Criminal Procedure Code, Section 451 – Representation of People Act, Section 78 – Release of seized currency notes during ongoing investigation – Petitioner, a politician, faced allegations of amassing wealth disproportionate to known sources of income – Currency notes seized during the investigation – Application for release under Section 451 Cr.P.C. – Petitioner’s contentions regarding the source of the amount – Detailed examination of contentions by Special Judge – Prima facie findings regarding the explanation of the petitioner – Purpose of Section 451 Cr.P.C. – Provisional arrangement for interim custody of seized articles during the trial – Safeguards for the recovery of articles – Application of guidelines from Supreme Court and Kerala High Court precedents – Preservation of wealth alleged to be disproportionate – Balanced approach considering rights of the State and the accused – Release of seized amount to the petitioner with conditions including execution of bond and bank guarantee – Findings in this order not to prejudice petitioner’s contentions during investigation and trial. [Para 1-16]

Family Law - Hindu Marriage Act - Marriage declared null and void under Section 11 - Challenge to the judgment and decree of nullity - Examination of evidence regarding the existence of custom or usage permitting marriages within the sapinda relationship - Failure to establish the custom - Marriage within sapinda relationship held to be null and void. [Para 1-30]

Rights of Children Born Out of Null and Void Marriages - Child born to parents whose marriage is declared null and void - Legitimacy conferred under Section 16(1) and (2) of the Act - Such children entitled to rights in the property of their parents, whether self-acquired or ancestral - No restriction on the property rights of such children - Child's entitlement to rights recognized. [Para 30-31]

Disposition of Appeal - Marriage declared null and void due to sapinda relationship - Child's legitimacy not in dispute - Appeal and pending application disposed of. [Para 32]

Criminal Procedure – Examination of Accused – Failure to question the accused under Section 313(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure – Effect on proceedings – Revision petitions challenging concurrent convictions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act – Accused denied a fair opportunity to explain incriminating circumstances – Failure to comply with the mandate of Section 313(1)(b) results in miscarriage of justice – Judgments of lower courts set aside – Complaints remitted to Trial Court for questioning of the accused under Section 313(1)(b) and fresh proceedings – Accused and complainant to appear before Trial Court on specified date – Directions issued for expeditious disposal of complaints. [Para 22-24]

Administrative Law – Transfer of cases between benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal – Chairman’s power to transfer cases – Requirements of a reasoned order – Orders transferring cases should specify reasons – Orders lacking reasoning violate principles of natural justice. [Para 23-31]

Decision – Orders dated March 2, 2023, and March 27, 2023, passed by the Chairman transferring and retaining cases are set aside – Cases to be considered afresh by the Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal, with proper reasoning – Proceedings in the affected cases are stayed until a new decision is made. [Para 36-37]

Civil Procedure Code (CPC) - Revision under Section 115 - Plaintiffs seeking withdrawal of the suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit after realizing that it had been instituted against deceased defendants - Trial Court rejecting the withdrawal application - Whether institution of the suit against deceased persons is a formal defect and whether Order 23 Rule 1(3) of the CPC is applicable - The suit against a deceased person is a nullity since its inception and can be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action - Impugned order set aside, and plaintiffs allowed to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit as permissible in law. [Para 1-13]

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Challenge to impugned notifications under Sections 4 and 6 - Acquisition proceedings for public purpose – Petitioners sought quashing of notifications for land acquisition in Sector 57, Gurugram for public purpose – Reliance on Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. [Para 1-3]

Legal Background – Supreme Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration by the High Court in light of the judgment in "Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal". [Para 6-7]

Factual Background – Prior litigations, representations, and proceedings disclosed – Initial writ petition disposed of by High Court and liberty granted to petitioners to file representation – Rejection of representation by authorities led to current writ petition. [Para 4-5]

Legal Tenacity - Re-canvassing of relief based on the Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal judgment - Claim for lapsing of acquisition proceedings - Statutory requirements for lapsing - Tendering of compensation and assumption of possession - Requirement for acquiring authority to meet statutory parameters embodied in Section 24(2) of Act of 2013. [Para 9]

Imperative Statutory Discharging Requirement - State's obligation to tender compensation and assume possession - Conditions for debarring the acquiring authority or enabling landowners to claim lapsing under Section 24(2) of Act of 2013 - Essential statutory elements to consider. [Para 9]

Lapse of Acquisition Proceedings - Conditions for the deemed lapse under Section 24(2) of Act of 2013 - Inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to the Act coming into force - Possession not taken, compensation not paid - Clarification of 'paid' in the main part of Section 24(2) - Non-deposit of compensation in court - Consequences and applicability of Section 24(2) - Mode of taking possession under the Act of 1894. [Para 9]

Decision - Dismissal of the writ petition - No merit found - Costs imposed on the petitioners - Disposal of pending applications. [Para 13-14]

Kidnapping – Biological Father’s Act of Taking Minor Son from Mother’s Custody – Examination of whether a biological father taking his minor son from the mother’s custody amounts to kidnapping under Section 363 of the IPC – Father’s role as natural guardian under Hindu law considered. [Para 4-5, 12]

Lawful Guardianship – Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 – Discussion on the rights and obligations of parents as natural guardians – Reference to Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, establishing the father as the natural guardian of a minor, subject to certain conditions. [Para 6, 9, 11]

IPC Section 361 – Interpretation and Applicability – Analysis of Section 361 of the IPC, pertaining to kidnapping from lawful guardianship – Emphasis on the term “lawful guardian” and its implications on the case involving a biological father taking his child from the mother’s custody. [Para 7-8, 12-13]

Precedents – Reference to Prior Judgments – Citing various judgments, including from Orissa, Kerala, Karnataka, and Gujarat High Courts, supporting the view that a biological father taking his own child does not amount to kidnapping under Section 363, IPC. [Para 14-17]

Decision – Quashing of FIR – The Court finds no prima facie case for kidnapping under Section 363, IPC and deems the continuation of prosecution as an abuse of the process of the Court – The FIR in Crime No.431 of 2023 is quashed and set aside. [Para 18-19]

Criminal Petition – Quashing of proceedings – Accused seeks quashing of order rejecting discharge application – Accused No. 8, Dr. Neha Bansal, a doctor, was implicated in a case involving the alleged leakage of question papers in a postgraduate entrance test – The government constituted an inquiry committee, which found malpractice and referred the matter to the CBI – Dr. Neha Bansal's discharge application was rejected by the concerned court – The polygraph test revealed deceptive responses, and brain mapping analysis suggested her knowledge of the alleged crime – Corroborative material in the charge sheet based on statements of witnesses – Quashing of proceedings not justified at this stage – Serious disputed questions of fact – Trial necessary – High Court's order to quash proceedings set aside. [Para 2-10]

Quashing of Complaint - Negotiable Instruments Act - Proceedings under Section 138 of the Act - Petitioners challenging proceedings instituted against them - Accused persons include Directors and office bearers of a company - Cheque issued for credit facility - Chairman of the Company issued the cheque, which was signed by him - Chairman passed away after issuance of the cheque - Accused No. 2 succeeded as Chairman - Renewal and execution of loan documents by accused Nos. 2 to 6 - Cheque presented for realization after being declared a non-performing asset - Dishonored cheque leads to legal proceedings - Company denies liability. [Para 1-12]

Cheque Issued as Security – Liability of Drawer – Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act – Blank cheque voluntarily signed and handed over by the accused towards payment – Presumption of liability under Section 139 unless rebutted with evidence – Death of the drawer does not absolve liability, especially when the cheque is issued on behalf of a Company – Company and its office bearers must rebut the presumption before the Court. [Para 15-16]

Decision – Criminal petitions dismissed – Observations made in the order are for the consideration of the case under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and do not bind or influence any other pending proceeding. [Para 16]