Defamation – Criminal Law – Appeal against summoning order and complaint quashing – A news article titled "Mission Misconduct" published in INDIA TODAY magazine led to defamation complaints – The article reported allegations of sexual misconduct, corruption, and sale of passports by Indian officials – The complainant, a senior officer, sought action against the Editor-in-Chief, author, and public servants – Supreme Court held that the Editor-in-Chief cannot be held liable without specific allegations against him – The public servants' actions were protected as they reported in their official capacity – The author of the article to be tried on facts to determine if the act was justified – Appeals allowed for Editor-in-Chief and public servants, appeal by author rejected [Paras 1-26].

Presumption – Editor vs. Editor-in-Chief – Section 7 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 applies presumption to editors but not to Editor-in-Chief – Supreme Court clarifies that Chief Editors can be proceeded against if specific allegations are made – In absence of specific allegations, no presumption against Chief Editors – Case reinforced by lack of presumption for Editor-in-Chief [Paras 17, 22-23].

Exceptions to Defamation – Section 499 IPC – Benefit of exceptions to defamation can be considered at the stage of application under Section 482 CrPC – Accurate and good faith reporting of public conduct of public servants protected – Reporting made to a superior officer alleging misconduct protected under Exception 8 to Section 499 IPC [Paras 18-20].

Decision – Appeals allowed in part – Summoning order and complaint against Editor-in-Chief (A-1) and public servants (A-3, A-4, A-8) quashed – Appeal by author of the article (A-2) rejected – Author to face trial on facts [Paras 26].

Environmental Law – Establishment of Wood-Based Industries – Appeal against NGT’s order quashing state notice for establishing new WBIs – NGT overstepped its jurisdiction by interfering with the expert assessment of the Forest Survey of India (FSI) – Supreme Court held that the estimation of timber availability by FSI was based on scientific methods and could not be lightly brushed aside – Courts should not enter into areas that are the domain of experts – Appeal allowed, NGT’s order set aside [Paras 1-95].

Sustainable Development – Balance with Environmental Protection – Importance of maintaining a balance between environmental protection and sustainable development – FSI’s assessment indicated sufficient timber availability for WBIs in Uttar Pradesh – Investment in WBIs would boost employment and rural economy, encouraging agro-forestry and reducing migration – State directed to ensure compliance with environmental norms [Paras 87-100].

Principles of Natural Justice – NGT’s failure to adhere to principles of natural justice – NGT did not grant a fair hearing to the provisional license holders – Lack of transparency in considering the credentials and bona fides of the applicants – Appeals against NGT’s orders allowed due to procedural impropriety [Paras 95-97].

Decision – Appeals allowed – NGT’s orders quashing state notice and provisional licenses set aside – State’s decision to grant licenses upheld – State directed to ensure compliance with environmental norms and promote sustainable development – No costs [Paras 100-101].

Criminal Law – Sentencing – Review Petition – Modification of Sentence – Appeal challenging the sentence of life imprisonment for offences under Sections 376(2)(i) and 376(2)(m) IPC and Sections 5(i) and 5(m) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act – Supreme Court modified the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for 20 years for each of these offences, to align with the sentence for the offence under Section 376A IPC – Life imprisonment was originally intended to be for the remainder of the appellant’s natural life – Petition allowed [Paras 1-8].

Sentencing Principles – Retributive and Restorative Justice – Court balanced retributive justice with restorative justice – Sentence modification aligns with the Court’s intent to not impose life imprisonment for the remainder of the appellant’s life for the offence under Section 376A IPC – Consistency in sentencing for similar offences [Paras 6-7].

Decision – Review petition allowed – Sentence for offences under Sections 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m) IPC, and Sections 5(i), 5(m) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act modified to rigorous imprisonment for 20 years – Judgment dated 19.04.2022 modified to the extent of sentence adjustment – Rest of the judgment remains unchanged [Para 7-8].

Criminal Law – Anticipatory Bail – Appeal against the High Court’s order granting anticipatory bail to the respondent accused of sexually assaulting his 12-year-old niece – Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in granting anticipatory bail given the seriousness of the allegations and the statutory presumptions under Section 29 of the POCSO Act – Observations made by the High Court suggesting the acts might be manifestations of affection were unwarranted – Investigating Officer requires a free hand to conduct a thorough investigation – Appeal allowed, anticipatory bail set aside [Paras 1-19].

POCSO Act – Presumptions under Section 29 – High Court overlooked statutory presumptions under Section 29 of the POCSO Act – Courts must consider these presumptions while dealing with bail applications in cases of sexual offences against children – Presumption of guilt unless proven otherwise [Paras 9-11].

Investigative Procedure – Custodial Interrogation – Importance of custodial interrogation in cases involving serious allegations – Mere absence of need for custodial interrogation not a sufficient ground for granting anticipatory bail – Courts must first consider the prima facie case against the accused and the nature of the offence [Para 17].

Observations on Conduct – High Court’s observations suggesting familial affection as possible motivation were inappropriate given the serious nature of the allegations – Specific allegations supported by the victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC should have guided the court’s decision [Para 11].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court’s order granting anticipatory bail to Respondent No. 1 set aside – Investigating Officer granted liberty to proceed according to law – No costs [Paras 19-21].

Motor Vehicles Act – Compensation Enhancement – Appeal against the High Court’s decision on compensation for the death of a housewife aged 25 years in a vehicular accident – Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in assessing the income of the deceased and in not considering future prospects – Income of the deceased should be considered at Rs. 7500 per month, with an addition of 40% towards future prospects – Appeal allowed, compensation enhanced [Paras 1-6].

Future Prospects – Calculation of Dependency – Court emphasized adding 40% of the income towards future prospects while considering loss of dependency – Contribution of a housewife to the family and her additional work, such as tuition, must be acknowledged – High Court failed to apply settled legal principles in calculating compensation [Para 5].

Compensation for Foetus and Consortium – The claimants entitled to Rs. 1 lakh for the loss of foetus instead of Rs. 50,000 as awarded by the High Court – Each claimant entitled to Rs. 40,000 for loss of consortium or loss of love and affection – Appropriate compensation must reflect the loss and suffering of the claimants [Paras 5.1-5.2].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgment modified – Appellants entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 32,82,000 with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum – No order as to costs [Paras 6].

Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Rules 2022 – Rule 30 – Motor Accident Claims – Claims Tribunal's duty to record evidence through a local commissioner when the insurance company disputes liability – Insurance company to bear the expenses of the local commissioner [Paras 60-61].

Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 – Section 159 – Information regarding accident – SHO to take steps as per Section 159 on receiving accident intimation – Investigating Officer to submit First Accident Report (FAR) within 48 hours to the Claims Tribunal and follow subsequent procedures [Paras 62(ii)-62(iii)].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – Concurrent findings of the lower courts affirmed – Specific directions issued to ensure compliance with the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act and Rules [Paras 62-62(xvi)].

Land Acquisition – Enhancement of Compensation – Sale Exemplars – High Court erred in discarding sale exemplars Exs. P3 and P4 solely because they involved transactions with a company – Proper deduction required for smaller parcels of land – Compensation determined at Rs. 12,16,800/- per acre – Impugned judgment modified [Paras 6-9].

Compensation Calculation – Smaller Parcels – Development – High Court failed to appreciate the nature of transactions – Proper deduction of 35% applied considering the location and use for LPG plant – Reasonable compensation awarded [Paras 7-9].

Decision – Appeals partly allowed – Compensation modified to Rs. 12,16,800/- per acre – Appeals succeed in part – No order as to costs [Para 9].

Permanent Commission – Armed Forces – Indian Navy – Women Officers – Short Service Commission – High Court's judgment challenged – AFT dismissed applications challenging denial of Permanent Commission – Principle issue whether AFT could adjudicate validity of selection proceedings when relevant material disclosed only to AFT in sealed cover – Appeal allowed – Judgment of AFT set aside – Cases remanded for fresh adjudication [Paras 3, 21, 23, 31-32].

Sealed Cover Procedure – Natural Justice – Disclosure of Information – Material relied upon by AFT in sealed cover not disclosed to appellants – Grave prejudice caused – Sealed cover procedure deemed dangerous precedent affecting transparency and fairness – Appeals allowed – Directions issued for fresh adjudication by AFT with proper disclosure [Paras 24, 28-30].

Decision – Appeals allowed – Impugned judgment of AFT set aside – OAs restored for fresh adjudication by AFT – Interim orders protecting officers to continue during pendency of proceedings [Paras 32-33].

Arbitration – Appointment of Arbitrator – Section 11(6) read with Section 11(12) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Petitions filed for appointing a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from three agreements executed between the parties – Supreme Court held that the arbitration agreement is enforceable despite pending payment of stamp duty on the substantive contract – Mr. Suresh C. Gupte appointed as sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes in a single arbitration [Paras 1-18].

Stamp Duty – Enforceability of Arbitration Agreement – Pending payment of stamp duty on substantive contracts does not impede enforceability of arbitration agreement – Doctrine of separability and kompetenz-kompetenz upheld – Supreme Court emphasized the need for arbitration matters to proceed without delay even if stamp duty issues are unresolved [Paras 10-11, 16].

Doctrine of Separability – Arbitration Clause Independent of Main Contract – Arbitration agreement treated as separate from substantive contract – Validity of arbitration agreement maintained irrespective of issues in the main contract [Paras 9-10].

Judicial Precedents – Consideration of Earlier Decisions – Supreme Court referred to N.N. Global Mercantile case and Inter-continental Hotels Group case to justify proceeding with arbitration despite unresolved stamp duty issues – Consistency with prior judgments and ongoing consideration by Constitution Bench noted [Paras 13-16].

Decision – Petitions allowed – Mr. Suresh C. Gupte, former Judge of the Bombay High Court, appointed as sole arbitrator – Arbitration to proceed as per agreed