Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(1-a) – Dissolution of marriage – Cruelty – Appeal against dismissal of petition – Evidence of wife remained unchallenged – Effect of non-cross-examination of witness – Family Court erred in rejecting the petition – Judgment and decree set aside – Appeal allowed. (Para 12 and 13)

Cross-examination of witness – Effect of non-cross-examination – Statement of witness deemed admitted – When a party fails to cross-examine a witness, the statement of the witness is to be taken as admitted. (Para 9)

Marriage solemnized at a young age – Dissolution of marriage sought after attaining majority – Non-filing of petition immediately after attaining majority not a ground for dismissal – If cruelty is established, dissolution of marriage can be granted. (Para 10 and 11)

Service Law - Pension eligibility – Writ petitioner appointed as Daily Wage Mazdoor and later as Ex-Cadre Assistant – Retired after over 25 years of service – Denied pension on the grounds of insufficient service period – Single Judge directed consideration of service period and grant of pension – Appellant challenged the order – Appellant contended that the petitioner did not complete 10 years of regular service – Court examined relevant provisions of Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 and Memo dated August 12, 1969 – Court found that continuous service exceeding 15 years can be considered for pension under Rule 59 – Court upheld Single Judge’s order and dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Revision Petition - Maintenance - Validity of order granting maintenance - Allegation of marriage and paternity dispute - Admissibility of evidence - Scope of Section 14 of the Family Courts Act - Photographic evidence and messages - Deliberate cheating and fraudulent intention of the respondent - Consideration of Supreme Court judgment on the treatment of a woman as a wife for the purpose of maintenance when married while unaware of existing marriage - Quantum of maintenance - Financial status of the respondent - Reasonableness of the maintenance amount. [Para 1]

Section 14 of the Family Courts Act - Empowers the Family Court to receive any report, statement, document, information, or matter that may assist it in effectively dealing with a dispute, regardless of its admissibility under the Indian Evidence Act - Exception to the strict technicalities of the admissibility and relevancy of evidence in matrimonial disputes. [Para 14]

Supreme Court judgment on the treatment of a woman as a wife for the purpose of maintenance - When a man marries a woman while keeping her in the dark about his existing marriage, the woman should be considered the wife for the purpose of maintenance. [Para 19]

Quantum of maintenance - Consideration of the economic scenario and the parties' status - Reasonableness of the maintenance amount - Financial status and evidence provided by both parties - Failure to dispute property ownership and rental income. [Para 22, 23, 24]

Bail application - Suspension of sentence and enlargement on bail - Applicant convicted under sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) - Applicant seeks bail pending appeal - Applicant's counsel argues lack of evidence supporting allegations - Prosecution relies on confessions, call detail records (CDRs), and an email as evidence - Absence of Section 65B Certificate for electronic evidence acknowledged - Court examines confessions and finds no corroborative material or evidence of applicant's alleged visit to Bangladesh or collection of funds - Email and CDRs deemed inconclusive without Section 65B Certificate - Applicant in custody for 17 years, engaged in educational and rehabilitative activities, and has pending appeal - Prima facie case made for suspension of sentence - Bail granted with specific conditions.  

Personal appearance – Exemption from – Parameters for granting exemption from personal appearance – Accused entitled to exemption when facing hardship or inconvenience due to trial delays – Factors to consider: being a woman, elderly, disabled, facing economic or physical hardship, or required to travel long distances – Each case to be assessed on its own facts and circumstances – Exemption subject to conditions imposed by the trial court. [Para 19]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sections 205 and 317 – Power of the court to dispense with personal appearance of the accused – Discretion of the court to exempt the accused from personal appearance at various stages of the trial – Concern for administration of criminal justice and progress of the trial – Parameters for granting exemption – Exemption to be based on the facts and circumstances of each case – Conditions may be imposed to ensure smooth proceedings. [Para 20]

Quashing of FIR and charges – Parameters for exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. – FIR and charges not quashed in the present case – Exemption from personal appearance granted instead – Prosecution’s failure to produce witnesses for an extended period causing undue suffering and inconvenience to the accused – Court deems it a fit case to dispense with personal appearance – Accused still required to comply with conditions imposed by the trial court. [Para 23]

Presumption of innocence – Accused presumed innocent until proven guilty – Presumption of innocence as a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India – Court’s obligation to safeguard the rights and interests of the accused during trial proceedings. [Para 18]

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Karnataka – B.Sc. Nursing course – Technical glitches in uploading student details – Writ petition filed seeking direction to consider representation and enable web portal for uploading details and issuing registration numbers – Admission Register found to have fabricated entries and additions made after the last date for uploading – Petitioner college engaged in fraudulent practices – Loss caused to students and their aspirations. [Para 2, Para 4, Para 8, Para 9, Para 10]

Petitioner college directed to compensate students for one year of loss – Payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- each as compensation ordered – Respondent university directed to take legal and administrative action against the petitioner college for fraudulent activities – Original Admission Register and Attendance Register returned to respondent university. [Para 12, Para 13(ii), Para 13(iii)]

Court dismisses writ petition, upholds refusal of respondent university to accept fraudulent practices of petitioner college – Calls for investigation by appropriate authorities and possible criminal action against petitioner college. [Para 11, Para 12]

Domestic Violence Act - Maintenance - Scope - Application for maintenance filed under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act by the divorced Muslim woman - Whether maintainable - Held, the subsequent decree of divorce does not absolve the liability of the respondent from the offence committed or deny the benefits to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act - Aggrieved person is entitled to file a proceeding under Section 12 of the D.V. Act in respect of past domestic violence - Muslim woman, even after divorce, is entitled to maintenance from her husband as long as she does not remarry - Sections 4 and 5 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 are applicable to proceedings initiated under the D.V. Act by a divorced Muslim woman. (Para 12)

Aggrieved Person - Definition - Domestic relationship - Interpretation - The definition of "aggrieved person" encompasses women who are or have been in a domestic relationship with the respondent, including past cohabitation or past living together - The literal construction of the provisions shows that even women who were in a past relationship are entitled to invoke the provisions of the D.V. Act. (Para 15)

Maintainability of application under D.V. Act - Separation of parties - Application filed after one year of separation - Whether maintainable - The provisions of the D.V. Act do not require the parties to be actually residing or living together at the time of filing the application - The words "has lived together at any point of time" in the definition of domestic relationship cover past cohabitation or past living together - Applications under the D.V. Act can be maintained even after separation, as long as there was a domestic relationship at any point in time. (Para 14)

Maintenance - Quantum of maintenance - Adverse inference - Husband suppressing his actual income - Standard of living - The wife is entitled to lead a life befitting the lifestyle and standard of the husband, even after separation or divorce - Maintenance quantified at 25% of the husband's net salary is just and proper - Non-applicant's suppression of income and failure to provide a detailed affidavit of assets and liabilities result in an adverse inference - The enhanced maintenance awarded by the Sessions Judge satisfies the bare minimum needs of the applicant. (Para 18, 19)

Rathyatra: Permission to carry deity on a chariot – Urgency – Short notice for instructions – Delay in communication – Modification of earlier order sought – Petitioner seeking to carry deity physically – Purpose and significance of Rathyatra – Historical practice observed for centuries – Police interference with religious practice – Sensitivity issue – Anticipation of disruption – Stern procedural measures to be taken if required – Order upheld, no modification – Parties to maintain peace and harmony in procession – Case disposed of.

Circumstantial evidence - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Principles - The circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established - The circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused - The circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused - The circumstances should exclude every possible hypothesis except the guilt of the accused - The chain of evidence should be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused - [Paragraphs 30-34]

Extra-judicial confession - Admissibility - Extra-judicial confession is a weak evidence by itself - It should be made voluntarily, truthfully, and inspire confidence - An extra-judicial confession attains greater credibility and evidentiary value if it is supported by a chain of cogent circumstances and is corroborated by other prosecution evidence - The extra-judicial confession should be proved like any other fact in accordance with law - [Paragraphs 24-25]

Benefit of doubt - When the prosecution case rests solely on circumstantial evidence, the cumulative effect of the circumstances must be such as to negative the innocence of the accused and establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt - Mere suspicion or circumstantial doubt cannot substitute proof beyond reasonable doubt - Conviction cannot be based on suspicion unless the prosecution proves circumstances conclusively and all circumstances prove the guilt of the accused - The possibility of any conclusion other than guilt of the accused would vitiate a conviction - [Paragraphs 35-36]

Reliability of witnesses - The credibility and reliability of witnesses must be carefully evaluated in a case based on circumstantial evidence - Material discrepancies in the statements of witnesses and lack of corroboration can cast doubt on their version - The prosecution must establish the veracity of witnesses and the accuracy of their testimony beyond reasonable doubt - [Paragraphs 28-29, 31-32]

Failure to produce material witnesses - The prosecution has a duty to produce material witnesses to support its case - Failure to produce such witnesses can raise a presumption against the veracity of the prosecution's version - [Paragraph 10]

Best evidence rule - The prosecution must adhere to the best evidence rule and ensure that relevant evidence, such as examination of cartridges and fingerprints, is properly presented and examined - Failure to do so may cast doubt on the prosecution's case - [Paragraph 26]

Evaluation of evidence - The Court must carefully evaluate the entire evidence in its entirety to ensure that the only inference that can be drawn from the evidence is the guilt of the accused - The Court should critically examine the evidence and ensure that the circumstances proved establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt - [Paragraphs 31-32, 37]

Benefit of doubt - In case of doubt, the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt - When the prosecution fails to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the accused must be acquitted - [Paragraph 39]