Writ Law - Coram Non Judice - Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 - Section 23 - Composition of Tribunal - Petitioner challenged order dated 15.5.2026 passed by Appellate Tribunal (Senior Citizens) Rohtak which had allowed respondent No. 3’s appeal against Maintenance Tribunal's dismissal of application for cancellation of transfer deeds - Petitioner contended that both original and appellate orders were passed without mandated coram of three members as required by Haryana Government Notification dated 17.11.2016 - Respondents did not dispute that orders were vitiated by lack of proper coram - Court found that Maintenance Tribunal order dated 08.10.2025 and Appellate Tribunal order dated 15.5.2026 were passed by authorities lacking jurisdiction - Held - Orders passed without prescribed coram are a nullity in eyes of law and cannot be sustained - Impugned orders set aside and matter remanded for fresh adjudication - [Paras 1-10].

Writ Law - Administrative Law - Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 - Composition of Tribunals - Haryana Government Notification dated 17.11.2016 - State government notification prescribes that Maintenance and Appellate Tribunals must comprise three members with SDM and Deputy Commissioner acting as respective Chairmen - Decision must be taken unanimously or by way of majority - Chairman has no jurisdiction to take decision alone if tribunal is constituted of three members - Held - Orders passed in absence of mandated members are illegal and without jurisdiction - [Paras 3-9].

Decision: Writ petition allowed – Orders dated 08.10.2025 and 15.5.2026 set aside – Matter remanded to the Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication – Parties directed to appear before the Tribunal on 13.07.2026.

Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Sections 85, 296, 351(2), 115(2), 3(5) and 351(3) BNS - Petitioners husband and his relatives sought quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings for offences relating to matrimonial cruelty and dowry harassment - Marriage solemnized in 2020 followed by allegations of physical and mental torture - wife alleged she was called a witch and harassed during pregnancy - Husband serving as Patwari allegedly threatened divorce - Charge-sheet filed and cognizance taken by Trial Court - Petitioners contended allegations were false and filed as counterblast to matrimonial discord - Record indicated that certain relatives resided separately in different districts and no specific overt acts were attributed to them - High Court observed that FIR and witness statements lacked specific dates - times - or distinct acts for individual petitioners - Allegations found to be leveled collectively against the entire family without specifying precise roles - Court noted that prosecution appeared to be launched by roping in the entire family without specific material - Held - Continuation of proceedings based on vague and omnibus allegations would amount to abuse of process of law - FIR and all consequential proceedings quashed - [Paras 1-27].

Criminal Law - Cruelty - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 - Section 85 - Relative of husband subjecting woman to cruelty - Scope of interference - Provisions relating to cruelty were intended to prevent harassment of women but are often used as instruments to settle personal scores - Judicial process cannot be used as an instrument of oppression - High Court highlighted that where allegations are sweeping and unsupported by concrete evidence - it must exercise inherent jurisdiction to prevent unnecessary harassment of innocent family members - Precedents establish that courts must be careful in proceeding against relatives unless specific instances of involvement are made out - Held - Vague and general allegations do not warrant prosecution - proceedings quashed - [Paras 13-25].

Decision: Petition allowed – FIR dated 19.01.2026 registered at Police Station Sirgitti - District Bilaspur and all consequential criminal proceedings arising therefrom are quashed – Proceedings under Section 125(4) BNSS to be decided independently on their own merits.

Criminal Law - Murder and Atrocities - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act 1989 - Section 3-2-va - Regular Bail - Appellant being the first accused challenged the order of the Special Court dismissing his bail plea in a murder case - Prosecution alleged the appellant and second accused reached the victims house in furtherance of common intention and brutally assaulted the victim with a chopper causing multiple injuries and amputation of a hand - Victim succumbed to injuries - Appellant contended innocence and prolonged custody since October 2023 - Prosecution opposed bail highlighting the appellants involvement in thirteen serious crimes including murder and rape - Investigation revealed appellant as a gang leader and drug addict with a history of detention under Kerala Anti-Social Activities Prevention Act 2007 - Report indicated that the appellant violated previous district entry restriction orders - Concerns raised regarding the safety of the victims family and intimidation of witnesses - Held - Considering the gravity of the offence and the prima facie materials and the criminal antecedents and the likelihood of tampering with evidence the appellant is not entitled to be released on bail - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-9].

Criminal Law - Habitual Offender - Kerala Anti-Social Activities Prevention Act 2007 - Sections 3 and 15 - Violation of Restriction Orders - Impact on Bail - Appellant previously detained for one year under KAAPA and violated restriction orders not to enter Ernakulam District - Records showed multiple pending cases for offences under IPC and NDPS Act - Residents of the crime scene locality reported to be living in fear - Prosecution established that bail would affect public tranquility and render police efforts futile - Held - Habitual engagement in criminal activities combined with the brutal nature of the present offence justifies continued incarceration - Trial directed to be completed while keeping the accused in custody - [Paras 7-9].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Order of the Special Court, Ernakulam in Crl.M.P. No.01/2026 confirmed – Registry directed to forward a copy of the judgment to the Special Court.

Civil Law - Recovery Suit - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 96 - Burden of Proof - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Sections 101 and 102 - Appellant sub-contractor filed a suit for recovery of Rs 5,06,029/- against the respondent for construction of police quarters - Plaintiff claimed outstanding dues on running bills and security deposit with 30 percent interest - Defendant denied the claims and cited lack of privity regarding interest rates but admitted a liability of Rs 35,096/- representing the balance security deposit - Trial Court partly decreed the suit for the admitted amount only - Plaintiff appealed seeking the remaining claim - High Court observed that the respondent remained absent during the hearing and the matter was heard ex-parte - High Court found that the plaintiff failed to produce original books of accounts bills or vouchers to substantiate the claim beyond the admitted amount - Held - Under Sections 101 and 102 of the Evidence Act the burden of proof lies squarely on the party asserting facts - Assertion is no proof and mere non-appearance of the defendant or weakness in the defense does not relieve the plaintiff of the obligation to lead cogent evidence - Trial Court correctly found that the plaintiff failed to prove the case within the four corners of the plaint - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-18].

Evidence Law - Books of Account - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 34 - Admissibility and Corroboration - Plaintiff relied on Exh 106 which was a photocopy of accounts maintained on plain paper - Defendant's witness admitted the handwriting belonged to his son but did not admit the contents as true or correct - Held - Admission of handwriting does not amount to admission of the contents of a document - Mere exhibiting of a document does not prove its contents - Under Section 34 entries in books of account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant but cannot be the sole basis for holding a person liable without independent corroborative evidence - Plaintiff failed to direct the defendant to produce originals or lay foundation for secondary evidence - Photocopies of account statements without corroboration by vouchers or receipts are insufficient to prove outstanding dues - [Paras 15-17].

Evidence Law - Witness Testimony - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 101 - Admissions in cross-examination - Plaintiff relied on the deposition of a Junior Clerk from the Geology Department regarding a No Objection Certificate (NOC) - Defense witness in cross-examination admitted a suggestion that Rs 35,096/- remained outstanding - Held - The suggestion put by the plaintiff's own advocate to the defense witness that only Rs 35,096/- was outstanding indicated the plaintiff was confining the relief to that specific amount - The plaintiff miserably failed to lead convincing documentary evidence to establish the higher claim - [Paras 13-14].

Decision: First appeal dismissed – Judgment and decree of the trial court affirmed – Registry directed to return Record and Proceedings.

Criminal Law - Murder - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 302 - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Accused allegedly strangulated his grandfather and dashed his head with a stone due to a property dispute - Trial Court acquitted the accused in Sessions Case No 241 of 1999 on 01.01.2000 - State challenged the acquittal on grounds that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the extra-judicial confession and medical evidence - High Court reappreciated the evidence noting the prosecution rested solely on the extra-judicial confession made to PW3 PW4 and PW5 - High Court observed that the incident occurred in March 1996 while the confession was allegedly made in November 1996 - Medical evidence indicated death due to blunt force trauma but discrepancies existed regarding strangulation - Held - Prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances or provide independent corroboration to the weak piece of evidence in the form of extra-judicial confession - Judgment of acquittal affirmed - [Paras 1-12].

Evidence Law - Extra-judicial Confession - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 24 - Reliability and Admissibility - Prosecution relied on confessions made to Rambhai Jivabhai PW3 Vrajlal Hakubhai Joshi PW4 and Bavkubhai Sisodia PW5 - Witnesses admitted they had no close acquaintance or relationship of confidence with the accused - Witnesses belonged to different communities than the accused - High Court found the narration of successive confessions to different persons at different places unnatural - Delay of eight months in making the alleged confession remained unexplained - Held - Extra-judicial confession is inherently weak and cannot be the sole foundation for conviction without being voluntary truthful and inspiring implicit confidence - Absent independent corroboration the evidence fails the test of credibility - [Paras 9-10].

Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeals - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 378 - Scope of Appellate Interference - Principles of Review - High Court reiterated that in acquittal cases there is a double presumption of innocence - Presumption is reinforced by the trial court order of acquittal - Appellate court should not disturb the findings of the trial court if the view taken is reasonable and plausible - Interference is permitted only in cases of manifest illegality or perversity - Held - Findings of the trial court were well-reasoned and did not suffer from any misappreciation of evidence - Acquittal maintained - [Paras 6-11].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Veraval in Sessions Case No. 241 of 1999 is confirmed – Bail bond of the respondent stands cancelled.

Matrimonial Law - Divorce - Hindu Marriage Act 1955 - Section 14 - Statutory bar for entertaining divorce petition within one year of marriage - Appellant husband filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) - Family Court Kadi dismissed the suit as premature since it was presented within one year of marriage - Trial Court however proceeded to discuss the merits of cruelty and desertion and concluded that the husband was not interested in living with the wife - High Court held that once a suit is found to be premature or in violation of Section 14 the proper recourse is to return the plaint or dismiss the suit while reserving the right to file a fresh suit - Adjudicating on merits in a premature suit is legally impermissible especially when findings are not based on sound evidence - Held - Impugned judgment and decree dated 21.08.2024 set aside - Liberty granted to file fresh suit - [Paras 1-8].

Family Law - Maintainability of Suit - Hindu Marriage Act 1955 - Section 14 - Filing of divorce petition before expiry of one year from date of marriage - Trial Court recorded findings on merits while dismissing the suit as premature - High Court ruled that the Family Court failed to assign proper and sound reasons on the merits and should not have discussed grounds of divorce once maintainability was hit by Section 14 - Held - Appellant permitted to file fresh suit and parties allowed to lead fresh evidence without relying on evidence from the previous suit - [Paras 6-7].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Impugned judgment and decree dated 21.08.2024 passed by Family Court Kadi in Family Suit No. 27 of 2024 is set aside – Appellant permitted to file fresh suit on available grounds – Family Court directed to decide the fresh suit afresh with liberty to parties to lead fresh evidence.

Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Sections 438 and 482 - Assault on vital part - Applicant-accused sought pre-arrest bail for multiple offences under BNS 2023 including sections related to assault and rioting - FIR alleged that the applicant hit the complainant’s mother on the head with a pipe and on the shoulder - Applicant claimed false implication based on familial ties with the principal accused and asserted a peripheral role - Prosecution presented medical evidence corroborating the assault on a vital body part and specific identification of the applicant - Court observed that while detailed evaluation of evidence is not permissible at the bail stage a prima facie case exists - Found that assaults targeting vital parts like the head are particularly serious and warrant custodial interrogation for qualitative investigation - Held - Discretionary relief of anticipatory bail cannot be granted when custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation - application dismissed - [Paras 1-12].

Criminal Law - Bail Jurisprudence - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 438 - Factors for grant of bail - Individual liberty vs Public interest - Court balanced the right to liberty and presumption of innocence against the gravity of the offence and impact on society - Referred to settled law that parameters for anticipatory bail must be satisfied in serious offences and reasons recorded - Observed that protective orders should not be granted if they adversely affect the qualitative nature of investigation - Held - Not a fit case to exercise discretion as there is no evidence of false implication with an intent to tarnish the applicant’s image - [Paras 5-11].

Decision: Application dismissed – Rule is discharged.

Civil Law - Tenancy and Land Reforms - Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act 1972 - Sections 104, 112 and 115 - Civil Court Jurisdiction - Bar of Jurisdiction - The plaintiff Bidhia filed for declaration of sole tenancy and ownership rights after the conferment of proprietary rights by the Land Reforms Officer under Section 104 of the Act - The defendants challenged the mutation claiming the tenancy was joint among all brothers and that Bidhia had fraudulently substituted his name for their father Hardeo - The Trial Court partially decreed the suit in favor of Bidhia while the Lower Appellate Court reversed it holding the substitution to be unauthorized - On second appeal the High Court examined the exclusion of Civil Court jurisdiction regarding the validity of orders passed under Chapter X of the Act - Held - The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred under Sections 112 and 115 for calling into question any proceedings or orders made under Chapter X unless there is a violation of the principles of natural justice or a failure to comply with statutory provisions - The respondents failed to plead or prove any such jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice in the conferment of proprietary rights which was done in the presence of the original landlord - The Civil Court lacked jurisdiction to go into the validity of the proprietary rights order which had attained finality - [Paras 18-24].

Evidence Law - Admissions - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Sections 17, 21, 58 and 145 - Evidentiary Value - Substantive Evidence - The respondents had previously made statements before authorities in 1975 admitting that they were not tenants and their father owned no land - The Lower Appellate Court disregarded these admissions because they were not confronted to the parties during cross-examination - The High Court analyzed the distinction between prior statements used for contradiction and admissions used as substantive evidence - Held - Admissions are the best proof of the facts admitted and constitute substantive evidence under Section 21 of the Evidence Act - There is no requirement in law to confront a party with their own admission under Section 145 if the admission is being used as substantive evidence proprio vigore - The Lower Appellate Court committed a grave error by ignoring these categorical admissions which proved the respondents were not in possession of the suit land as tenants - [Paras 23-35].

Civil Law - Revenue Records - Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act - Section 45 - Presumption of Correctness - Presumption of Truth - Revenue entries in the Jamabandi from 1952-53 consistently recorded Bidhia as the sole tenant on payment of rent - The Lower Appellate Court set aside these entries as incorrect based on inconsistent oral testimony - Held - A statutory presumption of truth attaches to the record-of-rights under Section 45 of the Act and Section 35 of the Evidence Act - Such a presumption can only be rebutted by evidence of impeccable integrity and reliability and not by mere oral testimony which is considered at a much weaker level compared to documentary evidence - Since neither the father nor the landlord challenged the entries during their lifetime the presumption remained unrebutted - [Paras 38-40].

Civil Law - Pleadings - Construction of Pleadings - Mufassil Pleadings - The respondents argued that the plaintiff failed to specifically plead the abandonment of tenancy by his father - Held - Pleadings in mofussil courts must be construed liberally and as a whole - Only because the parties did not use specific legal terminology does not mean the essential ingredients are absent if the core claim is evident from the entirety of the plaint - [Para 33].

Decision: Appeals allowed - Judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court set aside - Judgment and decree of the Trial Court restored.

Civil Law - Land Acquisition - Land Acquisition Act 1894 - Section 54 - Enhancement of Compensation - State acquired 2.96.5 hectares in Bhavani Taluk for bus stand formation - Notification under Section 4(1) issued on 30.08.1985 - LAO fixed compensation at Rs 23058 per acre based on sale deeds of a distant village - Landowners sought reference and the Reference Court enhanced rate to Rs 4000 per cent noting land potentiality near State Highway - State challenged the enhancement as exorbitant while landowners sought further increase based on contiguous sale deeds - High Court found LAO strategy of using distant lands was to minimize compensation - Trial Court correctly identified conversion of nearby lands into house sites and presence of huge buildings - Held - State appeal dismissed - Cross-objections partly allowed enhancing compensation to Rs 4500 per cent - [Paras 1-15].

Civil Law - Market Value - Land Acquisition Act 1894 - Section 23 - Valuation Principles - Reliance on sale deeds for smaller extents - State contended that sale instances Exs C1 and C2 for smaller plots cannot determine value for large acquisitions - High Court held that small extent sale instances cannot be rejected if land potentiality is admitted - State witness admitted acquired lands were near Bhavani-Mettur State Highway and developed areas - Market value must reflect price a willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller considering development activities and potentiality - Held - Potentiality of land justifies enhancement even if based on smaller plot sale instances - [Paras 9-12].

Civil Law - Just Compensation - Land Acquisition Act 1894 - Section 23 - Duty of Court - State as eminent domain is obligated to compensate citizens adequately - Reference Court correctly noted vast conversion of house sites and emerging developmental activities - Duty of court to award just and fair compensation taking into account true market value irrespective of owner claim - Held - Enhancement to Rs 4500 per cent is reasonable considering the potentiality and surrounding developments - [Paras 10-13].

Decision: Appeal suit by State is dismissed – Cross Objections are partly allowed – Compensation enhanced to Rs 4,500/- per cent – Judgment of Trial Court stands confirmed in other aspects – No costs.