Writ Petition – Retirement Age – Petitioner challenges the university’s decision to retire him at age 62, asserting his role as teaching staff should extend his retirement age to 65 like other teachers. [Para 2-3]

Employment Status – Assistant Engineer – The respondent, Mahatma Gandhi Chitrakoot Gramodaya Vishwavidhyalaya, clarified that the petitioner’s substantive post is Assistant Engineer, with all benefits attached to that post, determining his retirement age as 62. [Para 4]

Legal Definition – “Teachers of the University” – Court emphasizes the specific definition under Section 2(l) of the Mahatma Gandhi Chitrakoot Gramodaya Vishwavidhyalaya Adhiniyam, 1991, indicating the petitioner was not ‘appointed’ for teaching. [Para 7-8]

Temporary Arrangement – Not a teacher – Court rules that the petitioner’s involvement in teaching activities was a temporary measure due to a shortage of teachers, not sufficient to classify him as a “Teacher of the University.” [Para 8]

Decision – Petition Dismissed – Court dismisses the petition, holding the petitioner’s retirement age to be 62 years as per university’s notification dated 16/08/2018. [Para 9]

Protection of Lives and Liberty - Petitioners seek protection in a live-in relationship - Petitioner no. 1 is an adult, and petitioner no. 2 is a minor - No blood relationship between them - Continuous threats received - Representation filed before official respondents - Reference to a similar case involving protection for a minor in a live-in relationship - Petition disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 28.03.2022, rendered in the case of P…… Minor Through Vikram (supra). [Para 1-5]

Minor's Protection - Application of Juvenile Justice Act - Child Welfare Police Officer to produce the minor before the Committee - Enquiry under Section 36 of the Juvenile Justice Act - Orders under Section 37 of the Act - Decisions on boarding, lodging, and custody of the minor - Interim decisions for protection - Appropriate legal action against threat perception - Petitioners directed to appear before SSP/SP - Compliance report to be sent to the Court. [Para 4]

Disposition - Present petition disposed of following the judgment in the case of P…… Minor Through Vikram - Similar facts and circumstances - Protection measures ordered in line with the earlier judgment. [Para 5]

Constitutional Law – Right to Assemble and Demonstrate – Right to peaceful protest and freedom of speech – Fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution of India – Importance of safeguarding the right to protest and express grievances within a democratic system – Restrictions on the exercise of these rights permissible under Article 19(2) and (3) – Concerns of public order and security of the State – Lawful authority to regulate public gatherings – Necessity for prior written permission for public meetings, processions, and demonstrations – Scope of judicial review in such cases – Emphasis on maintaining a balance between individual rights and public safety. [Para 9-18]

Freedom of Speech – Right to express grievances and dissent – Integral part of a democratic system – Protection of fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) – The duty of courts to protect these rights – Need for the State to aid the exercise of the right to freedom of speech – Exercise of the power to restrict this right should serve the ends of constitutional rights rather than subvert them – Limitations on this right in the interest of public order and decency – Use of reasonable restrictions to prevent situations leading to the disturbance of public tranquility – Preventive and not provocative actions by law enforcement agencies – Judicial review of orders imposing restrictions – Limited scope of judicial review. [Para 9-13]

Law and Order – Concerns of maintaining public order and security of the State – Police’s role in ensuring public security and social order – Statutory provisions giving power to the police to maintain public order – Regulations for regulating traffic, preservation of order in public places, and preventing disorder – Exercise of discretion by the police in permitting public events – Balancing fundamental rights with the concerns of law and order – The importance of preventing situations that could lead to the disturbance of public tranquility – Law enforcement agencies must act within the limits of the law and cannot indulge in excesses – Necessity for police action to be preventive rather than provocative. [Para 14-16]

Balance of Rights – Balancing individual rights with public safety – The festive season and the significance of the period for the Hindu community – Possibility of events with communal overtones causing communal tensions in sensitive areas – The importance of taking into account law and order considerations – Limited scope of judicial review in such cases – Executive authorities given some leverage in decision-making – Scope for applying for fresh permission after the festive season with proper assurance to authorities – Dismissal of the writ petition based on law enforcement agency’s apprehension of law and order situation. [Para 14-18]

Civil Procedure – Second Appeal – Admissibility of second appeal – Requirement to formulate a substantial question of law – Mandatory procedure – Second appeal can only be admitted and maintained if it poses a substantial question of law – The substantial question of law should have substance, essentiality, and real significance, as opposed to being technical, inconsequential, or academic – Legislature has not qualified the scope of "substantial question of law" with the words "of general importance" – Compliance with Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Order XLII Rule 2 is mandatory for admitting and maintaining a second appeal. [Para 18-19]

Property Dispute – Claim over government properties – Greater scrutiny required in cases involving government properties – Unauthorized occupants, land grabbers, and encroachers should not be allowed to destroy the rights and titles of the government to immovable property – Need for careful examination of claims over government properties. [Para 13]

Registration Act – Documents requiring registration – Section 17(1)(b) – Documents purporting to create, declare, assign, limit, or extinguish any right, title, or interest in immovable property of a value of one hundred rupees and upwards must be registered – Unregistered agreements regarding government property have no legal effect or implication on government rights – Enquiry ordered to determine the authenticity of documents related to government property. [Para 10-12]

Formulation of Substantial Question of Law – Mandatory procedure for second appeal – Second appeal can only be decided based on the substantial question of law formulated during the admission stage – Equitable grounds not sufficient for deciding a second appeal – Compliance with Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Order XLII Rule 2 is mandatory for admitting and maintaining a second appeal. [Para 16-17]

Dismissal of second appeal – Failure to raise a substantial question of law warranting admission – Second appeal dismissed without being admitted – Directions to forward a copy of the judgment for future guidance and appropriate action. [Para 19]

Civil Suit – Declaration of Title and Recovery of Possession – Plaintiff claimed ownership of a specific land parcel – Allegation of encroachment by the defendant – Compromise decree passed earlier in favor of the plaintiff – Plaintiff’s suit for declaration and possession dismissed by trial court and affirmed by the first appellate court – Second appeal filed by the plaintiff challenging the lower courts’ decisions. [Para 1-8]

Execution of Decree – Limitation Act – Compromise decree passed in plaintiff’s favor – Plaintiff claims possession was not delivered – Plaintiff files a fresh suit for possession after the limitation period for executing the earlier decree – Question of whether the fresh suit is maintainable. [Para 9-19]

Power of Attorney Holder – Witness – Evidence regarding the delivery of possession – Plaintiff’s power of attorney holder testifies but does not confirm the delivery of possession – Plaintiff fails to depose personally in support of the case – Decision on the admissibility and sufficiency of evidence provided by the power of attorney holder. [Para 20]

Decision: Second appeal dismissed – Lower courts’ decisions upheld – Plaintiff’s suit for declaration and possession not maintainable after the limitation period for executing the earlier compromise decree has expired. [Para 22-23]

Contempt of Court – Allegations of contemptuous conduct against the respondent, an advocate – Multiple complaints filed by the respondent making false, baseless, and mischievous allegations against Hon’ble Judges – Contemptuous conduct clearly amounts to obstructing the course of administration of justice and maligning the reputation and prestige of the court – Held, respondent guilty of "criminal contempt" as defined under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with regard to certain complaints [Para 19].

Apology and unconditioned remorse not tendered by the respondent – No prayer made to drop the proceedings – Court left with no option but to decide the cases on merits – Advocate, as an officer of the court, owes a duty towards the court – Deliberate attempt to scandalize the court is a serious matter – Such actions can undermine the independence and impartiality of the judiciary – Found guilty of contempt with regard to specific complaints [Para 17-18].

Contempt proceedings initiated against the respondent with regard to certain complaints dropped – Punishment to be determined for the remaining complaints [Para 19].

Contempt of Court – Guilt of the respondent-contemnor established for criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, pertaining to specific complaints – Imposition of fine as just and appropriate punishment – Order for deposit of a fine of Rs.4,00,000/- within one month – Alternative of imprisonment for one month for non-compliance – Exoneration of the respondent-contemnor from guilt in relation to other complaints – Disposal of the contempt petitions. [Para 23-24]

Quashing of Proceedings - Offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC - Allegation of collecting money on a false job visa promise - Settlement between the petitioner and the victim - Victim's withdrawal of the composition application - Court's discretion to permit or deny composition - Analysis of Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. - Distinction between compoundable offenses with and without court permission - Effect of composition on acquittal - Court's role in verifying the voluntariness of composition - Decision to allow or deny composition must be judicious. [Para 2-19]

Compounding of Offenses - Nature of compounding - Classification of offenses under Section 320 Cr.P.C. - Two groups - One requiring court permission for compounding, the other not - Degree of wrong done to the State as a basis for categorization - Purpose of promoting peace and friendliness between parties - Court's discretion in permitting or denying composition. [Para 14-18]

Effect of Composition - Composition of compoundable offenses with court permission - Composition is incomplete until the court grants permission - No legal effect until court's satisfaction - Court's jurisdiction not deprived until permission granted - Verification of the genuineness, truth, and voluntariness of composition essential. [Para 22-23]

Disposition - Failure to provide sufficient material to quash the proceedings - No interference with the impugned order - Granting liberty to victims to move a petition for composition if they choose to do so. [Para 24-25]

Criminal Revision Petition – Challenge to the order of discharge – Accused discharged of various offences including murder – Mini trial conducted at the stage of framing charges – Alleged overlooking of crucial evidence – Prima facie case made out for further consideration – Operation of the impugned order stayed. [Para 3-18]

Framing of Charges – Judicial discretion in framing charges – Court's duty to determine whether a prima facie case exists – Mini trial not permissible at this stage – Evidence including CCTV footage and CDRs allegedly overlooked – Prima facie case requires further examination. [Para 12-15]

Suspension of Discharge Order – Court's authority to suspend a judgment and order of discharge – Reliance on precedent for suspension of the order – Operation of the impugned order suspended till the next hearing. [Para 17-18]

Writ of Habeas Corpus - Detention Order Challenged - Allegations of Illegal Detention - Petitioner seeks the production of the detenu and the setting aside of the detention order - Multiple criminal cases invoked as grounds for detention - Examination of the nature of these cases and their impact on public order. [Para 2-5]

Subjective Satisfaction - Requirement for the Detaining Authority to reach a subjective satisfaction when issuing a detention order - Lack of proper consideration of the entire material on record - Insufficient reasoning regarding disturbance to public order due to the detenu's actions. [Para 9-10]

Allowance of Writ Petition - Impugned detention order declared illegal and set aside - Direction to release the detenu if no longer required in other criminal cases - No order as to costs. [Para 10]