Commercial Appeal – Application for condonation of delay – Delay of 25 days in filing the appeal – Appellant, the defendant in a commercial suit, sought to condone the delay – Appellant’s explanation for the delay initially found unsatisfactory – Additional affidavit presented with evidence of a nine-month-old baby’s illness and other personal setbacks – Justification for the delay reasonably established – Judicial discretion exercised to condone the delay of 25 days – Cost of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the appellant – Application allowed. [Para 2-18]

Education - Admission to Ph. D. program in Fine Arts - Denial of admission due to the unavailability of a research supervisor - Petitioner, a Scheduled Caste candidate, secured high marks in the Ph. D. Entrance Test (PET) - Validity of PET score expired during the admission process - University issued an advertisement for admission without verifying vacancies - Petitioner's grievance agitated since 2020 - Instances of quota exceedance in other subjects cited - Request to allocate a research guide from another inter disciplinary subject - University's procedure violated, causing hardship to the petitioner - Gross violation of rules and discrimination - University's callous attitude - Imposition of a fine of Rs. 50,000 on the university, to be paid to the petitioner. [Para 2-29]

Cooperative Societies Act – Validity of order keeping elections of the society in abeyance – Impugned order challenged as a non-speaking order – Petitioner claims lack of alternative remedy – Interpretation of Section 68(h) of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 – Whether the impugned order is appealable – Held that the impugned order, although interlocutory, falls within the ambit of a decision under Section 68(1)(h) – Petition disposed of with liberty to avail of the appellate remedy. [Para 1-6]

Bail Application – Petitioner seeks regular bail – FIR registered under Sections 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Custody Certificate produced – Petitioner's counsel argues that an unauthorized officer conducted the search before an authorized officer arrived – Petitioner's prolonged incarceration and lack of criminal antecedents considered – Reference to Supreme Court orders granting bail in similar cases – Petition allowed, petitioner ordered to be released on bail with specified conditions. [Para 1-13]

Anticipatory Bail - Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR involving charges under IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and Section 13(1)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Petitioner a first-time offender - Nature of allegations and the need to provide an opportunity to course correct justifies consideration for bail. [Para 1-6]

Bail Principles - Bail decision must consider a variety of circumstances - Accused of non-bailable offenses entitled to bail if the prosecution fails to establish a prima facie case or if the court records reasons for bail - Gravity of the offense and heinousness considered - Bail conditions not to be so strict as to make bail illusory. [Para 7]

Bail Conditions - Possibility of accused influencing investigation and tampering with evidence can be addressed through stringent conditions - Court must balance individual's right to personal freedom with the right of police investigation - Conditions imposed to minimize dependence on surety and provide alternative options. [Para 8]

Bail Grant - Petitioner granted bail with specific terms and conditions, including personal bond, surety, and a fixed deposit - Directions regarding mobile phone usage during bail - Failure to comply with conditions may lead to bail cancellation - Conditions imposed to prevent the accused from repeating the offense and providing remedies for the victim. [Para 11-16]

Modification of Bail Conditions - Petitioner can seek modification of bail conditions if they find them violating rights or causing difficulty - No restriction on further police investigation as per the law - Observations made in the judgment not an expression of opinion on the case's merits. [Para 19-22]

Criminal Proceedings - Quashing of FIR and Subsequent Proceedings - Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.35 dated 29.05.2016 under Sections 306, 34, 120-B IPC and 420 IPC - Accused petitioner seeks the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings - Allegations of abetment to suicide and dishonor of cheques - Name of the petitioner appears in the suicide note without specific role attributed - Conviction of co-accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - Contention that no offense is made out against the petitioner - Disputed versions regarding how signed cheques came into the possession of co-accused - Quashing of proceedings against other co-accused - Prayer for quashing of FIR. [Para 1-18]

Criminal Law - Abetment of Suicide - Interpretation of Sections 306 and 107 of the IPC - Examination of what constitutes abetment in cases of suicide - The Supreme Court's scrutiny of various judgments - Notable emphasis on the need for clear mens rea, direct or intentional act of instigation, and a close link between abetment and suicide - Citing cases such as 'Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of Madhya Pradesh', 'Netai Dutta v. State of West Bengal', 'S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and Another', 'Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab', 'Surender Kumar v. State of Haryana', 'Kashmiri Lal v. State of Haryana', 'Ram Sarup versus Ravi and others', 'Shri Subhash Ramgopal Bharuka versus The State of Maharashtra through Police Inspect, Police Station, Kannad, Tal: Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad and others', 'Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat and Ors.', and 'Chandrakant S/o Yadavrao Gavhane v. The State of Maharashtra and another' - Clarification that intention and mens rea are essential elements of abetment, and mere demand for repayment of debt or legal action cannot be construed as instigation to commit suicide - Suicides by debtors do not necessarily imply abetment by creditors demanding repayment - The importance of not drawing unwarranted inferences against creditors demanding their dues, even if mentioned in the suicide note - The significance of Section 107 of the IPC in establishing abetment, and the need for a clear nexus between the alleged abetment and the act of suicide - Relying on the judgment in 'Harbhajan Sandhu versus State of Punjab and another' to emphasize that being named in a suicide note alone does not establish guilt without fulfilling the essential elements of the offense.

Criminal Appeal – Quashing of FIR and Proceedings – Allegations under Sections 306, 34, 120-B, and 420 IPC – Co-accused's case considered – Co-accused not named in the FIR – No specific role attributed in the suicide note – Multiple explanations for possession of cheques provided by prosecution – Accused availed legal remedy leading to deceased's conviction – Abetment not established without specific allegations of harassment or instigation – Proceedings against main accused quashed – No purpose in continuing proceedings against present petitioner – FIR and subsequent proceedings quashed. [Para 25-28]

- Bail Application – Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) – Petitioner seeking bail under Section 439 CrPC – Criminal antecedents of the petitioner – Long pre-trial custody exceeding two years and six months – Exceptional case for bail – Conditions imposed based on Dheeraj Kumar Shukla v. The State of Uttar Pradesh [Para 5-9]

- Conditions of Bail – Elaborative and stringent conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or fleeing justice – Alternative options to surety – Fixed deposit or account payee demand draft – Personal identification details required – Limitation on prepaid SIM cards – Surrender of weapons and arms license – Conditions to ensure safety and prevent repetition of the offense [Para 9-13]

- Proportionality of Bail Conditions – Conditions imposed must have a nexus to their purpose and be proportional to the purpose – Balancing the liberty of the accused with the necessity of a fair trial [Para 15]

- Modification of Bail Conditions – Petitioner can seek modification of bail conditions if they find them difficult or violative of rights – Competence of the Court to modify or delete conditions [Para 17]

- Observations – Comments made in the order are not expressions of opinion on the merits of the case and shall not be considered by the trial court [Para 18]

- Reciprocal Behavior – The accused is expected to reciprocate through desirable behavior in return for protection from incarceration [Para 19]

- Certified Copy of Order – No need for a certified copy of the order for furnishing bonds, it can be downloaded from the official court website and attested by any Advocate [Para 20]

Cheque Bounce Cases – Dispute over issuance of cheques – Petitioners seeking quashing of Complaint Cases under Section 138 of NI Act – Disputed allegations regarding the issuance of cheques – Whether cheques issued towards discharge of legally enforceable debt – Prima facie case against petitioners – Proceedings not quashed at pre-trial stage – Principles regarding cheque bounce cases reiterated by Hon'ble Apex Court – Onus of proving no existing debt or liability on accused – Factual issues and probable defense to be decided during trial – Complaints maintainable – Petitions dismissed. [Para 9-17]

Criminal Revision Petition – Conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Appeal against judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge-02 – Petitioner convicted for dishonoring a cheque – Facts involving a loan, cheque issuance, and dishonor – Petitioner seeks acquittal and challenges lower court decisions. [Para 1-8]

Presumption under Section 139 of NI Act – Burden on the accused to raise a probable defense and provide evidence against the presumption – Accused admitted signing the cheque – Failure to provide substantial evidence to rebut the presumption – Legal principles outlined. [Para 13-15]

Debt and liability – Accused's claim of repayment – Onus on the accused to establish repayment – Lack of material evidence to support the repayment claim – Failure to seek the return of the cheque – Presumption of issuance of cheque for repayment remains unrebutted – Conviction upheld. [Para 20]

Dismissal of revision petition – Petitioner directed to pay remaining fine/compensation and surrender within 15 days – Lower court judgments affirmed. [Para 22-24]