Civil Law - Motor Accident Claim - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166 - Liability for injuries caused by falling tree branch - Respondent was travelling in an auto-rickshaw which stopped under a tree for shelter during heavy rain when an old branch detached and fell on the vehicle causing life-altering injuries - Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim as a natural calamity - High Court in the second round of proceedings awarded compensation of seventeen lakh ten thousand five hundred rupees apportioning 25 percent liability to the appellant Municipal Corporation - Supreme Court examined whether the incident qualifies as an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle - Held - Though the term use is interpreted liberally to include stationary vehicles - the motor vehicle did not play an active role in the accident and was not the proximate cause - fastened liability under Section 166 MVA is not appropriate in such circumstances - However considering the respondent's total paraplegia and bladder-bowel incontinence - Court exercised Article 142 powers to enhance compensation to twenty five lakh rupees in the interest of justice - appeal disposed of - [Paras 1-16].

Civil Law - Tortious Liability - Act of God - Doctrine of Vis Major - Origins and application - Examination of precedents including Nichols v. Marsland and Rylands v. Fletcher regarding foreseeable natural occurrences - Act of God defined as a direct violent sudden and irresistible act of nature that could not be foreseen or resisted by human care - Held - While Municipal Corporations have a duty to maintain roadside trees - it is unrealistic to expect a constant vigil over every shrub or branch - extraordinary rainfall and falling of a branch under such conditions do not typically attract liability for negligence unless failure of preventive action is specifically proved - [Paras 5-9].

Civil Law - Statutory Interpretation - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 165 - Meaning of arising out of the use of motor vehicle - Distinction between expressions caused by and arising out of - Arising out of requires a less proximate relationship than caused by but still carries a sense of consequence - Held - Use of a vehicle does not cease when it is stationary or broken down - but there must be a causal relationship between such use and the injury - where a vehicle is merely a location for shelter from rain and an external object falls on it - the vehicle is not an active participant in the accident - [Paras 11-14].

Constitutional Law - Complete Justice - Constitution of India - Article 142 - Enhancement of compensation - Respondent suffered fracture of the spine and total paraplegia of both lower limbs - High Court awarded insufficient compensation based on a technical approach - Held - The Supreme Court as the final court must ensure that the law is implemented humanely - to avoid further rounds of litigation and ensure the victim is not left in the lurch without sustainment - the Court enhanced the total compensation to twenty five lakh rupees while maintaining the existing apportionment of liability - [Paras 15-16].

Decision: Appeal disposed of – Question of law settled – Total compensation enhanced to Rs. 25,00,000/- with interest – Appellant and other parties directed to deposit the amount in the respondent's bank account within four weeks.

Writ Law - Custody and Visitation - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Child-centric adjudication - Best Interest of Child - Appellant-mother challenged Bombay High Court orders modifying a direction for a single independent expert to a four-member panel of experts to evaluate the minor child for facilitating reconnection with the respondent-father - Child was an alleged victim of sexual abuse by the father with pending criminal trial under POCSO Act - Family Court had initially rejected the father’s plea for expert evaluation citing the grave nature of allegations and risk of re-traumatisation - High Court substituted the expression expert with panel of experts and included professionals suggested by the father and situated overseas - Supreme Court observed that the justice delivery system must respond to child victims by balancing welfare and psychological safety - Court emphasized that repeated evaluative processes in an adversarial context risk converting the child into an object of forensic scrutiny - Principles of minimum intrusion and minimum exposure found in Sections 33(5) and 36 of the POCSO Act were held to provide doctrinal guidance even in civil custody proceedings - Court noted that the High Court failed to record reasons why a single expert was inadequate or how a multi-layered hybrid evaluation would serve the child’s welfare - Held - High Court erred in prioritizing adversarial claims over the psychological integrity of the child victim - Directions modified to prioritize evaluation of parents first and consultation with the child’s current therapist before any further child evaluation - [Paras 1-101].

Evidence Law - Psychological Evaluation - Expert Opinion - Family Courts Act 1984 - Section 12 - Neutrality - High Court constituted a panel largely from names suggested by the respondent-father who was an accused in a POCSO case - Supreme Court held that the requirement of institutional neutrality is not a mere formality - Evaluative processes must remain strictly welfare-oriented and independent of adversarial objectives - Held - The process must satisfy the requirements of demonstrable necessity and proportionality - [Paras 60-73].

Family Law - Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) - Custody Disputes - Respondent-father alleged child was being tutored by the mother leading to PAS - Supreme Court referred to the decision in Vivek Singh v. Romani Singh and international developments - Court observed that PAS is not a diagnosable syndrome but a question of fact regarding alienating behaviors - Courts cautioned against prematurely labeling parents as propagators of such behavior without identified material - Held - Focus should be on particular behavior within the family and its impact rather than applying the label of a syndrome - [Paras 84-85].

Evidence Law - Child Victim Testimony - POCSO Act 2012 - Section 33(5) - Re-traumatisation - Statutory mandate to prevent the child from being called repeatedly to testify - Supreme Court held that the principle of minimum re-traumatisation reflects a broader recognition that repeated engagement in legal processes is a source of trauma - This principle provides doctrinal guidance for evaluating processes involving repeated psychological interaction in custody matters - Held - Repeated and overlapping psychological evaluations of a child victim should ordinarily be avoided unless compelling circumstances exist - [Paras 44-49, 70].

Decision: Appeals partly allowed – Impugned orders of Bombay High Court dated 27.04.2023 and 07.12.2023 modified – Family Court directed to appoint a psychologist to interact with both parents to assess their mental conditions – Psychologist to consult with the child’s current therapist to ascertain the child’s status – Family Court to decide on the necessity of child evaluation only after receiving the parents' assessment report and in consultation with the child's existing therapist – Principles of minimum intrusion and child-friendly procedures affirmed.

Writ Law - Mining Lease - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 - Sections 10A 11(1) and 5(1) - Applicability of auction regime - PIL petitioner challenged the grant of iron ore mining lease to Respondent No. 2 pursuant to a 2010 application - Petitioner contended that in the absence of a formal order of grant before 2015 and execution before 2021 the application should have been treated as pending and subsequently ineligible under the amended Act - Respondent No. 2 held preferential rights under Section 11(1) having obtained a prospecting license in 2006 and submitting a report in 2010 - State Government recommended the grant in 2011 and the Central Government provided prior approval in 2012 - Court observed that Section 10A inserted in 2015 applies only to applications pending without disposal and decision - Held - Since the decision to grant was made and approved prior to 12.01.2015 the application was not pending and Section 10A had no applicability - The transition from allotment to auction does not affect cases where a decision was already finalized before the amendment date - [Paras 1-8].

Writ Law - Statutory Interpretation - Mineral Concession Rules 1960 - Rules 63A and 22(4) - Definition of disposal - Petitioner argued that lack of communication of a formal grant order before 2015 meant the application remained pending - Rule 63A second proviso clarifies that for minerals listed in the First Schedule such as Iron Ore disposal means the recommendation by the State Government to the Central Government for grant of the concession - Rule 22(4) distinguishes between taking a decision to grant and communicating such a decision - Held - For First Schedule minerals the recommendation itself constitutes disposal - Formal non-communication of the grant order for execution does not diminish the accrued and vested rights of the concession holder where the decision was taken and prior approval obtained - [Paras 4-5].

Writ Law - Public Interest Litigation - Mining Operations - Environmental Clearances - Requirement of statutory approvals - Petitioner claimed public interest necessitated the auction route under Section 10(4) - State Government had obtained legal opinion from the Attorney General for India and consulted the Law Department before issuing the grant order - Held - The notion of public interest in not resorting to auction is misplaced when vested rights were established under the prevailing law - No illegality exists in the impugned order - However no mining operation shall be carried out without obtaining all statutory approvals including mining plan environment clearance and forest clearance - [Paras 4-7].

Decision: PIL dismissed – Pending applications stand disposed of – Relevant authorities directed to consider statutory clearances on their own merits expeditiously.

Civil Law - SARFAESI Auction - Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 - Rules 9(3) and 9(4) - Mandatory timelines for deposit of sale price - Appellant daughter of deceased guarantor challenged 2010 auction sale on ground that balance 75 percent was paid after the 15-day statutory period without a written agreement for extension - Trial before DRT and DRAT and High Court resulted in dismissal of challenge citing delay by borrower and perceived equities for auction purchaser - Supreme Court found that auction occurred on 11.03.2010 with 25 percent deposit made on 10/11.03.2010 - The 15-day period for balance 75 percent payment expired on 26.03.2010 but payment was admittedly made only on 31.03.2010 - No written agreement for extension of time existed between the secured creditor and the auction purchaser - Held - Rule 9 provisions are mandatory and go to the root of the validity of the sale - Any deviation from the timeline absent legally sustainable justification or written agreement renders the process vitiated - Auction sale quashed and set aside - [Paras 1-41].

Civil Law - Interpretation of Statutes - Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 - Rule 9 - Mandatory Nature - Validity of auction conducted under statutory regime is not to be tested on equitable considerations but strictly on whether the mandate of the statute and rules has been breached - Rule 9(3) and 9(4) are for the benefit of the secured creditor and borrower and while they can be waived by mutual consent - such extension must be by written agreement between the parties - Failure to adhere to the timeline constitutes a material irregularity going to the root of the matter - Held - Rights of an auction purchaser must yield where the process engendering the sale is demonstrated to be legally infirm - [Paras 24-28 and 32-36].

Civil Law - Right of Redemption - Article 142 of the Constitution of India - Balancing Equities and Restitution - Sale set aside due to procedural non-compliance not attributable to the auction purchaser - Appellant as legal heir expressed willingness to redeem by filing multiple applications before the DRT - Court exercised jurisdiction under Article 142 to balance competing equities - Auction purchaser directed to receive refund of entire deposit with 7 percent interest per annum from the secured creditor - Appellant granted a one-time opportunity to redeem the mortgage by paying the original demand amount of Rs 95,42,372.52 with 5 percent interest per annum from the date of Section 13(2) notice - Held - Failure of appellant to avail this opportunity will result in fresh auction with a fresh valuation report from a government-empanelled valuer - [Paras 40-46].

Decision: Appeal allowed in part – Auction sale quashed – Restitution ordered for auction purchaser with 7% interest – Appellant granted one-time opportunity to redeem the secured asset upon payment of dues with 5% interest.

Writ Law - Territorial Jurisdiction - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Forum Non Conveniens - Appellant BSF member dismissed from service for contracting second marriage without permission - Dismissal order passed in West Bengal and statutory appeal rejected in Jammu and Kashmir - Appellant filed writ petition in Delhi High Court citing location of BSF Headquarters and Ministry of Home Affairs - Division Bench of Delhi High Court dismissed petition invoking doctrine of forum non conveniens stating no cause of action arose in Delhi - Supreme Court observed that Article 226(1) permits filing based on situs of office of respondents - Union of India and Director General BSF are necessary parties with offices in Delhi - Held - Delhi High Court has competence to entertain petition as jurisdiction is clearly referable to Article 226(1) - doctrine of forum non conveniens misapplied as it should not deny access to justice when suitor chooses a forum convenient to respondents - impugned order set aside - [Paras 1-40].

Writ Law - Forum Non Conveniens - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Situs of Respondent - Court examined applicability of doctrine of forum non conveniens where jurisdiction is traceable to Article 226(1) - Held - Where a constitutional remedy is pursued and jurisdiction is based on the location of the respondents office the doctrine of forum non conveniens may rarely apply - filing a writ of certiorari requires records usually available at respondents head office - a suitor choosing the forum of the respondent should not be non-suited on this ground as it defeats access to justice - [Paras 36-39].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Order of Delhi High Court set aside – Writ petition revived for consideration on merits – Respondents granted two months to file counter-affidavit.

Criminal Law - Reference to Third Judge - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 392 - Scope of jurisdiction - Three siblings were convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 302/149 and 148 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment - On appeal to the High Court a Division Bench delivered split opinions - Both Judges upheld the conviction of two siblings but differed on the third sibling - The matter was referred to a third Judge under Section 392 CrPC - The referee Judge not only acquitted the sibling in respect of whom there was a difference of opinion but also reversed the unanimous findings of the Division Bench to acquit the other two siblings - Complainant and State filed appeals before the Supreme Court - The Court examined whether a referee Judge is a Judge of the case or a Judge of the appeal - Significant difference in phraseology between Section 429 of the 1898 Code and Section 392 of the 1973 Code noted - Court doubted the precedent in Sajjan Singh v. State of M.P. which allowed the third Judge to examine the whole case independently including unanimous findings - Held - The question of whether a third Judge is bound by unanimous conclusions of the Division Bench on certain aspects requires authoritative determination - Matter referred to a larger bench - [Paras 1-42].

Interpretation of Statutes - Grammar and Syntax - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 392 - Use of articles - The provision opens with the phrase an appeal and is followed by the appeal - Indefinite article an sets up the class while the definite article the refers back to the specific instance of disagreement - Comparison with Section 429 of the 1898 Code which used the term the case - Court observed that the legislature is prone to use indefinite articles for first mentions and definite articles anaphorically to limit subsequent clauses - Held - Sajjan Singh did not advert to the anaphoric use of the definite article and is thus distinguishable or requires reconsideration - [Paras 29-34].

Criminal Law - Judicial Discipline and Propriety - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 392 - Potential for anomalous results - Supreme Court noted that a mechanical application of the rule in Sajjan Singh could lead to irrational outcomes where a third Judge might reverse a unanimous acquittal recorded by the referring bench - Such an approach could lead to discrimination between litigants filing composite appeals versus separate appeals - Article 14 of the Constitution implicated - Held - Principles of judicial comity and discipline necessitate a deeper study of the jurisdiction of the third Judge - [Paras 35-41].

Decision: Reference made to a larger bench – Questions regarding the scope of Section 392 CrPC referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of an appropriate Bench.

Writ Law - Territorial Jurisdiction - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Appellant enrolled in BSF dismissed from service following inquiry into second marriage without permission - Dismissal order passed in West Bengal - Statutory petition rejected in Jammu - Writ petition filed in Delhi High Court on basis that BSF Headquarters and Ministry of Home Affairs located in Delhi - High Court dismissed citing forum non conveniens and cause of action arising elsewhere - Supreme Court observed that under Article 226(1) jurisdiction is referable to the situs of the respondent - Union of India and Director General BSF are necessary parties with offices in Delhi - Held - Delhi High Court possesses jurisdiction - Doctrine of forum non conveniens misapplied in context of writ jurisdiction under Article 226(1) where respondents are located within the territory - Impugned order set aside and writ petition revived - [Paras 1-40].

Writ Law - Forum Non Conveniens - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Principles - Choice of forum - Doctrine applies when multiple fora available and one is more convenient - However where a constitutional remedy is pursued under Article 226(1) based on the situs of the respondent the doctrine rarely applies - Suitor choosing forum convenient to the respondents cannot be non-suited - Records of the case for Certiorari usually available at respondent office - Held - Application of the doctrine to deny access to justice under Article 226(1) is self-defeating - [Paras 36-37].

Civil Law - Precedent - Conflict of coordinate benches - Supreme Court noted discordant notes between Abrar Ali and Kalyan Banerjee - Reconciliation of conflict regarding jurisdiction in service matters for CAPF personnel - Held - Notwithstanding cause of action arising elsewhere the Delhi High Court has jurisdiction under Article 226(1) due to the situs of the office of Union of India and Director General BSF - [Paras 17-27].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Order of the Delhi High Court set aside – Writ petition revived for consideration on merits – Respondents granted two months to file counter affidavit.

Criminal Law - Right to Travel Abroad - Constitution of India - Article 21 - Appeal against High Court judgment permitting Respondent No. 2 to travel to USA for medical treatment pending trial for offences under Sections 120-B and 306 IPC - Respondent No. 2 a US citizen had previously left India in 2017 after suspension of Look Out Circular and returned in 2025 leading to arrest - Magistrate ordered release of passport but required court permission for foreign travel - Sessions Court reversed this directing passport deposit due to prolonged pendency - High Court restored Magistrate order and granted permission to travel to USA citing medical exigencies and previous appearances - Supreme Court found High Court order unsustainable noting that medical facilities in India are comparable to those abroad - Court highlighted the proactive role of the accused in delaying trial through successive petitions and evading process - Held - Impugned order of High Court and Sessions Judge order set aside - Magistrate order dated 07/05/2025 restored - Respondent No. 2 shall not fly out of the country without express permission of the Sessions Court - [Paras 1-17].

Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights - Article 21 - Personal Liberty vs Societal Interest - Right to travel abroad is an integral facet of Article 21 but is subject to reasonable restrictions - A balance must be struck between individual liberty of the accused and the right of the complainant to a speedy trial along with larger societal interest in effective administration of justice - Accused contended that travel restrictions infringed Article 21 - Court observed that no right is absolute - Held - The High Court was indulgent towards the respondent instead of exercising judicial restraint given that the trial remained at committal stage for nearly ten years - [Paras 9-11].

Decision: Appeal disposed of – High Court and Sessions Court orders set aside – Magistrate order for passport release restored with a restriction on foreign travel without Sessions Court permission – Committal process to be expedited.

Civil Law - Mining Royalty - Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act 1957 - Section 9 - Enhancement of royalty rate - Respondent was successful bidder in e-auction for iron ore lots in July 2014 - Tender conditions stipulated royalty at 10 percent plus additional deposit for future variance - Central Government amended Second Schedule of MMDR Act on 01-09-2014 increasing royalty to 15 percent - Respondent removed mineral after the amendment - Monitoring Committee deducted 5 percent difference from security deposit - High Court quashed the deduction holding royalty was frozen at time of bid - Supreme Court reversed the decision holding that royalty is a statutory impost linked to removal or dispatch of mineral - Held - Contractual provisions must give way to statutory amendments - Appeal allowed - [Paras 1-14].

Civil Law - Statutory Interpretation - Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act 1957 - Section 9 - Definition of dispatch - Court examined Section 9 and 9-Judge Bench decision in Mineral Area Development Authority case - Stated that royalty becomes payable upon removal or consumption of mineral from leased area - Interpretation of the word applicable in auction terms means the rate prevalent at time of removal - Held - Liability for enhanced royalty cannot be escaped if movement occurs after statutory amendment - [Paras 11-13].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment of the High Court of Karnataka quashed – The appellant is entitled to the enhanced royalty of 15 percent.