Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Allegations of misappropriation and forgery - Petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 to 4 sought to quash FIR No. 52 of 2026 registered for offences under Sections 420- 406- 467- 468- 471 and 120B r/w 34 IPC - Complainant alleged that the CEO of the partnership firm and the petitioners acting as agents for land procurement misappropriated approximately Rs. 5.52 Crores - Allegations stated that the accused produced fabricated Agreements of Sale and fake payment receipts to induce the firm to transfer funds while making only partial payments to land owners - Petitioners contended that the dispute was purely civil and contractual in nature and that the respondent should have invoked the arbitration clause as per the Memorandum of Understanding - High Court held that the existence of an arbitration mechanism or civil remedy does not nullify criminal prosecution if the allegations disclose the commission of cognizable offences - Whether the sale agreements are genuine and whether the amounts were actually paid to land owners are disputed questions of fact requiring investigation - Held - Power under Section 528 BNSS is to be exercised sparingly and not to interdict investigation at the threshold when a prima facie case is made out - Petition dismissed - [Paras 1-21].

Criminal Law - Civil vs Criminal Remedy - Ratio Decidendi - Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 - Section 18 - Effect of arbitration clause on criminal prosecution - Criminal law cannot be employed as a mechanism for enforcing contractual rights alone but its process is not barred merely because a civil remedy exists - Arbitrator has no jurisdiction to try criminal charges even if they arise out of the same transaction - Held - Initiation of arbitral proceedings does not bar criminal prosecution if the acts complained of constitute offences under law - [Paras 12-16].

Criminal Law - Investigation - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Scope of quashing at nascent stage - Police have a statutory right and duty to investigate cognizable offences - Courts should not scuttle investigation at the threshold unless no cognizable offence is disclosed on a plain reading of the FIR - FIR is not expected to be an encyclopedia of all facts - Held - When specific allegations of forgery and misappropriation exist the matter must ordinarily proceed to trial and cannot be quashed at the investigation stage - [Paras 17-20].

Decision: Criminal Petition dismissed – FIR investigation to proceed in accordance with law – All pending miscellaneous applications closed.

Civil Law - Trademark Infringement - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Section 29 - Allied and Cognate Goods - Plaintiff sought interim injunction against Defendants for using the mark GODFATHER as part of a composite mark for whisky - Plaintiff established prior use and registration of arbitrary mark GODFATHER for beer in Class 32 since 1984 and for alcoholic beverages in Class 33 since 2005 - Defendants argued that beer and whisky are distinct products with different price points - alcohol content - and consumption patterns - Court observed that both products are alcoholic beverages sold through common trade channels and retail outlets under the same regulatory excise regime in India - Held - Beer and whisky are allied and cognate products - The price variation and target consumer profile are not the metrics to decide similarity of goods when trade channels and nature are common - Prime facie case for infringement made out - [Paras 16-18 and 23-26].

Civil Law - Trademark Infringement - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Section 28 - Rights of Registered Proprietor - Defendants alleged non-use of the mark by Plaintiff for whisky since 2013 - Court clarified that registration under Section 18 confers exclusive statutory rights under Section 28 irrespective of whether the mark is used in the ordinary course - Held - Non-use of a registered trademark does not ipso facto deprive a proprietor of the right to sue for infringement - Registration remains valid and enforceable until rectified or cancelled in accordance with law - [Paras 10-15].

Civil Law - Trademark Infringement - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Section 29 - Anti-dissection Rule and Dominant Feature Test - Defendants contended that their mark is composite and must be viewed as a whole including the personality name Sanjay Dutt and the brand The Glenwalk - Court found that GODFATHER remained the prominent and essential element of the Defendants mark which catches the eye of the general consumer - Held - Principle of anti-dissection does not apply when the essential element of a registered word mark is available in the composite mark - Deceptive similarity is established when the dominant part of the mark is identical to the registered mark - [Paras 19-22 and 27-30].

Civil Law - Passing Off - Goodwill and Reputation - Plaintiff demonstrated sales turnover of Rs 746 crores and decades of use - Court found that the mark GODFATHER is exclusively associated with the Plaintiff - Held - Defendants use of the same mark for whisky would cause an average consumer to believe the product emanates from the Plaintiff - Defendants attempted to ride on the coattails of Plaintiffs goodwill - Balance of convenience in favor of Plaintiff - [Paras 6.12 and 30-32].

Decision: Application allowed – Defendants and their associates restrained from manufacturing - bottling - selling - or advertising whisky under the mark GODFATHER or GODFATHER S or any deceptively similar mark during the pendency of the suit – Defendants directed to take down all online listings and advertisements bearing the infringing mark.

Criminal Law - Quashment of Charge Sheet - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 528 - Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 - Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(2) - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 120-B 167 409 and 420 - Petitioner serving as Deputy Block Development Officer challenged criminal proceedings arraying him as A1 for allegedly facilitating wrongful disbursement of housing funds to ineligible persons - Prosecution alleged failure to verify credentials before uploading data to the Awass Soft portal - Petitioner established that his role was purely clerical and confined to uploading data for 742 beneficiaries within a span of three days under extreme work pressure - Evidence showed that the ineligible beneficiaries had identical or strikingly similar names to the eligible ones leading to a bona fide mistake - Court observed that senior officials who admitted to monitoring lapses in their Section 161 statements were made witnesses rather than accused - Held - Mere clerical error or negligence under heavy workload without proof of illegal motive or direct nexus with beneficiaries does not constitute criminal misconduct - Criminal proceedings quashed - [Paras 1-18].

Criminal Law - Mens Rea - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 409 and 420 - Criminal Misconduct - Wrongful disbursement of government funds - Liability of data entry officials - Petitioner processed documents for 742 housing scheme beneficiaries as per a time-bound departmental circular - Disbursement was made to persons with names similar to actual eligible candidates - Funds were subsequently repaid by the ineligible beneficiaries to the State exchequer - Held - In the absence of evidence establishing malicious intention or unlawful gain the alleged lapse at most amounts to dereliction of duty and does not satisfy the requirements of criminal offences under the IPC or PC Act - [Paras 14-17].

Decision: Petition allowed – Charge sheet in Spl. C. No.5 of 2024 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special Judge for P.C. Act Cases Tiruvannamalai is quashed insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

Writ Law - Delay and Laches - Industrial Disputes Act 1947 - Section 10 - Belated Industrial Dispute - Respondent-employee dismissed in October 2000 for fraudulent withdrawals and misappropriation of customer funds - Raised industrial dispute after 13 years in 2013 - Reference made in 2014 - Statement of Claim filed in 2018 - Petitioner-Bank destroyed enquiry records after 10 years as per standard banking practice - Industrial Tribunal Pune held domestic enquiry fair but branded findings perverse solely due to Bank's inability to produce original depositions of 11 witnesses - High Court observed Respondent was responsible for delay of 18 to 24 years in various stages of adjudication - Held - Employee cannot take advantage of his own wrong - Tribunal's decision to reward a negligent litigant for delay that caused disappearance of evidence is unsustainable - Findings of Enquiry Officer were based on discussed evidence and cannot be termed perverse merely because records were destroyed over time - Awards set aside - [Paras 1-25].

Evidence Law - Adverse Inference - Industrial Disputes Act 1947 - Section 10 - Destruction of Records - Bank unable to produce 24-year-old enquiry records destroyed in normal course of business due to Respondent's late approach - Respondent failed to produce his own copies of depositions received during the fair enquiry - Tribunal held Bank responsible for non-production - High Court held that for stale claims the burden of producing documents or at least photocopies shifts to the claimant - Held - Tribunal committed material irregularity by not drawing adverse inference against the Respondent for non-preservation of his own records - Bank was not expected to preserve records for eternity under the hope of a future challenge - [Paras 19-22].

Labor Law - Domestic Enquiry vs Criminal Trial - Industrial Disputes Act 1947 - Dismissal - Respondent acquitted in criminal trial for same charges in 2013 - Contended acquittal as ground for reinstatement - High Court reiterated that tests and purposes of domestic enquiry and criminal prosecution are distinct - Domestic enquiry enforces discipline based on preponderance of probabilities while criminal trial punishes acts based on proof beyond reasonable doubt - Held - Mere acquittal in a criminal trial has no impact on the finding of guilt in a fair domestic enquiry - [Paras 31-32].

Labor Law - Misconduct - Standard of Integrity - Bank employee found guilty of misappropriating customer funds - Held - Bank employees are required to exercise a higher standard of honesty and integrity as per settled law - Punishment of dismissal for proven financial fraud is appropriate and not subject to interference on technical grounds of record unavailability after decades - [Paras 30-31].

Decision: Writ Petition allowed – Orders dated 09/08/2024 and 23/01/2025 passed by Industrial Tribunal Pune are quashed and set aside – Rule made absolute – No order as to costs.

Civil Law - Land Ownership Dispute - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 100 - Regular Second Appeal - Suit for declaration of ownership and permanent prohibitory injunction - Plaintiff asserted status as a tenant inducted by co-owners (Defendants 4 and 5) on payment of rent who subsequently became owner under the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act - Contesting Defendants 1 to 3 claimed ownership through their predecessor Vidya Parkash who allegedly purchased the land via oral sale in 1963 and developed an orchard - Trial Court dismissed the suit finding rent receipts produced by plaintiff were forged and revenue entries in favor of Vidya Parkash carried presumption of correctness - First Appellate Court reversed the trial court decree relying on an unproved affidavit of Defendant 5 admitting plaintiff's tenancy and a Local Commissioner's report from a separate contempt proceeding - High Court found that the First Appellate Court misappreciated evidence and ignored the perversity in relying on unexamined hearsay statements and procedurally flawed revenue entry changes - Held - The First Appellate Court's findings were perverse and unsustainable as it ignored material evidence regarding the defendants' possession and title - Judgment of the First Appellate Court set aside and Trial Court's dismissal of the suit restored - [Paras 1-54].

Civil Law - Scope of Second Appeal - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 100 - Jurisdiction of High Court - Interference with findings of fact - High Court's power to interfere with concurrent or reversed findings of fact is restricted to cases involving substantial questions of law - Interference is warranted only when findings are based on no evidence or misreading of evidence or ignore material evidence or are so outrageously defying logic as to be perverse - Held - Finding of fact however erroneous cannot be disturbed in second appeal unless it suffers from perversity - If the First Appellate Court's conclusion is based on inadmissible evidence or misconstruction of documents it constitutes a substantial question of law - [Paras 15-22].

Evidence Law - Admissions - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Sections 17, 18, 21 and 58 - Admission by co-defendant - Effect on contesting parties - Defendant No. 5 filed an affidavit admitting plaintiff's tenancy but was never examined in court - First Appellate Court treated this as a conclusive admission against contesting defendants 1 to 3 - Held - Admission by one defendant does not bind other defendants especially when they have an independent interest and the maker of the admission was not subjected to cross-examination - An admission is only the best evidence if it is clear and unambiguous and not successfully withdrawn or proved erroneous - [Paras 23-31].

Civil Law - Revenue Entries - Himachal Pradesh Land Records Manual - Procedure for change of entries - Presumption of correctness - Revenue entries recording defendants' predecessor as owner were changed to reflect plaintiff's name without notice or following mandatory procedure under the Land Records Manual - Held - Presumption of truth attaches to revenue entries but it is rebuttable - Changes made in violation of mandatory instructions requiring notice to affected parties and attestation by local officials are null and void - Subsequent entries made without authority do not have legal force - [Paras 32-40].

Evidence Law - Local Commissioner Report - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 26 Rule 10 - Admissibility of report from different proceedings - First Appellate Court relied on a Local Commissioner's report filed in a contempt petition to establish plaintiff's possession - Held - While a commissioner's report is admissible in evidence under Order 26 Rule 10 CPC it cannot be made the sole basis for a judgment in total disregard of other evidence on record - Probative value of a report where the commissioner was not examined or appointed in the specific suit is weak - [Paras 43-46].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court set aside – Trial Court judgment dismissing the suit restored.

Writ Law - Constitutional Validity - Delimitation Act 2002 - Section 9(1)(c) - Challenge to reservation of Assembly constituency - Petitioner challenged the continued reservation of Kadipur Assembly seat for Scheduled Castes for nearly sixty years - Argued that Section 9(1)(c) is ultra vires for lack of a rotational principle resulting in stagnation of seats - Contended that this violates Articles 14 and 15 and deprives general category residents of a free choice of candidates - Court evaluated the maintainability of the petition under Article 226 in light of the bar under Article 329(a) - Observed that while Articles 330 and 332 mandate reservation based on population proportion they do not expressly provide for rotation for Assembly seats unlike Panchayat elections under Articles 243D and 243T - Held - Section 9(1)(c) falls within the legislative competence of Parliament under Entry 72 of List I and does not violate any fundamental rights - The methodology for identifying reserved seats is a policy matter for the legislature - Held - Writ petition is maintainable but challenge to the vires fails - [Paras 1-41].

Writ Law - Maintainability - Constitution of India - Article 329(a) - Judicial review of delimitation - Respondents argued that Article 329(a) bars court interference in delimitation of constituencies - Court relied on Kishorchandra Chhanganlal Rathod vs Union of India - Held - Judicial review under Article 226 is permissible where interpretation of constitutional provisions is required or when a case of malafide or arbitrary exercise of power is made out - Article 329 cannot be construed to completely debar citizens from pleading grievances in a constitutional court - [Paras 12-18].

Civil Law - Fundamental Rights - Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 15 - Test of unconstitutionality - Petitioner alleged that population based reservation is arbitrary - Court referred to Rajbala vs State of Haryana and K S Puttaswamy vs Union of India - Held - A statute cannot be declared unconstitutional merely on the ground that it is arbitrary - Enactments can be struck down only for lack of legislative competence or violation of Part III rights or other constitutional provisions - Section 9(1)(c) does not infringe any constitutional mandate - [Paras 28-32].

Writ Law - Separation of Powers - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Mandamus to legislate - Petitioner sought directions to the legislature to adopt a rotational roster for SC/ST seats - Held - Courts cannot direct the legislature to enact a particular law or read words into a statute where the language is plain - Providing for rotation is a legislative function and the court cannot assume the role of a supervisory authority over the wisdom of the legislature - [Paras 33-40].

Writ Law - Right to Vote - Constitution of India - Articles 325 and 326 - Scope of electoral rights - Petitioner claimed that reservation hampers his right to vote for a candidate of choice - Court referred to PUCL vs Union of India and Rajbala vs State of Haryana - Held - The right to vote and the right to be elected are constitutional rights subject to limitations and restrictions prescribed by law - A voter does not have an absolute right to dictate the terms of allotment of a constituency or insist that it be general - Constitutional rights must be read in harmony with Articles 330 and 332 - [Paras 26-27].

Decision: Writ petition dismissed – No order as to costs.

Civil Law - Trademark Infringement - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Section 29 - Plaintiff registered proprietor of mark GODFATHER for beer since 1980s and Class 33 beverages since 2005 - Defendant sought to launch whisky under mark THE GLENWALK GODFATHER'S BY SANJAY DUTT - Defendant argued marks are composite and visually dissimilar and products differ significantly in price and target audience - Court found GODFATHER to be an arbitrary and well-known mark with immense goodwill exceeding Rs 746 crores - Held - prominent and dominant feature of Defendant mark is identical to Plaintiff registered word mark - mere price variation from Rs 100 to Rs 1750 does not negate likelihood of confusion among general consumers regarding source association - ingredients of Section 29(4) met as use by Defendant would unfairly ride on Plaintiff reputation - interim injunction granted - [Paras 1-33].

Civil Law - Statutory Rights of Registered Proprietor - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Sections 18 and 28 - Defendant alleged non-use by Plaintiff for Class 33 goods - Court observed that registration under Section 18 confers exclusive rights under Section 28 to use the mark and seek relief for infringement - Held - non-use of a registered trademark does not ipso facto disentitle a proprietor from enforcing rights against third-party infringement - registration remains valid and enforceable until rectified or cancelled through legal process - [Paras 10-15].

Civil Law - Allied and Cognate Goods - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Section 29 - Determining whether beer (Class 32) and whisky (Class 33) are allied products - Court applied the commercial reality test - Both products are intoxicants sold through common trade channels such as retail shops and bars under a common regulatory excise framework - Held - perception of consumer is not the sole metric - kind and intended use of products establish them as allied and cognate goods - [Paras 16-18].

Civil Law - Anti-dissection Rule vs Dominant Feature Test - Trade Marks Act 1999 - Section 29 - Defendant claimed mark was composite and should be viewed as a whole - Court noted Plaintiff mark is a word mark - Defendant used GODFATHER as a prominent element despite adding THE GLENWALK and BY SANJAY DUTT - Held - if an essential element of a registered word mark is adopted in a composite mark the anti-dissection rule does not apply - the dominant part retains the essential characteristics and leads to deceptive similarity - [Paras 19-24].

Decision: Application allowed – Defendants restrained from manufacturing or selling whisky under the mark GODFATHER or GODFATHER’S or any deceptively similar mark during pendency of suit – Defendants directed to take down all related online content and listings forthwith.

Civil Law - Arbitration and Conciliation - Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 - Section 9 - Interim Measures - Applicant BNR Infrastructure Projects Private Limited filed applications for interim injunction against invocation of bank guarantees worth Rs 310 Crores and stay of part termination notice dated 30-05-2026 issued by Respondent 1 Yuzhan Technology India Private Limited - Disputes arose from a contract dated 29-10-2025 regarding infrastructure works - Applicant alleged delays in site handover and design approvals by Respondent - Respondent alleged contractor delay and failure to provide catch-up plans - Sole Arbitrator appointed by consent on 11-06-2026 and Advocate Commissioner appointed for joint inspection - Previous interim order directed status quo which led to ambiguity regarding site materials and resumption of work - Court analyzed Clause 18-1-3 regarding 30-day post-termination obligation period and Clause 18-1-7 regarding employer right to continue works - Held - Right of employer to deploy materials and resume work under Clause 18-1-7 only kicks in after the expiry of the 30-day period granted to the contractor under Clause 18-1-3 and determination of unresolved receivables - Respondent restrained from claiming to continue work till 29-06-2026 - [Paras 1-35].

Civil Law - Contractual Obligations - Interpretation of Clauses - Right to continue work post-termination - Clause 18-1-3 vs Clause 18-1-7 - Notice of termination issued on 30-05-2026 - Clause 18-1-3 grants 30 days for contractor to perform post-termination duties - Clause 18-1-7 allows employer to continue work - Held - Employer right to continue work under Clause 18-1-7 only kicks in after the 30-day period for contractor compliance under Clause 18-1-3 expires and receivables are determined upon final settlement - Respondent cannot resume work till 29-06-2026 - [Paras 27-34].

Decision: Applications disposed of – Respondent restrained from claiming to continue work or utilizing site materials until the expiry of the 30-day compliance period on 29-06-2026 – Liberty granted to the parties as indicated in the order dated 11-06-2026 – No costs.

Civil Law - Matrimonial Property - Special Marriage Act 1954 - Section 27 - Recovery of money and car repair expenses - Appellant husband challenged the decree of the Family Court allowing the wife recovery of three distinct sums - claims involved car repair costs of Rs 12566 proceeds from premature closure of a recurring deposit of Rs 50000 and bank transfers totaling Rs 344367 - High Court observed that the husband admitted using the car and failed to dispute the repair claims during cross examination - regarding the recurring deposit closure the wife provided a specific narration of coercion supported by bank statements while the husband made only an evasive denial - Held - trial court findings on car repairs and recurring deposit proceeds were based on evidence and probability and required no interference - [Paras 1-9].

Civil Law - Gratuitous Transactions - Indian Contract Act 1872 - Section 70 - Bank transfers between spouses - Recovery of funds transferred via bank account - Wife sought recovery of Rs 344367 transferred to the husband alleging coercion and ill treatment - High Court examined the bank statement Ext A5 containing transaction descriptions such as MB FOR MY HERO gift and monthly expenses - court analyzed the frequency and nature of these transactions - Held - transaction descriptions render allegations of coercion highly improbable - payments indicate a gratuitous exchange between spouses in the ordinary course of their matrimonial relationship rather than an entrustment for a specific purpose - principle of recovery under Section 70 cannot be invoked for gratuitous marital transfers - decree for recovery of bank transfers set aside - [Paras 10-15].

Decision: Appeal allowed in part – Impugned decree modified by setting aside the direction for recovery of Rs 3,44,367 from the appellant – Directions regarding recovery of car repair costs and recurring deposit proceeds affirmed.