Criminal breach of trust - Ingredients - Proof of entrustment - Acquittal of accused - Challenge against - In the present case, the prosecution alleged that the accused had misappropriated a quantity of paddy belonging to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) - The prosecution failed to prove the entrustment of the property or dominion over the property with the accused - The internal inquiry conducted by FCI itself concluded that the custody of the rice paddy bags stored in the mill premises of the accused was under the control of FCI officials - The prosecution's evidence was not properly appreciated - The civil suit for recovery on the same allegations had already been dismissed - The burden of proof in the civil suit is of a much lesser degree compared to the criminal case - The trial court's finding of acquittal was based on proper appreciation of evidence - No illegality or irregularity was found in the trial court's judgment - The revision petition lacked merit and was dismissed.  (Para number: 7-13)

Goods and Services Tax (GST) - Refund claim - Seizure of documents and electronic gadgets - Petitioner sought direction to refund amount and supply copy of Panchnama and seized items - Petitioner contended that the amount was voluntarily deposited and no notice under Section 74(1) of CGST Act was served - Respondents argued that investigation was ongoing and no show cause notice had been issued - Court examined provisions of Section 74 of CGST Act and Rule 142 of CGST Rules - Relied on precedent - Held, deposit of tax during search was not voluntary and notice had not been issued within the specified period - Amount deposited by petitioner to be returned with interest - Petition allowed. (Para 24)

Service Law - Family Pension - Widow of Deceased Employee - Petition under Article 226 - Second wife denied full family pension - First wife predeceased employee - Note 1 of Rule 6.17(4) invoked incorrectly - Rule applicable only if more than one widow survives - Only one widow at the time of employee’s death - Full pension granted to the petitioner - Petition allowed. [Paras 1-11]

Application of Pension Rules - Legal Interpretation - Analysis - Rule 6.17(4) Note 1 applicable only when more than one widow survives - Note 1 does not apply when only one widow survives - Previous wife predeceased employee - Petitioner entitled to full family pension as sole surviving widow - Previous legal decisions support full pension to surviving widow. [Paras 7-10]

Decision - Allowance of Writ Petition - High Court sets aside the impugned order denying full family pension - Petitioner entitled to 100% family pension from the date of husband's death - Arrears of pension with 6% interest per annum - Costs of Rs. 10,000 awarded to petitioner. [Paras 10-11]

Value Added Tax - Deductions in Works Contracts - Section 36 of Haryana Value Added Tax Act - Appeal by revenue against Tribunal's order allowing deductions for depreciation on plant and machinery, financial expenses, and other related expenses - Tribunal upheld deductions allowed by assessing officer for expenses including depreciation, bank interest, postage, telephone, fuel, and lubricants - No specific provision in Act for such deductions - Tribunal's interpretation based on principles from Gannon Dunkerley & Co.’s case - Deductions for expenses incurred in supply of labour and services considered legitimate - Appeals dismissed. [Paras 1-12]

Depreciation on Plant and Machinery - Legal Interpretation - Analysis - Despite absence of specific provision in Act, depreciation on plant and machinery used in works contracts deductible - Principles from Gannon Dunkerley & Co.’s case applied - Deduction includes charges for obtaining on hire or otherwise machinery and tools used in execution of works contract - Tribunal's order allowing such deductions upheld. [Paras 9-10]

Financial and Other Related Expenses - Deductibility - Analysis - Expenses such as bank interest, postage charges, telephone, and fuel and lubricants for vehicles used in works contract deductible - Considered as part of cost of establishment relatable to supply of labour and services - Tribunal's order allowing these deductions upheld. [Para 10]

Decision - Dismissal of VAT Appeals - High Court dismisses revenue's appeals - Tribunal's order allowing deductions for depreciation and other related expenses upheld - Appeals fail on all grounds - Miscellaneous applications disposed of. [Paras 11-12]

Constitutional Law – Writ of Mandamus – Candidature under EWS Category – Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner’s candidature under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category for the post of Junior Engineer and to allow participation in the selection process. The petitioner appeared in the written test and performed well but was not called for scrutiny of documents due to the OMR sheet being scratched/smudged against Question No. 26. Instructions on the admit card and question paper strictly prohibited any damage to the OMR sheet. Held, given the factual matrix and legal position, relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-10]

OMR Sheet Instructions – Violation Consequences – Held, specific instructions were issued to candidates prohibiting folding, tearing, destroying, or making any stray marks on the OMR Answer Sheet, with explicit mention that any such actions would lead to cancellation of the answer sheet. The OMR sheet of the petitioner, found to be scratched, was thus cancelled in accordance with these instructions. This decision has been upheld by a Division Bench of the Court and affirmed by the Supreme Court. [Paras 6-8]

Decision – Writ Petition Dismissed – The Court, finding no merit in the petition, dismissed it based on the aforementioned legal and factual context. [Para 10]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Offences under Sections 283 and 427 of IPC - FIR registered against the petitioners for operating a car workshop in a residential area - Petitioners sought quashing of the FIR and all proceedings arising from it - Counsel for petitioners argued that the FIR was registered due to multiple litigations with the landlord and that the offences were not made out from the contents of the FIR - Counsel for the state argued that the sealed gate of the workshop was opened from one side, causing obstruction and injury to the public - High Court held that the allegations in the FIR did not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused - High Court quashed the FIR and all proceedings arising from it - Petition allowed.  Para Number: 1-14

Defamation - Cause of action - Disclosure in plaint - Rejection of plaint - Application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC - Defendant-petitioner filed application seeking rejection of plaint on the ground of lack of cause of action - Plaintiff-respondent alleged defamation and false complaints - Plaint did not disclose specific defamatory statements or provide details of alleged complaints - Court held that plaint failed to disclose cause of action for defamation - Mere allegation of defamatory statements without specific details does not constitute cause of action - Application allowed, plaint rejected.

Judicial Privilege - Quasi-judicial proceedings - Defamation claim - Statements made before quasi-judicial authority - Absolute privilege - Statements in affidavit filed before Registrar of Cooperative Society held to be absolutely privileged - No basis for defamatory action - Plaint rejected.

Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC - Rejection of plaint - Lack of cause of action - Plaint should contain facts constituting cause of action - Failure to disclose cause of action warrants rejection of plaint - Plaint must provide specific details of defamatory statements and alleged complaints - Allegations without particulars not sufficient for continuation of civil suit - Application under Order 7 Rule 11 allowed, plaint rejected.

Importance of Specificity - Defamation claim - Specific details of defamatory statements and alleged complaints necessary - Mere averment of defamatory and derogatory statements not sufficient - Plaint must disclose dates, authorities, and specific particulars - Failure to provide specific details leads to rejection of plaint.

Jurisdiction - Order 7 Rule 1(e) of CPC - Requirement of disclosing facts constituting cause of action - Lack of specific details in plaint - Failure to establish jurisdiction - Plaint rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(a) and (d).

Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Loss of dependence - Legal representatives entitled to claim compensation - Even if major married and earning sons are not fully dependent on the deceased, they are still covered as legal representatives - Compensation to be considered beyond conventional heads. [Para 9]

Dependency - Definition and criteria - Dependency includes financial dependency as well as other forms of dependency such as gratuitous service, physical, emotional, and psychological dependency - Children of deceased, though grown up and settled in their own lives, may still be dependent on the deceased in various ways. [Para 10]

Determination of loss of dependency - Earnings of the deceased and value of services towards household affairs to be considered - Modest estimate based on evidence to be taken into account - Addition for future prospects and deduction for personal living expenses - Appropriate multiplier to be applied based on the age of the deceased. [Para 12-15]

Compensation under conventional heads - Loss of consortium, funeral expenses, and loss of estate - Each of the appellants-claimants entitled to compensation for loss of consortium - Enhancement of compensation for funeral expenses and loss of estate. [Para 16-18]

Injuries sustained by appellant-claimant - Standard of proof in a claim petition - Summary enquiry with a lower standard of proof than in criminal or civil cases - FIR, medical records, and receipts of expenses to establish injuries - Lump sum compensation awarded for injuries and trauma suffered. [Para 21-26]

Appeals allowed - Impugned Award modified - Enhanced compensation awarded to the appellants based on loss of dependence, conventional heads, and injuries sustained - Interest and other terms to be as ordered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. [Para 27]

Service Law - Annual Increment - Disabled Employee - Petition under Article 226 - Challenge to denial of annual increment due to non-clearance of type test - Petitioner 60% disabled and locomotor disabled - Government instructions grant exemption to handicapped employees from passing type test - Authority failed to consider disability and applicable instructions - Impugned order set aside - Direction to reconsider petitioner's claim in light of government instructions - Petition allowed. [Paras 1-11]

Disability and Exemption from Type Test - Legal Analysis - Government instructions provide exemption for handicapped employees from the condition of passing type test - Failure of authority to consider disability and applicable instructions - Imperative for authority to examine instructions before deciding on benefits for disabled employees - Non-consideration leads to setting aside of impugned order. [Paras 7-10]

Decision - Allowance of Writ Petition - High Court sets aside impugned order denying annual increment - Direction to respondent to pass fresh order after considering government instructions and hearing petitioner - Speaking order to be passed if exemption not granted - Exercise to be completed within four months. [Paras 10-11]