Criminal Law – Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence – Appellant Ram Chandra Thakur was convicted for the rape and murder of a 4-year-old child. The prosecution relied on the testimony of child witnesses (victim’s sisters) and the appellant’s disclosure statement leading to the recovery of the body. The court upheld the conviction based on circumstantial evidence, applying the "last seen" theory. [Paras 1-90].

Application of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act – Court held that Ram Chandra Thakur failed to explain how the victim, last seen with him, died. The burden of proof shifted under Section 106 of the Evidence Act, as the facts were within the exclusive knowledge of the accused. [Paras 88-91].

Sentencing – Death Penalty – The court confirmed the death sentence under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, classifying the case as one of the "rarest of rare." The brutality of the crime—rape of a minor followed by throttling and abandonment of the body—justified the capital punishment. [Paras 92-110].

Acquittal of Co-Accused – Madhu Thakur, co-accused and father of the primary appellant, was acquitted due to lack of direct or circumstantial evidence linking him to the crime. His conviction by the trial court was set aside. [Paras 80-81].

Decision:

Death sentence for Ram Chandra Thakur upheld under Section 302 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

Madhu Thakur acquitted; his appeal allowed.

Arbitration Law – Challenge to Arbitral Award – Patent Illegality – SRMB Srijan Ltd. challenged the arbitral award on grounds of patent illegality, arguing that the correspondence between the parties constituted a waiver of the MGO clause and that the termination of the agreement was lawful. The Court rejected the argument, holding that there was no concluded contract for waiving the MGO clause and that the findings of the Tribunal were based on proper appreciation of evidence. The Court emphasized that it could not re-appreciate evidence under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act [Paras 1-50].

Contract Law – Repudiation of Contract under Section 39 of the Contract Act – SRMB further contended that the termination of the contract was justified under Section 39 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, due to non-performance by Great Eastern. The Court disagreed, holding that the termination was de hors the contract terms, as SRMB failed to renew the bank guarantee, which triggered the suspension of gas supply. The Tribunal's finding that the termination was invalid was upheld [Paras 51-85].

Damages for Breach of Minimum Guaranteed Offtake (MGO) Clause – The Tribunal awarded damages of ₹58,50,45,169/- for breach of the MGO clause, along with interest, based on findings that Great Eastern had to flare up gas after SRMB's termination. The Court found no infirmity in the Tribunal's calculation of damages, noting that the MGO clause was a standard industry practice to cover long-term infrastructure investments and mitigate risk [Paras 86-115].

Decision: Petition dismissed – The Court upheld the arbitral award, concluding that there was no patent illegality or perversity in the Tribunal's findings. The challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was rejected.

Maintenance – Limitation on Arrears – The petitioner challenged the order directing him to pay ₹1,20,000 in maintenance arrears, arguing that the claim was time-barred under Section 125(3) CrPC, which limits recovery of maintenance arrears to one year – The Court agreed, holding that the learned Magistrate had erred by ignoring the earlier order recognizing the time limitation – Warrant for recovery of maintenance exceeding one year quashed​.

One-Year Limitation – Section 125(3) CrPC – The Court reiterated that an application for recovery of maintenance must be made within one year from when the amount became due, and the Magistrate cannot issue a warrant for more than one year's arrears​.

Decision: Petition allowed – Order dated 25.12.2023 set aside – Petition filed by the respondent for maintenance arrears beyond one year dismissed​.

Indian Forest Act – Illegal Transportation of Guchhi – The State appealed against the acquittal of the respondent, who was apprehended while transporting 13.7 kg of Guchhi without a valid permit. The trial court acquitted the respondent on the grounds that the forest produce was being transported on behalf of a third party with a valid permit – The Court upheld the acquittal, observing that the trial court's view was reasonable and based on evidence​.

Expert Testimony – Forest Produce – The Court noted that the prosecution failed to prove the botanical classification of Guchhi as required under the applicable rules – The forest guard’s testimony lacked the necessary scientific data, making the prosecution's case weak​.

Non-Cognizable Offence – Lack of Police Jurisdiction – It was further held that the police could not have investigated the case without a magistrate’s permission since the offences under Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act are non-cognizable​.

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Acquittal upheld​.

Service Law - Civil Law – Reservation in Promotion – Cadre of Head Teachers – Petition filed challenging the benefit of reservation to scheduled caste candidates beyond their entitled quota in promotions to Head Teachers – Petitioners contended that 20% quota for reserved category candidates had been exhausted – High Court directed the State to ensure that reservation did not exceed the prescribed quota as per R.K. Sabarwal vs. State of Punjab – Held: The State must ascertain the exact number of scheduled caste candidates promoted through reservation and adjust promotions accordingly to maintain parity with the 20% quota [Paras 1-10].

Reservation Quota – Calculation and Application – Petitioners argued that the reserved category candidates were being granted promotions to Head Teacher posts even after exhausting the 20% quota – Respondents countered that the promotions would be made in accordance with the total number of posts, ensuring the 20% reservation was respected – Court observed that promotions beyond 20% quota would not be allowed once all cadre posts had been filled under the roster [Paras 2-8].

Promotion Roster – Operation and Cessation – Court emphasized that once all 319 posts in the promotion quota were filled, the roster system for reservation would stop operating – Further promotions would be made only from the source that vacated the post, ensuring the reserved category did not exceed the mandated percentage [Paras 8-10].

Decision: Petition allowed – The State directed to conduct a review to ascertain the correct number of promotions granted under the reserved category and adjust future promotions accordingly – Promotions exceeding the 20% quota to be discontinued unless a new vacancy arises within the quota [Paras 9-10].

Grant-in-Aid – Reduction of Aid Without Notice – Violation of Natural Justice – The petitioners, government-aided educational institutions, challenged the reduction of their grant-in-aid from 90% to 80% without providing any notice or reasons for the change – Held: The court found that the reduction of grant-in-aid was carried out in violation of the principles of natural justice as no show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners nor were any reasons provided for the change in category – The impugned order and minutes of the meeting were quashed as they failed to comply with Rule 18 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Rules, 1993 [Paras 5-8].

Power to Stop or Reduce Grant-in-Aid – Section 7 of the Act – The respondents argued that under Section 7(6) of the Act, the sanctioning authority is empowered to reduce, stop, or suspend grant-in-aid – Held: While the sanctioning authority has the power to reduce grant-in-aid, it must follow the prescribed procedure and provide an opportunity to the institution to show cause – The provision does not allow arbitrary reduction of aid without due process, especially when it has civil consequences affecting the education of students [Paras 6-7].

Requirement of Reasons and Adverse Material – The court emphasized the requirement to provide reasons for administrative actions that have civil consequences – It was noted that the reduction of grant-in-aid and change of category must be supported by adverse material or inspection reports – In this case, the respondents did not present any such evidence, and the impugned action was taken without proper justification [Para 9].

Decision – Writ Petitions Allowed – The court allowed the writ petitions, quashing the order reducing the grant-in-aid – The respondents were granted liberty to proceed in accordance with the law if they so choose, provided they follow the prescribed procedure and principles of natural justice [Para 10].

Criminal Law – Forgery and Conspiracy Charges – Acquittal Upheld on Appeal – Allegations of fabricating revenue records by respondents to benefit from land ownership dispute – The appellant claimed the respondents committed forgery and cheating by altering revenue records despite ongoing legal proceedings and an interim stay – Trial court acquitted respondents, finding no sufficient proof of forgery or conspiracy – Appeal dismissed, as no direct evidence linked the accused to the alleged conspiracy – Held: Acquittal upheld, benefit of doubt given to respondents [Paras 1-13].

Evidence – Insufficient Proof of Forgery and Cheating – Appellant failed to prove that an appeal concerning the disputed land was pending in court during the alleged alteration of revenue records – No proof of interim stay preventing the respondents from updating records – Allegation of forgery based on a clerk's signature authorization found to be routine and permissible – Held: Prosecution failed to substantiate allegations beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 8-12].

Public Officials – No Sanction for Prosecution – Accused public officials acted in their official capacity while updating records as per the orders of the Deputy Commissioner – No prior sanction obtained to prosecute the officials as required by law – No evidence of their active involvement in the alleged conspiracy [Paras 11-12].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Acquittal under Sections 420, 467, 465, 468, 120-B IPC upheld – No evidence of criminal conspiracy or forgery against respondents – Appellant failed to prove her case beyond reasonable doubt.

Criminal Law – Gang Rape Conviction – Acquittal – Appellants convicted under Sections 376D, 458, and 352 of IPC for gang rape and trespass – Trial court sentenced each appellant to 27 years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 376D, 10 years under Section 458, and 3 months under Section 352, IPC – On appeal, Gauhati High Court finds prosecution’s case riddled with inconsistencies, lack of medical corroboration, and unreliable witness testimonies – Medical examination report showed no signs of injury or recent intercourse – Held: Prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 27, 28, 29, 41].

Witness Testimony – Reliability of Prosecutrix – Court finds that the testimony of the prosecutrix (P.W.1) was inconsistent and lacked corroboration from medical evidence or independent witnesses – The prosecutrix’s version of how the accused entered her house varied between the complaint, her statement under Section 164, CrPC, and her deposition – Court also noted contradictions in the testimonies of related witnesses (P.W.5, P.W.6, and P.W.7), raising doubts about their credibility [Paras 26, 32, 33].

Circumstantial Evidence – Lack of Corroboration – Medical report did not support claims of forceful sexual intercourse – Despite the alleged duration of the assault, there were no injuries or signs of struggle on the prosecutrix’s body – Children present at the scene were not examined as witnesses, which further weakened the prosecution’s case – The investigating officer (P.W.8) failed to recover any forensic evidence, such as the kerosene lamp, which the prosecutrix claimed was lit during the incident [Paras 28, 29, 34, 35, 40].

Delay in Lodging FIR – The complaint was lodged four days after the incident – Though the court accepted that the delay might be due to the absence of the prosecutrix’s husband, it observed that the reasons for the delay were not fully explained and might have prejudiced the case against the accused [Paras 25, 38, 39].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Conviction and sentence under Sections 376D, 458, and 352 IPC set aside – Appellants acquitted – Appellants to be released from custody if not required in any other case [Paras 42, 43].

Maternity Leave – Working woman employed by RSRTC challenged the denial of 180 days of maternity leave – Court held that the petitioner is entitled to 180 days under the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 – Denial of full maternity leave based on Regulation 74 of the RSRTC Regulations is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution [Paras 9-36].

Constitutional Right to Maternity Leave – Right to maternity leave falls under the purview of Article 21 as part of the right to life and dignity – Court emphasized that limiting maternity leave to 90 days is unconstitutional and violates the equal rights of women employees, as guaranteed under Article 14 [Paras 31-35].

Directive to Amend RSRTC Regulations – The court recommended that RSRTC amend its Regulation 74 to align with the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017, which mandates 180 days of leave – Also issued a general mandamus to the Government of India and the Government of Rajasthan to ensure similar provisions in the private and unrecognized sectors [Paras 36-41].

Decision: Writ petition allowed – Petitioner granted 180 days of maternity leave with consequential benefits – If granting 180 days leave is impractical due to time elapsed, compensation equivalent to 90 days' salary to be provided [Paras 37-38].