Criminal Law - Bail - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 - Sections 3(6) 3(7) 3(8) 61(2) 103(1) 105 106(1) 238 308(2) 316(5) and 318(4) - Petitioner as organizer of North East India Festival in Singapore sought bail following the drowning death of Brand Ambassador Zubeen Garg - Prosecution alleged petitioner harbored a grudge and conspired to eliminate the deceased by forcing participation and ensuring constant alcohol supply despite known medical restrictions for epilepsy - Evidence from room charts and witness statements suggested petitioner manipulated hotel arrangements to facilitate alcohol consumption and permitted hazardous deep-sea water activities without safety measures - Petitioner argued death was accidental and he was not present on the Yacht - High Court found prima facie evidence of an active conspiracy and deliberate exposure of the victim to life-threatening dangers - Held - Bail application rejected considering the magnitude of the offence and the status of the investigation - [Paras 1-84].

Criminal Law - Flight Risk - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 483 - Conduct of accused - Petitioner fled to Malaysia immediately after the incident and was apprehended at Delhi Airport following a lookout notice and Interpol alert - Petitioner contended travel was not for absconding - Court observed that previous conduct of fleeing and the necessity of alerting international authorities indicated a high risk of absconding - Held - Probability of petitioner fleeing or tampering with the 394 prosecution witnesses justifies continued detention - [Paras 42-67].

Writ Law - Personal Liberty - Constitution of India - Article 21 - Speedy Trial - Petitioner in custody for 8 months argued prolonged incarceration violates constitutional rights citing Najeeb and Andrabi judgments - Court distinguished the cited precedents noting they involved detentions exceeding five years without progress - Court emphasized that a special designated court was constituted for the day-to-day trial of this specific case - Held - Period of 8 months does not constitute an undue delay violating Article 21 given the complexity and special trial arrangements - [Paras 70-81].

Decision: Bail application rejected – Bail prayer of the petitioner Shyamkanu Mahanta in connection with Sessions Case No. 256/2025 stands dismissed – Trial Court directed to proceed with day-to-day trial.

Criminal Law - Framing of Charge - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 323, 325, 330, 331, 341, 201, 506 and 34 - Accused-petitioners challenged the Trial Court order framing charges for causing grievous hurt to extort confession - Prosecution case rested on alleged dental injuries sustained by the complainant during an assault - Medical opinions from government doctors consistently categorized all ten injuries as simple in nature - Complainant relied upon a tooth extraction performed by a private practitioner nearly two and a half months after the incident - High Court observed that at the stage of framing charges the Court must sift through material to determine if a grave suspicion exists - Found that the clinical extraction after seventy-five days without an unbroken chain of medical corroboration failed to establish a direct causal link to the assault - Held - Documentary medical records must be treated as the primary anchor for prima facie evaluation when classification of an offence turns on the nature of injury - Impugned order modified to delete Sections 325 and 331 IPC and arraign petitioners under Section 330 IPC - [Paras 1-12].

Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 307 - Ingredients - Complainant sought addition of Section 307 IPC on the ground of assault - Court analyzed the medical metrics and found the injuries to be demonstrably superficial - Noted that for Section 307 IPC to be attracted the act must coexist with the requisite intention or knowledge that had death ensued the act would amount to murder - Held - A criminal charge cannot be anchored upon mere conjectures or flights of fancy - Grafting a charge of attempt to murder onto a factual foundation of purely simple injuries would be a patent misapplication of law - [Paras 10.4-10.5].

Criminal Law - Snatching and Robbery - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 379-B - Deletion during investigation - Complainant challenged the non-framing of charge for snatching despite specific FIR allegations - Police investigation report based on CCTV footage and witness statements found the allegations untrue - Court noted that charges cannot be framed in vacuo or based on bald allegations bereft of foundational material - Held - No illegality in the Trial Court refraining from framing a charge under Section 379-B IPC - [Para 10.5].

Criminal Law - Unlawful Assembly and Exonerated Accused - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 147 and 149 - Complainant assailed the exclusion of several accused persons from the charge-sheet - Court held that the jurisdictional scope of the current challenge was tethered strictly to the legality of the impugned order framing charges against the recommended petitioners - Found that delving into the merits of the exoneration of individuals not challaned would overstep the remit of the revision - Held - The status of those exonerated remains a collateral matter at the current stage of proceedings - [Para 10.6].

Decision: Revision petitions disposed of – Impugned order dated 20.11.2024 modified – Petitioners in CRR-2289-2025 directed to be arraigned for offences under Sections 323, 330, 341, 201, 506 and 34 of IPC.

Civil Law - Succession - Mutual Wills vs Identical Wills - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 96 - Appellants sought to set aside Trial Court judgment dismissing suit for partition and possession of property jointly owned by parents - Parents executed two separate Wills on 20-04-2006 in identical language bequeathing shares to the surviving spouse with absolute rights and subsequent devolution to children - After mother demise in 2007 father executed gift deeds for different floors in favor of Respondent No 1 and a subsequent Will in 2010 - Appellants contended that 2006 Wills were mutual wills creating binding irrevocable obligations - High Court examined the language of the Wills which provided that the survivor shall enjoy property in exclusive rights interest and control with power to dispose - Held - For a will to qualify as a mutual will there must exist a clear and definite agreement between executants that the arrangement remains irrevocable after death of one party - Mere execution of identical wills on the same day does not establish mutuality - Language used unequivocally conferred complete dominion and absolute ownership upon the survivor - Father was competent to execute gift deeds and subsequent Will - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-48].

Civil Law - Interpretation of Wills - Life Estate vs Absolute Ownership - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XV Rule 3 - Determination of interest created in favor of surviving spouse - Appellants argued father acquired only a limited life interest and could not alienate property except for necessity - High Court analyzed phrases shall enjoy the same in his/her own exclusive rights and shall be able to dispose of the same to meet necessities - Held - Use of such terminology reinforces intention to confer complete ownership - The condition regarding devolution to heirs only if property subsists after survivor death indicates alienation was contemplated and permitted - If testators intended to create a life estate they would have used specific restrictive language - No restrictive covenant or prohibition against alienation was discernible - [Paras 37-42].

Civil Law - Evidence and Pleadings - Competency to alienate - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order VI Rule 17 - Challenge to validity of gift deeds - Appellants alleged fraud and undue influence in procurement of gift deeds - High Court noted that no specific averments or pleadings were made in the plaint regarding validity of documents other than the competency of the father to execute them - Ratio Decidendi - In the absence of a clear agreement not to revoke discernible from the tenor of the will or surrounding circumstances separate wills with identical terms remain revocable by the survivor who acquires absolute interest - Held - Trial Court correctly concluded that property devolved upon father in absolute manner - [Paras 43-46].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Trial Court judgment and decree affirmed – Respondent No 1 directed to honor bequests in the father subsequent Will dated 06-08-2010.

Criminal Law - Sentence Modification - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 307 read with Section 34 - Attempt to Murder - Appellants Saghir Ahmad and Mohammad Iliyas convicted in 1985 for an incident occurring in 1981 - Trial court awarded five years rigorous imprisonment - During the pendency of the appeal the injured informant Smt Dharmi Devi moved a compromise application in 1986 stating that injuries were minor and received under pressure of local police - Compromise was verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Azamgarh in 1993 - Appellants are currently octogenarians and senior citizens - Matter has been pending for nearly forty-five years since the incident - Prosecution case involved fire opened by Iliyas resulting in gunshot injury to Smt Dharmi Devi during a village marriage party - High Court noted the long passage of time and the reformative nature of punishment in India - Reliance placed on Supreme Court precedents favoring the reduction of sentence to the period undergone in old cases involving elderly convicts - Held - Conviction maintained but sentence modified to the period already undergone - [Paras 1-22].

Criminal Law - Sentencing Policy - Reformative Justice - Proportionality - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 374 - Court observed that the law of punishment in India is reformative and not corporeal - Sending eighty-year-old appellants to jail after forty-one years of conviction would not serve the basic principles of law - Sentencing must be just adequate and proportionate to the gravity of the offence - Undue sympathy is harmful but sending senior citizens to serve a remaining sentence after a long lapse of time is not justified - High Court exercised judicial discretion to balance the ends of justice with the specific circumstances of the case - Held - Judicious and purposeful punishment requires modification of sentence to the period undergone - [Paras 17-19].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Substantive sentence modified to the period already undergone – Bail bonds and sureties discharged.

Civil Law - Procedure - Family Courts Act 1984 - [Not stated in judgment] - Restoration of application - Revision petitioner challenged the dismissal of his application C.M.P No. 2/2024 which was filed to restore an earlier petition to set aside an ex-parte order - The Family Court dismissed the application on the technical ground that the prayer was to set aside the order dated 30.08.2024 instead of explicitly seeking restoration - The High Court held that the nomenclature of the relief sought should not have been the primary focus of the lower court while ignoring the actual purpose sought to be achieved by the petitioner - Held - The decision of the lower court to dismiss the petition on purely technical grounds cannot be justified - Order set aside - [Paras 1-5].

Civil Law - Maintenance - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - [Not stated in judgment] - Conditional Restoration - Petitioner sought to set aside an ex-parte maintenance order directing payment of Rs 8000 per month - High Court observed that huge arrears were due to the respondent wife and further procrastination would cause hardship - As a pre-condition for the restoration of the petition to set aside the ex-parte order the Court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs 200000 out of the arrears within two months - Held - Restoration of C.M.P No. 1/2024 directed subject to the condition of partial deposit of arrears to balance the interests of both parties - [Paras 2-5].

Decision: Revision petition allowed in part – Order of Family Court in C.M.P No. 2/2024 set aside subject to petitioner depositing Rs 200000 within two months – Family Court directed to restore and decide C.M.P No. 1/2024 on merits upon compliance – Execution proceedings in M.C No. 289/2022 stayed for two months.

Criminal Law - Murder - Ranbir Penal Code 1989 - Section 302 - Conviction set aside - Appellants were accused of murdering the deceased husband of the female appellant to continue an illicit relationship - Prosecution theory alleged administration of sedatives followed by strangulation and hanging the body to simulate suicide - Trial Court convicted appellants based on disclosure statements and motive - High Court observed that the prosecution failed to establish the foundational fact of the presence of the deceased at home during the occurrence - Natural witnesses being the children of the deceased did not witness the presence of the male appellant - Medical evidence failed to support the charge as viscera report was negative for sedatives and the doctor ruled out smothering - Held - The chain of circumstances was incomplete and broken - Conviction founded on conjectures and surmises cannot be sustained - Appellants acquitted - [Paras 1-52].

Evidence Law - Disclosure and Confession - Evidence Act 1872 - Sections 25 - 26 and 27 - Admissibility - Trial Court relied on entire confessional narratives recorded by police - High Court held that only the portion which distinctly relates to the discovery of a fact is admissible under Section 27 - Alleged recoveries of a glass and scarf from non-concealed places in the kitchen were deemed weak and inconclusive - Evidence of PW-16 revealed that the alleged sedatives were procured for the appellant's father - Held - Confessional portions of disclosure statements made in custody are hit by Sections 25 and 26 and must be excluded from consideration - [Paras 34-37, 49-50].

Criminal Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Evidence Act 1872 - Section 3 - Standard of Proof - Suspicion vs Legal Proof - Prosecution relied on motive of illicit affair and Call Detail Records (CDR) - High Court held that suspicion however grave can never substitute for proof beyond reasonable doubt - Motive assumes significance in circumstantial cases but cannot take the place of substantive proof especially when based on hearsay - Prosecution failed to establish "last seen" theory as no witness saw the appellants together at the relevant time - Held - When two views are possible the view favourable to the accused must be adopted - Prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - [Paras 40-41, 45-48, 51].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court set aside – Appellants acquitted and ordered to be released forthwith.

Criminal Law - Murder - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 302 - Plea of Alibi - State challenged acquittal of respondents accused of murdering deceased by firing multiple shots - Prosecution relied on eye-witness testimony of deceased's cousin (PW-13) - Respondents Anand, Yudhvir, and Raj Kumar were Army personnel and took plea of alibi stating they were on duty at BEG Centre Roorkie on date of incident - Fourth respondent Bijender claimed to be visiting them - Defence produced extensive official Army records including attendance registers, morning report books, inspection books, and bank withdrawal slips - Senior Army officers (DW-1 to DW-13) testified to the physical presence of accused at the Army Centre throughout the day of occurrence - High Court found the alibi evidence overwhelming and conclusive - Held - Findings of Trial Court accepting the plea of alibi are correct as it was impossible for the accused to be present at the crime scene in Sonipat while being on duty in Roorkie - [Paras 1-15].

Evidence Law - Eye-witness reliability - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 3 - Unnatural conduct of witness - PW-13 claimed to be present when his cousin was shot five times - Witness admitted he did not raise any hue and cry during the arrival of assailants or after the shots were fired - Witness clothes had no blood stains despite proximity to the victim - Witness did not provide medical aid or assist in shifting the body - Prosecution failed to examine another cited eye-witness who was a close relative - Held - Conduct of the witness was highly unnatural and inconsistent with human nature - Testimony of sole eye-witness was unreliable - [Paras 16-20].

Criminal Law - Criminal Conspiracy - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 120B - Proof of meeting of minds - Prosecution relied on PW-12 who claimed to have overheard the accused hatching a conspiracy to kill the deceased through a window while standing outside a house - Witness alleged accused discussed using their Army status to create an alibi - High Court observed that it is improbable for conspirators to discuss a murder so loudly that a person outside could hear - Witness was unable to provide details of the alleged land transaction that brought him to the spot - Held - Charge of conspiracy must be proved by cogent evidence - Testimony of PW-12 was a futile attempt to plant evidence and did not prove meeting of minds beyond reasonable doubt - [Paras 21-22].

Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 378 - Scope of Interference - State and complainant challenged acquittal citing FSL reports and ocular evidence - High Court reiterated that interference in acquittal is only warranted if the Trial Court's view is perverse or palpably wrong - Trial Court correctly appreciated the evidence regarding alibi and witness conduct - Two views were possible and the Trial Court took a plausible one - Held - Judgment of acquittal does not suffer from any manifest illegality or perversity - [Paras 23-26].

Decision: Appeal and Revision dismissed – Order of acquittal upheld.

Writ Law - Banking Fraud - Constitution of India 1950 - Article 226 - Letters Patent Appeal by State Bank of India challenging Single Judge order - Respondent No 1 fell victim to cyber fraud after clicking a suspicious link leading to unauthorized withdrawal of Rs 260000 - Banking Ombudsman ordered partial payment of Rs 33340 - Single Judge set aside Ombudsman order and directed bank to pay full amount with 9 percent interest - Division Bench found that the transactions were secured by Two-Factor Authentication and OTP delivery - Held - Issues regarding whether credentials were compromised by malware or voluntary disclosure are disputed questions of fact requiring forensic examination - Writ Court cannot presume deficiency in service without technical evidence - Appeal allowed and impugned judgment set aside - [Paras 1-20].

Civil Law - Customer Negligence - RBI Master Circular dated 06 July 2017 - Clause 6 and Clause 7 - Liability in unauthorized electronic banking transactions - Respondent No 1 clicked a link from unknown source prior to transactions - Bank sent OTPs and SMS alerts - Single Judge held customer was not negligent as he denied sharing OTPs - Held - The expression such as where he has shared the payment credentials in Clause 7(i) is illustrative and not exhaustive - Interacting with suspicious links exposing banking credentials to misuse constitutes negligence - Liability for loss rests with the customer until reporting to the bank - [Paras 9.1-13].

Writ Law - Scope of Jurisdiction - Constitution of India 1950 - Article 226 - Judicial Review - Challenge to Banking Ombudsman order - Bench examined if Single Judge was justified in fastening liability for cyber fraud - Held - Inquiry under Article 226 must confine to manifest arbitrariness or procedural infirmity - Matters requiring technical and forensic adjudication on evidence should not be conclusively determined in writ jurisdiction - Reliance on Tony Enterprises distinguished as that case involved established police investigation of SIM swapping - [Paras 15-18].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Impugned judgment of the Single Judge dated 18.11.2024 set aside – Banking Ombudsman order dated 20.10.2021 restored.

Civil Law - Abatement and Substitution - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXII Rule 4 and Rule 11 - Appeal filed in 2013 - Respondent No. 7 died on 21.03.2020 during pendency - Application for substitution not filed within 90 days as per Article 120 of Limitation Act - Appeal abated by operation of law - Appellants filed for condonation of 12 days delay in seeking setting aside of abatement - Respondents argued that parties being co-villagers implied prior knowledge of death - Court observed that while abatement occurs automatically the delay of 12 days was satisfactorily explained by appellants - Held - The primary function of a Court is to adjudicate disputes on merits and advance substantial justice - Rules of limitation should not be used to terminate proceedings on technical grounds where no gross negligence or dilatory tactics are found - [Paras 1-18].

Civil Law - Duty of Counsel - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXII Rule 10-A - Communication of death of party - Respondents counsel failed to perform the duty to communicate the death of Respondent No. 7 to the Court - Tiny font used to mention dead in a previous miscellaneous application without specific date of death was deemed a deliberate attempt to keep appellants in the dark - Rule 10-A was inserted to avoid unnecessary disputes of fact regarding the death of a party - Held - Rule 10-A casts an obligation on the pleader representing the deceased to inform the Court so that the opposite party is put on notice - Non-compliance with this duty meant the Court had no occasion to notify the appellants within the limitation period - [Paras 9-10].

Civil Law - Condonation of Delay - Limitation Act 1963 - Section 5 - Sufficient Cause - Interpretation in abatement matters - Delay of 12 days in seeking setting aside abatement - Appellants claimed knowledge only upon receiving respondents application for dismissal of appeal - Held - The expression sufficient cause in the context of abatement of suits and appeals must receive a considerably more liberal construction to advance substantial justice - Courts should generally be more liberal in matters relating to setting aside abatement than in other cases - Appellants should not be non-suited for unintended lapses resulting in foreclosure of the appeal - [Paras 13-17].

Decision: Delay condoned – Abatement set aside – Legal heirs of deceased Respondent No. 7 taken on record – Appellants directed to file a fresh memo of parties.