Anticipatory Bail – Petitioners seeking anticipatory bail in the context of a conspiracy related to unprovoked firing upon peaceful protesters – Similar facts and common prayer in multiple petitions – Present order addressing six petitions with similar facts for brevity. [Para 1]

Background of the Case – Petitioners apprehending arrest for their alleged involvement in a conspiracy related to firing on protesters – Previous bail applications dismissed – Nature of the case and conspiracy outlined. [Para 2-3]

Historical Context – Incidents leading to the FIR, including a religious congregation, an FIR in 2007, and subsequent developments – Deepening resentment and sacrilege incidents explained. [Para 4-5]

Investigation and Findings – Overview of the SIT’s investigation, which implicated various individuals, including the petitioners – Specific actions attributed to each accused. [Para 13]

Reasons for Anticipatory Bail – Court’s reasoning for granting anticipatory bail – Emphasis on lack of custodial interrogation need, the impact of the crime, and the evidence collected – Conditions imposed on petitioners to prevent interference with witnesses or the investigation. [Para 16-23]

Legal Precedent – Reference to legal precedents, such as Mahdoom Bava v. CBI, Sidharth v. State of UP, and Aman Preet Singh v. CBI, in support of the decision. [Para 20-21]

Civil Appeal – Termination of service – Grant of back wages – Appellant-State challenges the judgment allowing the respondent's appeal against the termination of his services – Respondent's services were terminated without following proper procedure – Trial Court set aside the termination but declined to grant back wages – First Appellate Court granted back wages – Issue of entitlement to back wages for the period of absence from duty – No illegality or perversity in the First Appellate Court's judgment – No substantial question of law for determination – Appeal dismissed. [Para 1-18]

Rowdy Sheet - Legality of keeping rowdy sheet open against the petitioner - Petitioner's challenge to the action of respondents - Allegation of the action being illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India - Petition seeks closure of the rowdy sheet. [Para 1-2]

Background - Four criminal cases registered against the petitioner - Two cases resulted in binding over, and two cases are pending trial - Rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner based on the alleged offences - Petitioner claims that this continued surveillance causes inconvenience and hardship in leading a respectable life. [Para 2]

Evaluation - Examination of the petitioner's criminal history - Bound over cases from 2013 and 2015, pending trial cases from 2018 and 2019 - Consideration of the long interval between registration of the cases. [Para 5]

Lack of Allegations - Absence of allegations regarding breach of peace or public tranquility by the petitioner after opening of the rowdy sheet - Basis for opening the sheet is the 2013 and 2015 cases - No conviction in the subsequent cases registered in 2017 and 2019. [Para 7]

Legality of Rowdy Sheet - Discussion on the statutory nature of A.P. Police Standing Orders and their limitations - Emphasis on the serious consequences of opening a rowdy sheet and the protection of the right to reputation under Article 21 of the Constitution. [Para 8]

Insufficiency of Grounds - Finding that there are insufficient grounds to term the petitioner as a "habitual offender" under Clause (A) of Order 601 of A.P. Police Manual - Lack of specific instances of the petitioner's involvement in offences after the opening of the rowdy sheet. [Para 9]

Closure of Rowdy Sheet - Directing the respondents to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner - Acknowledgment of the possibility of future actions if the petitioner is involved in any crimes. Petition Allowed. [Para 10]

Eviction Petition - Challenge to Trial Court's order allowing substitution of legal heirs of deceased landlady - Two objections raised by the petitioner regarding formal application for condonation of delay and non-disclosure of details of all Class-I legal heirs - Limitation issue addressed in light of Supreme Court judgment - Second objection dismissed as the Trial Court considered the original Will and allowed the application - No infirmity or error found in the Trial Court's order - Petition dismissed - Petitioner has no locus to raise objections to the application by the sons of the deceased landlady under Order XXII Rule 3 CPC - Petition lacks merit. [Para 1-7]

Commercial Suit - Injunction against unauthorized dissemination of cricket matches - Prima facie case established by the Plaintiffs - Irreparable harm to the Plaintiffs if injunction not granted - Balance of convenience favors the Plaintiffs - Defendants restrained from communicating or disseminating any part of the ICC World Cup Cricket matches on electronic or digital platforms - Domain Name Registrars directed to lock and suspend rogue websites - ISPs/Telephone Service Providers directed to block rogue websites - Department of Telecommunications and Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology directed to issue blocking orders for illegal streaming websites - Plaintiffs given liberty to inform authorities of any new rogue websites for immediate blocking - Affidavits to be filed with the court to keep it informed of websites requiring blocking - Relief for non-infringing websites to approach the court for modification of the injunction - Service and compliance orders permitted via email - Replies to the application to be filed within four weeks. [Para 18-49]

Bail Application – Offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120B of the IPC – Allegations of cheating and fraud against the applicant – Prima facie involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offence established – Applicant's use of forged identity documents – Flight risk – 34 cases registered against the applicant across India – Bail application dismissed. [Para 13-16]

Forgery – Use of forged identity documents – Multiple documents with different dates of birth – Fortifies the prosecution's apprehension that the applicant is a flight risk – Adds to the reasons for denying bail. [Para 15]

Civil Procedure – Appeal against judgment and decree – Appellant filed appeal under Section 96 of the CPC challenging a judgment and decree passed in a suit filed by the respondent – Suit filed for recovery of a loan amount – Appellant had initially sought leave to defend, which was granted conditionally – Appellant failed to comply with the condition, leading to the passing of the impugned judgment. [Para 1-8]

Summary Procedure – Order XXXVII of the CPC provides for a summary procedure for expeditious disposal of suits – Timelines under this procedure must be strictly followed – Trial Court granted sufficient opportunity to the appellant, including conditional leave to defend. [Para 15-17]

Compliance with Conditions – Appellant's contentions regarding lack of awareness of the conditions imposed were rejected by the Trial Court – Appellant's subsequent application and appeal seen as afterthoughts to evade liability – Procedure under Order XXXVII Rule 3(6)(b) of the CPC followed, allowing judgment for the plaintiff. [Para 18-22]

Appeal Dismissed – The appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent – Amount deposited by the appellant released to the respondent in partial satisfaction of the decree. [Para 23]

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) - Petitioner highlights the inaction of the University Grants Commission (UGC) regarding unspecified courses in universities/institutions/colleges - Petitioner seeks various reliefs related to standardization of degree nomenclature and accountability of UGC officials. [Para 1-3]

Lapses and Inconsistencies - Petitioner argues that the lack of adherence to UGC regulations leads to students being conferred with unrecognized degrees, wasting time and resources - Highlights UGC's notification specifying degree nomenclature. [Para 4-6]

Section 22 of UGC Act - Section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956 is discussed, emphasizing the mandatory nature of conferring degrees only by recognized institutions - Petitioner claims that some universities violate this provision. [Para 7]

Violation of Fundamental Rights - Petitioner alleges that conferring unspecified degrees violates students' fundamental rights under Article 21 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India - Also claims discrimination under Article 14. [Para 11-13]

Supreme Court Judgment - Petitioner refers to the Supreme Court's judgment in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corp. Ltd. v. Rabi Shankar Patro and Ors., highlighting the role of UGC in regulating education and the need for effective implementation of regulations. [Para 13]

Section 13 of UGC Act - Section 13 of the UGC Act, 1956 is mentioned, and the petitioner suggests interpreting "may" as "shall" to ensure the prescribed education standards are met. [Para 14]

Penalties - Petitioner criticizes the relatively low penalty of one thousand rupees mentioned in Section 24 of the UGC Act, 1956 for contravention of Sections 22 and 23 - Claims UGC's lack of enforcement leads to litigation and problems for students. [Para 16]

Previous Writ Petition - Petitioner withdrew a previous writ petition and moved this PIL due to the systemic issues and lack of enforcement by UGC officials. [Para 17]

UGC's Actions - Counter-affidavit by Respondent no. 2 (UGC) mentions UGC's efforts to communicate and ensure compliance with Section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956 by universities and colleges - UGC's notifications and letters to universities are highlighted. [Para 18-23]

Compliance Measures - UGC's efforts to maintain standards and compliance with regulations are detailed, including the publication of specified degrees and penalties for non-compliance. [Para 27-30]

Disposition - The PIL is disposed of with observations that UGC should take necessary actions to ensure compliance with the UGC Act, 1956. [Para 30-31]

Motor Accident Claim - Appeal against judgment and award - Common judgment disposing of appeals challenging the judgment and award passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Kheda - All appeals relate to the same incident - Issues involve negligence, compensation, and liability - Appeal filed by Insurance Company challenging negligence and compensation - Claimants seeking enhancement of compensation - Examination of evidence and arguments by respective parties - Constructive res judicata considered in relation to negligence - Tribunal's view aligned with earlier Tribunal's findings - Compensation awarded on various heads - Examination of evidence regarding medical expenses - Request to reduce compensation on certain heads. [Para 1-16]

Motor Accident Claim - Issue of negligence - Previous decision by Tribunal in an earlier claim petition - Applicability of the principle of res judicata - Examination of the evidence and findings of the earlier Tribunal - Conclusion reached in the previous case that negligence of the truck driver was 70% and that of ST (State Transport) driver was 30% - Applicability of res judicata even when the parties in the earlier and subsequent proceedings are different - Citing relevant case law to support the application of the principle of res judicata - Upholding the findings of the earlier Tribunal as binding in the subsequent proceedings related to the same accident. [Para 17-25]

Compensation - Personal Injury - Calculation of compensation for a victim with 100% functional disability - Examination of the victim's condition and testimony of medical experts - Consideration of the victim's age, occupation, and future prospects - Enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal to reflect current market conditions and government norms for wages. [Para 26-32]

Attendant Charges - Determination of expenses for an attendant required for the injured victim - Reference to government wage norms - Calculation of attendant charges based on the wages of skilled laborers - Application of the multiplier for the victim's life expectancy - Enhancement of attendant charges awarded by the Tribunal. [Para 33-36]

Special Diet and Transportation Charges - Evaluation of expenses for special diet and transportation related to medical treatment - Consideration of the victim's need for regular hospital visits - Application of the multiplier for future expenses - Enhancement of special diet and transportation charges awarded by the Tribunal. [Para 37]

Loss of Marriage Prospect - Reassessment of compensation for loss of marriage prospect - Increase in the amount awarded by the Tribunal to reflect the victim's future prospects. [Para 37]

Total Compensation - Calculation of the total compensation amount, including enhancements to various heads - Clarification that no interest is applicable to the enhanced amount for attendant charges - Direction to deposit the revised compensation amount with the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. [Para 40-41]