Tax Law - Central Excise - Central Excise Rules 2002 - Rule 8(3A) - CENVAT Credit Utilization - Revenue preferred appeal against CESTAT order which allowed the assessee to utilize CENVAT credit for duty payment during a default period - Assessee failed to discharge duty on monthly basis and utilized CENVAT account for part payment during the default period between 05.07.2010 to 29.09.2010 - Adjudicating authority disallowed such utilization and confirmed demand with interest and penalty under Rule 8(3A) - CESTAT set aside the order relying on the Gujarat High Court decision in Indsur Global Ltd vs Union of India - Revenue contended that the Supreme Court had kept the question of law open in similar matters - Court reviewed the statutory scheme of deferred payment under Rule 8 and the introduction of Rule 8(3A) which forced defaulters to pay duty for each consignment in cash without utilizing CENVAT credit - Court observed that the right to CENVAT credit accrues instantaneously upon receipt of inputs in the factory - Court found the restriction in Rule 8(3A) unreasonable as it created a cyclical vicious pattern for manufacturers facing financial crunch - Held - The condition in Rule 8(3A) requiring payment of duty without utilizing CENVAT credit until the outstanding amount is paid is unconstitutional - The portion "without utilizing the CENVAT credit" of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules 2002 is invalid - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-7].

Constitutional Law - Subordinate Legislation - Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) - Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules 2002 - Reasonableness of Restriction - Challenge to the vires of Rule 8(3A) which prohibited CENVAT credit use for assessees defaulting beyond thirty days - Court noted that while treating willful defaulters and others differently is a valid classification - the specific restriction preventing use of credit for duty already paid on inputs was irrational and arbitrary - It acted as a serious affront to the right to carry on trade or business - Court emphasized that subordinate legislation can be struck down if it is contrary to the parent Act or is manifestly arbitrary - Held - The restriction was not commensurate with the wrong sought to be remedied and was violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) - [Paras 24-36].

Decision: Tax Appeal dismissed – The portion of Rule 8(3A) held unconstitutional – CESTAT order upheld.

Writ Law - Land Reservation - Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act 1976 - Section 20 and 21 - Deemed Lapsing of Reservation - Petitioner owned land in Village Nava Deesa reserved for a Development Plan Road since 1975 - Reservation continued through subsequent revised plans in 1994 and 2016 without any acquisition proceedings being initiated for nearly 50 years - Petitioner served a statutory purchase notice under Section 20(2) on 04-05-2022 - Respondent-Authority contended that the ten-year period for acquisition should be reckoned afresh from the date of the last revision of the Development Plan in 2016 making the notice premature - Court examined the scheme of Sections 20 and 21 - Held - The power of revision under Section 21 is a statutory obligation to be exercised at least once in every ten years - If revision proceedings are not initiated within the prescribed ten-year period and acquisition is not completed the statutory right of the owner under Section 20(2) cannot be defeated by a subsequent untimely revision - Administrative lethargy and indefinite reservation of private property violate the constitutional protection under Article 300A - The chronology revealed that every revision process was initiated beyond the statutory ten-year limit - Reservation declared as lapsed - Held - Petition allowed - [Paras 1-21].

Writ Law - Statutory Interpretation - Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act 1976 - Section 21 - Temporal Limitation on Power of Revision - Respondent argued that every revision under Section 21 gives a fresh lease of ten years for acquisition under Section 20 - Held - Such an interpretation would render Section 20(2) otiose and allow authorities to indefinitely postpone acquisition - The power of revision is conditioned by the temporal limitation of ten years - If revision is not lawfully commenced within the period of ten years from the date the final Development Plan comes into force the right of the owner to serve a purchase notice under Section 20(2) accrues and becomes enforceable - Subsequent initiation of revision proceedings cannot defeat a right that has already accrued to the landowner - [Paras 13-15].

Decision: Petition succeeds and is allowed – Reservation of the Development Plan Road over Revenue Survey Nos. 41 and 42/P4 at Village Nava Deesa is declared to have lapsed – Rule made absolute – Request for stay of judgment by Respondent-Authority refused.

Criminal Law - Regular Bail - Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 - Sections 3, 4, 19 and 45 - Applicant an IAS officer serving as Collector was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate for allegedly operating a bribe syndicate for Land Use Conversion applications - Prosecution alleged a fixed rate of bribe at ten rupees per square meter for agricultural to non-agricultural use conversion with fifty percent share of proceeds going to the Applicant - ED registered ECIR based on predicate offence under Prevention of Corruption Act following recovery of sixty-seven point five zero lakh rupees from a subordinate residence - Applicant sought bail arguing lack of predicate offence charge-sheet and medical grounds involving a knee injury - Court found prima facie evidence of digital logs and fifty percent bribe share attribution in hisab sheets - Evidence showed attempts to destroy digital evidence by resetting mobile devices prior to search - Held - Twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA not satisfied as there are no reasonable grounds to believe the applicant is not guilty - Gravity of economic offence and potential tampering of evidence necessitates denial of bail - Application dismissed - [Paras 1.0-11.0].

Criminal Law - Ratio Decidendi - Standalone Offence - Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 - Sections 3 and 19 - Applicant contended PMLA proceedings are unsustainable without a prior charge-sheet in the predicate PC Act offence - Court affirmed that PMLA is an independent standalone offence - ED is not bound to wait for a charge-sheet or conclusion of investigation in the scheduled offence to exercise power of arrest under Section 19 - Registration of FIR in scheduled offence is sufficient to trigger PMLA proceedings provided the same has not ended in acquittal or discharge - Held - Non-filing of charge-sheet in predicate offence is not a ground for bail - [Paras 4.2-4.6 and 7.1-7.4].

Criminal Law - Statutory Interpretation - PMLA Twin Conditions - Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 - Section 45 - Court noted Section 45 imposes a high threshold for bail reversing the presumption of innocence - Burden lies on the accused to make out a prima facie case for bail - Economic offences affect the financial health and social fabric of the nation and must be visited with a different approach than conventional crimes - Sovereignty of nation and protection of economy must prevail over personal liberty in cases of aggravated white collar crimes - Held - Accused failed to satisfy the court that he is not guilty or unlikely to commit further offences - [Paras 8.0-8.8 and 9.3].

Criminal Law - Medical Grounds - Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 - Section 45 Proviso - Sick or Infirm - Applicant claimed bail for knee injury diagnosed as bucket handle tear of lateral meniscus requiring surgery - Court observed the condition is general in nature and not terminally ill or life-threatening - Treatment and physiotherapy are available within jail infrastructure - Held - Proviso to Section 45 not applicable to non-serious ailments - [Para 8.9].

Evidence Law - Admissibility of Statements - Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 - Section 50 - Statements recorded by ED officials are admissible in evidence and can form the basis for a prima facie view at the bail stage - Retraction of statements by co-accused is a disputed question of fact to be decided during trial - Held - Statements of middlemen and subordinates corroborating the bribe racket and the fifty percent share of the Applicant provide sufficient material for detention - [Paras 8.5-8.7].

Decision: Application dismissed – No merit found in the request for regular bail.

Criminal Law - Dishonour of Cheque - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Sections 138 and 139 - Expert Analysis of Handwriting - Accused directors of chit fund company facing trial for cheque dishonour under Section 138 NI Act - Complainants specifically alleged in testimony and affidavits that accused wrote the entries and signed the cheques in their presence - Accused filed applications to send cheques for expert analysis to prove entries were not in their handwriting - Judicial First Class Magistrate Court at Taliparamba dismissed applications holding that handwriting is irrelevant once execution is established under Section 139 NI Act - High Court in exercise of Article 227 jurisdiction held that while statutory presumption exists the accused cannot be denied an opportunity to show that a specific factual contention of the complainant regarding the authorship of the entries is wrong - Such evidence strikes at the acceptability and credibility of the complainant case - Held - Impugned orders set aside - Cheques directed to be sent for expert analysis - [Paras 1-9].

Evidence Law - Expert Opinion - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 139 - Rebuttal of Presumption - Relevancy of handwriting analysis - Complainant asserted that second accused made entries in the impugned cheque at the establishment of the complainant - Accused sought to show handwritings were not theirs - Trial Court deemed this irrelevant due to presumption of execution - High Court observed that credibility of evidence tendered by the complainant about the execution would be at stake if handwritings are shown not to be of the accused - Accused cannot be denied opportunity to show the complainant contention is wrong - Held - Evidence adduced by complainant would be vitiated for lack of bonafides if handwriting is disproven - [Paras 7-9].

Criminal Law - Procedural Directions - Expert Analysis - Responsibility of Accused - High Court directed Magistrate to take steps for expert analysis - Held - Petitioners/accused shall have responsibility to make available specimen handwritings for the contemporary period - Expenses for such expert analysis shall be met by the accused - If accused fails to provide specimens within reasonable period Trial Court is free to wind up proceedings and decide on available evidence - [Paras 10].

Decision: Original Petitions allowed – Orders dated 11.08.2025 in C.M.P. No. 4344/2025 and 07.08.2025 in C.M.P. No. 4346/2025 set aside – Trial Court directed to send cheques for expert analysis.

Criminal Law - Cancellation of Bail - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Section 6 - Aggravated penetrative sexual assault - Respondent caretaker of a junior school was accused of taking a three-year-old nursery student to the basement and touching her private part with a finger causing bleeding - Additional Sessions Judge granted regular bail within one week of arrest primarily based on CCTV footage showing respondent exiting the school wing at 08-37 AM and MLC showing no external injuries - High Court observed that the Trial Court failed to appreciate the vulnerability of the child victim who independently identified the culprit and the crime scene - Court noted that the respondent was one of only two male staff members in the wing and CCTV confirmed his presence during the relevant window of 08-13 AM to 08-37 AM - High Court held that the Trial Court ignored the statutory rigours of the POCSO Act and the gravity of the offence involving a tender-aged child - Held - Grant of bail at a premature stage when investigation was in progress and FSL reports were awaited was improper - Impugned order set aside - Petitions allowed - [Paras 1-37].

Evidence Law - Child Witness - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 183 - Credibility of three-year-old victim - Trial Court doubted the version of the victim due to lack of medical corroboration and selective appreciation of electronic evidence - High Court ruled that a child of such tender age cannot be equated with an adult to narrate facts in proper sequence or with time accuracy - Incoherence in a child's speech does not imply falsity - Victim identified the respondent and the specific room where the incident occurred - Held - Version of the victim and her mother cannot be doubted at the bail stage despite lack of findings in blood-stained forensic exhibits - [Paras 29-33].

Criminal Law - Bail Parameters - POCSO Act 2012 - Section 6 - Nature and gravity of offence - High Court emphasized that while appellate courts do not usually interfere with bail orders they must do so if the Trial Court misses extremely important factors in grave offences - Court relied on Supreme Court precedents holding that absence of medical injuries on the body of a minor victim does not negate the nature and gravity of the offence - Held - Trial Court failed to consider the safety of vulnerable victims and the stage of investigation - Order granting bail set aside to secure the ends of justice - [Paras 34-35].

Decision: Petitions allowed – Bail order dated 07.05.2026 set aside – Respondent directed to surrender before the jurisdictional Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Court) on 01.07.2026 at 2:00 pm.

Civil Law - Railway Accident - Railways Act 1989 - Section 124A - Bona fide passenger - Deceased fell from Sealdah-New Alipurduar Padatik SF Express due to overcrowding and sudden jerk - Tribunal dismissed the claim petition holding that the victim was not a bona fide passenger as no ticket was recovered and treated police reports as hearsay - High Court set aside the dismissal - Held - Mere absence of a ticket does not negate a claim that the deceased was a bona fide passenger - Initial burden is on the claimant which can be discharged by filing an affidavit of relevant facts - Onus then shifts to the Railways to prove the contrary - Inquest report and police investigation corroborated a fall from a running train - Railways failed to adduce evidence to substantiate a run-over case or disprove the passenger status - Strict liability applies to untoward incidents under Section 124A - [Paras 1-22].

Civil Law - Statutory Compliance - Railway Passengers (Manner of Investigation of Untoward Incidents) Rules 2020 - Rules 10 and 12 - Mandatory Procedure - Railway authorities failed to show compliance with the investigation and reporting duties cast upon the Divisional Railway Manager - Railways as a State under Article 12 must ensure genuine claims are honored without forcing families into prolonged litigation - Held - Non-recovery of a ticket is common in accidental falls where belongings may be lost or destroyed - Benefit of doubt in such cases must go to the claimants - Inquest report under Section 174 CrPC and statements before the Enquiry Officer established the occurrence as an untoward incident - [Paras 12-21].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment and Award of Railway Claims Tribunal Kolkata Bench dated 08-10-2024 set aside – Respondent directed to pay compensation of Rs 800000 with interest at 6 percent per annum from the date of filing the claim case till payment – Amount to be deposited before the Registrar General of the High Court within 8 weeks.

Criminal Law - Successive Bail - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 483 - Cryptocurrency Fraud - Petitioners filed second bail applications in FIR No 120 of 2023 registered for cheating and criminal conspiracy involving the use of websites Voscrow and Hypenext to lure public into investing in Korvio and DGT coins - SIT investigation revealed a well-planned conspiracy where coin prices were artificially inflated and then crashed to 10 paise to defraud unsuspecting investors - Evidence included disclosure statements under Section 27 IE Act leading to recovery of digital devices and WhatsApp chats showing petitioners as top-liners in the chain with massive financial liabilities - Earlier bail applications were dismissed by the High Court and a petition to the Supreme Court was withdrawn - Petitioners argued that investigation was complete and trial would take time while State contended that petitioners were part of a deep-rooted conspiracy and main accused had absconded to Dubai - Held - Successive bail application can only be entertained when there is a substantial change in circumstances and not merely cosmetic changes - Passage of time or filing of charge-sheet does not automatically entitle accused to bail in serious economic offences - Primacy given to the interest of thousands of small investors who lost life savings - Bail applications dismissed - [Paras 1-34].

Criminal Law - Economic Offences - Principles of Bail - Class Apart - Judicial approach to financial scams involving public funds - Economic offences are committed with cool calculation and deliberate design for personal profit affecting the national economy - Court must balance individual liberty with the larger interest of society and the State - Held - Serious economic offences involving deep-rooted conspiracies must be viewed seriously and require a more stringent approach compared to other crimes - Incarceration period is not the sole criteria for bail when the gravity of the offence is severe - [Paras 17-24].

Constitutional Law - Speedy Trial - Right to Liberty - Constitution of India - Article 21 - Detention of under-trial prisoners - While Article 21 guarantees speedy trial and a prisoner cannot be detained indefinitely - this right must be balanced against the nature of accusations and severity of punishment - Held - Mere long incarceration or delay in trial conclusion does not entitle an accused to bail if the offence is a grave economic crime with massive societal impact - [Paras 26-31].

Decision: Bail applications dismissed – Observations made limited to the purpose of bail and not to influence the trial court.

Writ Law - Educational Reservation - Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Internal Reservation Classification - Petitioners challenged Notification dated 25.08.2025 and subsequent notifications dated 20.01.2026 and 30.01.2026 requiring applicants to submit updated Caste Certificates classified under internal reservation categories for Common Entrance Test 2026 - Petitioners possessed Scheduled Caste certificates issued in 2017-2018 for Beda Jangama category but were unable to register online due to the new requirement - Karnataka Examination Authority stated they had no jurisdiction to verify old certificates but offered to accommodate applications if updated certificates are furnished within 21 days to avoid disruption of counseling - Counsel for petitioners accepted the offer - Court directed petitioners to submit physical application copies with 2017-2018 certificates on 30.06.2026 - Directed uploading of updated online forms and certificates within 21 days - Held - Writ petition disposed of with directions for submission of forms and certificates - [Paras 1-10].

Writ Law - Education - Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Procedural Fairness - Students challenged technical hurdles in CET registration due to change in reservation certificate formats - Respondent state and KEA agreed to a time-bound window for students to rectify documentation - Held - Respondents permitted to proceed with allotment to other candidates if petitioners fail to submit required certificates within the 21-day grace period - [Paras 8-9].

Decision: Writ petition disposed of – Petitioners directed to submit physical applications on 30.06.2026 and upload updated caste certificates within 21 days from the date of order.

Civil Law - Recovery of Possession - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 100 - Regular Second Appeal - Respondent-plaintiff filed suit for possession and mesne profits against his nephews - Plaintiff asserted ownership based on 1984 purchase via GPA and Agreement to Sell and claimed defendants were licensees in one room who later trespassed into the ground floor - Defendants contested title claiming property was purchased from joint family funds in the name of their grandfather and identified by plaintiff - Trial Court decreed possession holding that plaintiff proved title while defendants failed to establish joint family nucleus or specific contribution - First Appellate Court independently re-appreciated evidence and affirmed the trial court judgment - High Court observed that no substantial question of law was raised as the challenge pertained only to findings of fact - Held - Concurrent findings based on proper appreciation of evidence do not warrant interference under Section 100 CPC - appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-32 41-54].

Civil Law - Jurisdiction - Delhi Land Reforms Act 1954 - Section 185 - Urbanization - Appellants challenged jurisdiction of Civil Court over suit property located in Palam Village - Court noted that the area was officially declared urban by the Delhi Revenue Department via notification dated 24.10.1994 - Once an area is urbanized under Section 507(a) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957 the provisions of the Delhi Land Reforms Act cease to apply - Held - Plea of lack of jurisdiction under Section 185 is unsustainable following urbanization of the area - [Paras 35 39-40].

Evidence Law - Burden of Proof - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XLI Rules 25 and 27 - Joint Family Property - Appellants claimed property was ancestral but failed to produce documentary evidence of a joint family nucleus - Receipt DW1/1 produced by appellants was not mentioned in pleadings and the signature was denied by the respondent - Appellants failed to examine the grandfather who was the most material witness to support their assertion of joint family funds - Evidence of defence witnesses was found inconsistent and failed to challenge the plaintiff’s registered chain of documents - Held - In the absence of specific pleadings and cogent evidence the claim of joint family ownership is rejected - [Paras 36-38 45-49].

Civil Law - Licensee - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Permissive User - Respondent established clear title through documents tracing rights to the erstwhile owner - Appellants admitted paying a monthly sum of Rs 200 to the respondent which fortified the respondent’s claim that they were inducted only as licensees - Respondent served legal notice terminating the permissive right - Held - Upon termination of license the status of the appellants became that of unauthorized occupants and they were liable for eviction - [Paras 4-6 50-51].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Concurrent findings of lower courts affirmed – Eviction of appellants upheld.