Panchayati Raj – Merger of Panchayats – Procedure Followed – Petition challenging merger of two Gram Panchayats into one – Held, the merger was based on resolutions passed by both Gram Sabhas – Proper procedure followed, and notification issued – Petitioner did not challenge the notification – Elections for merged Gram Panchayat held, and Panchayat functioning – Only Government authorized to decide delimitation of Panchayat areas – Court cannot substitute concept of village – Petition dismissed. [Para 6]

Proper Procedure – Analysis – Resolutions passed by Gram Sabhas requesting merger – Merger order followed by notification – No challenge to the notification by petitioner – Government's prerogative to decide panchayat areas and constituencies – Court's interference unwarranted. [Para 6]

Decision – Merger of Gram Panchayats – Order of merger upheld – No ground to quash the order – Petition dismissed for lack of merit. [Para 7]

Juvenile Justice - Bail to Juvenile in Conflict with Law - Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Petitioner denied bail under Section 323, 452 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act - Held, proximity of residence in same village not a valid ground to deny bail - No material showing release would bring juvenile into contact with criminals or expose him to danger - Release not defeating ends of justice - Juvenile entitled to bail as exceptions under Section 12 not met - Orders denying bail set aside. [Para 4]

Grounds for Declining Bail - Interpretation of Section 12 - Bail to be granted to juveniles regardless of offense gravity unless specific risks outlined in Section 12 present - Previous orders overlooked essential provisions - Revision petition allowed, juvenile granted bail with conditions. [Para 4]

Decision - Bail Granted - Orders by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Karnal, and Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, set aside - Petitioner/juvenile ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds. [Para 5]

Land Dispute - Jurisdiction and Classification - Wakf Property vs. Shamlat Deh - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution - Section 5 of the Wakf Act, 1954 - Sections 7 and 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 - Revenue entries classifying land as 'Gair MumkinKabaristan' hold precedence over entries of 'Shamlat Deh' in ownership column - Jurisdiction to resolve disputes vested in Punjab Wakf Board under Central Act - Held, Gram Panchayats have no authority to lease such lands - Orders under Punjab Act quashed - Character of land as 'Gair MumkinKabaristan' to be maintained. [Paras 28-29]

Conclusive Proof of Classification - Revenue Entries - Held, entries in revenue records classifying land as 'Gair MumkinKabaristan' are conclusive proof of its nature, even if not used for a prolonged period by the Muslim community - Such classification cannot be altered by prolonged non-use or contrary entries in the ownership column. [Para 30(2)]

Precedential Value and Jurisdiction - Wakf Tribunal vs. Punjab Act Authorities - Held, jurisdiction to try disputes regarding land classified as 'Gair MumkinKabaristan' is vested in the Punjab Wakf Tribunal - The Punjab Act authorities lack jurisdiction. [Para 29]

Decision - Quashing of Orders and Maintenance of Land Classification - Court quashes orders made by Punjab Act authorities, directs that the land's classification as 'Gair MumkinKabaristan' be maintained and protected on-site - Petitions by Wakf Board allowed, others dismissed. [Para 28]

Essential Commodities Act - Fertilizer Control Order - Appeal against Conviction - Appellant a dealer, not manufacturer - Prosecution's star witness admitted recovered stock had original machine stitching with no tampering - Manufacturer not arrayed as accused - Held, conviction of dealer in isolation unsustainable - Conviction set aside. [Para 13]

Prosecution Witness Admission - Machine-Stitched Bags - Prosecution witness confirmed bags were unopened and bore manufacturing concern's print - Held, dealer cannot be held responsible without evidence of tampering or defect caused by dealer - Conviction of dealer quashed. [Para 13]

Defence Stand - Purchase from Manufacturer - Dealer's Defence - Appellant stated he purchased fertilizer from Agro Chem Punjab Limited and sold it in original condition - Defence supported by prosecution witness’s admission - Conviction in isolation inappropriate without prosecuting manufacturer. [Para 7, 13]

Decision - Conviction Set Aside - Acquittal of Appellant - Court sets aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant, acquitting him of all charges. [Para 15]

Land Law – Ejectment of Tenant – Compensation for Improvements – Appeal against orders of ejectment and dismissal of revision petition – Appellants argued for compensation under Section 70 of Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 – Argument not raised before authorities or in amended written statement – Held, tenants estopped from raising new issues at belated stage – Appeal dismissed. [Paras 1-15]

Tenant's Duty – Statement of Claim – Held – Under Section 70 of the Act, the tenant must file a statement of claim for compensation for improvements or disturbance when contesting liability to ejectment – Conditional upon tenant's action, not court's duty to direct – Financial Commissioner noted lack of such claims by tenants. [Para 11]

Long Tenancy – Bar on Compensation – Held – Tenancy exceeding 20 years bars compensation claims for improvements as per Section 67 of the Act – Appellants' own pleading indicated long tenancy – No compensation owed due to prolonged enjoyment of tenancy benefits. [Paras 12-13]

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – No infirmity in Single Judge's order – Tenants estopped from raising compensation claims belatedly – Appeal dismissed in limine. [Paras 15]

Criminal Law - Identification Parade - Rash and Negligent Driving - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt-Test Identification Parade - Necessity in Criminal Cases – Criminal appeal challenging acquittal under Sections 337, 338, 427, and 304-A IPC – Held: In cases where the accused is not previously known to the witnesses, a test identification parade is necessary to strengthen the trustworthiness of the evidence. The absence of a test identification parade is fatal to the prosecution's case. [Para 9]

Acquittal - Lack of Corroborative Evidence – Analysis – Held: The respondent was not named in the FIR, and the prosecution failed to establish how the accused was arrested. There was no independent corroboration of the prosecution's version despite the incident occurring on a busy road. The trial court's findings are well-reasoned and justified, leading to the upholding of the acquittal. [Para 11]

Appellate Review - Acquittal – Consideration – Held: The High Court should not interfere with an acquittal if two views are reasonably possible based on the same evidence, and the trial court's view favours the accused. The appellate court must respect the trial court's judgment unless there are substantial reasons to believe a miscarriage of justice occurred. [Para 12]

Dowry Death - Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act - Appeal against Conviction - Death caused by consumption of pesticide (Aluminum Phosphide) - Held, once prosecution proves ingredients of dowry death, presumption under Section 113B arises, shifting onus to accused to prove innocence - Conviction upheld for husband Ranjit Singh. [Para 11-12]

"Soon Before" Death - Relevance in Dowry Death Cases - Expression "soon before" cannot be fixed by a strict period - Prosecution must establish proximity and link between cruelty and death - Conviction sustained as prosecution proved harassment for dowry leading to death. [Para 21]

Acquittal of Co-accused - Role of Mother-in-law - Allegations against mother-in-law vague and unsupported by evidence - Material improvements in witness statements - Acquittal upheld as no cogent evidence found against her - Double presumption of innocence in acquittal cases. [Para 28]

Decision - Conviction of Husband Upheld - Acquittal of Mother-in-law Upheld - Court dismisses both appeals, affirming conviction and sentence of Ranjit Singh, and acquittal of Manjit Kaur. [Paras 30-31]

NDPS Act - Section 42 - Appeal against Conviction - Non-compliance - Secret information regarding transportation of contraband received but not reduced to writing - Trial Court wrongly recorded compliance - Section 42 mandatory, not directory - Appellant acquitted for non-compliance with Section 42. [Para 14]

NDPS Act - Section 52-A - Procedure for Producing Contraband - Contraband not produced before Magistrate for certification of inventory - Infirmity constitutes factor for setting aside conviction - Total non-compliance of Section 52-A provisions observed. [Para 21]

NDPS Act - Section 57 - Report of Arrest and Seizure - Original report not brought on record - Photocopy lacked signatures or stamp - Full report not made out as having been sent to superior officer - Failure to send report factors into setting aside conviction. [Para 23]

Decision - Conviction Set Aside - Acquittal of Appellant - Court sets aside the conviction due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 52-A, and 57 of the NDPS Act. [Para 26]

Criminal Law - Appeal against Conviction - Hostile Witnesses - Section 307 IPC, Section 25 Arms Act - Appellant shot at complainant causing injury - All key witnesses declared hostile - Recovery of empty cartridge and country-made pistol from appellant - Conviction upheld based on forensic evidence linking bullet to pistol recovered from appellant - Sentence modified to period already undergone due to long lapse of time and family relations between parties. [Paras 5-18]

Hostile Witnesses - Evidentiary Value - Held, despite witnesses turning hostile, conviction can be sustained if other material evidence and forensic findings strongly support the prosecution case. [Para 6]

Forensic Evidence - Matching of Bullet and Weapon - Held, forensic evidence confirming that the bullet recovered from the victim's body was fired from the pistol recovered from the appellant is a strong basis for upholding conviction. [Para 13]

Sentence Modification - Consideration of Long Duration since Incident and Family Relations - Incident occurred 21 years ago, parties are from the same family - Sentence modified to the period already undergone by appellant - Fine and compensation remain unchanged. [Para 18]

Decision - Conviction Upheld - Sentence Modified - Court upholds the conviction but modifies the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant, maintaining the fine and compensation imposed by the trial court. [Para 18]