NDPS Act – Sentence and Default Imprisonment – Appellants convicted under Sections 8(c), 21, and 29 of the NDPS Act for possession of commercial quantity of brown sugar (500 grams) – Trial court imposed 15 years RI and Rs. 1.5 lakh fine, with 3 years RI in default – High Court affirmed conviction and sentence – Supreme Court confirms conviction but modifies sentence to 10 years RI (minimum prescribed) and reduces default imprisonment to 6 months considering the appellants' poverty and first-time offense [Paras 8-15].

Nature of Imprisonment in Default of Fine – Supreme Court clarifies that default imprisonment is not a sentence but a penalty for non-payment of fine – Emphasizes courts must consider offender's financial capacity, nature of the offense, and circumstances before imposing harsh default terms – References past rulings to highlight need for proportionate fines and penalties [Paras 10-14].

Decision: Appeals partly allowed – Conviction confirmed – Sentence reduced to 10 years RI – Default imprisonment reduced to 6 months – Appellants ordered to be released forthwith if no other offenses are pending [Paras 15-16].

Murder – Reclassification to Culpable Homicide – Appellant convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his son – Supreme Court finds the absence of premeditation and concludes that the act was committed in the heat of passion due to the son's misbehavior under the influence of liquor – Reclassifies the offense under Section 304 Part I IPC – Sentence reduced to the period already undergone [Paras 8-10].

Circumstantial Evidence – Witness Testimony – Incident witnessed by the mother of the deceased, who testified that the appellant inflicted a single stab injury on the deceased – Appellant's actions driven by the son's habitual drunken misbehavior – Court notes the single blow was inflicted without cruelty and in a moment of anger [Paras 5-9].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Conviction altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part I IPC – Sentence modified to period already undergone – Appellant ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case [Paras 9-10].

Interest on Decretal Amount – Execution of Decree – Interpretation of Order XXI Rules 1, 4, and 5 of CPC: The appellant challenged the computation of interest on the decretal amount following partial payments made towards the award. The court examined the implications of partial payments on the cessation of interest, as prescribed under Order XXI Rules 1(4) and (5). The court upheld that interest ceases to accrue on the amount paid under a decree from the date of payment notification to the decree-holder. The decision also affirmed the application of the general rule of appropriation, directing adjustments first towards interest, then towards costs, and lastly towards the principal amount [Paras 1-29]​​.

Calculation of Interest – Role of Arbitrator's Award – Rule of Court Approval: The court analyzed the award issued by the arbitrator and its subsequent approval as the rule of the court. It clarified that the award amount and the interest are distinct components and must be treated separately in the calculation of amounts due. The interest was calculated from a specific date till the decree's payment or the date of the decree, whichever was earlier. The future interest was awarded at 12% per annum from the decree date till realization, if not paid within two months [Paras 12-18]​​.

Application of Section 34 of CPC and Section 3(3)(c) of Interest Act: The court addressed the contention that Section 34 CPC and Section 3(3)(c) of the Interest Act prohibit the award of interest upon interest. The court found no merit in this argument, concluding that the interest calculation adhered to the decree's terms and did not contravene these statutory provisions [Paras 29]​​.

Decision: Appeal dismissed. The court affirmed the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, which upheld the Single Judge's order on the calculation and cessation of interest following partial payments. The appellant's objections were dismissed, and the original calculation of interest as per the decree was upheld [Paras 1-29]​​.

Criminal Law – Bail Application – Transportation of Prohibited Substances – Appellants were found transporting large quantities of cough syrup containing codeine phosphate without valid documents – Contended that content per dosage was within permissible limits – High Court denied bail, noting lack of proper documentation and potential violation of NDPS Act – Supreme Court upheld the decision, emphasizing the importance of documentation and legal compliance in the transportation of controlled substances [Paras 1-17].

NDPS Act – Codeine Phosphate Content – Therapeutic Practice Exception – Appellants argued exemption under Notifications dated 14.11.1985 and 29.1.1993, claiming permissible content per dosage unit – Court found failure to satisfy therapeutic practice requirement – Reiterated necessity for proper documentation to claim exemption under NDPS Act [Paras 12-13].

Illegality of Detention – Period in Custody – Allegations of illegal detention beyond 24 hours by police – High Court’s satisfaction with the detention procedure upheld – Claim of prolonged custody raised for the first time on appeal, not entertained by the Supreme Court [Paras 14-15].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Denial of bail affirmed – Court clarified that observations were specific to the bail application and did not address the merits of the case against the appellants [Para 17].

Bihar Consolidation Act – Abatement of Proceedings – Partition suit dismissed and appeal filed – During pendency, consolidation notification issued – Application for abatement filed but not considered – Appellate court allowed withdrawal of appeal due to non-substitution of a respondent's legal representatives – Remand by High Court for proper disposal of appeal including competency consideration – Consolidation proceedings continued relying on civil court findings – Supreme Court held entire civil proceedings abate on consolidation notification, rendering civil court findings extinct [Paras 1-37].

Consolidation Proceedings – Civil Court Findings – High Court upheld reliance on civil court findings by consolidation authorities – Supreme Court emphasized statutory abatement under Section 4(c) abates entire civil proceedings, including judgments and decrees, ensuring consolidation authorities' unhampered jurisdiction – Reiterated consolidation proceedings must not rely on civil court findings which are rendered extinct by abatement [Paras 30-37].

Decision:

Appeal allowed – Orders of learned single Judge and Division Bench set aside – Matter remanded to learned single Judge for decision on merits based on material before Consolidation Authorities – Civil court findings not to be considered [Para 37].

Hindu Marriage Act – Divorce by Mutual Consent – Custody of Children – Parties divorced by mutual consent with the father gaining sole custody of children and the mother relinquishing visitation rights – Mother later challenged decree alleging fraud and sought custody – Supreme Court upheld lower court's decisions emphasizing the welfare and desires of the children who preferred to stay with their father and resisted visiting their mother – Court denied visitation rights to the mother, holding such an arrangement adverse to the children's best interests [Paras 1-16].

Custody Determination – Welfare of Minor – Court reiterated principles from previous cases, emphasizing that custody decisions should prioritize the child's welfare, desires, and a conducive upbringing environment over the parents' rights – Noted that moral, ethical, and physical well-being are paramount considerations [Paras 12-14].

Decision:

Appeals dismissed – High Court's orders affirmed – Custody of children to remain with the father – No visitation rights granted to the mother [Para 16].

Penal Code – Criminal Conspiracy – Evidence – Prosecution's case based on inference of conspiracy to commit murder – Proof required beyond reasonable doubt – No credible ocular evidence – Discrepancies in witness testimonies – Court emphasized the need for direct or inferred evidence showing agreement to commit the crime – Absence of meeting of minds between accused for conspiracy – Appeals allowed, convictions set aside [Paras 1-18].

Penal Code – Murder – Last Seen Doctrine – Prosecution's reliance on last seen doctrine insufficient without corroborating evidence – Recovery of blood-stained clothes and knife not adequate to establish guilt – Court underscored the importance of conclusive evidence linking accused to the crime – Benefit of doubt given to the accused [Paras 16-18].

Decision:

Appeals allowed – Convictions under Sections 120B and 302 IPC set aside – Accused acquitted – Directed to be released unless required in other cases [Para 18].

Criminal Law – Abetment to Suicide – Instigation – The court examined the requirements for proving abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. It emphasized that mere utterance of words or a single instance of harassment may not constitute instigation. Persistent and continuous harassment, coupled with the utterance of words suggesting suicide, can be sufficient to infer instigation. In the present case, the appellant's continuous harassment and humiliation of the deceased led to his suicide, as evidenced by the suicide note and statements of the deceased's family members [Paras 1-16].

Criminal Procedure – Quashing of Prosecution – While dealing with a quashing application under Section 482 CrPC, the court cannot form a firm opinion but only a tentative view to see if the charges can evoke the presumption of guilt. The court dismissed the appellant's plea for quashing the chargesheet, noting the consistent and persistent nature of harassment and the specific allegations made against the appellant [Paras 14-16].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – High Court's decision upheld – Observations made in the judgment not to affect the trial's outcome [Para 16].

Penal Code – Criminal Conspiracy, Murder, and Evidence – Conviction based on circumstantial evidence – Essential to establish motive and ensure that all links in the chain of evidence are conclusive and point towards guilt – Court affirmed findings of lower courts – Appellant failed to provide explanations for incriminating circumstances during examination under Section 313 CrPC – Recovery of articles and call records supported prosecution’s case – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-25].

Criminal Procedure – Examination of Accused – Obligation of the accused to explain incriminating circumstances when examined under Section 313 CrPC – Court noted failure of the appellant to explain presence at crime scene and other evidence linking him to the crime – Statements from police recoveries upheld as credible despite absence of independent witnesses [Paras 20-25].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Convictions under Sections 120B, 201, 302, 34, and 404 IPC upheld – Court found the chain of evidence complete and the appellant’s explanations inadequate [Para 25].