Redemption of Mortgage – Rights of Legal Heirs – Plaintiffs (Appellants) sought redemption of a mortgage bond dated 13.09.1969 and claimed 2/3^rd share of the property as legal heirs of Abdul Rahim – Trial Court decreed suit in favor of plaintiffs recognizing their share – First Appellate Court reversed the decision, questioning the redemption right post-execution of a sale deed – Second Appeal addressed substantial questions of law regarding res judicata and Order II Rule 2 CPC – High Court held that principles of res judicata and Order II Rule 2 CPC do not bar the present suit – Redemption right upheld based on finality of earlier suit’s judgment confirming plaintiffs’ 2/3^rd share [Paras 1-22].

Res Judicata and Order II Rule 2 CPC – Previous judgment in Title Suit No. 16 of 1974, which confirmed plaintiffs’ 2/3^rd share and right to redemption, attained finality – High Court emphasized that res judicata and Order II Rule 2 CPC are inapplicable as the cause of action in the present suit (redemption) differs from the earlier declaratory suit [Paras 17-22].

Finality of Earlier Judgment – High Court overturned the First Appellate Court’s decision – Reinstated the Trial Court’s decree favoring the plaintiffs – Confirmed the 2/3^rd share and the right to redeem the mortgaged property, recognizing legal heirs’ rights under Mohammedan Law [Paras 14-16, 20-22].

Decision: Second Appeal allowed – Judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court set aside – Trial Court’s decree restored – Plaintiffs entitled to redemption of 2/3^rd share of the suit property.

Constitutional Law – Writ of Mandamus – Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Chief Electoral Officer and the Regional Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation for implementing free bus services for voters and increasing the number of polling booths – Respondents opposed the petition stating such directions would contravene Section 123(5) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and highlighted that the number of polling booths had already been increased from 160 to 195 – Court held that respondents had duly addressed the petitioner's grievances [Paras 2-6].

Election Law – Free Transport for Voters – Supreme Court of India reviewed the petitioner's plea for free bus services on polling day – Found that provision of such services by the State or Public Transport Corporations would violate the express provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1951 – Court noted that directions for free bus services could not be issued as it would be deemed a corrupt practice under the Act [Paras 3-4].

Enhancement of Polling Booths – Petition also sought an increase in the number of polling booths for elections – Court noted that respondents had already increased the number of polling booths from 160 to 195 based on voter numbers and Deputy Commissioner’s inputs – Court satisfied that this addressed the petitioner's concerns [Para 5-7].

Decision – Dismissal of Writ Petition – Held – The writ petition was dismissed as the respondents had adequately addressed the issues raised by the petitioner through objections and an endorsement, meeting the requirements of the election process as per legal provisions [Para 8].

Negotiable Instruments – Dishonour of Cheque – Petitioner issued cheque for Rs.80,000/- which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds – Complainant presented cheques for Rs.80,000/- and Rs.64,400/- which were both dishonoured – Complaint filed under Section 138 of N.I. Act – Petitioner claimed innocence and alleged forgery, stating the cheque was a blank cheque misused by the complainant – High Court emphasized the need for the trial to determine factual disputes and defenses, rejecting quashing petition at this stage [Paras 1-12].

Criminal Procedure – Quashing of Proceedings – Inherent Power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Petitioner’s contentions about repayment and misuse of blank cheque deemed matters for trial – High Court cited Supreme Court rulings stressing restraint in quashing legitimate prosecutions, and the necessity of a trial to test the veracity of defenses [Paras 8-11].

Decision: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition dismissed – Liberty granted to petitioner to present defenses during trial – Emphasis on trial court’s role in assessing evidence and resolving factual disputes [Para 12].

Administrative Law – Policy Decision – Relocation of Railway Stalls – Petitioner, an allottee of a catering stall at Dadar Railway Station, challenges multiple orders directing the relocation of her stall – Petitioner argues non-application of mind, adverse impact on livelihood, and violation of hygienic conditions – Court upholds the railway administration’s policy decision for decongesting platforms and facilitating free passenger movement, finding no merit in the petitioner’s objections [Paras 1-20].

Relocation of Stall – Considerations and Judicial Review – Decision to relocate based on congestion and passenger flow issues at one of Mumbai’s busiest railway stations – Feasibility report suggesting relocation near an escalator was overruled by a broader policy decision affecting multiple stalls – Court finds no arbitrariness or discrimination in the decision, highlighting the need to prioritize public interest over individual business preferences [Paras 3-18].

Public Interest and Individual Rights – Relocation aimed at decongesting platforms to ensure passenger safety and convenience – Court emphasizes that individual business interests must yield to larger public interest – Petitioner's argument regarding unhygienic conditions near the new location dismissed, as multiple stalls would be situated between the urinal and the petitioner's stall, ensuring hygienic conditions are maintained [Paras 14-19].

Decision: Writ Petition dismissed – Court finds the railway administration's decision to relocate the stall within its policy-making prerogative, ensuring passenger convenience and safety at a busy station like Dadar – Petition devoid of merit and hence dismissed with no order as to costs [Paras 20].

Civil Procedure – Rejection of Plaint – The petitioner challenged the Trial Court's decision under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, which dismissed the plaint for lack of jurisdiction, stating that the plaintiff had not provided documentary evidence of loan repayment and was thus barred under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act – The Trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction by making observations on the merits of the case – Order by the District Judge affirmed the Trial Court’s decision, rejecting the application for status quo on the basis of no response from the respondents [Paras 1-10].

Jurisdiction – SARFAESI Act – The petitioner’s claim for the return of title deeds based on a no dues certificate, argued to remain valid until invalidated by a competent authority – The court emphasized the need for proper adjudication of the validity of the no dues certificate at the trial stage – Status quo granted until the next hearing date to maintain the position of the parties [Paras 6-9].

Decision: The writ petition was partly allowed – The court granted status quo until the next hearing date and mandated a proper examination of the no dues certificate during the trial [Para 10].

Criminal Law – Bail – Applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. – Allegations of forgery and conspiracy involving false sale deeds – Accused persons include a former Computer Operator and an Advocate – No incriminating material recovered from accused’s possession – Charge-sheet filed, no requirement for further custodial interrogation – Bail granted with conditions [Paras 1-12].

Forgery and Conspiracy – Bail considerations – Accusations of replacing original sale deeds with forged ones in Sub-Registrar Office – Applicant Dal Chand Singh alleged to have bound false deeds in place of original – Applicant Kamal Virmani alleged to have drafted forged documents – Bail granted considering absence of substantial incriminating evidence and prolonged custody without trial [Paras 4-9].

Decision – Bail Applications Allowed – Applicants released on personal bond and two sureties – Conditions imposed include regular attendance at trial and no tampering with evidence – Court emphasizes the presumption of innocence and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution [Para 10-13].

Criminal Law – Investigation Inadequacies – Final report submitted by IO in a rape case involving a minor, rejected by the trial court – Court directs further investigation considering multiple discrepancies and lack of thoroughness in the initial investigation – Emphasizes the need for IO to explore alternative leads and gather comprehensive evidence before concluding the investigation [Paras 1-22].

Prosecution Case – Investigation Failures – Revisionist provided alibi with supporting statements and Call Detail Record (CDR) locations – Trial court found the investigation lacking, particularly in verifying alternate mobile numbers and thorough cross-examination of alibi witnesses – Court criticizes superficial acceptance of alibi without exhaustive verification [Paras 4-10].

Delayed FIR – Impact on Credibility – FIR lodged after seven months from the incident date due to alleged inaction by authorities – Court notes delay does not invalidate FIR but necessitates careful examination of all evidence due to potential bias and enmity between parties [Paras 18-19].

Decision – Revision Allowed – Order rejecting final report set aside – Matter remanded for further investigation with specific directions to explore additional evidentiary leads and ensure comprehensive inquiry – IO instructed to submit detailed follow-up report [Para 21-25].

Income Tax Law – Appeal against ITAT order – Submission of Audit Report – High Court dismisses Revenue's appeal challenging ITAT's decision to allow assessee's exemption under Section 11 of Income Tax Act despite late filing of audit report in Form 10B – Tribunal's reliance on CBDT Circulars clarifying deadlines for returns accepted – No substantial question of law found.

Exemption Eligibility – Filing Deadline – CBDT Circulars F. No.173/193/2019-ITA-I and Circular No. 8 of 2021 provided extensions for filing belated and revised returns – Tribunal's application of Circulars upheld by High Court – Held: Assessee entitled to exemption despite late filing as Tribunal's decision aligned with CBDT guidelines .

Decision – Dismissal of Appeal – Held – Appeal by Revenue dismissed – Tribunal's decision to treat return as filed within time affirmed – Stay application also dismissed – High Court concurs with Tribunal's interpretation of CBDT Circulars and concludes no substantial question of law arises for consideration .

Criminal Law – Abetment to Suicide – Appeal against the acquittal – Respondents acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.5, Jamnagar – Allegations of mental and physical torture leading to suicide of the victim by burning – Dying declaration and witness testimonies considered – High Court upheld the acquittal, finding no manifest illegality or perversity in the trial court's judgment – Emphasized the double presumption of innocence in favor of the accused in cases of acquittal [Paras 1-18].

Presumption under Section 113(A) of the Indian Evidence Act – Applicability discussed – Court held that the mere fact of suicide within two years of marriage and allegations of cruelty do not automatically lead to conviction without corroborative evidence – Dying declaration suggesting accidental cause of death considered significant [Paras 4, 17].

Appellate Court’s Scope – Reiterated principles for interference with acquittal – High Court reviewed evidence, confirming trial court’s findings as plausible and not suffering from perversity – Cited precedents emphasizing reluctance to overturn acquittal unless evidence overwhelmingly supports conviction [Paras 6-10, 13-14].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Acquittal judgment affirmed – No interference warranted as trial court’s decision was found just, legal, and proper [Para 18].