Land Law – Ejectment of Tenant – Compensation for Improvements – Appeal against orders of ejectment and dismissal of revision petition – Appellants argued for compensation under Section 70 of Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 – Argument not raised before authorities or in amended written statement – Held, tenants estopped from raising new issues at belated stage – Appeal dismissed. [Paras 1-15]

Tenant's Duty – Statement of Claim – Held – Under Section 70 of the Act, the tenant must file a statement of claim for compensation for improvements or disturbance when contesting liability to ejectment – Conditional upon tenant's action, not court's duty to direct – Financial Commissioner noted lack of such claims by tenants. [Para 11]

Long Tenancy – Bar on Compensation – Held – Tenancy exceeding 20 years bars compensation claims for improvements as per Section 67 of the Act – Appellants' own pleading indicated long tenancy – No compensation owed due to prolonged enjoyment of tenancy benefits. [Paras 12-13]

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – No infirmity in Single Judge's order – Tenants estopped from raising compensation claims belatedly – Appeal dismissed in limine. [Paras 15]

Criminal Law - Identification Parade - Rash and Negligent Driving - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt-Test Identification Parade - Necessity in Criminal Cases – Criminal appeal challenging acquittal under Sections 337, 338, 427, and 304-A IPC – Held: In cases where the accused is not previously known to the witnesses, a test identification parade is necessary to strengthen the trustworthiness of the evidence. The absence of a test identification parade is fatal to the prosecution's case. [Para 9]

Acquittal - Lack of Corroborative Evidence – Analysis – Held: The respondent was not named in the FIR, and the prosecution failed to establish how the accused was arrested. There was no independent corroboration of the prosecution's version despite the incident occurring on a busy road. The trial court's findings are well-reasoned and justified, leading to the upholding of the acquittal. [Para 11]

Appellate Review - Acquittal – Consideration – Held: The High Court should not interfere with an acquittal if two views are reasonably possible based on the same evidence, and the trial court's view favours the accused. The appellate court must respect the trial court's judgment unless there are substantial reasons to believe a miscarriage of justice occurred. [Para 12]

Dowry Death - Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act - Appeal against Conviction - Death caused by consumption of pesticide (Aluminum Phosphide) - Held, once prosecution proves ingredients of dowry death, presumption under Section 113B arises, shifting onus to accused to prove innocence - Conviction upheld for husband Ranjit Singh. [Para 11-12]

"Soon Before" Death - Relevance in Dowry Death Cases - Expression "soon before" cannot be fixed by a strict period - Prosecution must establish proximity and link between cruelty and death - Conviction sustained as prosecution proved harassment for dowry leading to death. [Para 21]

Acquittal of Co-accused - Role of Mother-in-law - Allegations against mother-in-law vague and unsupported by evidence - Material improvements in witness statements - Acquittal upheld as no cogent evidence found against her - Double presumption of innocence in acquittal cases. [Para 28]

Decision - Conviction of Husband Upheld - Acquittal of Mother-in-law Upheld - Court dismisses both appeals, affirming conviction and sentence of Ranjit Singh, and acquittal of Manjit Kaur. [Paras 30-31]

NDPS Act - Section 42 - Appeal against Conviction - Non-compliance - Secret information regarding transportation of contraband received but not reduced to writing - Trial Court wrongly recorded compliance - Section 42 mandatory, not directory - Appellant acquitted for non-compliance with Section 42. [Para 14]

NDPS Act - Section 52-A - Procedure for Producing Contraband - Contraband not produced before Magistrate for certification of inventory - Infirmity constitutes factor for setting aside conviction - Total non-compliance of Section 52-A provisions observed. [Para 21]

NDPS Act - Section 57 - Report of Arrest and Seizure - Original report not brought on record - Photocopy lacked signatures or stamp - Full report not made out as having been sent to superior officer - Failure to send report factors into setting aside conviction. [Para 23]

Decision - Conviction Set Aside - Acquittal of Appellant - Court sets aside the conviction due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 52-A, and 57 of the NDPS Act. [Para 26]

Criminal Law - Appeal against Conviction - Hostile Witnesses - Section 307 IPC, Section 25 Arms Act - Appellant shot at complainant causing injury - All key witnesses declared hostile - Recovery of empty cartridge and country-made pistol from appellant - Conviction upheld based on forensic evidence linking bullet to pistol recovered from appellant - Sentence modified to period already undergone due to long lapse of time and family relations between parties. [Paras 5-18]

Hostile Witnesses - Evidentiary Value - Held, despite witnesses turning hostile, conviction can be sustained if other material evidence and forensic findings strongly support the prosecution case. [Para 6]

Forensic Evidence - Matching of Bullet and Weapon - Held, forensic evidence confirming that the bullet recovered from the victim's body was fired from the pistol recovered from the appellant is a strong basis for upholding conviction. [Para 13]

Sentence Modification - Consideration of Long Duration since Incident and Family Relations - Incident occurred 21 years ago, parties are from the same family - Sentence modified to the period already undergone by appellant - Fine and compensation remain unchanged. [Para 18]

Decision - Conviction Upheld - Sentence Modified - Court upholds the conviction but modifies the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant, maintaining the fine and compensation imposed by the trial court. [Para 18]

Service Law - Pension - Daily Wage Service - Regularization - Continuity of Service - New Pension Scheme-Pension - Counting of Daily Wage Service – Civil writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 challenging conditions in the regularization of service – Held: The petitioner, who worked as a daily wager from 01.01.1995 and whose services were regularized in 2014, is entitled to count his daily wage service for pensionary benefits. The Labour Court award granting reinstatement with continuity of service implies that the petitioner had unbroken service from 1995, qualifying him for pension under the old scheme. [Paras 3, 11]

New Pension Scheme - Applicability – Analysis – Held: Despite the regularization of service in 2014, the petitioner is not governed by the New Pension Scheme due to the continuity of service established from 1995. The Haryana Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2016, specifically Rule 14(4), support this position, allowing service from contingencies followed by regularization to count as qualifying service for pension. [Paras 4, 9]

Arrears of Pay - Entitlement – Consideration – Held: The petitioner is not entitled to arrears of difference in pay from the date of regularization but is entitled to pensionary benefits counting from the date of his initial daily wage service. Arrears of pension are limited to three years before the date of the order. [Paras 11, 12]

Appointment of Lambardar - Choice of Collector - Interference by Higher Authorities - Held, the choice of the Collector cannot be lightly interfered with unless there is some perversity or illegality in the order - Collector considered the comparative merits of all candidates - Found respondent no.4 more qualified, younger, and financially stronger - Appointment upheld. [Para 12, 15]

Collector’s Decision - Comparative Merits Considered - Found Respondent No.4 was better suited - Graduate, younger, and had prior experience assisting former Lambardar - Financial strength and community support considered. [Paras 2, 15]

Pendency of Litigation and Financial Default - Relevance in Appointment - Held, petitioner being a bank loan defaulter at the time of Financial Commissioner's decision - Rule 15(d) and Rule 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules consider indebtedness in appointment and dismissal of Lambardar - Financial default a significant demerit. [Paras 16]

Decision - Dismissal of Petition - Court finds no illegality or perversity in the Collector's order - Financial Commissioner rightly set aside the Commissioner’s re-evaluation - Petition dismissed. [Paras 17, 19]

NDPS Act - Compliance with Section 42 - Conviction Challenged - Search and Seizure from Private Vehicle - Secret information not reduced to writing - No evidence of information conveyed to senior officer - Held, a private vehicle does not qualify as a 'public place' under Section 43 - Provisions of Section 42 are mandatory - Conviction set aside due to non-compliance with Section 42. [Para 12]

Search and Seizure - Requirements under NDPS Act - Applicability of Section 42 vs. Section 43 - Held, private vehicle is not a 'public place' - Section 42 applies and mandates writing down information and informing higher officers - Non-compliance with Section 42 invalidates the proceedings. [Para 12]

Decision - Conviction Set Aside - Court sets aside the conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 15 of the NDPS Act due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Section 42. [Paras 13]

Employment Law - Termination of Temporary Employee - Misconduct Allegations - Requirement for Enquiry - Termination of services of a temporary employee on grounds of alleged embezzlement of Rs.6 without conducting a formal enquiry—Order deemed stigmatic and punitive—Court held that such termination necessitates a formal enquiry to establish misconduct—Absence of such an enquiry renders the termination order invalid—Second appeal dismissed. [Paras 1-13]

Nature of Termination Order - Stigmatic versus Simpliciter - Analysis - Held, termination order referencing allegations of misconduct (embezzlement) cannot be classified as an order simpliciter—Such orders are punitive in nature and mandate a formal enquiry to substantiate the charges—Reference to Supreme Court's distinction between 'motive' and 'foundation' in termination orders. [Para 7-9]

Decision - Reinstatement and Retiral Benefits - Court upholds reinstatement of the respondent—Directs the State to decide on representation for release of retiral benefits and issue a speaking order if benefits are owed. [Paras 12-13]