Suo Motu PIL – Child Deaths – Electrocution – Anganwadi Centre – Illegal Live Wire Fencing – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Section 105 – High Court took suo motu cognisance upon newspaper reports of deaths of two minor children due to electrocution — one a 2½-year-old inside an Anganwadi Centre in Kondagaon due to a live damaged wire, and another a 6-year-old in Pendra-Marwahi district who touched illegally fenced live wires in an agricultural field — Court monitored State accountability and preventive measures — Held: State having taken departmental and penal action, disbursed compensation and issued statewide safety directions, no further judicial direction warranted — PIL disposed of [Paras 9, 10, 11].

"Unsafe Electrical Infrastructure in Anganwadi Centres — State Accountability and Systemic Preventive Action Required"

Public Interest Litigation – Child Safety – Anganwadi Centres – Electrical Safety – In the first incident, a 2½-year-old child died inside an Anganwadi Centre, Village Padeli, District Kondagaon, after coming into contact with a live wire — enquiry revealed that a damaged power supply line caused electrification of the channel gate — Anganwadi Worker and Assistant were dismissed and the Sector Supervisor placed under suspension for failure of supervision — Court noted that repeated complaints about exposed wires and unsafe fittings had gone unaddressed — State filed affidavit through Chief Secretary confirming action taken, issuance of statewide safety directions for inspection of electrical installations in all Anganwadi Centres, and disbursement of ex-gratia of Rs.1,00,000/- to the bereaved family [Paras 3, 7].

"Illegal Live-Wire Fencing of Agricultural Fields — Grave Public Danger and Criminal Liability"

Electrocution – Agricultural Fields – Illegal Electric Fencing – Section 105 BNS – In the second incident, a 6-year-old child died in Village Kargikala, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi, after coming in contact with a live wire connected directly to field fencing by a landowner to protect crops from cattle — instead of a shock-based fence, a direct live current supply was connected, constituting dangerous negligence — FIR registered under Section 105 of the BNS — Power Distribution Company issued directions against illegal connections — Ex-gratia of Rs.4,00,000/- sanctioned to the mother of the deceased [Paras 4, 8].

"Electrocution Incidents — Pattern of Negligence — State Directed to Formulate Comprehensive Preventive Roadmap"

Judicial Concern – Systemic Negligence – Preventive Measures – Court observed with serious concern that electrocution incidents caused by unauthorised live connections to field fencing and by immersion of live wires in water bodies for illegal fishing are being reported with alarming frequency, resulting in loss of human lives, cattle, and wildlife — absence of warning signs and seasonal flooding adding to the danger — Court held that isolated action would not suffice and directed the State to formulate a comprehensive roadmap for prevention of electrocution deaths in government premises and agricultural fields — Court consigned the matter to records upon being informed that no fresh incident of a similar nature had come to its notice and that compensation had been disbursed [Paras 6, 9, 10, 11].

Decision: PIL disposed of — Matter consigned to records — No further directions found necessary in view of action taken by the State [Para 11].

Education – PG-NEET In-Service Quota – Delay in Issuance of Form-H – Petitioners, in-service GDMOs, applied for PG-NEET 2025 – Unable to claim OBC benefit due to non-issuance of Form-H by Tahsildar despite Government Circular dated 08.05.2025 – Cut-off percentile subsequently reduced making them eligible – Held: Delay in issuance of Form-H not attributable to petitioners – They cannot be deprived of in-service reservation benefits on account of administrative lapse [Paras 6-8, 17].

Reservation – Decategorisation of In-Service Seats – Large number of in-service seats decategorised and merged with general pool due to absence of eligible candidates in earlier rounds – Petitioners subsequently became eligible after reduction of percentile – Held: Though decategorisation per rules not disputed, petitioners entitled to equitable consideration consistent with earlier order of co-ordinate Bench in W.P. No.110014/2025 [Paras 16-19].

Parity – Similarly Situated Candidates – Co-ordinate Bench (Dharwad) had directed that petitioner therein be treated as in-service candidate and offered first preference in Mop-up round along with similarly situated candidates – No challenge shown to said order – Held: Present petitioners, being similarly situated, also entitled to same treatment and first preference in order of merit in Mop-up round [Paras 19-20].

Mop-Up Round – Allotment of Seats – Petitioners to be treated as in-service candidates and offered first preference in order of merit along with petitioner in W.P. No.110014/2025 to choose from available regular PG seats and DNB seats reserved for Health and Family Welfare in-service candidates – Remaining seats thereafter to be offered to other candidates – Timelines fixed for completion of Mop-up and stray vacancy rounds [Paras 20-22, Post-order directions].

Administrative Directions – Timeline – Court directed Mop-up round to be held before 05.03.2026 and stray vacancy round before 12.03.2026 – Entire process to be completed on or before 18.03.2026 – KEA permitted to coordinate with MCC for portal access [Post-order directions].

Decision: Writ Petition disposed of – Petitioners to be treated as in-service candidates and granted first preference in Mop-up round along with similarly situated candidate in W.P. No.110014/2025 – Directions issued regarding completion of counselling process within stipulated timeline.

Disciplinary Proceedings – Summary Security Force Court – Scope of Judicial Review – Appellant, BSF Constable, dismissed from service after SSFC found charges of misconduct and act prejudicial to good order proved – Six witnesses examined – Appellant declined to cross-examine – Findings based on material on record – Held: High Court under Article 226 cannot reappreciate evidence or act as appellate authority – Interference permissible only on grounds laid down in P. Gunasekaran – None attracted – Appeal dismissed [Paras 11–12, 20–21].

Parity in Punishment – Discrimination – Unequals Cannot Be Treated Equally – Appellant claimed discrimination as co-delinquent Head Constable Gyani Ram awarded lesser punishment of reversion – Appellant had four prior convictions in service whereas co-delinquent had none – Held: Prior convictions constitute relevant distinguishing factor – Doctrine of equality does not mandate equal treatment of unequals – No discrimination made out [Paras 13–16].

Departmental Enquiry – Non-Examination of Informant – Distinguishing Precedent – Appellant relied on Robert Xess case to contend non-examination of informant vitiated proceedings – In present case, six witnesses examined and evidence recorded in presence of appellant – No violation of mandatory procedure or Rule 158 shown – Robert Xess distinguishable – Proceedings not illegal [Paras 17–18].

Confession – Allegation of Duress – Even assuming confession discarded, six unimpeached depositions remained – Confession signed without contemporaneous objection – Held: No merit in plea of involuntariness – Charges independently supported by evidence [Para 19].

Judicial Review – Armed Forces – High Standard of Discipline – Appellant earlier convicted four times in service – Disciplinary authority considered recurrent delinquency while awarding dismissal – No mala fides, no incompetence of authority, no perversity – Punishment does not shock conscience – Interference unwarranted [Paras 14, 20–21].

Decision: Intra-court appeal dismissed – Order of learned Single Judge dated 04.08.2023 in W.P. 7572(W) of 2009 upheld – Punishment of dismissal from service affirmed – No interference warranted.

Caste Certificate – OBC (Tanti, Tantubaya) – Panchayat Election – Post of Pradhan Reserved for OBC – Sub-Divisional Officer upon Court’s direction conducted re-enquiry and found that certificate holder did not belong to OBC community – However no formal cancellation order passed – Held: Once finding recorded that incumbent does not belong to OBC category, authority is duty-bound to take consequential steps for cancellation – Direction issued to cancel certificate within one week [Paras 6, 23, 31–33].

Power of Certificate Issuing Authority – Section 9(1) of 1994 Act read with Rule 3 of 1995 Rules – Whether SDO competent to initiate cancellation – Held: Certificate issuing authority may suo motu or on complaint initiate proceedings for cancellation upon prima facie satisfaction of fraud/misrepresentation – Supervisory jurisdiction of State Scrutiny Committee under Section 8A(3) does not denude such power – Harmonious construction of Sections 8A and 9 applied [Paras 24–27].

State Scrutiny Committee – Scope of Jurisdiction – Committee empowered to verify social status and examine contravention of Act – However absence of prior report of Committee not condition precedent for initiation of proceedings by certificate issuing authority – Aggrieved party may invoke supervisory jurisdiction of Committee against illegal cancellation [Paras 25–26].

Fraudulent Claim of Reserved Status – Constitutional Scheme of Reservation – Person not belonging to reserved category obtaining certificate by misrepresentation amounts to fraud – No leniency permissible – Immediate corrective action necessary to prevent subversion of constitutional purpose [Paras 10, 26, 29].

Enquiry Report – Absence of Supporting Documents – Field enquiry revealed locality predominantly Mahishya sub-caste – Clan (Gotra) Sandilya – Rituals and customs aligned with Mahishya community – No documentary proof establishing OBC (Tanti, Tantubaya) status – Affidavit alone insufficient – Conclusion that claimant failed to establish OBC status upheld [Paras 22, 28–31].

Maintainability – Alternative Remedy – Though order appealable under statutory framework, writ petition entertained in facts where earlier direction of Court required remedial action and issue pertained to fraudulent occupation of reserved public office – WPA 21813 of 2025 allowed – WPA 20033 of 2025 dismissed [Paras 20, 31–34].

Decision: WPA No. 21813 of 2025 allowed – Sub-Divisional Officer directed to take immediate steps for cancellation of OBC certificate of Smt. Khukurani Mondal Ghorai within one week – WPA No. 20033 of 2025 dismissed – Parties permitted to act on server copy – Urgent certified copies directed to be supplied upon compliance of formalities.

Real Estate – Enforcement of RERA Order – Recovery as Arrears of Land Revenue – Petitioner allotted housing unit and paid substantial consideration – RERA allowed complaint and directed refund with 9.3% interest – Recovery certificate issued under Section 40(1) RERA – District Collector declared amount recoverable as arrears of land revenue under Section 103 H.P. Land Revenue Act – Recovery proceedings stalled on ground that project land vested in State under Section 118 H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act – Held: Vesting of subject land does not defeat enforceability of monetary recovery order – Authorities bound to proceed in accordance with statutory modes of recovery – Recovery to be taken to logical conclusion expeditiously [Paras 3-4].

RERA – Section 40 – Scope and Effect – Where promoter fails to comply with refund order, amount recoverable as arrears of land revenue – Recovery certificate validly issued – Finality of RERA order not disputed – Enforcement cannot be frustrated by subsequent change in asset profile of debtor – Statutory mechanism under Land Revenue Act must be invoked in entirety [Para 4].

Land Revenue Recovery – Statutory Procedure – Sections 74 to 83 H.P. Land Revenue Act provide multiple modes including writ of demand, arrest and detention, distress and sale of movable property, attachment and sale of immovable property and proceedings against other properties of defaulter – Authorities cannot halt proceedings merely because one property has vested in State – Statute mandates strict adherence to prescribed recovery mechanism – No deviation permissible [Para 4].

Administrative Inaction – Impermissibility – Tehsildar (Recovery) failed to proceed with recovery since 15.09.2023 – Such inaction contrary to statutory duty – Legislative intent of RERA and Land Revenue Act would be frustrated if recovery is stalled – Direction issued to District Collector to ensure expeditious completion of recovery proceedings [Para 4].

Decision: Writ petition disposed of – District Collector, Solan directed to ensure that recovery proceedings pursuant to RERA order dated 26.02.2021, recovery certificate dated 17.10.2022 and Demand Order dated 14.11.2022 are taken to their logical conclusion expeditiously in accordance with law – Pending applications, if any, disposed of.

Criminal Law – Rape and Gang Rape – Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix – Conviction can rest solely on testimony of prosecutrix if of sterling quality – Where testimony suffers from material contradictions, improvements and inconsistencies going to root of prosecution case, Court must seek corroboration – Failure to meet standard laid down in Rai Sandeep v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2012) 8 SCC 21 – Conviction unsustainable [Paras 21–22].

Evidence – Material Improvements – FIR alleged sexual assault about seven days prior to rescue – Deposition before Court alleged confinement and repeated rape for nearly one year by multiple persons – Drastic variation not minor discrepancy – Allegations against A3 (administering injections, arranging multiple men, repeated rape) surfaced for first time during trial – Material improvements render testimony unsafe without corroboration [Paras 22, 26].

Medical Evidence – MLC – History recorded did not mention A3 – While omission of accused’s name in MLC not by itself fatal (Pattipati Venkaiah v. State of A.P., (1985) 4 SCC 80), in present case MLC assumes significance due to inconsistent testimony of prosecutrix – Adds to doubt [Para 23].

Corroboration – Independent Witnesses – PW12 and PW14 corroborated rescue of prosecutrix from house – However, their evidence does not corroborate allegations of prolonged confinement and repeated sexual assault – Presence in house established, but reason for presence doubtful [Para 24].

Wrongful Confinement – Conduct of Prosecutrix – Admitted that she was taken outside house on multiple occasions, including to doctor – Neighbouring houses in close proximity – Gave birth during alleged period of confinement – Failure to raise alarm or escape despite opportunities creates serious doubt regarding prosecution version of continuous wrongful confinement for one year [Paras 25–26].

Role of Co-Accused – Shifting Versions – FIR stated prosecutrix eloped with Angesh who abandoned her – No allegation of rape by him in FIR – During deposition alleged rape by Angesh, A3 and several others – A4 initially implicated but later given clean chit and acquitted – Such shifting stands undermine credibility [Paras 16, 26].

Criminal Trial – Section 232 Cr.P.C. – Non-compliance does not ipso facto vitiate trial unless prejudice shown – No prejudice demonstrated [Para 8].

Benefit of Doubt – Prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt – Accused entitled to acquittal [Para 27].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Conviction and sentence of A1 (Manoj) and A3 (Mukesh) under Sections 342/34, 323/34, 376, 376(2)(g) IPC set aside – Appellants acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. – To be set at liberty – Bail bonds cancelled.

Negotiable Instruments Act – Dishonour of Cheque – Appeal against Acquittal – Trial Court convicted accused under Section 138 NI Act and awarded 2 years’ RI with compensation – Appellate Court reversed conviction holding complainant failed to prove financial capacity and doubted issuance of cheque – High Court held reasoning of appellate court flimsy and based on assumptions not forming part of defence – Signature on cheque admitted and proved – Statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 attracted – Accused failed to rebut presumption by cogent evidence – Acquittal set aside and conviction restored [Paras 13, 18, 22, 25].

Presumption under Sections 118 & 139 NI Act – Scope and Rebuttal – Once execution of cheque is admitted, presumption arises that it was issued in discharge of legally enforceable debt – Accused must rebut by leading credible evidence – Mere suggestions in cross-examination insufficient – No defence evidence adduced – Defence of lost cheque book neither pleaded in cross-examination nor substantiated – Presumption remained unrebutted [Paras 12, 14-16, 22].

Financial Capacity of Complainant – Cash Loan – Burden of Proof – Complainant explained availability of funds from agricultural income and furniture business – Failure to reflect loan in income tax return not fatal in attending circumstances – In absence of rebuttal evidence, finding of appellate court on lack of financial capacity unsustainable – Law laid down in Sanjabij Tari, Bir Singh and APS Forex Services applied [Paras 17, 19-23].

Statutory Notice – Non-reply – Adverse Inference – Notice under Section 138 duly served and acknowledgement proved – Accused neither replied nor initiated proceedings disputing cheque – Failure to reply strengthens presumption that cheque was issued towards discharge of liability – Defence of financial incapacity held to be afterthought [Paras 16, 23].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment of acquittal dated 01.02.2012 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa set aside – Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 01.10.2011 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khandwa restored – Trial Court directed to take accused into custody and execute sentence – Record to be sent back for compliance.

Civil Law - Second Appeal – Scope under Section 100 CPC – Substantial Question of Law – Appellant challenged concurrent findings dismissing suit for permanent injunction claiming tenancy rights over municipal land – Substantial questions framed in memo began with “Because” and were improperly worded – Held: To qualify as substantial question of law, issue must be debatable, arise from pleadings, materially affect rights of parties and not be settled by binding precedent – Concurrent findings of fact cannot be interfered with unless perverse or based on no evidence – Questions framed did not satisfy test laid down in Chandrabhan v. Saraswati – Appeal dismissed [Paras 13-16, 25-29].

Tenancy vs Licence – Agricultural Land of Municipal Body – Plaintiff pleaded tenancy on yearly Lagan basis – No Patta or lease deed produced – Defendants pleaded that plaintiff was licencee for one Fasli year (1372 Fasli) and thereafter trespasser – Trial Court and First Appellate Court held plaintiff was licencee for limited period and subsequently trespasser – Mere Lagan receipts insufficient to establish tenancy in absence of lease document – Concurrent findings upheld [Paras 18-24, 26].

Pleadings – Beyond Pleadings – Asami Rights – Plaintiff never pleaded that he was Asami – First Appellate Court observed that at best plaintiff could have been Asami for one Fasli year but such rights did not continue – Held: No evidence can be led beyond pleadings – No admission by defendant regarding conferment of Asami rights – Questions of law based on alleged admission misconceived [Paras 19, 22, 24-27].

Admission under Order XII Rule 6 CPC – Requirement of Clear and Unequivocal Admission – Alleged admission regarding Asami status neither clear nor unconditional – Not sufficient to decree suit on admission – Courts below rightly declined injunction [Para 27].

Concurrent Findings of Fact – Interference – Supreme Court authorities including Hero Vinoth, Murthy and Rabindranath Panigrahi relied upon – No perversity, misapplication of law or ignoring of material evidence shown – High Court declined to interfere with concurrent findings [Paras 28-29].

Decision: Second Appeal dismissed – Interim order, if any, vacated – Concurrent judgments of Trial Court and First Appellate Court affirmed.

Criminal Law – Recall of Witness – Section 348 BNSS (Section 311 Cr.P.C.) – Investigating Officer recalled to prove disclosure statements and connected documents – Trial Court found that certain material documents relating to ownership of vehicle, lease deed of hospital and inspection report were not put to PW-4 during examination-in-chief – Held: Power under Section 348 BNSS can be exercised at any stage if evidence appears essential to just decision of case – Recall not to fill lacuna but to place complete link evidence on record – No illegality in order permitting recall [Paras 19-21, 24].

Scope of Section 348 BNSS – “Essential to the Just Decision of the Case” – Expression covers holistic adjudication and not confined only to prejudice or benefit of accused before Court – Court empowered to summon or recall witness to ascertain truth even if documents are already on record but not duly proved through concerned witness – Power to be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily [Paras 21-23].

NDPS Act – Disclosure Statements under Section 27 Evidence Act – Disclosure statements of accused recorded by Investigating Officer referred to involvement of hospital owner and use of vehicle registered in name of hospital – Though other witnesses proved disclosure memos, IO failed to depose about relevant facts during examination – Recall justified to complete chain of evidence – Objection that prosecution seeks to implicate discharged person held speculative [Paras 16-20].

Filling Lacuna – Distinction – Mere recall of witness to formally prove documents or clarify omissions does not ipso facto amount to filling lacuna – Unless serious prejudice is demonstrated, recall permissible – Reliance placed on principles laid down in Rajaram Prasad Yadav and Mannan Sk. [Paras 23-24].

Fair Trial – Balancing Interests – Section 348 BNSS serves object of discovery of truth – Fair trial entails rights of accused, victim and society – Court must ensure evidence essential for just decision is not shut out on technicalities [Para 23].

Decision: Petition dismissed – Order dated 21.05.2025 allowing recall of PW-4 (Investigating Officer) upheld – No illegality or infirmity found.