Criminal Law - POCSO Act - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Sections 7 and 8 - Quashing of proceedings - Accused charged with sexual assault for holding victim's hand and wiping tears while promising marriage - Court observed that Section 7 requires 'sexual intent' as an indispensable ingredient - Acts of consolation or contrition lacking sexual intent do not fall within the ambit of the Act - Final report found failing to disclose necessary ingredients of offence - Held - Compelling the accused to undergo trial for acts lacking sexual intent would be an abuse of process - Quashed - [Paras 11-19].

Criminal Law - POCSO Act - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Section 11 - Sexual intent - Determination of - Explanation to Section 11 clarifies that intent is a matter of inference from attendant circumstances - Court held that if circumstances can fasten sexual intent upon an act, they can with equal legitimacy negate it in ambiguous conduct - Held - The contact was momentary and occurred in public setting hence lack of sexual intent is evident - [Paras 12-14].

Criminal Law - POCSO Act - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Sections 9 and 10 - Aggravated sexual assault - Status of offender - Court held that status as a member of armed force under Section 9(b)(iii) only aggravates a sexual assault - It cannot create an offence where the underlying act of sexual assault is absent - Held - Charges under Sections 9 and 10 must fall if primary charge under Section 7 is not made out - [Paras 16].

Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Inherent powers of High Court - Where material collected during investigation taken at face value does not disclose ingredients of offence - Held - High Court is duty-bound to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law - [Paras 15-19].

Decision: Criminal Original Petition allowed – Final report in Spl.S.C.No.577 of 2025 on the file of the Principal District Court, Tenkasi is quashed – Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Co-operative Societies Law - Appointment of Person-in-Charge - Resignation of Majority Members of Managing Committee - Natural Justice - Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act 1964 - Section 32(7)(a)(i) read with Section 34(1) - Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules 1964 - Rule 23-AAA(5) - Out of 13 Managing Committee members 7 submitted resignations resulting in lack of requisite quorum under Rule 23(2) - Deputy Registrar cancelled the Managing Committee and appointed a person-in-charge committee under Section 32(7)(a)(i) read with Rule 23-AAA(5) without issuing prior notice or affording hearing - Petitioners challenged the order contending violation of principles of natural justice and asserting that supersession could only be done under Section 34(1) after notice - Matter referred to Full Bench to determine if notice and hearing are mandatory before appointing a person-in-charge and whether Rule 23-AAA is intra vires Section 130 - Full Bench held that Section 34(1) is punitive and requires notice for misbehaviour or maladministration whereas Section 32(7)(a)(i) read with Rule 23-AAA(5) operates to fill a governance vacuum caused by lack of quorum and is purely an administrative non-punitive interim measure - Held - Power under Section 32(7)(a)(i) read with Rule 23-AAA(5) is exercised to preserve the society and falls within established exceptions to natural justice - No prior notice or opportunity of hearing is mandatory - [Paras 1-25].

Co-operative Societies Law - Rule Making Power - Validity of Subordinate Legislation - Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act 1964 - Sections 79A(1)(e) and 130 - Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules 1964 - Rule 23-AAA - Challenge to procedural rule providing for appointment of person-in-charge upon resignation of entire or majority managing committee - Harmonious reading of penal consequence for transacting business without quorum under Section 79A(1)(e) with general rule making power under Section 130 - Held - State Government possesses full statutory competence to frame rules providing procedure for emergent governance transitions - Rule 23-AAA is well within the rule-making power conferred under the Act - [Paras 11-12 and 24].

Decision: Reference answered holding that prior notice and opportunity of hearing are not mandatory under Section 32(7)(a)(i) read with Rule 23-AAA(5) and that Rule 23-AAA is intra vires the Act – No order as to costs.

Civil Law - Motor Accident Claims - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166 and 173 - Appellant seeking compensation for damages to defence vehicle - Tribunal dismissed claim upon finding the driver of the defence vehicle guilty of rash and negligent driving based on police investigation and charge-sheet - Appellant suppressed material fact of death of occupant in said accident - Evidence on record including Sketch Plan and photographs belied testimony of driver that oil tanker was the cause - High Court observed that driver had sufficient time to exercise due care and that the version of driver was untrustworthy - Held - Tribunal correctly held that no negligence was attributable to the respondent-oil tanker - appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-18].

Evidence Law - Burden of Proof - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166 - Negligence - Claimant failed to prove that the respondent-oil tanker was parked in a manner that caused the accident - Documentary evidence and Sketch Plan contradicted oral testimony of the claimant-driver - Suppression of material facts regarding death of personnel in the vehicle leads to adverse presumption - Held - testimony of driver does not inspire confidence - [Paras 10-15].

Civil Law - Contributory Negligence - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Collision from behind - Defence vehicle hit the parked oil tanker from the rear side - Court found no evidence of negligence on the part of the parked vehicle - Held - no liability can be saddled on the insurer of the oil tanker - [Paras 17-18].

Decision: Appeal dismissed being devoid of any merit – The impugned judgment and order passed by the Tribunal is upheld.

Criminal Law - Dishonour of Cheque - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Sentence and Compensation - Priority of compensatory aspect over punitive aspect - Petitioner purchased land and issued cheque of Rs 3 crores towards discharge of liability which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds - Statutory legal notice served but payment not made - Trial Court convicted petitioner sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs 10000 without awarding compensation - Appellate Court upheld conviction and modified sentence to simple imprisonment for two years maintaining fine and no compensation - High Court observed that Courts below failed to consider compensatory object of Chapter XVII of the Act thereby depriving complainant of Rs 3 crores for 14 years - Held - compensatory aspect of remedy under Section 138 must receive priority over punitive aspect - fine should be commensurate to cheque amount to be appropriated as compensation under Section 357 CrPC - impugned orders on sentence set aside and matter remanded for de novo sentencing - [Paras 1-12].

Criminal Law - Sentencing Principles - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 357 - Regulatory Offence - Object of Chapter XVII is to inculcate faith in banking operations and discourage cheque bouncing - Punishment under Section 138 is not for seeking retribution but a means to ensure recovery of money - Failure of Courts to award compensation causes severe hardship to complainants due to expiry of civil limitation period - Held - Trial Courts must uniformly exercise power to levy fine up to twice the cheque amount and direct payment of compensation under Section 357(1)(b) CrPC - [Paras 5-7].

Decision: Revision petition allowed – Order on quantum of sentence passed by Trial Court and judgment of Appellate Court set aside – Matter remanded to Trial Court for de novo consideration on sentence after hearing parties afresh – Petitioner ordered to be released on bail till passing of order on sentence – Parties directed to appear before Trial Court on 27.09.2026.

Civil Law - Registration of Consent Decree - Registration Act 1908 - Sections 17 and 23 - Requirement of Society NOC - Suit premises situated on ground floor of building of respondent no 4 society - Erstwhile owners entered into agreement to sell with petitioners' company and subsequently filed suit - Suit disposed of in terms of consent terms operating as conveyance in favour of petitioners conferring absolute title - Consent decree sealed by Prothonotary and Senior Master after determination and payment of stamp duty of Rs 9158300 - Respondent no 1 Sub-Registrar required no-objection from respondent no 2 Collector - Collector insisted on no-objection certificate from respondent no 4 society prior to granting permission - Society raised objection to transfer - Petitioners approached High Court under Article 226 challenging arbitrary condition - Held - Consent decree operating as conveyance had attained finality - Revenue authorities bound to act in furtherance of and in deference to decree of Court rather than creating obstacles - No statutory provision or rule empowers the Collector to insist on a no-objection certificate from the co-operative housing society as a pre-condition for registration of the decree - Decree presented within four months of being drawn up and sealed complying with Section 23 of Registration Act 1908 - Collector directed to decide application without insisting on NOC from society upon payment of applicable transfer fee and premium - Petition allowed - [Paras 1-52].

Civil Law - Transfer of Property on Government Land - Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966 - Section 37A - Scope and applicability - State revenue authorities contended that Section 37A imposes restrictions on transfer of government land - Land originally leased to builder and private ownership of premises created - Application of Government Resolution dated 7 July 2017 allowing regularisation of transfers upon payment of prescribed transfer fee - Held - Section 37A pertains to restrictions on government land transactions and does not empower Collector to withhold approval solely for want of society NOC - State has no authority to mandate prior society approval when transfer fee and premium are duly offered - [Paras 40-47].

Decision: Writ petition allowed – Respondent No. 2 Collector directed to decide the petitioners' application dated 22nd August 2024 without insisting on a No-Objection from Respondent No. 4 Society upon payment of applicable transfer fee with premium to facilitate registration of the Consent Decree dated 16th December 2022 by Respondent No. 1 – No order as to costs.

Criminal Law - Habeas Corpus - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 35 - Arrest and Remand - Petitioner a juvenile arrested for offences with maximum punishment of three and five years respectively - Police failed to verify age or comply with arrest guidelines regarding offences punishable up to seven years - Magistrate granted mechanical remands without application of mind or verifying the age of the petitioner - Court found detention illegal and ordered release - Held - Authorities directed to strictly abide by the dictum of Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil - Caution issued to judicial officers regarding mechanical remand orders - [Paras 7-14].

Criminal Law - Juvenile Justice - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 - Plea of Juvenility - Petitioner being a juvenile at the time of arrest and remand - Police and Judicial authorities failed to ascertain age despite documentation indicating minority - Held - Plea of juvenility must be taken into consideration by concerning authorities strictly in accordance with law - [Paras 11-14].

Criminal Law - Professional Conduct - Disciplinary Action - Police and Judicial officers - Erring officials failed to demonstrate compliance with legal safeguards - Judicial officers tendered unconditional apology for mechanical remand orders - Held - Apology accepted with caution that such careless approach will not be taken lightly in future - [Paras 8-11].

Decision: Writ petition disposed of – Petitioner directed to be treated as a juvenile – Judicial caution issued to errant officers – Directives issued for future strict compliance with Apex Court mandates regarding arrest and remand.

Criminal Law - Second Revision Bar - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Sections 175, 438 and 528 - Petitioner financial company challenged order of Sessions Court upholding Magistrate order dismissing application under Section 175(3) BNSS for registration of FIR regarding alleged fabrication of loan and assignment agreements - High Court examined interplay of Section 438(3) and Section 528 BNSS holding that second revision is explicitly barred and inherent powers cannot be invoked as a backdoor entry unless a case of gross injustice or exceptional circumstances is established - Held - dispute is predominantly commercial and contractual in nature and petitioner is not left remediless as pre-summoning evidence can be led before Magistrate - petition dismissed with costs - [Paras 1-18].

Criminal Law - Police Investigation - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 175 - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 156(3) - Scope of Magistrate power - Magistrate declined to order FIR registration holding that identities of accused and all documents are within knowledge of complainant and no custodial interrogation or complex police investigation is required - Held - power under Section 175(3) BNSS should be exercised sparingly and only where police assistance is strictly necessary - [Paras 11-15].

Criminal Law - Abuse of Process - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Civil dispute given criminal cloak - Petitioner sought to criminalize a commercial dispute arising out of Inter-Corporate Loan Agreement already examined by High Court in civil proceedings - Held - converting civil disputes into criminal prosecution to apply pressure for settlement is an abuse of process of court - [Paras 11-17].

Decision: Petition and pending applications dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000 to be deposited online with www.bharatkeveer.gov.in by the petitioner within one week.

Civil Law - Urban Land Ceiling - Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 - Sections 8(3), 8(4), 10(5) and 10(6) read with Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act 1999 - Sections 3 and 4 - Abatement of Ceiling Proceedings - Retention of Physical Possession - Land declared surplus vide order under Section 8(4) dated 20.05.1982 which preceded the draft statement notice under Section 8(3) dated 05.08.1982 - Alleged voluntary possession taken under undated notice under Section 10(5) without signatures of tenure holder or independent witnesses - No proceedings for forceful dispossession initiated under Section 10(6) - Revenue entries continued in name of original tenure holder and successors until mutated in favour of State on 20.09.2021 - Petitioner had constructed house on subject land - Competent authority rejected petitioner's representation for restoration of revenue records - Challenge thereto - Held - Striking irregularity apparent as order declaring surplus land preceded statutory draft notice making order under Section 8(4) void ab initio - State failed to discharge burden of establishing actual de facto physical possession prior to enforcement of Repeal Act 1999 - Undated notice without witness signatures cannot establish valid transfer of possession - Mere de jure vesting under Section 10(3) does not confer de facto possession - Revenue entries uninterrupted for over two decades establish continued possession of petitioner - Proceedings stand abated under Section 4 of Repeal Act 1999 - Order rejecting representation quashed and direction issued to expunge State name from revenue records - [Paras 1-34].

Civil Law - Validity of Orders - Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 - Sections 8(3) and 8(4) - Order preceding statutory notice - Section 8(4) order passed on 20.05.1982 declaring land surplus whereas draft notice under Section 8(3) was issued subsequently on 05.08.1982 - Held - Passing of final order prior to issuance of draft statement notice demonstrates non-compliance with statutory procedure and natural justice - Order rendered unsustainable in law - [Paras 12-14, 26].

Civil Law - Taking of Possession - Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 - Sections 10(5) and 10(6) - Mandatory Nature of Notice - Undated notice under Section 10(5) without proof of service or witness attestations - Held - Requirement of delivering notice under Section 10(5) is mandatory and word may must be read as shall - Notice must be served on possessor - Failure to establish peaceful surrender under Section 10(5) or forcible dispossession under Section 10(6) means actual physical possession never vested in State - Mere paper possession does not divest tenure holder - [Paras 15, 22-26].

Evidence Law - Revenue Records - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 35 - Presumption of Possession - Continuous revenue entries in name of landholder and descendants for over twenty-three years after alleged vesting - Held - Revenue records carry presumption of correctness under Section 35 - While revenue entries do not confer title they constitute admissible evidence raising strong presumption of continuous physical possession - [Paras 16-21].

Writ Law - Delay and Laches - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Challenge to ceiling proceedings after lapse of time - State raised plea of delay - Held - Since de facto physical possession was never taken and revenue entries remained intact in petitioner's name until 2021 when mutation was sought to be altered - Delay cannot defeat substantive statutory protection of abatement under Repeal Act 1999 - Petition not barred by laches - [Paras 27-32].

Decision: Writ petition allowed – Proceedings in Ceiling Case No. 486/2480/5523/81-82 held abated – Direction issued to District Magistrate to expunge revenue entries in favour of the State and restore petitioner's entries within three months.

Criminal Law - Domestic Violence - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 - Section 20(6) - Attachment of salary for recovery of maintenance arrears - Petitioner contended that arrears older than one year are time-barred under the proviso to Section 125(3) of the CrPC - Court held that Section 20(6) of the DV Act provides an independent and specific statutory mechanism for enforcement of monetary relief - Limitation contained in the proviso to Section 125(3) of the CrPC is a restriction specific to that provision and cannot be mechanically imported into enforcement proceedings under the DV Act - Held - Petition dismissed as the recovery proceedings are legally sustainable - [Paras 1-25].

Criminal Law - Maintenance - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 125(3) - Scope of proviso - Limitation period of one year for recovery of maintenance arrears - Court held that the proviso to Section 125(3) restricts only the warrant-based coercive mechanism under that specific section and does not extinguish the underlying substantive liability for maintenance - Held - Distinction between the mode of enforcement and the underlying liability must be preserved - [Paras 15-18].

Criminal Law - Statutory Interpretation - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 - Section 20 - Enforcement of monetary orders - Nature of proceedings - Proceedings under the DV Act are predominantly of civil nature - Court held that once a monetary order attains finality, the Magistrate is competent to invoke powers under Section 20(6) to reach the source of income of the respondent to satisfy the award - Held - Challenge to enforcement of arrears based on CrPC limitation period rejected - [Paras 11-24].

Decision: Petition dismissed – Impugned order directing attachment of salary upheld.