Criminal Law – Conviction for Attempt to Murder and Arms Possession – Appellants convicted under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act – Trial Court sentenced Raj Singh to seven years and others to three years rigorous imprisonment with fines – Appeals contesting convictions based on alleged procedural errors and contradictions in witness testimonies [Paras 1-14].

Procedure – Discrepancies and Contradictions – Noted significant inconsistencies in the statements of prosecution witnesses regarding the incident details and their locations during the event – Absence of forensic evidence linking the accused to the recovered firearms [Paras 20-24].

Evidence – Inadequate Presentation and Missing Forensic Reports – Observed missing ballistic reports and unexplained custody of firearms between recovery and submission – Highlighted importance of consistent and corroborative evidence in criminal convictions [Paras 22-24].

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Held – Convictions and sentences set aside due to major discrepancies in prosecution’s case and lack of critical forensic evidence – Appellants acquitted of all charges [Para 26].
 

Criminal Law – Appeal against Acquittal – State appealed against the acquittal of the respondent in a murder case – Trial Court had acquitted the respondent on grounds of insufficient evidence and contradictions in witness testimonies – High Court examined the merits of the trial court’s findings and the prosecution's evidence – High Court upheld the acquittal, agreeing with the lower court’s assessment of unreliable witness statements and lack of concrete evidence linking the respondent to the crime [Paras 1-28]​​.

Evidentiary Standards – Witness Testimonies – High Court highlighted inconsistencies in witness statements and the prosecution's failure to provide a coherent narrative – Emphasized the necessity of reliable and corroborated testimonies in securing convictions – Court found the prosecution's evidence insufficient to overturn the trial court’s acquittal [Paras 10-20]​​.

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Acquittal upheld – High Court affirmed that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt [Para 28]​​.

Taxation Law – Compounded Rate of Tax – Bakery Products and Beverages – Petitioners, dealers in bakery products and beverages, contested the denial of compounded tax rate under Section 8(c)(i) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act for the turnover of packaged bakery items – Assessing Authorities applied regular tax rates under Section 6 for resale items – Appellate Authority and Tribunal confirmed the assessment – High Court interprets Section 8(c)(i) to permit compounded tax rate on total turnover, including other goods incidentally sold by dealers in cooked food and beverages – Orders of lower authorities set aside, allowing compounded rate for petitioners [Paras 1-10].

Legal Interpretation – Section 8(c)(i) of KVAT Act – Clarifies that once a dealer qualifies under Section 8(c)(i), they may apply the compounded tax rate to the total turnover – Emphasizes legislative intent to enable dealers in cooked food and beverages to pay tax at a simplified rate on all sales, not restricted to items of the same nature [Paras 8-10].

Decision:

Revisions allowed – Orders of the VAT Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam, set aside – Petitioners entitled to pay tax at the compounded rate under Section 8(c)(i) on their entire turnover, including resale items [Paras 10-11].

Quashing of Proceedings – Criminal Intimidation – Insufficient Material – Petition to quash final report and proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. – Allegations under Sections 366, 354(D)(1), 354, and 506 read with Section 34 IPC – Threat by 2nd accused related to an earlier incident not linked to the primary crime – Threat insufficient to constitute criminal intimidation under Section 503 IPC – Court finds lack of sufficient material against the 2nd accused – Quashes final report and proceedings against 2nd accused, directs trial to continue against 1st accused [Paras 1-9].

Ingredients of Criminal Intimidation – Definition and Application – Detailed examination of Section 503 IPC – Clarification that mere statement in the form of a threat does not automatically constitute criminal intimidation unless it meets specific legal criteria – Application of these principles to the facts of the case [Paras 7-8].

Decision: Petition allowed – Annexure A2 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.P.No.12/2022 quashed against the petitioner – Trial to proceed against 1st accused [Para 9].

Sanction for Prosecution – Validity – Evidence Act – Requirement of proving sanction for prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act – Non-examination of sanctioning authority – Appellant’s challenge to the sanction order as being issued without considering relevant documents – Court’s satisfaction with sanctioning authority’s application of mind – Held, sanction for prosecution was valid and properly granted [Paras 6-9].

Demand and Acceptance of Bribe – Evidence – Role of Accomplice – Evidence of PW6 (decoy witness) and PW2 (approver) corroborated by independent witness PW4 and trap laying officer PW7 – Conviction based on evidence of demand and acceptance of bribe corroborated by phenolphthalein test – Presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act invoked – Held, prosecution proved case beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 10-18].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Conviction and sentence by the trial court upheld.

Adverse Possession – Mandatory Injunction – Joint Possession – Plaintiffs purchased ½ share of property from a co-owner and sought mandatory injunction for defendants' eviction – Defendants claimed adverse possession and exchange of property – Courts found defendants to be licensees, not co-owners – Defendants not entitled to protection under Section 44 of Transfer of Property Act – Suit for mandatory injunction held proper without need for partition suit [Paras 2-14, 19-25, 32].

Transfer of Property Act – Co-Owners – Section 44 does not grant joint possession to non-family members acquiring property – Defendants residing as licensees, not as co-owners – Other co-owner's rights unaffected by decree in favor of plaintiffs [Paras 7-10, 12-14].

Partition Act – Right of Pre-emption – Section 4 of Partition Act not applicable as defendants not co-owners – Plaintiffs' suit for possession valid without partition claim – Absence of other co-owner in suit not fatal to plaintiffs' case [Paras 19-24].

Easements Act – Licenses – Section 59 states transferees not bound by prior licenses – Plaintiffs terminated license before suit – Defendants' possession not adverse [Paras 30-31].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Judgment and decree of Additional District Court, Palakkad upheld – Plaintiffs entitled to mandatory injunction directing defendants to vacate the property [Paras 33].

Criminal Conspiracy – Adulterous Relationship – Murder – Evidence – Prosecution proved beyond doubt that the first accused, Nino Mathew, committed the murders of Omana and Swasthika and attempted to murder PW1 in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy with the second accused, Anu Shanthi, with whom he had an adulterous relationship – Evidence included testimony of PW1 identifying the voice and presence of the first accused, material recoveries, forensic evidence, and eyewitness accounts [Paras 2-43, 63].

Circumstantial Evidence – Section 106 of Indian Evidence Act – The burden of proving facts within the special knowledge of the accused lies on them – First accused failed to explain his presence at the crime scene and possession of stolen items, thereby strengthening the prosecution's case [Paras 61-62].

Admissibility of Evidence – Recovery of Material Objects – MOs 1, 2, 5, 9-11, and 21-24 recovered based on the first accused's disclosure statement under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act were admissible and corroborated the prosecution's case – Forensic reports confirmed the presence of blood on weapons and clothing, matching the victims’ blood group [Paras 50-52].

Rarest of Rare Doctrine – Death Penalty – Trial court's imposition of the death penalty on the first accused confirmed – Crime deemed to fall within the ‘rarest of rare’ category due to its brutal nature, conspiracy, and motive driven by adulterous relationship – Sentence also included fines and compensation to victims' family [Paras 7, 12-13, 67].

Information Technology Act – Section 67A – Both accused found guilty under Section 67A for transmitting explicit content – Evidence showed exchange of sexually explicit photographs and videos between accused [Paras 39, 68].

Decision: Appeals dismissed – Convictions and sentences, including death penalty for the first accused, upheld – Compensation ordered for victims’ family [Paras 33, 67].
 

Election Law - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Article 329(b) of the Constitution - Petitioner sought declaration of electoral malpractices and repolling - High Court held that disputes relating to election process should be resolved through election petitions as per constitutional mandate - Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable - Held that the Court cannot intervene in ongoing election processes which must be challenged via appropriate election petitions after conclusion of elections - Writ petition dismissed. [Paras 7-9, 12, 18]

Conduct of Elections - Scrutiny of Electoral Documents - Petitioner claimed denial of opportunity to address grievances during scrutiny of Form 17A - High Court found no evidence of violation of Election Commission guidelines by election officers - Held that instructions from Election Commission, though binding, do not constitute enforceable law for invalidation of elections - Petitioner's remedy lies in filing an election petition. [Paras 4-6, 14-15]

Decision - Election Dispute Resolution - High Court emphasized adherence to constitutional framework for resolving election disputes - Reinforced the principle that election processes should not be interrupted by judicial intervention during their course - Writ petition dismissed without costs, with liberty to petitioner to seek appropriate remedy through election petition. [Paras 16-19]

Election Law – Writ Petition challenging election process – Dismissal on grounds of non-maintainability – Petitioner contested in the 2024 General Elections as an MLA candidate from the YSR Congress Party – Allegations of electoral offences and collusion between election staff and Telugu Desam Party personnel – Petitioner sought fresh polls in specific polling stations – Court found that the proper recourse for election disputes is through an election petition as per Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India and not through a writ petition under Article 226 – Writ petition dismissed. [Paras 1-19]

Jurisdiction and Maintainability – Article 329(b) – Interpretation – Election disputes to be adjudicated via election petition – High Courts barred from interfering in election processes while they are ongoing – Only after the conclusion of the election process can disputes be raised. [Paras 7-12]

Election Commission Directives – Legal standing – Directions issued by the Election Commission to Chief Electoral Officers – Binding but not equivalent to law – Violation of such directions does not invalidate election results – Remedies available through election petitions, not writ petitions. [Para 14-15]

Decision – Dismissal of Writ Petition – Court held the petition as not maintainable under Article 329(b) – Petitioner advised to pursue election disputes through appropriate proceedings after the election process – No adjudication on the truthfulness of allegations – Petition dismissed without costs. [Paras 18-19]