Income Tax – Cooperative Society – Retrospective Amendment – Waiver of Interest – Section 234-B and 234-C of Income Tax Act – The petitioner, a cooperative society, contested interest levied due to a retrospective amendment in Section 80(P)(2)(a)(iii) denying tax exemption for agricultural product marketing societies – Citing prior judicial precedent supporting exemption, the petitioner argued that interest was unjustly imposed due to retrospective change – Held: In light of the Supreme Court’s ruling and later legislative clarification exempting such societies, waiver of interest is warranted [Paras 1-6, 9-10].

CBDT Circulars – Effect on Interest Waiver in Retrospective Tax Amendments – Court emphasized that CBDT circulars support waiver of interest when tax liability arises from retrospective amendments, as seen here – Consistent with CBDT's directive, the interest levied solely due to retroactive tax amendments must be waived [Para 5].

Decision: Petition allowed. The Court quashed the impugned order dated 15.07.2002, directing waiver of interest under Sections 234-B and 234-C for the assessment years 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 [Para 10-11].

Criminal Law – Dacoity Conviction – Appeal against conviction – Appellants Mahendra Shaw and Sk. Raju convicted by the trial court for dacoity with use of firearms and deadly weapons, resulting in grievous injury to shop employees – Appellants sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000 each – Appeal dismissed, with court finding no reason to interfere with trial court's reasoned judgment – Appellants identified in Test Identification Parade, and recovery of stolen articles substantiated by evidence from witnesses and forensic reports – Held: Prosecution successfully proved the appellants’ involvement in the dacoity and injuries inflicted, justifying the conviction [Paras 1, 5-7, 12-18].

Evidence – Testimony of Medical Witnesses – PW-16 and PW-17, doctors who examined injured employees, corroborated injuries sustained due to bomb explosion and physical assault during the dacoity – Injury reports (Exhibits 10, 11, and 15/1) substantiate evidence of grievous hurt – Injuries supported by forensic evidence of low-explosive mixture remnants from the scene, validating the victims' account of events [Paras 10-11, 16].

Identification of Accused – Test Identification Parade – Appellants Mahendra Shaw and Sk. Raju identified by witnesses in Test Identification Parades conducted in 2002 and 2003, reports marked as Exhibits 14 and 20 – Identification by multiple witnesses established appellants' presence at the crime scene and involvement in dacoity [Paras 12, 17].

Recovery of Stolen Items – Chain of custody maintained – Stolen gold chain and finger rings recovered from appellants and documented through seizure lists (Exhibits 18 and 19), corroborated by testimony from seizure witnesses PW-20 and PW-22 – Recovery operations led by PW-26 of the Anti-Dacoity and Robbery Section affirmed recovery from appellants, strengthening prosecution case [Paras 13-15].

Forensic Evidence – Bomb explosion verified – Forensic Laboratory confirmed remnants of low-explosive mixture from the crime scene, providing scientific basis for bomb usage claim and supporting prosecution's sequence of events during dacoity – This evidence substantiates grievous nature of crime and threat level involved [Paras 16].

Judgment – Conviction upheld – Court concludes that trial court judiciously evaluated evidence, and the appeals lack merit – Both appellants had already served the sentence; no need for further intervention – Acknowledgment of assistance from Amicus Curiae – Appeals dismissed and trial court records to be returned for necessary action [Paras 18-20, 23].

Decision: Appeals CRA 106 of 2011 and CRA 861 of 2006 dismissed – Conviction and sentence under Sections 395/397 IPC affirmed – Appellants confirmed to have served their sentence – No order as to costs [Paras 19, 20, 22].

Competence of Central Government to Impose Additional Fees – Validity of the Central Motor Vehicles (Twenty Third Amendment) Rules, 2021 – The petitioners challenged the imposition of additional fees for delayed renewal of Certificates of Registration and Fitness Certificates under the amended Rule 81 of the CMV Rules. The Court, citing the Bombay High Court’s decision in K' Savakash Auto Rickshaw Sangha v. Union of India, upheld the validity of the amended provisions. It reasoned that Section 211 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides the Central Government with sufficient power to levy additional fees for delayed applications, and such fees do not constitute a penalty. Therefore, the amendment was within the legislative competence of the Central Government – Held: Amendment upheld [Paras 18-20].

Judicial Comity and Divergent Decisions – Balancing Interpretations – The Court emphasized the principle of judicial comity, choosing to align with the Bombay High Court’s view, which validated the amendment, over the earlier Madras High Court decision in Chennai City Auto Ootunargal Sangam v. Union of India. Judicial discipline and respect for precedents from other jurisdictions were highlighted as essential to maintaining judicial integrity – Held: Followed Bombay High Court’s precedent [Paras 19-20].

Harmonization with State Rules – Coexistence of Central and State Regulations – The Court dismissed the argument that the Odisha Motor Vehicles Rules, 1993, which prescribe penalties for delayed renewals, nullify the Central amendment. It held that the Central Government retains the authority to amend the CMV Rules without requiring a parallel amendment in State Rules – Held: State Rules do not override Central Rules [Para 10].

Decision:  The writ petitions challenging the validity of the Central Motor Vehicles (Twenty Third Amendment) Rules, 2021, were dismissed. The Court upheld the imposition of additional fees for delayed applications as a lawful exercise of the Central Government's powers under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
 

Family Law – Maintenance to Wife and Child – Financial Obligations of Husband – Petitioner argued inability to pay maintenance awarded by Family Court due to low income and personal obligations – Evidence showed inconsistent financial disclosures by petitioner, including alleged property dealing income and sale of ancestral property – Held: Petitioner, being healthy and capable of employment, cannot evade maintenance obligations; ordered to fulfill arrears and regular payments [Paras 3-7].

Delay in Maintenance Payment – Non-Compliance with Court Orders – Coercive Measures Directed – Petitioner’s repeated non-compliance with court orders to pay maintenance arrears led to accumulation of debt – Court directed petitioner’s presence at the next hearing and authorized the Executing Court to take strict action if arrears remain unpaid – Held: Maintenance non-payment justifies coercive action under law to ensure financial responsibility towards dependents [Paras 10-14].

Decision: The revision petition is dismissed. Petitioner ordered to pay arrears and costs of ₹1,00,000 to respondents within one month. The Executing Court is instructed to initiate strict action if non-compliance persists [Paras 14-15].
 

Labour Law - Scope of the BOCW Act – Statutory Welfare Measures – Model Code of Conduct Implications – The Petition impugned a Circular dated 17 October 2023 issued by the Maharashtra Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, which suspended registrations, renewals, and other welfare measures for construction workers based on the Model Code of Conduct for elections – Held: The Model Code of Conduct does not impede pre-existing statutory welfare measures – Suspension of registration and renewals was not justified as these are ongoing statutory activities under the BOCW Act, unrelated to election influence [Paras 5-12, 17-21].

Implementation of Welfare Schemes – Continuation of Statutory Benefits – The Court held that the suspended welfare activities such as registrations, renewals, and disbursal of benefits under pre-existing schemes should continue without interference from the Model Code of Conduct – The Model Code is intended to prevent election-influencing activities but does not cover statutory entitlements – Suspension quashed; welfare activities directed to resume immediately [Paras 23-27, 29-33].

Decision – Quashing of Circular – The Circular dated 17 October 2023 was declared void and ultra vires the BOCW Act – The Court directed the Respondents to restore the registration process and resume disbursal of benefits under the existing welfare schemes without political influence or promotional events, while prohibiting any introduction of new schemes or benefits during the election period [Paras 35-39].
 

Service Law – Financial and Pensionary Benefits – Work Charge Employee – Entitlement to Pension and ACP – Petitioner sought financial and pensionary benefits, claiming that her deceased husband’s services should be regularized from 2003, making her eligible for benefits like ACP, medical allowance, leave encashment, LTC, etc. – The Court held that as a work charge employee, the deceased was not entitled to benefits available to regular employees, as neither the ACP nor LTC applied to work charge employees without regular service status – Held: Family pension not permissible as per policy; the request for benefits dismissed due to non-applicability of cited benefits to work charge cadre [Paras 6-16].

Administrative Law – Scope of Judicial Review – Delay and Procedural Non-Compliance – The petitioner’s claim, made several years post her husband's demise, was dismissed as it failed to establish valid grounds for delayed claim; delay and procedural grounds further barred entitlement – Held: Writ relief unavailable due to excessive delay and failure to meet eligibility requirements [Paras 7, 10].

Decision: Petition dismissed. Court upheld the Tribunal's findings that the petitioner was ineligible for the claimed benefits under applicable rules for work charge employees and due to procedural deficiencies.
 

Criminal Law - Murder Case – Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence – Validity of Disclosure Statements and Recovery – Appeals Dismissed - The appellants challenged their conviction under Section 302/34 IPC for the murder of Hardev Singh – The prosecution relied on CCTV footage, disclosure statements, recovery of stolen items, and an extra-judicial confession – The Court upheld the conviction, finding the evidence, including human blood on the weapon, consistent with the chain of circumstances – Held: Conviction and sentences imposed by the trial court are affirmed [Paras 20–32, 41–50].

CCTV Footage – Evidentiary Value Under Section 65-B, Indian Evidence Act – Affirmed - The prosecution’s reliance on certified CCTV footage showing the appellants near the crime scene was challenged for lack of test identification parade – The Court held the footage admissible and corroborated by witness testimony and recovery evidence, thus satisfying the evidentiary threshold under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act [Paras 12–15, 35–40].

Extra-Judicial Confession – Credibility and Corroboration – Strengthened Case -  Appellant Baljinder Kaur’s extra-judicial confession to PW-16, corroborated by her presence at the crime scene and recovery of incriminating items, was held valid and evidentiary – The confession indirectly implicated co-appellant Gurjant Singh, adding to the chain of evidence [Paras 24–28, 50].

Decision: Appeals dismissed – Conviction and sentences under Section 302/34 IPC upheld – Appellants to remain in custody to serve life imprisonment – No order as to costs [Paras 55–58].
 

Criminal Law - Sexual Assault - Appeal Against Acquittal - The appellant contended that the trial court disregarded key evidence and failed to apply the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act in acquitting the accused of charges under Sections 354 and 323 IPC and Section 10 of POCSO - Held: On examination, the trial court’s reliance on inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements, coupled with the significant delay of 52 days in filing the complaint, was deemed reasonable. No sufficient grounds were found to overturn the acquittal [Paras 7-10].

Evidentiary Presumption - Section 29 POCSO - The Court affirmed that while the presumption under Section 29 places an onus on the accused, the burden is satisfied when the evidence shows credible contradictions or delay without sufficient explanation - In this case, the trial court’s findings, including the lack of corroborative medical evidence, justified the acquittal [Para 5].

Scope of Appellate Review in Acquittals - Presumption of Innocence - The appellate court noted that an acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence, and intervention is warranted only if the lower court’s findings are demonstrably perverse or contrary to the weight of evidence. The acquittal was thus upheld [Paras 9-10].

Decision: The appeal is dismissed, upholding the acquittal of the accused.
 

Criminal Contempt – Allegations Against Judicial Officers and Abuse of Court Process – Repeated Complaints – Criminal Contempt Established - Sanjeev Kumar, acting as contemnor, filed multiple complaints against judicial officers and court personnel, accompanied by defamatory and unsubstantiated accusations – In hearings and written submissions, the contemnor displayed continued contemptuous behavior, using degrading language against officers of the court, which amounted to abuse of the judicial process and interference with justice administration – Held: The contemnor’s actions demonstrated intent to scandalize the court, justify punitive action, and uphold judicial dignity [Paras 10-12, 18-19, 23-24, 27].

Chat Box and Hybrid Court Abuse – Use of Disparaging Remarks in Virtual Proceedings – Breach of Court Dignity – Criminal Contempt - During court hearings through video conferencing, the contemnor posted derogatory and inflammatory remarks in the chat box directed at the judges and judicial process – His conduct further illustrated a disregard for court authority and amounted to direct interference with judicial proceedings – Held: Misuse of the chat function in virtual hearings to undermine court authority is contemptuous; contemnor’s conduct constituted direct contempt [Para 7, 21].

Sentencing for Criminal Contempt – Refusal to Apologize or Show Remorse – Four Months’ Simple Imprisonment and Fine Imposed - Given the contemnor’s persistent refusal to apologize or show remorse for his conduct, as well as the gravity of his contemptuous actions, the court imposed a sentence of four months of simple imprisonment and a fine – Held: The contemnor’s brazen contempt left the court with no alternative but to impose punitive measures to preserve judicial respect and authority [Para 28-29].

Decision – The Contempt Petition is allowed; contemnor is sentenced to simple imprisonment for four months and fined Rs. 2,000. In default of fine payment, he shall serve an additional 15 days’ simple imprisonment [Para 29].