False Promise of Marriage – Cheating under Section 417 IPC – Consensual Relationship Between Majors – Appellant convicted for cheating after acquittal under Section 376 IPC – Evidence showed long-standing love affair of more than 1½ years and repeated consensual physical relationship – No proof that consent was obtained under misconception of fact – Held: Conviction under Section 417 IPC unsustainable – Appeal allowed [Paras 7-8].

Consent – Section 90 IPC – Misconception of Fact – Prosecutrix aged about 23 years – Admitted love affair and voluntary physical relationship on several occasions – No evidence of force, threat or coercion – Medical evidence revealed no injuries – Trial Court itself held consent voluntary and not vitiated under Section 90 IPC – In absence of proof of false promise at inception, offence of cheating not made out [Paras 4, 7].

Rape Charge – Acquittal by Trial Court – Appellant acquitted of offence under Section 376 IPC – DNA evidence confirmed appellant as biological father of child – However, mere proof of paternity does not establish sexual intercourse against will or on false promise – Prosecution failed to prove absence of consent beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 3, 7].

Delay and Disclosure – Relationship Disclosed Only After Pregnancy – Evidence showed prosecutrix informed family only after becoming pregnant and when appellant declined marriage – Indicates consensual relationship rather than deception at inception – Conviction based solely on subsequent refusal to marry impermissible [Paras 4, 7].

Compensation – Despite Acquittal – Though conviction and sentence set aside, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- already deposited in name of minor child directed to be sustained along with conditions permitting mother to withdraw periodical interest for welfare of child [Para 8].

Decision: Criminal Appeal allowed – Conviction and sentence under Section 417 IPC set aside – Compensation already deposited in name of minor child sustained.

Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Election Dispute – Recounting of Votes – Issuance of Election Certificate – Legal Status – Election of President of registered Society initially declared in favour of appellant – On reference under Section 25(1), Prescribed Authority directed recounting of votes – After recount, Assistant Registrar issued certificate declaring respondent elected and cancelled earlier certificate – Held: Election certificate issued by Assistant Registrar has no independent statutory or legal status under the Act – Authority to function as office bearer flows from registration of list under Section 4(1), not from issuance of certificate [Paras 14–16, 25].

Writ Jurisdiction – Maintainability – Challenge to Consequential Order – Statutory Appeal Pending – Appellant challenged only election certificate dated 28.03.2025 without assailing foundational order of Prescribed Authority dated 22.03.2025 – Statutory appeal against Prescribed Authority’s order pending before Commissioner under Section 25(1)(d) – Held: Indirect challenge to main order through writ petition not maintainable – High Court cannot record findings which may affect pending statutory appeal [Paras 21–24, 32].

Section 25, Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Powers of Prescribed Authority and Assistant Registrar – Prescribed Authority directed recount and declaration of result – Assistant Registrar bound to comply with directions – Challenge to legality or consequences of such direction lies only in appeal against Prescribed Authority’s order – Writ petition confined to certificate alone held misconceived [Paras 20–21].

Section 25(2), Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Fresh Election – When Attracted – Contention that Assistant Registrar ought to have convened fresh general body meeting after alleged setting aside of election rejected – Held: Occasion to invoke Section 25(2) does not arise when Prescribed Authority’s order directing recount is under challenge in appeal and list of office bearers already registered under Section 4(1) [Paras 30].

Section 4(1), Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Registration of List of Office Bearers – Effect – List of office bearers after recount registered on 02.04.2025 and signatures of respondent attested – No challenge laid to registration or attestation under Section 4(1) or appeal under Section 4(1-A) – Held: Relief restraining respondent from functioning as President cannot be granted [Paras 24–25].

Election Law Analogy – Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Inapplicability – Comparison drawn with powers of High Court under R.P. Act to declare candidate elected rejected – Held: Scheme of Societies Registration Act distinct – Once challenge confined to certificate lacking legal sanctity, analogy with R.P. Act provisions misplaced [Paras 31].

Decision: Special Appeal dismissed – Order of learned Single Judge upholding dismissal of writ petition affirmed – No interference warranted – No opinion expressed on merits of Prescribed Authority’s order dated 22.03.2025 pending before Commissioner [Paras 34–35].

Specific Performance – Agreement to Sell – Execution through Father – Subsequent Ratification – Plaintiff residing abroad – Agreement dated 11.03.1985 executed by father on his behalf – Power of attorney executed on 04.06.1985 prior to target date for execution of sale deed – Subsequent ratification vide power of attorney dated 08.06.1987 – Doctrine of relation back applies – Held: Ratification validates earlier act from date of original transaction and agreement not void for want of prior authority [Paras 8, 9, 12].

Stamp Act – Unstamped/Insufficiently Stamped Power of Attorney – Admissibility vs Validity – Objection regarding stamping and authentication raised – Supreme Court in Re: Interplay between Arbitration Agreements and Indian Stamp Act (2024) 6 SCC 1 relied upon – Non-stamping renders document inadmissible but not void – Defect curable on payment of duty and endorsement – Held: Subsequent duly embossed power of attorney cured defect in earlier instrument and document could be acted upon [Paras 11, 12].

Additional Evidence – Order XLI Rule 27 CPC – Photocopy of Power of Attorney – Objection not raised before First Appellate Court regarding mode of proof – Held: In absence of specific objection at appellate stage, appellant barred from challenging admissibility in second appeal – Allowing additional evidence did not amount to filling lacuna but to clarify authority and ratification [Para 10].

Readiness and Willingness – Proof – Bank Draft Prepared – Notices Issued – Plaintiff issued notices dated 09.05.1985 and 21.05.1985 – Appeared before Sub-Registrar – Bank draft prepared for balance consideration as proved by Bank Officer (PW-4) – Defendant failed to turn up and did not initiate criminal proceedings alleging fraud – Held: Continuous readiness and willingness established [Paras 9, 13].

Agreement to Sell – Vagueness – Absence of Specific Khasra Numbers – Land described as approximately 28 kanals with stipulation of proportionate adjustment – Non-availability of jamabandi with defendant – Execution proved by scribe and attesting witnesses – Held: Agreement not vague or unenforceable [Para 14].

Second Appeal – Scope under Section 41 Punjab Courts Act – Framing of Substantial Question of Law – Not mandatory for Punjab and Haryana High Court – No perversity or illegality in First Appellate Court judgment – Held: No interference warranted – Appeal dismissed [Paras 15, 16].

Decision: Regular Second Appeal dismissed – Judgment and decree of First Appellate Court granting specific performance upheld – Pending applications disposed of.

Education Law – Student Discipline – Rustication – Conditions imposed by Writ Court – Validity – Learned Single Judge set aside rustication order but imposed multiple conditions including requirement to carry a placard admitting misconduct and stand at university gate for 30 minutes daily for 30 days – Division Bench held that while the High Court can mould relief under Article 226, directions must be reasonable, proportionate and non-stigmatic – Direction compelling student to publicly carry a placard was humiliating, punitive in nature and capable of casting a permanent scar on character – Such direction held wholly unjustified and liable to be set aside [Paras 9–11].

Education Law – Judicial Discretion under Article 226 – Humanitarian considerations – Scope – Directions relating to minimum attendance, affidavit of good conduct, written apology and deployment of anti-romeo squad upheld as reasonable and corrective – Court observed that appellant had poor attendance history and indulgence granted by Single Judge was justified – However, discretion cannot extend to imposition of degrading or shaming penalties [Paras 9–10].

Procedure – Delay in Filing Appeal – Condonation – Delay of 57 days – Sufficient cause shown by affidavit – Delay condoned in the interest of justice [Paras 4–7].

Relief – Consequences of setting aside stigmatic direction – If rustication was again imposed solely due to non-compliance with the quashed direction, appellant entitled to one opportunity to comply with remaining valid directions – On compliance, rustication to stand set aside – Appeal partly allowed and disposed of [Paras 11–13].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Direction No. (II) issued by the learned Single Judge set aside – Remaining directions upheld – Matter disposed of with consequential relief.

Partition – Joint Purchase by Husband and Wife – Half Share – Suit property purchased under registered sale deed in joint names of spouses – Defendant contended entire sale consideration paid by her and her mother and loan repaid by her – Held, Income Tax Returns of both parties (Exs.A8, A9, B2, B3) disclosed declaration of only half share each in property – No documentary proof to establish exclusive contribution – Plaintiff entitled to 50% share – Preliminary decree confirmed [Paras 14-15].

Burden of Proof – Contribution of Consideration – Mere assertion that defendant alone repaid housing loan insufficient – Bank statements relied upon by defendant did not establish exclusive payment – Plaintiff’s statements showed regular EMI payments – In absence of cogent documentary evidence proving entire contribution by defendant, plea rejected [Paras 14-15].

Benami Plea – Bar under Section 4, Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 – Defence that property though standing in joint names was in reality exclusively purchased by defendant amounts to plea of benami – Such defence barred under Section 4(2) – No plea of fiduciary capacity or trust taken in written statement – Benami defence not maintainable [Para 16].

Additional Evidence – Order XLI Rule 27 CPC – Appellant sought to produce divorce decree and order under Domestic Violence Act – Held, documents not relevant for deciding issue of partition and title in suit property – Additional evidence declined – Petition dismissed [Paras 9-10].

Matrimonial Disputes – Irrelevance to Title – Allegations regarding cruelty, divorce and DV proceedings held not germane to adjudication of proprietary rights in jointly purchased property [Paras 4, 10].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Preliminary decree declaring plaintiff’s half share in suit property confirmed – C.M.P. No. 2800 of 2026 dismissed – No costs.

Mandatory Injunction – Licensor–Licensee Relationship – Maintainability – Suit for mandatory injunction filed by husband and subsequent purchaser against wife occupying flat – Wife claimed to be trespasser post revocation of licence – Held: Where defendant occupies premises as a licensee and licence is terminated, suit for mandatory injunction for recovery of possession is maintainable – Not barred under Section 41(h) Specific Relief Act – Reliance placed on Sant Lal Jain v. Avtar Singh and Bharat Bhushan Gupta v. Pratap Narain Verma [Paras 14–18].

Ownership of Property – Exclusive Title – Stridhan Plea – Wife claimed joint ownership alleging contribution of stridhan and personal assets – Lease deed and allotment documents stood solely in husband’s name – No documentary proof of contribution produced – Affidavit filed by wife not subjected to cross-examination – Held: Burden of proving joint ownership lay on wife and remained undischarged – Trial court rightly held husband to be sole owner [Paras 19–26].

Evidence – Affidavit Without Cross-Examination – Evidentiary Value – Wife failed to appear for cross-examination despite repeated opportunities – Held: Affidavit in evidence without cross-examination cannot be relied upon – Trial court justified in discarding such evidence [Paras 21–24].

Transfer of Property – Sale During Pendency of Suit – Section 52 TPA – Lis Pendens – Sale deed executed in favour of subsequent purchaser during pendency of litigation – Necessary permissions obtained from NOIDA and builder – Indemnity bond executed – Mere pendency of matrimonial or domestic violence proceedings does not invalidate transfer – Purchaser acted in good faith after due diligence – Sale deed held valid [Paras 27–32].

Domestic Violence Act – Right of Residence – Shared Household – Scope – Wife claimed right of residence under PWDV Act – Evidence showed existence of more than one household – Held: Act contemplates right in one shared household only – Disputed flat could not be treated as shared household once licence stood terminated and alternate residence existed [Paras 31–32].

Mesne Profits – Assessment – Quantum – Trial court awarded damages @ ₹60,000 per month based on admitted prior rental value – Claim of low maintenance by wife irrelevant for determining mesne profits payable to lawful owner – Award held reasonable and supported by evidence [Paras 33–34].

Appellate Interference – Findings of Fact – Ownership and Possession – High Court reiterated that findings of fact by trial court should not be interfered with unless perverse – No perversity or illegality shown – Decree affirmed [Paras 36–37].

Decision: Both First Appeals dismissed – Judgment and decree dated 11.12.2018 affirmed – Mandatory injunction, declaration of ownership in favour of purchaser, and award of mesne profits upheld.

Criminal Law – Criminal Intimidation – Section 506 IPC – Quash Petition under Section 482 CrPC – Allegation that accused drove car at victim with intention to cause fear of death – FIR and final report disclose specific overt act and intention – Prima facie offence made out – Proceedings not liable to be quashed [Paras 1–5, 8, 14–17].

Section 503 IPC – Ingredients – Threat with intent to cause alarm – Not confined to verbal threats – Act capable of creating reasonable apprehension of injury or death sufficient – Driving vehicle towards victim alleged to have instilled fear of death – Held: Satisfies basic ingredients of criminal intimidation at threshold stage [Paras 9–14].

Inherent Powers – Section 482 CrPC – Scope – High Court cannot conduct mini-trial or assess sufficiency of evidence – Interference justified only where allegations even if taken at face value do not constitute offence – Where FIR and final report disclose offence, proceedings must continue [Paras 15–16].

Distinction from Civil Dispute – Petitioner relied on precedents where allegations revealed purely civil disputes – Held: Present case involves allegation of physical act intended to cause alarm, supported by motive and eyewitness – Decisions relied on by petitioner held inapplicable on facts [Paras 6, 12–14].

Trial – Liberty to Accused – Though quashment declined, accused reserved liberty to raise all defences before Trial Court including filing discharge application – Trial Court directed to consider such plea independently, uninfluenced by observations in quash proceedings [Para 17].

Decision: Criminal Miscellaneous Case dismissed – No ground to invoke inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC – Criminal proceedings in C.C. No.17 of 2020 to continue in accordance with law.

Matrimonial Law - Domestic Violence Act – Interim Maintenance – Allegation of Adultery – Revision Petition by husband challenging concurrent orders granting interim maintenance of ₹26,000/- per month to wife – Contention that wife living in adultery is not an “aggrieved person” under Section 2(a) of PWDV Act – Held: At interim stage, unproven allegations of adultery cannot disentitle wife from interim maintenance – Genuineness of photographs alleging illicit relationship to be examined only after evidence – No express statutory bar under PWDV Act akin to Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. – Prima facie allegations of domestic violence sufficient to grant interim relief [Paras 10–24].

Domestic Violence – Scope of PWDV Act – Comparison with Section 125 Cr.P.C. – Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. expressly bars maintenance if wife living in adultery – PWDV Act contains no such bar – Conduct of parties relevant but requires adjudication on evidence – Interim orders to be based on prima facie satisfaction – Allegations of adultery are matters of trial [Paras 19–22].

Evidence – Photographs Alleging Adultery – Deepfakes and fabrication – Photographs disputed by wife as morphed – Courts below justified in deferring examination of genuineness till trial – Allegations by both spouses against each other involving extra-marital conduct raise disputed questions of fact – Cannot be conclusively decided at interim stage [Paras 15–18, 23].

Interim Maintenance – Assessment of Income – Bank Statements and ITRs – Husband claimed income of ₹25,000/- per month – Credit entries of ₹28,45,120/- over three years reflected in bank account – Explanation that credits were proceeds of PPF/FDs of parents not substantiated at interim stage – Concurrent findings of Magistrate and Sessions Court upheld – No perversity or illegality warranting interference in revision [Paras 25–27].

Revisional Jurisdiction – Limited Interference – Concurrent findings on entitlement and quantum of interim maintenance – Revisional court not to reappreciate evidence or substitute its own assessment unless findings are perverse – Orders granting interim maintenance upheld [Paras 24–28].

Safeguard – Refund of Interim Maintenance – Direction that if wife is ultimately found living in adultery and disentitled to maintenance, she shall refund entire interim maintenance received with 6% interest – Undertaking to be filed by wife before Trial Court – Magistrate directed to decide main petition expeditiously within one year [Paras 29–31].

Decision: Revision Petition dismissed – Impugned order dated 31.10.2023 upheld – Interim maintenance of ₹26,000/- per month sustained – Directions issued for expeditious disposal and conditional refund mechanism.

Motor Accident Compensation – Multiplier – Age of Deceased – Deceased aged 55 years 3 months at time of accident – Insurer contended multiplier should be 9 instead of 11 – Held, as per Sarla Verma read with Reshma Kumari and affirmed in Pranay Sethi, multiplier for age group 51–55 years is 11 and for 56–60 years is 9 – Since deceased fell within 51–55 age bracket, Tribunal correctly applied multiplier of 11 – No interference warranted on this count [Paras 3-4, 39-40].

Future Prospects – Government Servant Above 50 Years – Deceased was an Assistant Teacher – Tribunal added 15% towards future prospects – Insurer contended no addition permissible for Government servant above 50 years – Court did not disturb addition of 15% future prospects but examined grant of interest thereon separately [Paras 8-10, 41, 43].

Interest on Future Prospects – Permissibility – Tribunal awarded interest @7% per annum on entire compensation including future prospects – Relying on Champabati Ray and similar Gauhati High Court precedents, held that interest cannot be awarded on component relating to future prospects, as same represents income relatable to future period – Interest to be calculated on compensation amount excluding 15% future prospects – Award modified to that extent [Paras 11, 42-45].

Driving Licence – Fake Licence – Liability of Insurer – Evidence of DTO official established that DL No. 363/NB/04 not issued by office and not traceable in register – Licence held not genuine – Applying Swaran Singh, insurer directed to pay compensation to claimants with liberty to recover from owner – Order of pay and recovery upheld [Paras 31-34, 37-38].

Negligence – Proof – Eye-witness testimony and charge-sheet established rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle – Finding of Tribunal on negligence affirmed [Paras 26-27].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Multiplier of 11 upheld – Direction of pay and recovery maintained – Award modified to exclude grant of interest on 15% component added towards future prospects – Interest @7% per annum to apply on remaining compensation amount – Records to be sent back to Tribunal.