Criminal Law - Surety’s Liability - Appeal - Appeal against orders imposing a fine of Rs.1 lac on surety due to the non-appearance of the accused - Held, Fine must be proportionate to the circumstances, inconvenience to the court, and expense in re-apprehending the accused - Appellant, who facilitated the re-arrest of the accused, deserves reduction in penalty - Appeal Partly Allowed, fine reduced to 50% of the surety amount [Paras 7-10].

Discretionary Power of Court - Analysis - Held, Section 446(3) Cr.P.C. provides the court discretion to remit part of the penalty for sufficient cause - Appellant’s active role in securing the accused’s re-arrest considered - No allegation of connivance with the accused [Para 7].

Decision - Reduction of Penalty - Court modifies the impugned orders, reducing the penalty to 50% of the surety amount, directing appellant to deposit Rs.50,000/- before the Trial Court [Para 10].

Contempt of Court – Matrimonial dispute - Violation of Settlement Agreement – Respondent retracts from settlement agreement due to dissatisfaction with financial settlement, claiming financial constraints – Respondent’s behavior constitutes abuse of legal process as she seeks a more lucrative financial settlement – Respondent’s admission of not intending to resume marital life with petitioner – Court finds that marriage has broken down – Respondent’s refusal to abide by settlement agreement undermines faith in legal proceedings – Court examines past judgments on the sanctity of undertakings and agreements – Court imposes fine and one-month imprisonment on Respondent for contempt – Opportunity for respondent to avoid imprisonment by compliance and apology within two weeks – Application for stay of proceedings disposed as not applicable in other jurisdictions.

Criminal Bail Application – Offences under Section 121-A and 153-A IPC read with Section 66 of the IT Act – Applicant seeking bail – Allegations of forming a WhatsApp group spreading jihadi literature and videos – Applicant charged with being the administrator of the group and promoting anti-India sentiments – Applicant’s association with foreign members and acquisition of arms alleged – Bail application challenged by the State – Whether offences are prima facie made out – Interpretation of Section 121-A IPC – Right to practice religion and propagate – Gravity of allegations – Bail denied. [Para 1]

Conspiracy to Commit Offences – Offence under Section 121-A IPC – Overawing Central or State Government by criminal force – Punishment of imprisonment for life or up to ten years – Applicant alleged to be administrator of two WhatsApp groups with foreign members promoting arms acquisition and religious prejudices – Gravity of allegations indicating potential conspiracy – Bail application rejected due to the seriousness of the charges. [Para 7]

Religious Freedom vs. Criminal Conspiracy – Right to practice and propagate religion under Article 19 – Allegations involving promotion of religious prejudices and acquisition of arms – Balance between religious freedoms and potential threat to public order – Second part of Section 121-A IPC deemed to be made out – Bail denied due to the weight of allegations and potential gravity of the conspiracy. [Para 7]

Conclusion – Bail application rejected – Seriousness of allegations of forming jihadi WhatsApp group with foreign members promoting arms acquisition and religious prejudices – Applicant’s association with the group and potential conspiracy deemed prima facie – Bail denied due to potential threat to public order and gravity of the offence. [Para 8]

Civil Procedure – Execution of Money Decree – Interest on deposited amount – Obligation of judgment-debtor to give notice to the decree-holder about the deposit of the decretal amount – Interest ceases to run on deposit and notice, or on tendering the amount outside the Court – Notice required to inform the decree-holder that the decretal amount is available for withdrawal – Violation of Order 21 Rule 1(2) CPC – Principles established in Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Poonam Pahwa applied – Impugned order allowing refund of interest set aside – Revision petition allowed. [Para 8]

Facts – Petitioner and her son filed a claim petition for compensation – Award granted – Respondent No.1-Insurance Company appealed, but appeal dismissed – Insurance Company deposited amounts post dismissal – Petitioner initiated execution for the awarded amount – Respondent No.1-Insurance Company sought refund of interest – Executing Court allowed the refund – Petitioner challenged the order in revision.

Issues – Whether the petitioner's right to interest was affected due to the failure of the judgment-debtor (Insurance Company) to provide notice of deposit to the decree-holder (petitioner) as per Order 21 Rule 1(2) CPC.

Observations – The obligation of providing notice to the decree-holder about the deposit of the decretal amount is vital – Interest ceases upon deposit and notice, or on tendering the amount outside the Court – Notice serves to inform the decree-holder about the availability of the decretal amount for withdrawal – Violation of the principles in Order 21 Rule 1(2) CPC resulted in the delay of releasing the awarded amount and loss of interest to the petitioner.

Decision – The impugned order allowing the refund of interest to respondent No.1-Insurance Company is set aside – The case is allowed, and if the interest amount has been refunded, it shall be deposited with the Tribunal – Notice of deposit shall be given to the petitioner in accordance with Order 21 Rule 1 CPC. [Para 9]

Internet Piracy – Copyright Infringement – Plaintiffs filed suit against rogue websites involved in unauthorized streaming, reproduction, and distribution of copyrighted content. Court acknowledged the global issue of piracy and the need for dynamic injunctions to protect copyright owners. [Para 5-9, 15-19]

Dynamic Injunction – Court issued an ex-parte ad-interim dynamic injunction, restraining unauthorized dissemination, including future works. Emphasized the need for global consensus and innovative remedies to combat internet piracy. [Para 15-19]

Defendants – Rogue Websites – Specific websites identified as engaging in illegal activities, encouraging users to avoid legitimate platforms. Court ordered blocking of these websites and extension of the injunction to mirror websites and alphanumeric variations. [Para 18-20]

ISPs and Domain Name Registrars – ISPs directed to block said websites, and Domain Name Registrars ordered to lock and suspend domain names, providing details to Plaintiffs. MeitY and DoT to issue blocking orders within one week. [Para 21-22]

Decision – Ex parte ad interim injunction granted, restraining Defendants from any infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted content, including future works. Issued ‘Dynamic+ injunction’ to protect works as soon as created. Set further dates for compliance, reply, and listing. [Para 20-27]

Goods and Services Tax Act – Refund claim – Limitation period for filing refund application – Proper officer rejecting the petitioner's refund claim as barred by limitation – Petitioner assailing the rejection – Challenge to vires of Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules and paragraph 12 of the impugned Circular – Nature of deficiencies noted – Whether application for refund complete in terms of Rule 89(2) of the CGST Rules – Application for refund accompanied by necessary documentary evidence – Proper officer requiring further documents and clarification – Whether limitation period stops running – Precedent of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Union of India &Ors. relied upon – Petition allowed, impugned order set aside, application for refund restored for consideration on merits. [Para 1-30]

Goods and Services Tax Act – Refund – Application for refund of IGST paid on zero rated supplies – Proper officer issuing deficiency memos pointing out defects and requiring clarifications – Proper officer rejecting refund claim on the ground of limitation – Whether the deficiencies render the application incomplete in terms of Rule 89(2) of the CGST Rules – Nature of deficiencies noted – Whether the application was accompanied by required documentary evidence – Whether proper officer can withhold processing of refund claim based on deficiencies – Precedent of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Union of India &Ors. considered – Refund application restored for consideration on merits. [Para 21-29]

Criminal Procedure - Supply of Documents - Petition under Section 482 CrPC to set aside Trial Court’s order refusing to provide documents not part of challan - FIR registered for offenses under Sections 376, 354, 354-A, 506, 120-B IPC - Petitioner sought documents including inquiry report and witness statements recorded by an investigating officer - Trial Court dismissed application, stating documents could be summoned at defense stage - Supreme Court guidelines and amended High Court Rules require list of 'un-relied' documents to be submitted with report under Section 173 CrPC - Held, non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements vitiates Trial Court order - Petition partly allowed, matter remanded to Trial Court for fresh consideration in light of Supreme Court judgment and amended High Court Rules. [Paras 10, 12, 17]

Supply of Documents in Criminal Trials - Analysis - Held - Supreme Court's guidelines and amended High Court Rules mandate providing a list of documents not relied upon by the prosecution along with the report under Section 173 CrPC - Procedural safeguards ensure fair trial and prevent suppression of exculpatory evidence - Trial Court’s failure to consider these requirements warrants setting aside its order. [Paras 6, 7]

Decision - Setting Aside Trial Court’s Order - Court sets aside the impugned order, directing the Trial Court to reconsider the application for supplying documents not part of the challan, ensuring compliance with the Supreme Court guidelines and the amended High Court Rules - Trial Court to decide afresh within two months. [Para 13]

Family Court Appeal – Divorce on grounds of mental cruelty and allegations of illicit relationships – Husband seeking dissolution of marriage – Allegations of extra-marital affair made by wife in written statement – Husband’s failure to prove instances of cruelty claimed – Husband also alleging mental cruelty based on false allegations in wife’s pleadings – Husband’s failure to mention mental trauma in his affidavit – Family court granting divorce – Appeal challenging the decision – Court’s analysis of precedents regarding false and scandalous allegations in pleadings – Husband’s lack of mention of mental trauma disentitling him to divorce on this ground – Court’s finding that unsubstantiated allegations didn’t necessarily prove malice – Appeal allowed, impugned judgment set aside, divorce petition dismissed. [Para 1-58]

Criminal Appeal – Conviction under POCSO Act – Acquittal based on age determination – Appeal challenging judgment convicting appellant – Victim alleged consensual sexual relationship leading to pregnancy – Radiological report indicated victim’s age as 16 to 17 years – Marginal error allowed in determining age – Lack of conclusive medical evidence to prove victim’s age – Benefit of doubt given to accused – Acquittal granted under Section 6 of POCSO Act – Conviction set aside.

Age Determination – Appellant convicted for sexual offence under POCSO Act – Victim’s age crucial to establish applicability of POCSO Act – Prosecution failed to provide conclusive evidence of victim’s age – Radiological report indicated age as 16 to 17 years – Margin of error in age determination considered – Benefit of doubt goes to accused – Lack of evidence to prove victim’s age as below 18 years – POCSO Act cannot be invoked – Conviction set aside. [Para 33]

Consensual Relationship – Prosecution alleged consensual sexual relationship – Victim claimed age of 14 during the incident – Victim’s age disputed, no conclusive evidence provided – Marginal error in age determination considered – Benefit of doubt given to accused – Lack of evidence to prove victim’s age as below 18 years – Consensual relationship not constituting offence under POCSO Act – Conviction set aside. [Para 34]

Conclusion – Appeal allowed – Accused acquitted and set at liberty – Conviction and sentence under Section 6 of POCSO Act set aside – Lack of conclusive evidence for victim’s age – Benefit of doubt granted to accused – Acquittal based on age determination and consensual relationship. [Para 36]