Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Inherent powers - Parties engaged in long-standing civil litigation regarding title and possession of property - Complainant initiated criminal proceedings under BNS and SC/ST Act after failing to obtain or extend interim injunctions in pending civil suits - Court held that criminal law cannot be weaponized to resolve civil disputes or serve as a surrogate for civil adjudication where title and possession remain contested - Allegations in the complaint found to be a counter-blast to pending civil proceedings - Held - Continuance of proceedings constitutes abuse of process - FIR quashed - [Paras 1-34].

Criminal Law - SC/ST Act - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 - Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) - Public View - Crucial ingredient of place within public view is missing - Incident alleged within private land during property dispute - Ratio Decidendi - Mere existence of a civil dispute between members of different communities does not attract the Act unless the specific intent to humiliate on the basis of caste is proved and the incident occurs in public view - Held - Offence not made out as ingredients are absent - [Paras 18-19, 26-28].

Criminal Law - Criminal Trespass - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 - Section 329 - Possession - Foundation of trespass requires possession of another - Petitioners claiming title and possession under registered sale deeds - Title dispute pending before civil court - Ratio Decidendi - Criminal trespass cannot be alleged against persons claiming valid title and possession until civil court adjudicates otherwise - Criminal law cannot pronounce upon title - Held - Ingredients of criminal trespass not satisfied - [Paras 12-15].

Decision: Petitions allowed - FIR in Crime No. 90 of 2025 pending before the 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District quashed.

Civil Law - Amendment of Plaint - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 6 Rule 17 - Application for impleadment and re-inclusion of property - Petitioners sought to implead a charitable trust and a subsequent purchaser as defendants and re-include land previously deleted by court order - Trial Court rejected amendments as time-barred and beyond the scope of a partition suit - High Court held that since the alienation of property occurred in 1971 and was consciously excluded by the plaintiffs initially - the amendment sought in 2010 was grossly barred by limitation - Further held that the court cannot allow an amendment that changes the nature of a partition suit by introducing extraneous title disputes against strangers to the family - Held - Order of the Trial Court upheld - Petition dismissed - [Paras 13-35].

Civil Law - Limitation - Limitation Act 1963 - Article 58 - Amendment of pleadings - Plaintiffs sought to challenge property alienation through amendment long after the cause of action accrued and after the property had been explicitly excluded from the suit by a previous order - Held - Amendment introducing time-barred claims cannot be permitted even under the guise of the dominus litis principle - [Paras 28-31].

Civil Law - Partition Suit - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 6 Rule 17 - Scope of inquiry - Suit for partition of joint family properties - Plaintiffs attempted to incorporate a declaration of no-title against third-party transferees without challenging the underlying deeds of conveyance - Held - In a simple partition suit parties cannot assert title against strangers and such amendments would result in misjoinder of causes of action - [Paras 23-27].

Decision: Petition dismissed – Impugned order of the City Civil Court dated 14 September 2015 affirmed.

Writ Law - Electricity Supply - Constitutional Law - Article 21 - Right to live with dignity - Premises in dilapidated condition - CESC disconnected supply as a safety measure due to water percolation - Single Judge ordered restoration of supply after necessary repairs and installation of a new meter board - Appellants argued restoration creates equity for unauthorized occupants and conflicts with municipal orders - Division Bench held that electricity is an essential service and deprivation amounts to denial of meaningful civilized living - Held - Restoration of electricity does not confer any title or equity in favour of occupants - Appeal disposed of with directions - [Paras 1-13].

Writ Law - Equity - Property Rights - Interlocutory relief - Restoration of electricity - Appellants contended that restoration of supply validates the occupation of premises currently subject to proceedings under Section 412A of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act 1980 - Court held that mere provision of electricity cannot create rights or equities in favour of occupiers - Status of occupants remains subject to pending municipal and civil court proceedings - Held - Restoration order upheld with clarification - [Paras 10-11].

Decision: Appeal and connected application disposed of - Restoration of electricity supply is subject to the final outcome of proceedings initiated by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation or pending before civil courts - No right or equity created in favour of occupants.

Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 482 - Petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail for charges of criminal breach of trust and cheating involving misappropriation of approximately Rs 5.58 crores from employer - Prosecution established prima facie case through trail of digital transactions linked to petitioners and their relatives - Court held that custodial interrogation is essential to unravel the extent of the conspiracy and recover siphoned funds - Held - Bail applications dismissed - [Paras 1-13].

Criminal Law - Custodial Interrogation - Principles for grant of bail - Reliance on Supreme Court precedent - Mere absence of requirement for custodial interrogation does not entitle an accused to anticipatory bail - Prima facie case and severity of the offence are the primary considerations for the Court - Held - Gravity of economic offence and need to trace digital footprints warrant denial of relief - [Paras 9-12].

Evidence Law - Financial Fraud - Electronic Records - Misappropriation of funds via digital payment links and fake accounts - Investigation revealed that mobile numbers used for fraudulent transactions were registered in the names of the petitioners' spouses and relatives - Held - Prima facie evidence of systemic embezzlement and diversion of funds to personal accounts necessitates custodial probe - [Paras 6-7, 10-12].

Decision: Petitions dismissed – Anticipatory bail denied – Observations made are strictly for the purpose of deciding the instant bail applications and shall not influence the Trial Court.

Criminal Law - Preventive Action - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 164 - Attachment of land - Dispute regarding possession of 69 Kanals 7 Marlas of land where multiple civil suits and revenue proceedings regarding title were pending between the parties and Gram Panchayat - SDM attached the land and appointed Tehsildar as Superdar to avoid breach of peace and to harvest standing crops - Revision against order dismissed by Sessions Court - High Court held that where title and possession are sub-judice and both parties claim conflicting rights leading to a breakdown of law and order the Magistrate acts within jurisdiction to attach property to preserve the subject matter and prevent violence - Order of attachment upheld - Petition dismissed - [Paras 1-22].

Criminal Law - Dispute of Possession - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 164 - Scope of inquiry - While proceedings under Section 164 BNSS should not be used as a substitute for civil adjudication where rights are clear - Where no party can establish clear possession and there is a high risk of conflict over harvesting of crops the Executive Magistrate is empowered to act as a temporary measure to protect the property and maintain public order until a competent Civil Court decides the dispute - Held - No illegality in attachment - [Paras 10-21].

Evidence Law - Civil Litigation Pendency - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 114 - Effect of pending civil suits on Section 164 BNSS proceedings - Mere pendency of civil suit does not oust the jurisdiction of the Executive Magistrate if there exists an imminent threat to peace - Where Gram Panchayat also asserts ownership as shamlat deh and neither party has proven undisputed possession the Magistrate correctly exercised discretion to appoint a receiver - Held - Impugned orders justified - [Paras 12-20].

Decision: Petition dismissed – Impugned orders of the Additional Sessions Judge and Sub Divisional Magistrate affirmed – Direction for deposit of sale proceeds in government treasury to continue until final adjudication by competent civil courts.

Writ Law - Review Jurisdiction - Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act 1988 - Section 40 - Appellate Tribunal discretion - Petitioners challenged Tribunal order allowing review application following the recall of a Supreme Court precedent - Tribunal had originally passed orders granting liberty to parties to seek review if the Apex Court recalled its judgment in Ganpati Dealcom Pvt Ltd - Petitioners acquiesced to this initial order by not challenging it - Supreme Court in review proceedings specifically permitted aggrieved parties to seek review of orders based on the recalled judgment - High Court held that where the Tribunal has reserved liberty to review its order in anticipation of a higher court's decision and the Apex Court provides explicit liberty to seek such review the standard limitations under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC are not strictly attracted - Held - Tribunal acted within its jurisdiction and in consonance with judicial propriety - Petitions dismissed - [Paras 11-17].

Civil Law - Review - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XLVII Rule 1 - Applicability - Tribunal procedure under Section 40 of the Act of 1988 - The Act allows the Tribunal to regulate its own procedure guided by principles of natural justice and grants powers of a Civil Court - Where an order is passed conditionally subject to the outcome of a pending Supreme Court review the Tribunal retains jurisdiction to recall its decision upon the happening of that contingency - Held - Principles of CPC do not narrowly restrict the Tribunal's inherent power to rectify its orders in line with the specific directions of the Supreme Court - [Paras 12-16].

Decision: Writ petitions dismissed – The order of the Appellate Tribunal allowing the review application is upheld as it aligns with the liberty granted by both the Tribunal and the Supreme Court.

Civil Law - Motor Accident Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 164 - Enhancement of Compensation - Claimants sought enhancement of compensation originally awarded under Section 163-A following the death of their minor daughter in a motor vehicle accident in 2004 - The Tribunal had awarded Rs 1,54,500 based on the then-prevailing Second Schedule - High Court held that in light of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act 2019 and the ratio of the Supreme Court in Ram Murti and others versus Punjab State Electricity Board 2023 ACJ 631 the claimants are entitled to the benefit of the beneficial provision of Rs 5,00,000 as compensation provided under Section 164 notwithstanding the fact that the accident occurred prior to the amendment - Held - Award modified to enhance compensation to Rs 5,00,000 with interest at 7.5 percent per annum - [Paras 1-13].

Civil Law - No Fault Liability - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 164 - Beneficial Construction - The Court ruled that Section 164 which replaced the regime of Section 163-A/Section 140 acts as a beneficial piece of legislation intended to provide immediate lump sum relief in cases of death or grievous hurt without requiring proof of negligence - Applying the principle of beneficial interpretation the Court directed the insurance company to pay the difference between the awarded sum and the statutory amount of Rs 5,00,000 - Held - Insurance company liable to pay the enhanced amount - [Paras 7-12].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Award modified – Compensation enhanced to Rs 5,00,000 with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition – Respondent No. 4-insurance company directed to pay the enhanced amount within eight weeks.

Criminal Law – Rape, Extortion, Criminal Intimidation – Sections 376(2)(n), 384, 506 Part II IPC – Appeal Dismissed – Appellant convicted for repeatedly raping the prosecutrix by blackmailing her with her own private photographs, extorting money from her and criminally intimidating her and her family – Prosecutrix's testimony found consistent and corroborated by medical and electronic evidence – Held: Prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction and sentence upheld [Paras 40-44].

Repeated Rape Under Threat of Circulating Private Photographs – Matrimonial-website acquaintance – Long-distance relationship turned abusive – Appellant obtained prosecutrix's nude photographs and threatened to circulate them among her family unless she complied with his demands – Raped her at Hotel Radisson, Paschim Vihar, during his stay from 23.01.2017 to 25.01.2017 and again on 29.08.2017 – MLC recorded torn hymen and 3-4 cm blade-cut marks on thighs, corroborating her account of being forced to self-harm – Held: Ingredients of Section 376(2)(n) IPC established [Paras 2, 13-15, 24, 40].

Credibility of Prosecutrix – Minor Inconsistencies Immaterial – Defence highlighted inability to recall room/floor number and confusion over the month of the second incident (29.09.2017 v. 29.08.2017) – Accused's own admission (DW1) of a hotel stay on 29.08.2017, corroborated by unchallenged Ext. PW8/D registration card, resolved the discrepancy – Charge itself confined to the January 2017 incident – Held: Peripheral inconsistencies do not dislodge an otherwise consistent core testimony [Paras 20-21, 26].

PCR Call – Non-Mention of Rape Not an Afterthought – PCR call referred only to blackmail and not rape or extortion – Held: A PCR call made for urgent police assistance cannot be expected to contain a full narration; omission does not discredit the subsequent consistent account in the FIR, Section 164 statement and deposition [Para 22].

Penetration and False Promise of Marriage – Rahul and Nitin B. Nikhare Distinguished – Defence relied on absence of proof of penetration and on the "false promise of marriage" line of cases – Held: Unlike Rahul (supra), prosecutrix specifically deposed to rape (not merely "physical relations"), corroborated by medical evidence – Unlike Nitin B. Nikhare (supra), the case was not founded on an unfulfilled promise to marry following consensual relations, but on blackmail and coercion – Both precedents held inapplicable [Paras 23-26].

Electronic Evidence – Call Recordings, CDR and IMEI Corroboration – Section 65-B Certificate – Defence challenged the call-recording transcript for absence of voice sampling/comparison – Held: Data was extracted by FSL from mobile phones seized from both parties (not a recording retained solely by the complainant), and was correlated with CDRs, IMEI numbers and Customer Application Forms – Primary evidence being available, no Section 65-B certificate was necessary – Anil Markende (supra), involving an uncorroborated recorder retained by the complainant, held distinguishable [Paras 27-36].

Alleged False Implication for Extortion by Complainant's Family – Accused claimed PW1's family demanded money and that a CD recording such demand existed – CD never produced despite opportunity; accused unable even to identify the advocate to whom it was allegedly handed over – Held: Defence version not established even on preponderance of probability [Paras 38-39].

Extortion and Criminal Intimidation – Sections 384 and 506 Part II IPC – Threats to circulate private photographs used to extract money from prosecutrix, established through her testimony and corroborating audio/video clippings – Threats to prosecutrix and her family of dire consequences established ingredients of criminal intimidation – Held: Sections 383/384 and 506 Part II IPC ingredients proved [Paras 41-42].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Conviction under Sections 376(2)(n), 384 and 506 Part II IPC and sentence of the Trial Court upheld.

Criminal Law - Dacoity with Murder - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 396 - Sudden encounter and lack of nexus - Appellants were convicted by the trial court for dacoity with murder after the deceased Atar Singh was killed in a chance encounter with the Mahavira gang due to prior enmity - Prosecution alleged that after the deceased was shot, the accused looted his gun and cartridges - High Court observed that Section 396 IPC requires that the murder be committed while conjointly committing dacoity - Since the meeting was accidental and triggered by personal enmity rather than a pre-meditated design to commit robbery or dacoity, the essential ingredients for Section 396 IPC were not satisfied - Prosecution failed to prove that dacoity was the primary intention - Held - Conviction under Section 396 IPC unsustainable - Appeal allowed and appellant acquitted - [Paras 24-26].

Criminal Law - Dacoity - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 391 and 396 - Definition and ingredients - The court reiterated that for an offence under Section 396 IPC to be made out, it must be established that five or more persons were acting conjointly to commit or attempt to commit robbery/dacoity and murder was committed in the course of such commission - Accidental encounter followed by the opportunistic taking of a weapon does not satisfy the criteria for dacoity as defined under Section 391 IPC - Held - Absence of prior intent or nexus to commit robbery nullifies the application of Section 396 IPC - [Paras 24-26].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment and order dated 02.11.1982 set aside – Appellant Sattu acquitted of all charges – Bail bonds cancelled and sureties discharged.