Criminal Law – Conviction based on Circumstantial Evidence – Appellant convicted for the murder of his wife – Court discusses the principles for convicting based on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing that the chain of evidence must be complete and exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence – The appellant was "last seen" with the deceased, failed to provide a satisfactory explanation, and exhibited suspicious conduct post-incident [Paras 1-24, 37].

Witness Testimony – Examination of Witnesses – Prosecution not bound to examine all listed witnesses – Court held that the prosecution's failure to examine certain witnesses did not affect the case as those witnesses were available to the defense, and their testimony was not essential to the core issues [Paras 8-17].

Hostile Witnesses – Court held that the testimony of hostile witnesses could still be relied upon to the extent it supports the prosecution's case – Partial acceptance of hostile witness evidence after careful scrutiny is permissible [Paras 19-20].

Motive and Conduct – Examination of the accused's motive and conduct, including post-incident behavior and possession of the victim's belongings – The presence of motive strengthens the prosecution's case when supported by other evidence [Paras 21-23, 36].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and sentence upheld – Court found the prosecution's case to be coherent and supported by reliable evidence – Minor discrepancies in witness testimonies were deemed non-material [Para 42].

Education – Rights of Disabled Students – Appellant-organization sought mandamus for provisions to introduce a bridge course for visually impaired students in the first year of a four-year undergraduate program – Sought directions for accessible reading materials and teacher training – High Court directed the University to consider suggestions and report by 7th June 2013 – Supreme Court emphasized the need for sensitivity and responsiveness towards visually impaired students, urging the University to address grievances more comprehensively [Paras 1-12].

Statutory Obligations – Persons with Disabilities Act – Sections 30 and 31 – University required to restructure curriculum and provide adequate facilities for visually impaired students – Ensuring compliance with international conventions and constitutional mandates – Court highlighted the importance of suitable modifications in the examination system and curriculum to accommodate visually impaired students [Paras 9-11].

International Conventions – United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – India’s commitment to providing appropriate measures for disabled students, including training of teachers and use of alternative communication modes – Court referred to Article 24 of the Convention to underline the necessity of specialized educational techniques and materials [Para 11].

Decision – Appeal Disposed – Directed the appellant-organization to submit a representation with detailed grievances and suggestions to the Empowered Committee within three days – Committee to address the issues within a week – Court refrained from staying the introduction of the four-year undergraduate program [Para 12-13].

Criminal Law – Inherent Powers of High Court – Exercise of jurisdiction u/s 482 CrPC – High Court directed refund of amount deposited by the respondent's deceased husband, considering it was made to avoid arrest – Court held that inherent powers cannot be invoked for administrative actions; appropriate remedy is through writ jurisdiction [Paras 11-20].

Deposit of Money – Voluntary vs. Conditional Deposit – Distinction between money deposited voluntarily to avoid arrest and money deposited as a condition of bail – Court clarified that the latter can be directed to be refunded upon acquittal, but the former requires a different legal approach [Para 20].

Judicial Review – Appropriate Forum – Administrative actions by governmental agencies to be challenged through writ petitions, not under inherent powers of High Court – Court emphasized the necessity of following proper legal channels for such disputes [Paras 20-21].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – High Court's order set aside – Liberty granted to the appellant to approach the High Court by way of a writ petition – All contentions regarding liability and entitlement for refund to be addressed in writ jurisdiction [Para 21].

Criminal Law – Conviction and Sentence – Murder and Theft – Court upheld the conviction and life imprisonment sentence for murder, and three years for theft, based on reliable witness testimony, medical evidence, and recovery of stolen items – Minor contradictions in witness statements deemed insignificant and not undermining overall credibility [Paras 1-20].

Witness Credibility – Minor Contradictions – Court emphasized that minor discrepancies do not vitiate the testimony if it remains consistent and credible overall – Witnesses' statements were scrutinized, and minor discrepancies were found not to affect the core of the prosecution's case [Paras 11-15].

Delay in Lodging FIR – Explained and Justified – Court held that the delay in lodging the FIR was satisfactorily explained by the circumstances, including the initial registration under Section 174 CrPC and subsequent identification of the deceased – Delay did not indicate fabrication of evidence [Paras 9-10].

Sole Testimony – Conviction – Court reiterated that conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a witness if found reliable and corroborated by other evidence – PW-6's testimony was deemed trustworthy and corroborated by medical evidence and recovery of stolen items [Paras 16-19].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and sentence upheld – Testimony of PW-6 corroborated by medical evidence and recovery of stolen items, found reliable and credible – Minor contradictions and delay in lodging FIR not affecting the overall case [Para 20].

Narcotics Law – Authority to Search and Seize – Compliance with Section 42 NDPS Act – Court examined whether a temporary in-charge SHO (Station House Officer) could legally conduct search and seizure operations under the NDPS Act – The officer had received reliable information and conducted the operations as per procedural requirements – High Court's strict interpretation of the term "posted" as SHO was found erroneous – The officer in temporary charge was deemed competent to conduct the operations [Paras 11-14].

Judicial Interpretation – Literal vs. Pragmatic Approach – Court emphasized a pragmatic approach to interpreting statutory provisions – Strict literal interpretation may defeat legislative intent and practical enforcement – Constitution Bench precedent in Karnail Singh applied to justify substantial compliance with Section 42 NDPS Act [Para 12].

Conviction and Sentence – Restoration by Supreme Court – High Court's judgment of acquittal set aside – Trial court's conviction and sentence restored – Directions issued for the respondent's arrest to serve the remaining sentence [Para 15].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – High Court's judgment of acquittal set aside – Trial court's judgment of conviction and sentence restored – Directions for arrest and serving remaining sentence [Para 15].

Criminal Law – Circumstantial Evidence – Conviction based on circumstantial evidence where no eye-witnesses are available – Court emphasized that the absence of an explanation from the accused for incriminating circumstances, or providing a false explanation, becomes an additional link in the chain of evidence to establish guilt – The appellant's behavior and absconding from the scene reinforced the inference of guilt [Paras 6-19].

Medical Evidence – Hyoid Bone Fracture – Court examined medical testimony and established jurisprudence regarding the fracture of the hyoid bone in cases of strangulation versus hanging – Absence of hyoid bone fracture does not necessarily indicate suicide over homicide – Consistent judicial interpretation favors considering overall circumstances and evidence [Paras 12-14].

Last Seen Theory – Burden on Accused – Court reiterated that when the accused is last seen with the deceased, it becomes incumbent on the accused to explain the circumstances leading to the victim's death – Failure to provide a plausible explanation strengthens the prosecution's case [Para 17].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and sentence affirmed – Court found the appellant had adequate motive, failed to explain the incriminating circumstances, and the evidence supported the conclusion of guilt – No reason to interfere with the lower courts' judgments [Para 20].

Criminal Law – Investigation Fairness – Court highlighted the necessity of unbiased and transparent investigations, emphasizing that omissions by investigating officers do not invalidate the prosecution's case unless the investigation is proven to be dishonest or manipulated – Investigation should maintain public confidence in the justice system and respect the constitutional rights of all parties [Paras 12-13].

Witness Testimony – Reliability of Witnesses – Court found the testimonies of Maya Devi (PW.3) and Birma (PW.4) consistent and credible, noting that their presence at the crime scene was justified despite minor discrepancies – The failure of the defense to effectively challenge the core prosecution evidence reinforced the validity of the conviction [Paras 9-11].

Motive and Threats – Adequate Proof – Evidence established that the appellant had a motive related to a financial dispute and had threatened the deceased prior to the murder – The unchallenged testimonies about the motive and prior threats further substantiated the prosecution's case [Paras 6-7].

Conviction Upheld – Court affirmed the conviction and life sentence, finding no merit in the appeal – Criticized the initial investigation's deficiencies but upheld the overall integrity of the evidence supporting the conviction [Para 18].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC upheld – Directions issued for the state administration to review the conduct of the investigating officer [Paras 18-19].

Criminal Law – Circumstantial Evidence – Conviction based on circumstantial evidence – Court emphasized that all circumstances must be consistent with the guilt of the accused and must exclude any hypothesis of innocence – Suspicion, however grave, cannot replace proof beyond a reasonable doubt – Court found that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of evidence to conclusively prove the guilt of the appellant [Paras 6-10, 18].

Examination of Accused – Section 313 CrPC – Court highlighted the necessity of putting all incriminating circumstances to the accused during examination – Failure to put the key evidence (bloodstains on the appellant's underwear matching the victim's blood group) to the accused invalidated reliance on this evidence – The accused's right to explain incriminating evidence is fundamental to a fair trial [Paras 12-13, 18].

Abscondence – Relevance and Interpretation – Court stated that mere abscondence does not necessarily indicate guilt; it must be evaluated in the context of the entire evidence – Abscondence may be consistent with innocence under certain circumstances [Paras 14-15].

Benefit of Doubt – Doctrine of Innocence – Court reiterated that the prosecution must prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt, especially in circumstantial evidence cases – Any reasonable doubt must result in acquittal [Paras 11, 17].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Conviction and death sentence set aside – Appellant to be released forthwith unless required in any other case – Court appreciated the amicus curiae for their assistance [Para 18].

Criminal Law – Sanction for Prosecution – Validity – Court examined the requirement for valid sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act – Sanction must demonstrate the sanctioning authority's application of mind to the material facts – High Court erred in dismissing the CBI's application for leave to appeal against acquittal solely based on alleged sanction defect [Paras 6-16].

Parameters of Appeal – Court's Duty – High Court's responsibility to scrutinize evidence thoroughly and not merely endorse the trial court's findings – Court emphasized the need for a detailed examination of all aspects of the case when considering an appeal against acquittal [Para 19].

Remand to High Court – Appropriate Procedure – Court decided to remit the case to the High Court for reconsideration of the application for leave to appeal – Highlighted that remanding to the trial court would cause unnecessary delays in the criminal justice process [Paras 17-20].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – High Court's order and trial court's findings on the validity of sanction set aside – Case remitted to High Court for reconsideration of the application for leave to appeal – No opinion expressed on merits of the case [Para 20].