Trade and Commerce – Tax Rebate – Government of Uttar Pradesh issued notifications granting tax rebate to cement manufacturers using fly-ash within the state – Rebate not extended to manufacturers outside Uttar Pradesh – High Court held the condition discriminatory, violating Articles 301 and 304(a) – Supreme Court upheld High Court's decision, affirming the rebate discriminates against imported goods [Paras 1-54].

Constitutional Law – Article 304(a) – Interpretation – Supreme Court emphasized equal treatment for goods imported from other states – Rebate of tax constituting discriminatory taxation when applied only to local manufacturers – Stressed the importance of ensuring free trade and commerce across state boundaries [Paras 27-33].

Doctrine of Severability – Validity of Notifications – Striking down discriminatory conditions while preserving the beneficial aspects – Supreme Court applied doctrine, severing the invalid condition from the notification, maintaining the rebate for eligible entities without altering overall legislative intent [Paras 48-50].

Decision – Appeals dismissed – Orders – Condition restricting rebate to manufacturers within Uttar Pradesh declared invalid – Directed state to extend rebate to eligible manufacturers irrespective of location – Refund excess deposits with interest at 10% per annum [Paras 53-54].

Criminal Law – Dishonour of Cheque – Prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act – Accused directors contended absence of specific averments that they were in charge and responsible for the conduct of business at the time of the offence – High Court quashed prosecution of Vikram Prakash but declined for A.K. Singhania – Supreme Court examined specific allegations in complaints and found them inadequate to establish necessary averments for holding directors liable [Paras 1-22].

Section 141 NI Act – Liability of Directors – Supreme Court reiterated that for fastening liability under Section 141, it is essential to aver that directors were in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business – Mere designation as directors not sufficient – Specific role or involvement in day-to-day operations required to be stated [Paras 17-20].

Quashing of Prosecution – Exercise of Inherent Powers – High Court’s decision to quash prosecution of Vikram Prakash affirmed due to lack of specific allegations – High Court’s decision to not quash prosecution of A.K. Singhania reversed on same grounds – Supreme Court emphasized uniform application of law regarding necessary averments [Paras 22-23].

Decision – Appeals by Gujarat State Fertilizers Company Ltd. dismissed – Appeals by A.K. Singhania allowed – Prosecution against A.K. Singhania quashed [Para 23].

Criminal Law – Dowry Death – Appellant convicted under Section 304B IPC for causing the death of his wife – Trial court imposed life imprisonment – High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence – Supreme Court examined proportionality of life sentence under Section 304B(2) IPC – Emphasized need for balancing aggravating and mitigating factors in sentencing [Paras 1-14].

Sentencing – Principles for Determination – Supreme Court reiterated principles for sentencing, especially under Section 304B IPC – Considered factors such as time between marriage and death, conduct of accused, persistence of dowry demands, and circumstances of cruelty – Also considered the acquittal of appellant under Section 302 IPC and his young age at the time of the offence [Paras 6-13].

Mitigating Factors – Reduction of Sentence – Considering appellant’s age, lack of criminal record, and specific circumstances, Supreme Court found life imprisonment disproportionate – Reduced sentence to ten years rigorous imprisonment, maintaining the fine imposed [Paras 13-15].

Decision – Appeal partly allowed – Orders – Sentence of life imprisonment reduced to ten years rigorous imprisonment – Fine maintained – Appellant to serve remaining sentence as per modified order [Para 15].

Motor Vehicles Act – Compensation Claim – Appellants, wife and daughters of Nicolau Fernandes, claimed compensation for his death in a motor vehicle accident – Tribunal rejected the claim based on findings of negligence by the deceased – High Court affirmed Tribunal’s decision – Supreme Court reversed the findings, holding accident was due to rash and negligent driving by respondent – Awarded compensation to claimants [Paras 1-10].

Evidence – Negligence and Liability – Supreme Court found Tribunal erred in rejecting evidence of claimants’ witnesses and accepting respondent’s version – Noted that the respondent was charge-sheeted and there was no medical evidence of deceased’s intoxication – Emphasized the Tribunal’s duty to assess claims based on preponderance of probabilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 7-8].

Compensation – Quantum – Tribunal assessed compensation at Rs. 666,041.78, withheld due to adverse findings on negligence – Supreme Court awarded the same amount with 6% interest from date of Tribunal’s award [Paras 9-10].

Decision – Appeal allowed – Orders – Compensation of Rs. 666,041.78 with interest at 6% per annum from 20.07.2004 awarded to claimants – Costs not ordered [Paras 9-10].

Criminal Law – Bail – Appellant reported attack by Kunwar Singh and others, resulting in injuries and death of appellant's son – Kunwar Singh granted bail by High Court despite criminal antecedents – Supreme Court found High Court erred in granting bail without considering past criminal record and potential for witness intimidation [Paras 1-6].

Bail Cancellation – Multiple Criminal Cases – Supreme Court emphasized the need to deny bail to individuals with multiple pending cases and likelihood of tampering with evidence – Cancelled bail of Kunwar Singh and Rafal Singh, both with significant criminal history – Upheld bail for Shashpal and Hanish due to lack of prior cases and specific allegations [Paras 5-10].

Decision – Appeals allowed in part – Orders – Bail of Kunwar Singh and Rafal Singh cancelled, directed to be taken into custody – Bail of Shashpal and Hanish upheld, with condition against witness intimidation – Observations not to affect trial merits [Paras 6, 9-10].

Criminal Law – Murder Investigation – Petitioner, widow of Madan Tamang, alleged improper investigation by state and CBI into husband's murder by Gorkha Jan Mukti Morcha supporters – Sought quashing of charge sheets and re-investigation by Special Investigation Team or further investigation by CBI – Supreme Court directed transfer of trial to Calcutta, monitored by Joint Director CBI, ensuring comprehensive investigation [Paras 1-42].

Evidence – Intercepted Telephonic Conversations – Supreme Court considered authenticity of intercepted conversations and their relevance in investigation – Emphasized importance of admissible evidence in ensuring justice – Directed forensic verification of transcripts to be included in further investigation [Paras 6-25].

Monitoring of Investigation – Role of Courts – Supreme Court highlighted judicial duty in monitoring investigations to prevent miscarriage of justice – Directed CBI to proceed with thorough investigation, ensuring all accused are brought to trial – Issued comprehensive directions for effective prosecution and trial [Paras 30-37].

Decision – Writ petition partly allowed – Orders – Transfer of trial to Calcutta Civil and Sessions Court, continued investigation by CBI under Joint Director’s supervision – CBI to file comprehensive report within three months – Further trial to proceed post-report submission – Regular updates to Supreme Court for further directions [Paras 38-42].

Criminal Law – Framing of Charges – Appellant, former Central Government minister, charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC – Special Judge directed framing of charges – Appellant, aged 98 and suffering from severe health issues, sought exemption from personal appearance – Medical board's report noted potential senile dementia, impaired memory, and other serious health conditions – Trial Court directed personal appearance despite medical findings [Paras 1-6].

Section 329 CrPC – Mental Fitness – Supreme Court emphasized need for High Court to evaluate appellant's capability to understand proceedings – Application of Section 329 CrPC in context of appellant’s age and medical condition – High Court failed to address appellant's specific medical incapacity claims [Paras 8-9].

Judicial Review – Supreme Court’s Intervention – Supreme Court remitted case to High Court for re-evaluation – Directed High Court to consider medical reports and testimony to determine appellant's fitness to face trial – Ensured fair trial without pre-judging mental fitness [Paras 10-11].

Decision – Appeals allowed in part – Orders – High Court to re-examine appellant’s medical condition and capacity to defend herself – Expedited disposal directed within three months due to delayed trial of co-accused [Paras 10-11].

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act – Confessional Statements – Appellant convicted based on confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act – Contention that such statements are inadmissible as the officer recording them is a "police officer" within the meaning of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act – Supreme Court noted that earlier judgments held NDPS officers as non-police officers, making such statements admissible – However, Court re-examined the matter considering broader interpretation and influence exerted by NDPS officers over accused persons [Paras 1-25].

Legal Interpretation – Section 67 NDPS Act – Scope and Powers – Supreme Court deliberated whether Section 67 empowers officers to record confessions and if such confessions hold evidentiary value – Noted that unlike Sections 108 of the Customs Act or Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, Section 67’s primary intent is to obtain information, not confessions – Court acknowledged conflict in previous judgments on this issue [Paras 26-30].

Constitutional and Statutory Provisions – Article 20(3) of the Constitution – Right against Self-Incrimination – Supreme Court emphasized safeguarding constitutional rights of accused – Referred matter to larger Bench for comprehensive examination on whether NDPS officers qualify as police officers and the admissibility of confessional statements under Section 67 [Paras 31-43].

Decision – Appeals partly allowed – Orders – Matter referred to larger Bench to determine:

Whether officers under NDPS Act are considered police officers.

Whether confessional statements under Section 67 are admissible as evidence.

Appellant granted bail pending larger Bench decision [Paras 42-43].

Income Tax – Duty-Free Import Benefits – Respondent company received benefits through advance licences and DEPB against export obligations – Assessee claimed these benefits were taxable in the year imports were made, not in the year exports were made – Tribunal and High Court ruled in favour of the Assessee – Revenue appealed contending benefits should be taxable in the year exports were made – Supreme Court upheld Tribunal and High Court's decision, ruling benefits accrued only when imports were made [Paras 1-27].

Real Income Theory – Accrual of Income – Supreme Court emphasized income must be real and not hypothetical – Income accrues only when there is a corresponding liability of the other party to pay – For advance licences and DEPB, no liability on customs authorities to allow duty-free imports until actual importation – Benefits contingent upon actual imports, not merely on export obligations being met [Paras 17-27].

Consistency in Tax Treatment – Revenue's Previous Stand – Supreme Court noted consistent decisions in the Assessee’s favor for previous years – Highlighted that Revenue did not pursue appeals in some cases, and in others, appeals were dismissed – Asserted importance of consistency and fairness in tax administration [Paras 28-32].

Decision – Appeals dismissed – Orders – Upheld Tribunal and High Court’s decision that benefits from advance licences and DEPB are taxable in the year of import – Directed Revenue to implement litigation policy practically and seriously to avoid fruitless litigation [Paras 33].