Criminal Law – Offences under Sections 354, 294(b), 323 IPC and Section 4(1)(i) of Kerala Healthcare Service Persons and Healthcare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Amendment Act, 2023 – Petition for transfer of investigation and anticipatory bail – High Court’s dismissal of bail application and writ petition – Importance of custodial interrogation emphasized by Court – Judicial scrutiny upheld the need for arrest to ensure thorough investigation – Dismissal of anticipatory bail based on severity of allegations and existing evidence [Paras 1-12].

Evidence Evaluation – Court evaluated statements and case diary indicating prima facie evidence supporting the complainant’s allegations – Court found allegations credible and necessitated further investigation, rejecting anticipatory bail – Judicial scrutiny confirmed investigation was conducted appropriately without bias, but with an emphasis on necessity for arrest and custodial interrogation [Paras 9-13].

Decision – Dismissal of Bail Application and Disposition of Writ Petition – Held – Bail application was dismissed due to serious nature of allegations and necessity for custodial interrogation – Writ petition for transfer of investigation dismissed as current investigation was deemed satisfactory – Defacto complainant given liberty to re-approach the Court if further issues with investigation arise. [Para 13].

Compassionate Appointments – Age Limit and Substitution – Petitioners challenged clauses 3.11 and 3.21 of Government Resolution dated 21/09/2017, which limit the age for compassionate appointments to 45 years and allow for substitution of legal heirs under specific circumstances – Division Bench formed an opinion that the judgment in Dnyaneshwar S/o. Ramkishan Musane v. State of Maharashtra permitting substitution contrary to clause 3.21 did not align with established principles in Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana and other similar cases – Questions referred for determination of the legality of creating a wait list and permitting substitution even after crossing age limit [Paras 1-46].

Purpose of Compassionate Appointments – Sudden Financial Crisis – Highlighted the purpose of compassionate appointments to provide immediate financial relief to families of deceased employees – Emphasized that creating a wait list and allowing substitution does not violate the object of such appointments if done within the policy framework [Paras 47-50].

Wait List and Substitution – The policy of creating a wait list for compassionate appointments and allowing substitution, even after crossing the age limit of 45 years, is not contrary to the object and purpose of compassionate appointments – Substitution of legal heirs should be permitted to provide relief to the family of the deceased employee, as long as it does not result in more than one member of the family receiving an appointment [Paras 20-30].

Immediacy and Compassionate Appointments – The lapse of time in making an appointment does not necessarily negate the immediacy required for compassionate appointments – A rigid approach to substitution is not justified if it defeats the purpose of providing succour to the family of the deceased [Paras 31-38].

Legal Principles – The Court reiterated established legal principles concerning compassionate appointments, including the objective to alleviate immediate financial distress, the necessity of a transparent and fair process, and the avoidance of appointments by inheritance – Emphasized that compassionate appointments are an exception to the general rule of merit-based public employment [Paras 9-19].

Decision – Writ Petitions Allowed – Held – The view in Dnyaneshwar Musane case upheld, allowing substitution even if age limit is crossed – The policy of maintaining a wait list is not contrary to the purpose of compassionate appointments – Matter referred back to Division Bench for disposal [Paras 51-53].

Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Criminal petition for quashment of FIR under Sections 377, 498-A, 294, 506 IPC - Allegations include unnatural sex, dowry demand, and harassment - Petitioner argues the allegations are false, motivated by matrimonial discord, and supported by insufficient evidence - Court analyzes the amended definitions of rape and considers marital exceptions - Held, offences under Sections 377, 294, and 506 IPC not made out due to lack of evidence and non-recognition of marital rape in the current legal framework - However, offence under Section 498-A IPC prima facie established due to specific allegations of dowry demand and harassment - Petition partly allowed. [Paras 1-22]

Legal Analysis - Offence under Section 377 IPC - Marital Rape - Analysis - Unnatural sex by husband with wife - Legal interpretation of Section 377 IPC vis-a-vis Section 375 IPC (rape) - Amended definition includes all unnatural acts as part of rape - Exception to marital rape under Section 375 IPC - Court reiterates non-recognition of marital rape - Offence under Section 377 IPC not applicable to husband-wife relationship - Prior judgments cited to support interpretation - FIR under Section 377 quashed. [Paras 8-15]

Offence under Sections 294 and 506 IPC - Absence of Evidence - Sections 294 and 506 IPC - Lack of prima facie evidence for obscene acts and threats - Omnibus and unsubstantiated allegations - FIR quashed for these offences. [Paras 16-17]

Offence under Section 498-A IPC - Dowry Demand and Harassment - Specific allegations and corroborating evidence - Prima facie offence under Section 498-A IPC made out - Petition dismissed concerning this offence. [Paras 18-19]

Decision - Quashing of FIR - Sections 377, 294, and 506 IPC - FIR and consequential proceedings quashed for lack of evidence - Section 498-A IPC - FIR upheld, petition dismissed in this respect - Clarification provided that observations are not binding on trial court merits. [Paras 20-22]

Civil Procedure – Compensation for Land and Trees – Revision petition by Power Grid Corporation against the order of the District Court awarding enhanced compensation for trees cut and diminution in land value due to the drawing of high tension electric lines – Respondent’s property affected significantly, with trees cut and land rendered less valuable – District Court awarded compensation based on oral evidence, documents, and site-specific factors – High Court upheld the compensation, dismissing the revision petition for lack of illegality or material irregularity in the impugned order. [Paras 1-6]

Land Valuation – Assessment of Diminution – Analysis – Held – District Court’s valuation of land and trees justified based on evidence and site-specific considerations – Compensation for trees and diminution in land value appropriately calculated – Court’s discretion exercised correctly in awarding 30% land value for affected area and 100% for the tower footing area. [Para 2-3]

Judicial Discretion – Interest on Compensation – Argument by petitioner regarding improper awarding of interest dismissed – High Court noted that the District Court’s decision to award 9% interest per annum was within its discretion and in line with legal precedents. [Para 5-6]

Decision – Civil Revision Petition Dismissed – High Court found no grounds to interfere with the District Court’s order under Section 115 CPC – Compensation order for the respondent upheld in full. [Para 6]

Criminal Procedure Code – Statutory Bail under Section 167(2) – Filing of Charge Sheet – Criminal revision petition against order rejecting statutory bail – Allegation of robbery at gunpoint – FIR registered and petitioner apprehended – Charge sheet filed electronically within 90 days but physically submitted after 90 days – Petitioner’s claim of right to statutory bail before physical submission – Court examines procedural compliance with e-filing rules and guidelines.

Statutory Right to Bail – E-Filing of Charge Sheet – Analysis – Held – E-filing recognized under guidelines and confirmed charge sheet filed electronically within statutory period – Physical submission delay immaterial if e-filing within period – Indefeasible right to bail extinguished once charge sheet e-filed within 90 days.

Decision – Dismissal of Bail Petition – Court finds electronic filing of charge sheet within statutory period suffices – Petitioner’s right to statutory bail ends with electronic filing – Petition dismissed.

Criminal Law – Appeal against denial of bail under Sections 120-B & 153-A IPC and Sections 17, 18, 18B, 20, 22, 38 & 39 of UAPA – High Court upheld denial of bail due to substantial evidence against the appellant, including involvement in PFI’s activities aimed at establishing Islamic Caliphate, radicalizing youths, and facilitating terrorist training – Appellant’s past association with SIMI and role in PFI’s National Executive Council corroborated involvement – Appeal dismissed based on prima facie evidence supporting charges under UAPA [Paras 1-113].

Evidence Evaluation – High Court found statements of protected witnesses and documentary evidence sufficient to establish prima facie case – Witnesses detailed appellant’s role in radicalizing and training for jihad, managing funds for terrorist activities, and making inflammatory speeches – Court emphasized necessity of considering totality of evidence without detailed evaluation at bail stage [Paras 60-92].

Medical Grounds – Appellant’s plea for bail on medical grounds due to Parkinson’s disease and other ailments rejected – Court noted previous directions ensuring appellant’s treatment in AIIMS with appropriate care – Lack of cooperation from appellant regarding medical treatment noted – Further medical review allowed if condition worsens [Paras 99-107].

Decision – Dismissal of Appeal – Held – Appeal against denial of bail dismissed – High Court confirmed prosecution’s case as prima facie true, found no violation of fundamental rights, and upheld trial court’s directions for medical care – Court directed trial to proceed without prejudice from observations in bail decision [Paras 108-114].

Criminal Law – Quashing of Summoning Orders and Complaints – Criminal petitions filed against summoning orders of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate – Allegations of forgery and fabrication of trade mark registration certificates – Complaint filed under Sections 463, 464, 465, 469, 470, 471, 474, 475, 477-A of IPC – Held that the foundational facts for initiation of prosecution under Section 193 of IPC necessitate verifying the authenticity of the documents from the Trade Marks Registry – Complaint under Section 340 CrPC filed by the respondents concerning the same documents – Bar under Section 195(1)(b) of CrPC applied – Complaint and summoning orders quashed. [Paras 1-33]

Forgery – Prima Facie Case – Analysis – Held – The alleged forgery of trade mark registration certificates requires verification from the Trade Marks Registry – The Deputy Registrar admitted issuance of the certificate – No evidence of seals or signatures being forged – The alleged forgery was not established – Proceedings deemed improper. [Para 12-22]

Maintainability of Complaint – Section 195 CrPC – Bar Applied – Held – If the alleged forgery is central to an offense requiring a court complaint, splitting offenses is not permissible – Complaint under Section 340 CrPC already pending on the same facts – Maintaining a private complaint would lead to evasion of the statutory bar – Complaint and summoning orders quashed as impermissible under Section 195(1)(b) of CrPC. [Paras 23-30]

Decision – Quashing of Summoning Orders and Complaints – The Court quashed the summoning orders and complaints against the petitioners, holding that the bar under Section 195(1)(b) of CrPC applied – The continuation of proceedings against the petitioners was found to be an abuse of the process of law. [Paras 31-33]

International Taxation – Taxability of Guarantee Charges – Indo-UK DTAA – Income Accruing in India – The appeal involves the issue of whether the guarantee charges received by the appellant, a UK-based company, from its Indian subsidiaries for providing parental corporate guarantees to foreign banks can be taxed in India. The appellant contended that since the source of the guarantee is outside India, the charges should not be taxable in India under Article 12 of the DTAA. The Tribunal held that the charges were not in the nature of ‘interest’ under Article 12 but classified under ‘other income’ in Article 23 of the DTAA. The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision, finding that the guarantee charges accrued in India as they were directly tied to the loan transactions undertaken by the Indian subsidiaries. [Paras 1-39]

Interpretation of DTAA – Guarantee Charges Not ‘Interest’ – Article 12 and Article 23 of Indo-UK DTAA – The Tribunal correctly concluded that guarantee charges do not qualify as ‘interest’ under Article 12 of the DTAA. The charges were not linked to any debt claim or borrowing by the appellant from the Indian subsidiaries but were remuneration for providing assurance to foreign financial institutions for loans extended to Indian subsidiaries. [Para 20-24]

Accrual of Income – Section 5(2) of the Income Tax Act – Income Arising in India – The guarantee charges were held to have accrued in India as they were based on services utilized by the Indian subsidiaries, and the right to receive the income arose directly from the Intra Group Agreement. The income was characterized as having a regular periodic return derived from sources in India. [Para 25-34]

Decision: The appeals are dismissed. The guarantee charges are held to be taxable in India under Article 23 of the Indo-UK DTAA, and the question of their classification as ‘business income’ under Article 7 is kept open for future cases. [Para 38-39]

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Expeditious Trial - Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking direction for expeditious conclusion of trial - Complaint filed in 2021 but trial not concluded - Emphasis on statutory mandate under Section 143(2) and 143(3) N.I. Act for day-to-day trial and conclusion within six months - Apex Court directions in Indian Bank Association v. Union of India (2014) and In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 N.I. Act (2021) for speedy disposal of cases reiterated - Court directs trial court to conclude trial within six months from receipt of order copy. [Paras 1-8]

Directions for Expeditious Disposal - Section 138 N.I. Act - Supreme Court Directions - Court reiterates necessity for expeditious trial and disposal of cases under Section 138 - Magistrates directed to follow procedures ensuring speedy trials as per guidelines from Supreme Court - Directions include day-to-day hearings, proper service of summons, and adherence to statutory timelines - Application disposed of with directions for trial court. [Paras 3-7]

Decision: The court directs the 5th Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 18, Basti, to conclude the trial of Complaint Case No. 23545 of 2021 expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, in accordance with Sections 143(2) and 143(3) of the N.I. Act, subject to no legal impediments. [Para 8]