Criminal Law – Murder Conviction – Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of her daughter-in-law by pouring kerosene and setting her on fire – Supreme Court upheld the conviction based on two dying declarations and corroborative evidence – Dying declarations recorded by the Investigating Officer and a Magistrate found reliable and consistent [Paras 1-4].

Evidence – Dying Declarations – Reliability – Deceased Santoshi made two dying declarations implicating the appellant – Declarations were recorded after certification of her fitness by a doctor – Supreme Court held declarations credible, as they were consistent and made without external influence – No evidence suggesting declarations were fabricated [Paras 2-4].

Dowry Death – Presumption under Section 113B – Court applied Section 113B of the Evidence Act, raising presumption of dowry death – Evidence showed Santoshi was subjected to cruelty and dowry demands shortly after marriage – Supreme Court upheld trial court’s and High Court’s application of presumption, affirming appellant’s guilt [Para 3].

Premature Release – Appellant's Imprisonment – Appellant sought consideration for premature release under Section 432 CrPC, having served 14 years and 6 months – Supreme Court directed State of U.P. to consider appellant’s case for premature release within three months as per law – State assured compliance [Para 5].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Conviction and life sentence upheld – Directed State to consider appellant's premature release in accordance with law [Para 5].

Property Law – Determination of Tenancy – Appellants, owners of property, challenged the possession by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (HPCL) after termination of lease – Court found the tenancy determination by appellants under Section 106 of T.P. Act valid – HPCL, as a holding-over tenant, deemed a trespasser post-termination, liable for mesne profits [Paras 1-26].

Lease Renewal – Notice Requirement – Court observed that HPCL failed to issue notice for lease renewal to the mortgagee as required under the lease deed – Deemed renewal of lease rejected – Original lease expired on July 1, 2000, without proper renewal [Paras 20-25].

Expropriatory Legislation – Interpretation – Supreme Court emphasized strict interpretation of expropriatory legislation – Reiterated that HPCL, being a 'State' under Article 12, must act reasonably, fairly, and without arbitrariness in exercising statutory powers [Paras 24-25].

Fairness and Reasonableness – Rent Assessment – Court noted HPCL’s offer of Rs. 5000/- per month rent as unfair and unreasonable considering the market value of the property – Emphasized the need for fair compensation to property owners [Para 25].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Judgment and decree of Ist Additional District Judge, Mainpuri, restored – HPCL declared a trespasser post-termination of lease and liable to pay mesne profits [Para 26].

Adoption Law – Validity of Adoption – Appellant claimed to be adopted son of Sarup Singh, challenging a gift deed executed by Sarup Singh – Courts below found no valid adoption, as no custom allowing adoption of person over 15 years was proved, nor was the actual giving and taking in adoption established – Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' findings, emphasizing the need for conclusive proof of custom and compliance with statutory conditions for valid adoption [Paras 1-19].

Customary Law – Pleading and Proof – Appellant failed to plead and prove custom allowing adoption of a married person over 15 years – Courts held that custom must be precisely pleaded and proven beyond doubt – Cited case law supports strict adherence to procedural requirements for establishing customary law [Paras 9-15].

Adoption Procedure – Section 10 and 11 Compliance – Adoption of person over 15 years requires proof of custom permitting such adoption – Actual giving and taking ceremony essential for valid adoption under Section 11 – Lack of evidence for these conditions led to rejection of adoption claim [Paras 13-15].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – High Court and first appellate court judgments affirmed – No merit found in appellant's claim of valid adoption [Paras 18-19].

Criminal Law – Rape and House Trespass – Appellant convicted for raping a minor girl and house trespass – High Court reversed trial court's acquittal – Supreme Court upheld conviction, noting proper evaluation of evidence and determination of prosecutrix’s age as below 16 years, making consent irrelevant [Paras 1-12].

Consent – Legal Interpretation – Submission under fear or terror is not consent – Consent must be voluntary and informed, based on understanding the act's significance – Supreme Court highlighted differences between consent under threat and voluntary consent, reinforcing legal standards [Paras 13-15].

Medical Evidence – Corroboration of Rape – Medical examination confirmed rape, showing injuries consistent with forced intercourse – Blood stains and human spermatozoa found on clothes of prosecutrix and appellant supported prosecution's case [Paras 6, 10-11].

Judicial Sensitivity – Treatment of Rape Victims – Supreme Court emphasized need for sensitive handling of rape cases by prosecution and judiciary, suggesting guidelines for victim support and investigation procedures – Recommendations include legal representation for victims, timely medical examination, and prompt investigation [Paras 17-18].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and sentence affirmed – Supreme Court directed State authorities to issue comprehensive guidelines for handling rape cases, ensuring sensitive treatment of victims [Paras 16-18].

Hajj Policy – Long-Term Framework – Supreme Court directed that Hajj Policy should be framed for a period of five years (2013-2017) instead of on an annual basis – Emphasized the need for policy stability and continuity, allowing amendments only for changes in international agreements – The policy should address special needs of lady pilgrims [Paras 1-10].

Time-Bound Hajj Process – Submission of applications, scrutiny, and seat allotment to follow a strict schedule – No extension of deadlines to ensure efficiency and avoid disruptions – Reference to Mridul Dhar v. Union of India, directing adherence to time schedules in public interest [Paras 11-13].

Accommodation in Saudi Arabia – Emphasis on securing long-term accommodation arrangements (at least five years) to reduce costs and improve convenience for pilgrims – Formation of a committee including non-official members to negotiate and secure such arrangements [Paras 14-17].

Airfare – Reduction in airfare through competitive tendering – Suggestion to invite tenders from multiple airlines, including Saudi Airlines and Indian registered airlines, while considering Saudi policy constraints [Paras 18-19].

Grievance Redressal – Establishment of a dedicated grievance redressal mechanism within the Hajj Cell – Recommendation to assign responsibility to an officer of Deputy Secretary level – Separation of Gulf and Hajj responsibilities for better management [Paras 20-21].

Private Tour Operators (PTOs) – Approval of policy for PTOs for Hajj 2013-2017 – Policy balances needs of pilgrims with opportunities for new entrants – Classification of PTOs into two categories to ensure fair distribution of seats and avoid monopoly – Annual review and allocation based on qualification and compliance [Paras 22-28].

Decision – Appeal and connected matters disposed of – Supreme Court provided comprehensive directions for improvements in Hajj management, addressing key issues for better implementation and support for pilgrims [Paras 32-36].

RTI Act – Exemption for Personal Information – Appellant sought information on follow-up action related to the ACR of a CESTAT Member – Request denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which exempts personal information from disclosure if it causes unwarranted invasion of privacy – Supreme Court upheld denial, citing lack of larger public interest justifying the disclosure [Paras 2-17].

Third-Party Information – Disclosure Procedure – Court emphasized mandatory procedure under Section 11(1) RTI Act for third-party information – Decision requires notice to the third party and consideration of their privacy defense against public interest in disclosure – Procedure ensures balanced evaluation of competing interests [Paras 13-15].

Public Interest and Privacy – Supreme Court reaffirmed that public interest must outweigh privacy concerns for disclosure of personal information – Mere public duty of an officer does not negate privacy rights – Relevant precedents, including Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Cen. Information Commr., discussed to underscore importance of balancing transparency and privacy [Paras 9-16].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Supreme Court found no merit in appellant's claim for disclosure, affirming High Court's judgment – RTI requests for personal information must demonstrate larger public interest to override privacy defenses [Para 17].

Entertainment Tax – DTH Services – Appellants challenged the imposition of entertainment tax by the Madhya Pradesh Government on DTH services under the 1936 Act – Supreme Court held that the provisions of the 1936 Act are applicable only to place-related entertainment, not to DTH services – DTH operations, being non-place related, are beyond the charge created by the taxing statute – Notification dated May 5, 2008, prescribing a 20% entertainment duty does not extend the scope of the 1936 Act to cover DTH operations [Paras 1-41].

Collection Mechanism – Applicability – Court emphasized that the collection machinery under the 1936 Act (requiring stamped tickets) cannot be applied to DTH services – Established principle that if collection machinery is inapplicable, the event is beyond the charge of the tax [Paras 35-39].

Legislative Competence – Not Addressed – As the 1936 Act does not cover DTH operations, the Court did not address arguments regarding the legislative competence of the State to impose such tax, given that DTH is a service chargeable to service tax under the Finance Act 1994 [Para 43].

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment upholding the State's demand for entertainment tax on DTH services – No costs awarded [Paras 42, 44].

Divorce – Cruelty and Desertion – Appellant sought dissolution of marriage under Section 13 on grounds of cruelty and desertion by the respondent – Family Court and High Court found that the appellant was cruel and responsible for the situation leading to the respondent's departure from the matrimonial home – Both courts dismissed the divorce petition, holding that the appellant was trying to take advantage of his own wrong [Paras 2-6].

Prior Marriage Concealment – Appellant failed to disclose his previous marriage and a son from that marriage to the respondent – High Court noted the similarity in the appellant's allegations in divorce petitions against both the first and second wives, indicating a pattern of deceit – Appellant's attempt to remarry during the pendency of the appeal further demonstrated his disregard for legal and ethical obligations [Paras 8-12].

Section 23(1)(a) – Court's Examination – Under Section 23(1)(a), court must ensure the petitioner is not taking advantage of his or her own wrong – Both courts found the appellant guilty of cruelty and creating circumstances forcing the respondent to leave – Consequently, relief was denied as the appellant sought to benefit from his own wrongdoing [Paras 13-14].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the Family Court and High Court, finding no illegality or perversity in their judgments – Appellant's appeal dismissed with no order as to costs [Paras 14-15].

Wildlife Conservation – Second Home for Asiatic Lion – Supreme Court directed the creation of a second home for the endangered Asiatic Lion in Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary – Emphasized the necessity of reintroducing the lion to prevent extinction due to epidemics, natural calamities, or other threats – Kuno identified as the most suitable habitat after extensive research and surveys [Paras 1-16].

Legal Framework – Articles 48A and 51A of the Constitution – Wild Life (Protection) Act and Forest (Conservation) Act – Court underscored the duty of the state and citizens to protect wildlife and conserve biodiversity – Highlighted the necessity of implementing national wildlife action plans and centrally sponsored schemes for endangered species [Paras 26-37].

Eco-Centric Approach – Reintroduction Project – Supreme Court advocated for an eco-centric approach rather than an anthropocentric one – Decisions should prioritize the species' best interests – Criticized Gujarat’s refusal to translocate lions based on cultural and regional pride [Paras 38-41, 48-50].

Implementation and Monitoring – Committee Formation – Directed the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) to constitute an expert committee for the reintroduction project – Committee to include senior officials, technical experts, and wildlife biologists – MoEF to ensure the translocation process follows IUCN guidelines and addresses prey base and habitat management [Paras 61-62].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Supreme Court ordered urgent steps for the reintroduction of Asiatic lions to Kuno within six months – Quashed MoEF's decision to introduce African cheetahs in Kuno, citing lack of scientific study and statutory approval – Directed the Government of India and MoEF to identify and protect all endangered species, conduct periodic reviews, and implement recovery programs [Paras 60-63].