Criminal Procedure – Quashing of Charges – Section 482 CrPC – Power to quash proceedings after framing of charges is somewhat wider as materials revealed by investigation come on record – Such materials can be looked into not for determining guilt or innocence but for satisfaction that they do not disclose the commission of an offense alleged [Paras 15-16].

Forgery and Fraud – Prima Facie Case – Allegations of forgery and fraud in renewal and encashment of fixed deposits – No positive role of accused bank officials disclosed in materials – Criminal trial not to assume character of fishing and roving enquiry – Charges against bank officials not maintainable [Paras 19].

Evidence – Criminal Jurisprudence – Prosecution cannot continue based on mere hope and expectation – Criminal trial contemplated only on definite allegations prima facie establishing commission of an offense [Paras 18-19].

Decision: Appeals by bank officials allowed – Criminal proceeding not maintainable against accused bank officials – Partial relief granted to another accused challenged and set aside – Criminal appeal arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 569 of 2012 allowed in part [Paras 23].

Contempt of Court – Advocate's Conduct – Appellant guilty of suborning a court witness in a criminal trial – No remorse shown – Action struck at roots of criminal justice administration – Normally warrants imprisonment – Consideration of contemnor's age, health of his wife, and prolonged proceedings – Undertaking by contemnor to perform pro bono services and monetary donation accepted as punishment [Paras 7-14].

Judicial Objective – Balanced Approach – Importance of objectivity in judicial proceedings – Mitigating factors considered – Punishment aimed at serving social purpose rather than imprisonment [Paras 8-10].

Decision: Appeal disposed of with directions – Contemnor barred from professional work for one year, to provide pro bono services, and to donate Rs. 21 lakhs to Bar Council of India for law college development – Delhi Legal Services Authority to monitor and report on contemnor's pro bono work [Paras 11-15].

Criminal Law – Unlawful Assembly – Section 149 IPC – Conviction of appellants for offenses under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC – High Court upheld the conviction, reversing the Trial Court's view on the applicability of Section 149 – Assembly of accused with a common object to commit murder established – Motive and antecedent circumstances considered [Paras 52-71].

Motive and Evidence – Land dispute and prior murder – Evidence of enmity between parties and previous incidents leading to motive – Convictions based on consistent and reliable witness testimony and medical evidence – High Court's judgment supported by comprehensive analysis of facts [Paras 41-47, 58-66].

Delay in FIR and Presence of Complainant – Reasonable explanation for delay in lodging FIR and special report – Presence of complainant at crime scene corroborated by circumstances – Absence of injuries on complainant not conclusive of non-presence [Paras 36-40, 44-48].

Decision: Appeals dismissed – Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC upheld – High Court's decision affirmed in entirety [Paras 72].

Criminal Law – Dying Declaration – Conviction under Section 304B and 498A IPC – Deceased made a dying declaration blaming the appellant for dowry demands and driving her to suicide – Statement recorded by police in presence of doctors – Deceased conscious and fit to make statement despite 90% burns – Dying declaration detailed and consistent with surrounding facts – Accepted as voluntary and truthful [Paras 6-27].

Evidence – Burns and Consciousness – Precedent cases where victims with severe burns made reliable dying declarations – Presence of medical officers and absence of undue influence or pressure at time of statement [Paras 16-20].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Conviction and sentence under Sections 304B and 498A IPC upheld – Dying declaration accepted as voluntary and truthful [Paras 28-29].

Succession and Settlement – Testamentary Disposition vs. Settlement – Interpretation of Exhibit A1 concerning item No. 1 of Schedule No. 8 – Distinction between settlement (gift) and testamentary disposition (Will) – Document composite in nature with characteristics of both – Test for determination based on transfer of interest in praesenti or upon executant's death – Exhibit A1 creating no vested rights in praesenti for item No. 1, thus considered testamentary [Paras 9-30].

Registration of Will – Composite Document – Mere registration does not alter testamentary nature – Document severable in parts, operating as a Will or settlement based on respective terms – Intention of executants determined by words used in the document – Ambulatory nature of Will with revocability during lifetime [Paras 16-24].

Intention and Language – Primary rule of construction based on clear intention found in document – Contemporary events and circumstances surrounding execution irrelevant if language unambiguous – Meaning and effect discerned from ordinary usage of words in original language of document [Paras 18-19].

Decision: Appeals allowed – High Court and lower appellate court judgments set aside – Judgment and decree of trial court restored – Item No. 1 of Schedule No. 8 under Exhibit A1 deemed testamentary in character, not available for partition during executants' lifetime [Paras 31].

Evidence Act – Test Identification Parade (TIP) – Failure to hold TIP not fatal to prosecution's case – Court must be cautious when accepting in-court identification if accused is a stranger to the witness – Substantive evidence of accused's involvement can suffice without TIP if other corroborative evidence exists – TIP should be conducted early to prevent memory fade [Paras 19-29].

Penal Code – Conviction for Murder and Dacoity – Conviction under Sections 302 and 397 IPC upheld based on credible witness testimony and corroborative evidence – Identification by child witness (victim) accepted due to absence of meaningful cross-examination – Recovery of stolen items further supported conviction [Paras 30-32].

House Trespass Intent – Section 449 IPC – House trespass was for the purpose of committing robbery, not for committing an offense punishable with death – Conviction under Section 449 IPC not sustainable – Conviction for Sections 302 and 397 IPC affirmed, conviction under Section 449 IPC set aside [Paras 32-33].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Conviction under Section 449 IPC set aside – Convictions under Sections 302 and 397 IPC upheld – Appellant's sentence for Sections 302 and 397 IPC affirmed [Paras 33].

Court Fees – Declaratory Suit – Valuation and Court Fees – Suit for declaration that a will and sale deed are void, without consequential relief – Ad valorem court fee required under Section 7(iv-A) of the U.P. Amendment Act – Article 17(iii) of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act not applicable when specific provision for valuation exists under U.P. Amendment Act – Plaintiff's valuation of suit property at Rs. 30 Lakhs but paid fixed court fee of Rs. 200/- incorrect – Plaintiff required to pay ad valorem court fee as per U.P. Amendment Act [Paras 3-12].

Comparative Analysis – Court Fees Act and U.P. Amendment Act – U.P. Amendment Act specifically provides for suits involving cancellation of instruments – Article 17(iii) of Schedule II applicable only when no other provision under the Act covers the relief sought – U.P. Amendment Act requires ad valorem court fee for suits involving cancellation of a will or sale deed [Paras 7-9].

Applicability of Precedent – Suhrid Singh Case – Not applicable to current case as it dealt with Punjab's amendment and not U.P. Amendment Act – U.P. Amendment Act specifically addressed valuation issues for suits seeking to cancel instruments securing property of monetary value [Paras 10-11].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Plaintiff required to pay ad valorem court fee under Section 7(iv-A) of the U.P. Amendment Act – High Court and Trial Court decisions upheld [Para 12].

Representing Advocates:

For the appellant: Viresh Kumar Yadav, Md. Farman

For the respondent: M.R. Shamshad, Shashank Singh, Gaurav Agarwal

Criminal Law – Death Sentence – Principles of sentencing – Death penalty converted to life imprisonment – Examination of whether life imprisonment or death sentence should be awarded in capital offences – Uncertainty and lack of uniformity in sentencing – Life imprisonment preferred when death sentence not unquestionably necessary [Paras 1-81].

Sentencing – Role of Remission – Power of appropriate Government under Section 432 CrPC – Remission is statutory, requiring procedural and substantive checks – Remissions to be granted case-by-case, not wholesale – Section 433A mandates 14 years of imprisonment for life sentences [Paras 55-77].

Death Penalty – Rarest of Rare Cases – Application of Bachan Singh principles – Need for fresh look at aggravating and mitigating circumstances approach – Sentencing must consider both crime and criminal – Judge-centric sentencing should be avoided in favor of principled sentencing [Paras 27-33, 80].

Decision: Appeals allowed to the extent – Death penalty awarded to appellants converted into sentence of life imprisonment – No evidence to support conclusions of sexual harassment or professional killing – Appreciation recorded for counsel efforts [Paras 81-83].

Motor Vehicles Act – Accident Compensation – Liability of Insurer – Nature of insurance policy crucial for determining liability – Certificate of Insurance alone insufficient to ascertain policy type – Requirement for full policy production to determine if it is an "Act Policy" or a "Comprehensive/Package Policy" – Liability depends on policy nature [Paras 7-14].

Legal Precedent – Distinction between Policy Types – Clarification provided in recent judgments distinguishing "Act Policy" and "Comprehensive/Package Policy" – Comprehensive policies include third-party coverage including vehicle occupants – Act policies cover statutory requirements only [Paras 13, 21-22].

Remand for Policy Examination – Absence of full policy necessitates remand to tribunal for complete policy examination – Parties granted liberty to file additional documents and evidence [Paras 14-15].

Decision: Appeals by insurer allowed in part – Matter remitted to tribunal for determination of policy nature – Compensation quantum upheld – Appeals by claimant for enhancement of compensation dismissed – No order as to costs [Paras 17].