 46 and 54.37 percent - Petitioners challenged attendance shortage and invoked Delhi High Court judgment in Sushant Rohilla which directed that students should not be detained for attendance shortage pending BCI reconsideration - Supreme Court stayed paragraph 249 of Sushant Rohilla prospectively on 26th May 2026 and subsequently on 21st July 2026 granted one-time protection to students whose academic session was ongoing to appear for final and supplementary examinations - High Court held that Supreme Court order of 21st July 2026 applies to all ongoing students regardless of year or semester of study and irrespective of whether they personally read the Delhi High Court judgment - Held - Petitioners entitled to one-time protection and supplementary examination directions issued accordingly - [Paras 1-68].

Writ Law - Supreme Court Orders - Supreme Court Order dated 21st July 2026 - Applicability to ongoing students - College contended Supreme Court protection is confined only to final year students and inapplicable in Maharashtra due to contrary High Court rulings - High Court held Supreme Court order draws no distinction based on year of study or territorial jurisdiction - Held - protection extends to all students facing detention for attendance shortage during the ongoing academic session 2025-26 - [Paras 29-48].

Decision: Writ petitions disposed of - Interim protection confirmed for students who appeared for exams and academic progression preserved - University and College directed to conduct supplementary examinations within four weeks for students unable to appear - [Paras 66-68].

Civil Law - Partition - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 100 - Plaintiffs filed suit for partition claiming three-fourth share in suit properties alleging joint family status and joint acquisition - Defendant No.1 contested that items 1 and 5 were self-acquired properties purchased in 1986 and pleaded prior partition in 1984 - Trial Court decreed the suit granting share in all items - First Appellate Court reversed the judgment regarding items 1 and 5 holding them to be self-acquired properties of defendant No.1 in the absence of pleading and proof of joint family nucleus - High Court upheld the First Appellate Court judgment noting that plaintiffs failed to plead or prove joint family nucleus and that admissions of plaintiff No.2 established separate living and independent acquisitions - Held - First Appellate Court justified in reversing the decree for items 1 and 5 - appeals dismissed - [Paras 1-52].

Civil Law - Burden of Proof - Hindu Law - Joint Family Property - Self-acquisition - Presumption of jointness does not automatically extend to properties standing in the individual name of a coparcener without proof of adequate joint family nucleus - Plaintiffs asserting joint family character of individually held property must plead and prove foundational facts regarding existence of nucleus and contribution - Held - mere existence of a joint Hindu family does not raise a legal presumption that property acquired in the name of an individual member is joint family property without establishing operative nucleus - [Paras 21-25, 45-47].

Civil Law - Pleadings and Evidence - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 6 Rule 1 - Evidence adduced without foundational pleadings cannot be looked into to grant relief - Plaintiffs omitted to plead specific facts regarding contribution of salary or joint funds towards purchase of items 1 and 5 in the name of defendant No.1 - Held - oral improvements during trial regarding joint purchase cannot cure the inherent lack of pleadings in the plaint - [Paras 32-35].

Civil Law - Additional Evidence - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 41 Rule 27 - Application for production of additional documents in second appeal - Documents sought to be produced belatedly without due diligence and failing to satisfy statutory conditions - Held - additional documents cannot be entertained to overturn categorical admissions made during cross-examination - [Paras 26-28, 49].

Decision: Both appeals dismissed - Judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court in R.A. Nos. 186 of 2006 and 190 of 2006 dated 22/01/2010 in respect of item nos. 1 and 5 confirmed.

Writ Law - Contempt of Courts - Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 - Section 12 - Non-compliance with order directing reimbursement of dues to schools - Petitioners filed contempt petition alleging breach of court order requiring State to reimburse pending dues claimed under RTE Act - State tendered unconditional compliance statement undertaking to release admissible amount within four weeks - Court accepted statement as undertaking while making broader observations on recurring systemic delays in processing reimbursements - Held - contempt petition disposed of in view of undertaking and State directed to review reimbursement mechanism - [Paras 1-12].

Constitutional Law - Right to Education - Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 - Section 12 - Statutory obligation of State to reimburse unaided schools - Beneficial social welfare legislation requiring private schools to admit weaker sections and disadvantaged groups - State obligated to reimburse per-child expenditure - Absence of strict timelines in rules leading to recurring litigation and institutional financial burden - Held - State Government directed to review mechanism and prescribe definite timelines and monitoring frameworks - [Paras 5-12].

Decision: Contempt Petition disposed of in view of the statement made by the State – State directed to release admissible amount within four weeks not later than 4th September 2026 – State Government recommended to undertake a comprehensive review of the reimbursement mechanism and constitute a committee before the end of calendar year 2026.

Criminal Law - Dishonour of Cheque - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Revision petitioner-accused convicted for dishonour of cheque issued for Rs.12,000,000/- towards refund of advance sale consideration and penalty under a registered agreement - Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused - First Appellate Court confirmed conviction and dismissed additional evidence application under Section 391 CrPC - High Court dismissed revision petition holding that statutory presumption under Section 138 stood unrebutted as accused failed to substantiate alternate defences regarding chit transactions or third-party dealings and failed to dispute handwriting or signature on agreements - Held - concurrent findings of fact suffer from no legality or perversity warranting revisional interference - petition dismissed - [Paras 1-17].

Criminal Law - Statutory Presumption - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Rebuttal of presumption - Accused raised multiple unverified defences including repayment and execution of sale agreement as guarantee for third-party transactions involving Ningamma and Jyothi without examining witnesses or leading defence evidence - Held - mere bald assertions without cogent rebuttal evidence or preponderance of probabilities cannot displace statutory presumption - [Paras 3, 10, 12, 16].

Criminal Law - Financial Capacity - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Source of income - Complainant established financial capacity through documentary evidence including experience certificate, bank statements, silk worm craft records, and immovable property RTC extracts - Held - complainant successfully discharged initial burden regarding source of funds - [Paras 6, 14].

Criminal Law - Service of Notice - General Clauses Act 1897 - Section 27 - Legal notice sent to correct and undisputed residential address returned as delivered through postal department tracking records - Held - service of notice is complete and valid when dispatched to correct address and unclaimed or unreplied by the drawer - [Paras 7, 13].

Criminal Law - Appellate Additional Evidence - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 391 - Production of bank statements at appellate stage - Accused failed to exercise due diligence during trial and offered no explanation in Section 313 CrPC statement for non-production - Held - appellate court rightly rejected application seeking production of additional documents in absence of sufficient grounds - [Paras 4, 14].

Decision: Criminal Revision Petition dismissed – Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court and affirmed by the First Appellate Court upheld.

Writ Law - Right to Practice - Advocates Act 1961 - Sections 24, 30 and 49 - All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 - Rules 9, 10 and 11 - Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice Verification Rules 2015 - Rule 5 - Applicant seeking bail whose counsel graduated after the academic session 2009-10 and argued without passing the All India Bar Examination within two years - High Court examining whether law graduates from academic session 2009-10 or thereafter enrolled under Section 24 of the Advocates Act can continue practice without qualifying the All India Bar Examination and whether advocates failing to verify certificates of practice after five years are entitled to practice - Held - Law graduates from academic session 2009-10 onwards are entitled to practice provisionally for two years under a provisional enrollment certificate and provisional advocate roll - but upon failure to qualify the All India Bar Examination within two years they cease to be entitled to practice in any court tribunal or authority - Held further - Disability regarding non-verification of certificate of practice under Rule 5 of the Rules of 2015 comes into force only after publication of the list of non-practising advocates under Rule 20.4 - Held - Application disposed of with specific directions to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and authorities regarding expeditious issuance of enrollment numbers and police verification - [Paras 1-41].

Writ Law - Definition of Court - Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 - Section 2(1)(a) - Right of audience - Revenue courts and tribunals - Presiding officers refusing audience to disqualified advocates - Held - Courts include all judges magistrates and persons except arbitrators legally authorized to take evidence encompassing revenue courts from the court of Tehsildar up to the Board of Revenue - [Paras 10, 32, 33].

Decision: Bail application disposed of – Questions answered holding that law graduates from academic session 2009-10 onwards cannot practice beyond two years without clearing the All India Bar Examination – Specific directions issued to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police and Registrar Compliance.

Civil Law - Second Appeal - Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act 1961 - Section 11 - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 6 Rule 17 and Order 7 Rule 7 - Defendants appellants challenged concurrent decrees of eviction and possession based on title arguing that in a landlord-tenant suit failing to prove tenancy warrants outright dismissal without granting relief on title - Trial Court and first appellate court concurrently found that landlord-tenant relationship was not established but decreed possession based on title after allowing plaintiffs to amend the plaint and pay separate court fees upon defendants disputing title and pleading adverse possession - High Court upheld concurrent findings noting that unlike cited precedents where plaints were not amended and relief was sought solely on tenancy the plaintiffs in this case duly amended the plaint sought relief based on title paid separate court fees and proved title through admissions and documentary evidence - Held - no substantial question of law is involved - appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-24].

Civil Law - Amendment of Plaint - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 6 Rule 17 - Conversion of suit - Plaintiffs originally filed suit for eviction based on oral tenancy and later amended plaint to incorporate alternative prayer for possession based on title after defendants denied tenancy and claimed adverse possession - Defendants did not challenge the amendment order and filed consequential written statement amendments - Held - amendment was rightly allowed and tried by both courts - [Paras 4-12].

Civil Law - Adverse Possession - Limitation Act 1963 - Article 65 - Defendants claimed perfection of title by adverse possession since 1969 while admitting in written statements and depositions that they did not even know the true owners Kishorilal and Shivcharan Shivbaksh - Held - mere long possession without establishing hostile open and continuous possession with knowledge of true owner cannot establish adverse possession - [Paras 3-15].

Decision: Appeal dismissed - Concurrent judgments and decrees of the trial court and first appellate court affirmed - No order as to cost - Record of the courts below be sent back.

Civil Law - Temporary Injunction - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Section 151 - Plaintiff filed suit for injunction based on an agreement for entrusting readymade business - Defendant denied agreement and possession alleging forgery and production missing bill books - Trial court granted temporary injunction and ordered handing over of keys - First appellate court reversed finding cloud of doubt over genuineness of agreement and lack of evidence regarding possession - High Court held that appellate interference was justified as trial court exercised jurisdiction perversely by ignoring material evidence including travel documents and trade license - Held - appellate court judgment affirmed - original petitions dismissed - [Paras 1-37].

Civil Law - Appeal Maintainability - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XLIII Rule 1 - Maintainability of civil miscellaneous appeal against orders passed under Section 151 CPC - Applications filed for return of keys consequential to injunction orders - Held - misquoting provision does not take away statutory right of appeal when enabling provision exists - [Paras 12-18].

Decision: Original petitions dismissed - Common judgment of the First Appellate Court upheld.