Criminal Procedure – Recall and Re-examination of Witnesses – Appellant challenged the High Court's order allowing the re-examination of a witness under Section 311 of CrPC – Contention that the witness had previously turned hostile and re-examination was sought to fill lacunae in the prosecution's case – Supreme Court emphasized the wide discretionary power of courts under Section 311 CrPC, which should be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily – Emphasized that the recall of a witness is warranted only when it is essential for the just decision of the case [Paras 1-30].

Judicial Discretion – Exercise of Power under Section 311 CrPC – The Court reiterated principles for invoking Section 311, including the need for judicial mind application, ensuring just decisions, and avoiding filling lacunae in prosecution or defense cases – Held that the High Court’s order did not meet these principles and thus warranted interference [Paras 13-28].

Evidence Law – Hostile Witnesses – The Court discussed the treatment of hostile witnesses and the circumstances under which they could be re-examined – Noted that the witness’s initial statement and the subsequent hostility must be carefully scrutinized to prevent misuse of judicial process [Paras 24-29].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court's order set aside – Trial Court's order restored – Directions given to proceed with the trial expeditiously [Paras 30].

Criminal Law – Rape – Appeal challenging the High Court's reversal of acquittal and conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC – Supreme Court analyzed the credibility of prosecutrix’s testimony and absence of medical corroboration for physical injuries – Emphasized that prosecutrix’s evidence, if credible, does not require corroboration in material particulars – Appellant’s contention that the prosecutrix consented to the act was not supported by any defense evidence [Paras 1-16].

Evidence Law – Credibility of Witnesses – Discussed the legal standards for treating the testimony of the prosecutrix as reliable – Noted that discrepancies in the prosecutrix's testimony do not automatically discredit her account – Reinforced that the absence of injuries does not necessarily indicate consent, especially considering the circumstances described by the prosecutrix [Paras 10-12].

Judicial Discretion – Review of Lower Court Decisions – High Court’s reversal of trial court’s acquittal deemed appropriate given the evidence – Emphasized the importance of judicial discretion in evaluating witness testimonies and the context of the alleged crime [Paras 10-16].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Conviction and sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment upheld – Supreme Court reiterated the principles of evidence evaluation and judicial discretion in cases of sexual offenses [Paras 16].

Criminal Law – Murder and Attempt to Murder – Appellants convicted under Sections 302 and 307 IPC – High Court affirmed the convictions based on witness testimonies and forensic evidence – Supreme Court reviewed the evidence, highlighting inconsistencies and embellishments in witness statements – Held that grain must be separated from the chaff to ensure justice – Appellants except Balwinder Singh acquitted as prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt their specific involvement in the shooting [Paras 1-40].

Evidence Law – Credibility and Corroboration – Discussed the legal standards for evaluating witness credibility, especially in faction-ridden societies – Emphasized that mere presence at the crime scene does not implicate individuals as members of an unlawful assembly unless overt acts are proven – Acquittals were based on the lack of corroborative evidence linking the appellants to specific violent acts [Paras 25-39].

Right to Private Defence – Assessment of the right to private defence in the context of land possession – Supreme Court found that the appellants did not exceed their right to private defence – Highlighted the need for proper assessment of defensive acts versus aggressive acts [Paras 43-45].

Decision – Appeal partly allowed – Convictions of Amrik Singh, Rajinder Singh, Jaswinder Singh, Makhan Singh, and Gurdial Singh set aside – Balwinder Singh's conviction upheld – Supreme Court underscored the necessity of corroborative evidence in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt [Paras 46-47].

Land Acquisition – Rental Compensation – Appeal challenging High Court's direction to deposit rental compensation at 8% of the award amount passed by the Reference Court – Supreme Court examined the statutory provisions and resolutions by the State of Maharashtra regarding rental compensation – Found that the resolutions mandated rental compensation but did not limit it to the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer – Upheld the High Court’s decision for interim relief based on the enhanced award amount [Paras 1-20].

Review and Recall of Orders – High Court recalled its earlier order directing payment based on an erroneous interpretation of precedent – Supreme Court upheld the recall, noting it was justified given the pending appeals and unresolved disputes regarding the final compensation amount [Paras 13-20].

Interim Relief – The Court emphasized the need for interim relief to be fair and just, balancing the rights of the landowners and the State – Upheld the provision allowing withdrawal of 50% of the deposited amount upon furnishing security [Paras 20].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – High Court's order upheld – Supreme Court provided clarification on the entitlement of enhanced rental compensation proportionate to the final award amount [Para 20].

Criminal Law – Conviction under Sections 498A and 302 IPC – Appeal challenging the High Court's affirmation of conviction and sentence – Supreme Court examined the validity of multiple dying declarations, inconsistencies in witness testimonies, and the role of each accused – Held that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to contradictory dying declarations and lack of corroborative evidence – Appellant acquitted [Paras 1-28].

Evidence Law – Multiple Dying Declarations – The Court scrutinized the consistency and credibility of three dying declarations (Ex. P.12, Ex. P.22, and Ex. P.29) – Found significant contradictions regarding the events leading to the incident and the involvement of the accused – Emphasized that the reliability of dying declarations is paramount, and in this case, the discrepancies undermined their trustworthiness [Paras 12-23].

Witness Testimonies – Reliability and Language Barrier – The Court noted that key witnesses, including medical officers, did not speak the same language as the deceased, raising concerns about accurate recording and understanding of her statements – Highlighted the necessity for clear communication in recording dying declarations to ensure their authenticity [Paras 24-26].

Decision – Appeal allowed – Conviction and sentence set aside – Appellant acquitted of all charges – Supreme Court emphasized the importance of consistent and corroborated evidence in upholding convictions [Para 28].

Service Law – Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) – Petitioner challenged the dismissal of his services and sought acceptance of his voluntary retirement application – Petitioner absented himself without approval and moved to the United States for employment – Supreme Court examined the conditions of VRS and emphasized the employer's discretion in accepting retirement applications – Deemed acceptance not applicable in absence of explicit provision in the VRS – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-16].

Judicial Discretion – Acceptance of Voluntary Retirement – Court reiterated the employer's authority to decide on VRS applications – Highlighted that the petitioner's actions demonstrated a lack of intent to rejoin duty, justifying disciplinary action – Supreme Court found no merit in the petitioner's claim of deemed acceptance based on the expiration of the notice period [Paras 10-15].

Precedent Application – Tek Chand vs. Dile Ram – Court distinguished the present case from the precedent cited by the petitioner – Emphasized that voluntary retirement rules applicable in Tek Chand’s case were different from the VRS conditions of the respondent company – Affirmed the dismissal of the petitioner's service was justified under the specific terms of the VRS [Paras 6-9].

Decision – Special Leave Petition dismissed – No order as to costs – Supreme Court upheld the termination of the petitioner’s services and rejected the plea for deemed acceptance of the voluntary retirement application [Para 16].

Arbitration Law – Enforceability of Foreign Awards – Appeal challenging enforceability of foreign awards passed by GAFTA’s Board of Appeal under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Supreme Court emphasized the limited scope of inquiry under Section 48, which does not permit a review on merits – Held that procedural defects in foreign arbitration do not necessarily bar enforcement unless they contravene the fundamental policy of Indian law, interests of India, or justice or morality – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-47].

Public Policy – Interpretation and Application – Court discussed the interpretation of "public policy of India" under Section 48(2)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Reiterated that "public policy" for enforcement of foreign awards must be given a narrow meaning – Enforcement can only be refused if contrary to (i) fundamental policy of Indian law, (ii) interests of India, or (iii) justice or morality – Overruled broader interpretation suggested in Phulchand Exports Ltd. v. OOO Patriot [Paras 20-28].

Contractual Compliance – Certification and Evidence – GAFTA awards based on certification from SGS Geneva rather than SGS India, which was specified in the contract – Supreme Court held that while GAFTA may have erred in considering evidence beyond contract terms, such errors do not render awards unenforceable under Section 48 unless they meet the narrow criteria of public policy violations [Paras 30-46].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Supreme Court upheld the enforceability of GAFTA’s foreign awards, emphasizing the narrow scope of "public policy" under Section 48(2)(b) and the limited review permitted at the enforcement stage [Para 47].

Criminal Law – Conviction for Dowry Death – Appeal against High Court's reversal of acquittal – Trial court acquitted accused based on contradictory statements and lack of evidence – High Court convicted accused relying on presumption under Sections 113A and 113B of the Evidence Act – Supreme Court set aside High Court's decision, restoring trial court's acquittal – Emphasized presumption of innocence and requirement of compelling reasons to interfere with acquittal [Paras 1-15].

Evidence – Presumption under Sections 113A and 113B – High Court's reliance on presumption without substantive evidence – Supreme Court held presumption cannot override the necessity for proving basic ingredients of harassment or dowry demand – Restoration of acquittal due to lack of compelling evidence and presence of reasonable doubt [Paras 8-14].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Supreme Court allowed the appeal, restoring the trial court's judgment of acquittal – Emphasized principles of presumption of innocence and requirement for compelling circumstances to overturn acquittal [Paras 14-15].

Criminal Law – Conviction for Murder – Appeal against conviction under Sections 302 read with 34 IPC and 324 read with 34 IPC – Accused involved in a dispute over a pathway leading to the murder of Ramachandra Lagad – Conviction based on the testimony of the injured eyewitness (P.W. 4) and corroborated by medical evidence – Supreme Court upheld the conviction, emphasizing consistency and credibility of eyewitness testimony supported by medical evidence [Paras 1-34].

Evidence – Eyewitness Testimony – Sole testimony of an injured eyewitness (P.W. 4) sufficient for conviction – Discrepancies in minor details do not discredit the core narrative – Testimony supported by another eyewitness (P.W. 5) and medical evidence, including postmortem and injury reports [Paras 16-22].

Evidence – Forensic Evidence – Presence of human blood on the accused’s clothes not satisfactorily explained – Supported by chemical analysis reports – Rejection of the defense's contention regarding lack of supporting expert evidence [Paras 29-30].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and life sentence imposed by the lower courts – Emphasized the role of corroborative evidence and the lack of any substantial ground for interference [Paras 34].