Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 341, 323, 506 - Framing of charges - Discharge - Scope of interference - At the stage of framing charges, the court's role is limited to determining whether a prima facie case has been made out against the accused - Detailed inquiry into evidence or weighing its sufficiency cannot be conducted - Personal biases or prejudices against the complainant should not affect the consideration of the case. [Para 12]

Lawyer's Duty - Lawyers have a professional obligation to provide representation and legal assistance to their clients while maintaining a sense of fairness and respect for the legal process - Personal enmity or grudges against opposing parties cannot be presumed solely based on the representation of their clients. [Para 17]

Filing of False Complaint - The fact that a complaint is lodged by a lawyer, who may have previously lodged a complaint against the accused's client, does not automatically render the complaint false or motivated - Each complaint must be assessed independently, irrespective of the financial or professional status of the parties involved. [Para 19]

Judicial Powers - Courts have limited powers at the stage of framing charges - Interference should only be exercised in exceptional cases and on rare occasions when there are strong reasons to quash charges in the interest of justice and to avoid abuse of the court process. [Para 20]

Duty of Magistrate - The Magistrate is bound by the directions passed by the superior court and must comply with those directions - The correctness of the superior court's order cannot be questioned by the Magistrate at the stage of framing charges. Petition Dismissed [Para 24]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 439 - Interim Bail - Consideration of bail application by a petitioner seeking interim bail for six months - Petitioner gave birth to a child during custody - Allegations of the petitioner pushing her eight-year-old son into a canal - Petitioner's claim of accidental slip - Importance of maternal care and child's welfare - Constitutional provisions and international rules emphasizing non-custodial sentences for pregnant women and women with dependent children - Impact of maternal mental health on fetal development - Rights of newborns - Prima facie case and discretion of the court - Imposition of stringent conditions - Modification of bail conditions - Observations not affecting trial proceedings - Grant of interim bail subject to specific terms and conditions.

DNA test in a declaratory suit - Order for DNA test should not be granted as a matter of routine - Burden of proof lies on the litigating party - A party cannot be compelled to prove the case in the manner suggested by the contesting party - DNA test cannot be ordered for a roving enquiry.

The plaintiff's right to privacy and protection from stigmatization - Consideration of social and cultural implications - Timing of the application for DNA test - Balancing the interests of the parties.

The discretion of the court in ordering a DNA test - Test of "eminent need" and "proportionality" - Examining the legitimate aims pursued and the impact on the person's privacy and personal autonomy - a strong prima facie case and balancing the interests of the parties.

The burden of proof - Party asserting the positive has the burden of proof - Shift of burden when challenged - Court should not compel a party to prove the case in the manner suggested by the contesting party.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 52-A – Standing Order No. 1 of 1988 – Conflict between statutory provisions and instructions – Implication of Section 52-A of the Act – Requirement of drawing representative samples of seized contraband – Standing Orders cannot supersede the Act – Statutory instructions are mandatory in nature – Investigating agency bound to follow Section 52-A of the Act for drawing representative samples. (Para 16)

Time limit for dispatch of samples – Procedural safeguards under Standing Order No. 1 of 1988 – Standing Orders to be adhered to in addition to the provisions of the NDPS Act – Failure to comply suffocates the prosecution case. (Para 19)

Non-examination of an independent witness – Failure to associate independent witness creates a dent in the case of prosecution – Fair and impartial investigation required – Investigator and informant must not be the same person – Doctrine of bias and principles of natural justice. (Para 20, 21, 22, 23)

Applicability of law laid down in a previous case – Pending criminal prosecutions, trials, and appeals prior to the law laid down in a later case governed by individual facts of the case. (Para 25)

Stricter degree of proof for more serious offences – Fundamental right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution essential to dispensation of justice – Obligation on the investigating officer to follow procedural safeguards. (Para 26, 27)

Acquittal of appellants – Judgment of conviction and order of sentence set aside – Appellants acquitted of charges – Bail bonds and surety bonds discharged. (Para 28)

Negligence - Liability for compensation - Distinction between civil and criminal negligence - Receipt of compensation for criminal liability does not bar claim for compensation for civil wrong - Liability to pay compensation for civil wrong and criminal wrong are independent and mutually exclusive - Liability of respondents to pay compensation established. [Para 8.1]

Standard Compensation - Assessment - Compensation for non-pecuniary losses - Need for revision to counter inflation and erosion of the value of the rupee - Standard Compensation enhanced based on the Consumer Price Index for Industrial Workers (CPI-IW) - Standard Compensation assessed at Rs. 3,08,666/-. [Para 14.1]

Pecuniary Compensation - Assessment - Loss of earnings - Calculation based on potential earning capacity of the deceased - Annual loss of dependency determined after deducting personal expenses - Application of multiplier based on the age of the deceased - Pecuniary Compensation assessed at Rs. 20,25,000/-. [Para 16]

Joint and Several Liability - Liability of respondents to pay compensation jointly and severally - Total compensation awarded to the appellants - Respondents directed to pay Rs. 23,33,666/- as compensation along with 6% simple interest from the date of filing the writ petition. [Para 18]

Eviction Orders - Alleged encroachment on gair mumkin rasta (pathway) in khasra No. 145 - Petitioners challenged eviction orders issued by Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Rewari, and Collector, Rewari - Reliance on demarcation report - Objections raised by petitioners - Violation of guidelines, ex parte demarcation, failure to ascertain fixed points, and relay them onto the ground. (Para 1-3)

Demarcation Report - Inappropriate reliance - Demarcating officer's failure to serve respondents No. 5 and 6, and obtain necessary signatures - Ex parte demarcation against petitioners - Invalid demarcation - No valid demarcation from masawi (map) - Inability to ascertain fixed points. (Para 4-6)

Interference with impugned orders - Quashing and setting aside of orders - Remand to Assistant Collector - Eliciting fresh valid demarcation report - Tendering report into evidence - Opportunity to cross-examine demarcating officer - Decision on remanded lis within six months from today. (Para 7-9)

Negotiable Instruments – Presumption and Burden of Proof – Application for leave to appeal against acquittal under Section 138 of the Act – Respondent issued cheque for Rs.2,50,000, which was dishonoured – Respondent claimed cheques were stolen and account was closed – Court held that initial burden is on complainant to prove transaction leading to issuance of cheque – Presumption under Sections 118 and 139 comes into play only after initial burden is discharged – Application dismissed. [Para 8]

Initial Burden on Complainant – Analysis – Complainant failed to prove the transaction – No evidence provided showing how complainant and respondent came into contact or circumstances of loan – Evidence showed respondent's account was closed long before the date on cheque – Trial court's acquittal well-reasoned and upheld. [Para 8]

Scope of Interference – Limited in Acquittal Appeals – Appellate Court should not interfere unless the trial court's conclusions are perverse or unreasonable – If two views are possible, appellate court should not disturb trial court's finding – No compelling reasons to interfere in this case. [Para 9-12]

Decision – Leave to Appeal Denied – Application for special leave to appeal dismissed – Trial court's judgment of acquittal upheld. [Para 14]

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 11-A – Power of Labor Court to interfere with charges – Applicability and scope – Labor Court has the right to reappreciate the evidence and come to a different conclusion – Charges can be interfered with if necessary. (Para 21)

Labor disputes – Writ jurisdiction – High Court’s supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226 or Article 227 of the Constitution of India – Cannot act as an appellate court – Findings of fact reached by the inferior court or tribunal cannot be reopened or questioned in writ proceedings, unless there is an error of law apparent on the face of the record. (Para 20)

Scope of cross-objection – Civil Procedure Code (CPC) – Not applicable to labor matters – Challenging a finding of the Labor Court should be done through an appeal and not by filing a writ petition. (Para 18)

Dismissal from service – Misconduct by a workman – Consideration of past record – Even one past record is sufficient to impose a capital punishment, depending on the gravity of the charges. (Para 12)

Fairness of domestic enquiry – Labor Court’s power under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Labor Court can interfere with the fairness of the enquiry if the charges are found to be disproportionate or if there is an error in admitting or refusing admissible evidence. (Para 21)

Reinstatement and backwages – Modification of award – Workman to be reinstated in the same post with continuity of service and attendant benefits – No entitlement to backwages – Period to be considered as continuous for terminal benefits – No PF contribution required during the period the workman was not in service. (Para 23)

Transfer of workman – Workman to be transferred to a different location within Tamil Nadu if the management has a branch there – Considerations for smooth functioning and administration of the factory. (Para 23)

Haryana Staff Selection Commission - Recruitment for the post of Clerk - Revision of answer key - Challenge to correctness of answer - Expert committee's opinion - Scope of interference by the Court - Timeliness of the petition - High Court dismissed the petition - Appeal filed - Supreme Court precedents considered - Held, once the matter has been examined by experts, the Court is not required to question the correctness of their opinion - In this case, an expert committee examined the correctness of the answer to the disputed question - Answer revised based on their opinion - Single Judge's decision justified - Advertisement issued in 2015, examination held in 2016, result published in 2017, revised result declared in 2018 - Taking up the issue at this stage would not serve any meaningful purpose - Appeal dismissed. (Para No. 6&7)