Criminal Law – Framing of Charges – Criminal Appeal against the decision of the Sessions Court, affirmed by the High Court, quashing charges under Sections 307 and 386 IPC – Appellant assaulted by a group of persons armed with deadly weapons, causing multiple injuries – Supreme Court finds sufficient prima facie evidence of intention to kill – Held that the charges under Section 307 IPC were improperly quashed – Appeal allowed, and the matter remanded for trial on all charges. [Paras 1-18]

Intention to Kill – Prima Facie Evidence – Held – The statements of witnesses and the nature of the injuries support the appellant’s claim that the accused intended to kill – The presence of sharp weapons and the context of the assault indicate knowledge and intention of causing death – Courts below failed to appreciate the prima facie evidence – Charges under Section 307 IPC reinstated for trial. [Para 16-17]

Decision – Reinstatement of Charges under Section 307 IPC – The Supreme Court sets aside the decisions of the Sessions Court and the High Court, reinstating the charges under Section 307 IPC – Matter remanded for trial on all charges including Sections 307 and 386 IPC – The trial court to determine the final outcome based on the evidence presented. [Para 18]

Service Law - Termination and Regularization - Ad-hoc Employees-Civil appeals by the State of Jharkhand challenging the High Court's order setting aside the termination of ad-hoc engineers employed since 1987. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, affirming the regularization of the employees who had served continuously for more than 10 years without any disciplinary proceedings against them. The court noted that the termination of services was arbitrary and violated Articles 14, 16, 19, and 21 of the Constitution, amounting to a deprivation of livelihood. [Paras 1-25]

Doctrine of Regularization - Long Continuous Service - Application of Uma Devi’s Case- The Supreme Court applied the principles from Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi and Others, holding that employees who had served for more than 10 years without court intervention were entitled to regularization. The Court observed that terminating such employees after decades of service without providing an opportunity for regularization was unjust and arbitrary. [Para 20]

Jurisdiction - High Court’s Power - Regularization Orders-The Supreme Court endorsed the High Court's jurisdiction and discretion in ordering regularization, noting that the employees had been performing permanent nature duties and were paid salaries without objection from the CAG. The Court emphasized that interference under Article 136 should be sparing and only in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case. [Paras 23-24]

Decision - Dismissal of Appeals-The Court dismissed the appeals filed by the State of Jharkhand, directing the continuation of the respondents in their services and extending all benefits as granted by the High Court. [Para 25]

Constitutional Law - Protection of Property Rights – Articles 226, 300A of the Constitution of India – Property rights of borrowers under the SARFAESI Act – Validity of auction sale challenged – Compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under SARFAESI Act and Rules – Held, borrower’s property rights protected under Article 300A necessitate strict adherence to statutory requirements for auction sale – Auction sale conducted without proper 30 days notice in violation of Rule 8 and Rule 9 of SARFAESI Rules invalid – High Court’s setting aside of the auction sale upheld. [Paras 2-27]

SARFAESI Act - Auction Sale - Procedural Requirements - Compliance – Rules 8 and 9 of the SARFAESI Rules – Requirement of 30 days public notice prior to auction sale – Bank’s failure to provide proper notice – Waiver of mandatory requirement not established by borrower’s conduct – Auction sale conducted in violation of mandatory notice period void – Principle that borrower’s waiver must be clear and unequivocal – High Court’s findings affirmed – Appellant to be reimbursed for amounts paid if borrower settles dues. [Paras 12-27]

Waiver - Doctrine of Waiver – Applicability to statutory procedural requirements – Rule 9 of SARFAESI Rules – Established principle that even mandatory statutory provisions can be waived if the party for whose benefit they exist expressly or impliedly waives them – Facts of the present case indicate no waiver by borrower of the mandatory requirement of 30 days notice for auction sale – Borrower’s consistent challenge to the validity of auction notice supports absence of waiver – High Court’s decision upheld. [Paras 17-25]

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Auction sale conducted by Syndicate Bank in favour of Appellant set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under SARFAESI Rules – Borrower granted two months to settle dues with the bank – Appellant entitled to reimbursement for payments made towards purchase price, registration fees, stamp duty, and discharge of encumbrances. [Paras 26-28]

Civil Law - Medical Negligence - Application of Res Ipsa Loquitur - Appeal against High Court decision enhancing damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff in hospital premises - Plaintiff, an indoor patient with high fever, found injured due to alleged negligence by hospital authorities - High Court applied res ipsa loquitur, holding hospital liable in absence of due care - Supreme Court upheld findings of negligence and dismissed appeals, affirming enhanced damages. [Paras 1-12]

Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitur - Analysis - Held - Court applied the principle that the occurrence of the incident itself indicates negligence by hospital, placing the burden of proof on hospital to show absence of negligence - Hospital failed to prove non-negligence, leading to liability for injuries sustained by plaintiff. [Paras 8-10]

Quantum of Damages - Assessment - Held - Damages assessed under three broad heads: loss of future prospects in employment, cost of attendant, and non-pecuniary loss including pain and suffering - High Court enhanced damages to Rs. 11 lakhs with interest - Supreme Court found assessment reasonable and affirmed quantum of damages awarded. [Paras 7, 11]

Decision - Appeals Dismissed - Both the plaintiff's appeal seeking further enhancement and the defendant hospital's appeal against findings of negligence and quantum of damages were dismissed - Supreme Court upheld High Court's judgment in entirety. [Paras 10-12]

Civil Procedure - High Court's Obligation to Frame Substantial Questions of Law - High Court allowed the second appeal without framing substantial questions of law as required by Section 100 CPC - Held that such failure is a grave procedural error - Judgment and decree of the High Court set aside - First appellate court’s findings reinstated as it properly evaluated evidence and upheld appellant's rights. [Paras 1-9]

Jurisdiction - Bar under Consolidation and Land Reforms Acts - Question of civil court’s jurisdiction under Section 49 of the UP Consolidation of Land Holdings Act and Section 331 of the UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act - Held that civil court’s jurisdiction not barred as the case involves title and sonship, not mere consolidation issues - Suit not barred under the aforementioned sections. [Para 10]

Fraud and Legality of Consolidation Officer's Order - Order of Consolidation Officer found to be obtained by fraud - Consolidation Officer failed to examine rightful ownership and allowed withdrawal of appellant’s objection without proper verification - Held that order is null and void due to legal malice - Appellant entitled to be recorded as half-share owner in the revenue records. [Paras 11-12]

Decision - Restoring First Appellate Court’s Judgment - High Court’s judgment set aside - First appellate court's judgment restored - Competent authority directed to record appellant's name in revenue records as half-share owner - Appeal allowed. [Paras 13]

Contempt of Court – Non-Compliance with Supreme Court Directions – Contempt Petition against State Government –Supreme Court held that the State Government is in contempt of the Court’s order dated 14.03.2012, which directed the State to recommend the grant of iron ore mines to BPSL as per the MOU. The State Government’s plea of subsequent legal and statutory complications was rejected. The State was given one month to comply with the Court's order by making the requisite recommendation to the Central Government, failing which further contempt proceedings would ensue. [Paras 14-27]

Administrative Law – Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation – Enforcement of MOUs –Supreme Court affirmed that BPSL’s legitimate expectations arising from the MOU dated 15.05.2002 must be honored by the State Government. The State's subsequent actions and disputes, including overlapping applications and statutory notifications, do not negate the obligations established by the MOU and affirmed by the Supreme Court. [Paras 16, 24-25]

Mineral Rights – Overlapping Claims and Simultaneous Consideration –The Court dismissed the State’s argument regarding the complexity of overlapping mining lease applications, emphasizing that the specific direction to recommend BPSL’s application must be honored. Other pending applications must be considered independently, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions and relevant legal principles. [Para 24]

Decision – Contempt Petition Allowed – State Government Directed to Comply –The Supreme Court allowed the contempt petition, mandating the State Government to make the necessary recommendations for mining leases to the Central Government within one month. The State’s failure to comply would result in further contempt proceedings. [Para 27]

Writ Petitions – Maintainability under Article 32 – Liberty to Approach Appropriate Forum –Three writ petitions filed under Article 32 were dismissed on the grounds of maintainability. The Court held that the petitioners must first approach the High Court or other appropriate forums for relief. The Court did not address the merits of the cases, leaving those issues open for adjudication by the appropriate forum. [Paras 29-30]

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 – Determination of Compensation – Civil Appeal against High Court's reduction of compensation awarded by Tribunal – Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 20,90,000 based on a monthly income of Rs. 15,000 – High Court reduced the compensation to Rs. 5,76,000 based on the net income from the income tax return and reduced the multiplier and other heads of compensation – Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in deductions and inappropriately reduced the compensation – Compensation re-assessed based on gross income, appropriate deductions, and heads of compensation – Compensation of Rs. 14,51,000 awarded with 9% interest per annum. [Paras 1-16]

Determination of Income – Analysis – Held – The income should be calculated based on the gross income from the income tax return – Future prospects to be considered – Deductions for personal expenses to be 1/3rd of total income – Proper heads of compensation should include loss of consortium, love and affection, loss of estate, and expectation of life. [Paras 7-15]

Decision – Modification of High Court Judgment – Compensation increased to Rs. 14,51,000 with 9% interest per annum – Distribution and deposit instructions provided – Tribunal to consider release of deposited amount upon application by appellants. [Paras 16]

Constitutional Law - Article 14 Violation - Town Planning Scheme - Validity:

Article 14 of the Constitution of India was violated by Section 192(1)(c) of the Punjab Municipal Act, which allowed land to be taken for town planning schemes without compensation, leading to the provision being declared void prospectively from 15.07.1994. This did not affect schemes already implemented and completed before this date. [Paras 1-17]

Municipal Law - Finalization and Implementation of Town Planning Scheme - Civil Appeal:

The Municipal Committee issued notices under a Town Planning Scheme, which was challenged by the appellant on grounds of non-finalization and incorrect demarcation. The appellant argued that the Scheme had not become final as objections remained unresolved. The Supreme Court held that the objections had been duly considered and rejected by the Municipal Committee in 1980, thus finalizing the Scheme. The need for fresh demarcation was recognized due to errors in the initial demarcation report. [Paras 18-35]

emarcation and Implementation - Procedural Directives-Supreme Court directed a fresh demarcation to be conducted by the Patwari within two months to determine the existence of a 30-feet road as per the revenue records. The Scheme's implementation would depend on the results of this demarcation, with both parties required to adhere to the outcome. [Para 35]

Decision - Fresh Demarcation Ordered:

Appeal disposed of with an order for a fresh demarcation to verify the existence of the road per the revenue record, ensuring proper implementation of the Town Planning Scheme based on accurate demarcation results. [Paras 34-36]

Road Safety - Implementation and Enforcement of Existing Laws - Supreme Court's direction to the Central and State Governments to strictly enforce existing road safety laws under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Emphasis on licensing, certification of fitness of vehicles, adherence to vehicle capacity limits, and use of road safety devices. The necessity for robust enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance with road safety norms. [Paras 24-28]

Infrastructure and Maintenance - Road Engineering - Central and State Governments directed to integrate road safety in road design and conduct regular road safety audits. Identification and rectification of 'black spots' on highways and roads where frequent accidents occur. Mandate for regular maintenance to ensure roads are traffic-worthy, considering available resources. [Paras 29]

Public Awareness and Education - Road Safety Education - Directions to the Central and State Governments to continue and enhance efforts in educating citizens on road safety, starting from a young age. Implementation of road safety education in school curricula and public awareness campaigns. [Paras 30]

Emergency Response and Post-Accident Care - Directions to improve post-accident medical response. Central and State Governments to ensure availability of ambulances, trauma centers, and medical facilities. Adoption of best practices for quick removal of accident victims to medical facilities. Addressing jurisdictional disputes and financial barriers that delay medical attention to victims. [Paras 31]

Constitution of Monitoring Committee - Establishment of a Committee by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to monitor the implementation of Supreme Court directives on road safety. The Committee to submit periodic reports to the Court on the state of enforcement, suggestions for legislative changes, and deficiencies in implementation. [Paras 33-35]

Decision - Directions Issued Under Article 142 - Supreme Court issued directions under Article 142 for strict enforcement of existing road safety laws, enhancement of road safety infrastructure, public education on road safety, and improvement of emergency response systems. States impleaded as respondents to ensure accountability and implementation of directives. [Paras 32-35]