Labour Law – Termination – Section 25F Industrial Disputes Act – Reinstatement vs. Compensation – Labour Court found termination of petitioner illegal but granted compensation instead of reinstatement – Petitioner sought reinstatement with back wages – High Court upheld Labour Court’s decision, citing that compensation can be an appropriate remedy for daily-wage workers terminated due to procedural defects [Paras 2-10].

Employment – Daily-Wage Workers – Right to Reinstatement – Court emphasized that daily-wage workers do not have an automatic right to reinstatement even if termination is found illegal – Compensation deemed sufficient [Paras 7-10].

Judicial Review – Scope and Limitations – Article 227 – High Court reviewed Labour Court’s decision and found no error in awarding compensation instead of reinstatement [Paras 10-11].

Decision:

Petition dismissed. Labour Court’s award of compensation in lieu of reinstatement upheld.

Motor Accident Claims – Compensation – Enhancement of Compensation – Petitioner injured in auto rickshaw accident – Tribunal awarded Rs.1,44,400/-; petitioner sought higher compensation – Court reassessed damages under multiple heads, including future income loss – Enhanced compensation to Rs.2,10,500/- – Insurance Company held liable despite expired fitness certificate of vehicle [Paras 1-18].

Liability of Insurer – Fitness Certificate – Insurance Company's liability questioned due to expired fitness certificate – Court referred to precedents affirming liability despite lapse of fitness certificate if it was valid at policy issuance – Insurance Company directed to pay enhanced compensation [Paras 15-18].

Decision: Appeal allowed in part – Enhanced compensation awarded at Rs.2,10,500/- with 6% p.a. interest from the date of petition till deposit – Both respondents liable to pay; Insurance Company directed to deposit compensation within eight weeks.

Administrative Law – Doctrine of Pleasure – Petitioner removed from Chairman position before term completion – Claimed removal was arbitrary and without valid reason – Court found statutory provision allowing removal at Government's pleasure but emphasized requirement for valid reasons and non-arbitrary exercise of power – Noted lack of specific allegations against petitioner justifying removal – Reinstated petitioner until end of term [Paras 1-16].

Statutory Interpretation – Sections 3, 4, and 5 of Karnataka State Minorities Commission Act – Examined terms of office and conditions for removal – Court highlighted statutory framework allowing tenure subject to Government's pleasure, but constrained by principles of fairness and non-arbitrariness – Emphasized procedural fairness and requirement of valid grounds for removal [Paras 9-16].

Decision:  Petition allowed – Court quashed the notification dated 15-12-2023 cancelling petitioner’s nomination and reinstated petitioner as Chairman of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission until 15-10-2025, subject to valid statutory grounds for removal if necessary.
 

Criminal Procedure – Preliminary Enquiry – Section 340 Cr.P.C. – Requirement for Enquiry – Petitioner argued that court should have conducted a preliminary enquiry before ordering prosecution under Sections 340 & 344 Cr.P.C. – Court held that preliminary enquiry is not mandatory if the court can form a prima facie opinion – Petition dismissed [Paras 4-39].

Forged Documents – Issuance and False Evidence – Tehsildar's Actions – Allegations of Forgery – Trial court found that petitioner, as Tehsildar, issued a forged patta and provided false evidence – Directions for criminal action justified – Upheld by High Court [Paras 3-39].

Judicial Review – Certiorari and Mandamus – Scope and Limitations – Writ petition to quash order and prevent action against petitioner dismissed – No interference warranted when trial court followed procedure [Paras 7-10].

Decision:

Petition dismissed. Collector, Chhatarpur directed to proceed with actions as per trial court’s recommendations.

Criminal Law – Conviction for Murder – Appellants convicted under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, and 323 IPC – Based on eyewitness accounts, TIP, and recovery of weapons – High Court upholds conviction, finding no legal infirmity in trial court’s judgment – Evidence sufficiently corroborates prosecution’s case [Paras 1-20].

Eyewitness Testimony – Reliability – Two key eyewitnesses, P.W.1 and P.W.6, provided consistent accounts of the incident – Their testimonies corroborated by medical evidence and recovery of weapons – High Court finds no contradictions or unreliability in their statements [Para 13].

Test Identification Parade (TIP) – Legality and Procedure – TIP conducted lawfully in presence of Magistrate – Accused properly identified by eyewitnesses – High Court dismisses contention of procedural lapses, confirming TIP’s validity [Paras 14-14.2].

Recovery of Weapon – Forensic Evidence – Lathi recovered from appellant Karni Singh found with bloodstains – Corroborates eyewitness testimony and strengthens prosecution’s case – High Court considers recovery as valid evidence [Paras 11.1, 17].

Motive and Intention – Prior Enmity – Prosecution established motive based on prior enmity between parties – Appellants acted with common intention to commit murder – High Court affirms conviction based on motive and cumulative evidence [Para 18].

Decision – Appeals Dismissed – Conviction and sentence upheld – Appellants to be taken into custody to serve remaining sentence – Bail bonds cancelled [Paras 19-21].

Criminal Procedure – FIR Quashing – Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Allegations of dowry harassment and assault – Petitioner claims false implication due to long-standing family estrangement – Court examines specific allegations and finds prima facie case warranting investigation – Application dismissed [Paras 1-18].

Investigation – Role of Accused – Right to Influence – Accused has no right to dictate the manner of investigation – Allegations must be investigated without interference from accused [Paras 13-15].

Natural Justice – Application in Criminal Investigation – Accused not entitled to prior hearing or choice of investigating agency – Consistent view that accused cannot demand specific investigation methods [Paras 24-30].

Decision:

Application for quashing the FIR dismissed. Investigation to proceed.

Criminal Law – Conviction on Circumstantial Evidence – Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife – Prosecution based on circumstantial evidence, including extra-judicial confession and footprints at the crime scene – High Court finds inconsistencies in prosecution's evidence, including contradictions in witness statements and lack of forensic evidence – Conviction quashed due to failure to meet standards for circumstantial evidence [Paras 1-25].

Extra-Judicial Confession – Reliability – High Court notes extra-judicial confession was a weak piece of evidence and recorded after a significant delay – Confession by appellant to relatives of the complainant, viewed as insufficient to sustain conviction [Para 14.1].

Footprints as Evidence – High Court finds no forensic examination conducted on footprints alleged to be of the appellant – Presence of footprints at the crime scene not conclusively linked to the appellant, creating doubt about their reliability as evidence [Para 16].

Motive and Last Seen Theory – Prosecution's assertion of marital discord as motive not substantiated – Alleged "last seen" theory undermined by lack of corroborative evidence – High Court emphasizes need for complete and cogent chain of evidence in circumstantial cases [Paras 19-21].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Conviction and sentence set aside – Appellant acquitted – High Court directs discharge of bail bonds – Case emphasizes strict scrutiny required for circumstantial evidence to uphold a conviction [Paras 25-26].

Affiliation Fee – Discrepancy in Payment – Petitioner institute applied for annual affiliation for academic session 2024-25 – University’s online portal automatically generated fee details, showing a shortfall of Rs.60 – University demanded penalty equal to the amount of affiliation fee due to the shortfall – Petitioner argued automatic generation of details and non-intentional shortfall – High Court quashes university’s demand for full penalty, imposing a reduced penalty instead [Paras 2-16].

Procedural Fairness – Online Payment System – Petitioner contends that discrepancy arose from university’s online system generating incorrect fee details – High Court finds communication delay by university contributed to issue – Orders reduced penalty in lieu of full amount demanded [Paras 13-15].

Decision – Writ Petition Allowed – Impugned orders quashed – Petitioner to pay Rs.60 shortfall and Rs.1,00,000 penalty – Respondent to grant affiliation if all other requisites are fulfilled – Pending applications disposed of [Paras 16].

Medical Reimbursement – Ayushman Bharat Scheme – Respondent underwent heart surgery and incurred Rs.1,24,000 in expenses at petitioner hospital – Hospital charged respondent as no proof of insurance under Ayushman Bharat Scheme was provided – Post-treatment, respondent submitted requisite documents to District Collector for reimbursement, which was denied – Permanent Lok Adalat directed hospital to reimburse Rs.1,16,420 plus Rs.5000 costs – High Court upholds reimbursement order, quashing cost imposition [Paras 1-14].

Delayed Submission of Documents – Respondent’s family did not submit insurance proof during critical treatment – High Court finds this does not disqualify respondent from benefits under Ayushman Bharat Scheme – Proper documents submitted post-treatment entitles reimbursement – Hospital to seek reimbursement from State Government [Paras 6-13].

Decision – Writ Petition Disposed – Petitioner to reimburse Rs.1,16,420 to respondent within two weeks upon submission of insurance documents – Petitioner to seek reimbursement from State Government within eight weeks – Rs.5000 cost imposed by Lok Adalat quashed [Paras 12-14].