Right to privacy of accused - Collection of voice sample - Grievance raised by petitioner that collection of voice sample without appropriate rules and standard operating system violates accused's right to privacy - Reference made to case of Ritesh Sinha vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2019) 8 SCC 1 - Court held that until explicit provisions are enacted in CrPC by Parliament, Judicial Magistrate has power to order collection of voice sample for investigation of crime - Power conferred on Magistrate through judicial interpretation and Article 142 of Constitution - No infirmity found with impugned judgments ordering collection of voice sample - Petition dismissed. [Para 1-5]

Judicial interpretation - Power of Judicial Magistrate - Collection of voice sample - Until explicit provisions enacted in CrPC by Parliament, Judicial Magistrate has power to order collection of voice sample for investigation of crime - Power conferred through judicial interpretation and Article 142 of Constitution - Magistrate empowered to order collection of voice sample until explicit provisions are enacted. [Para 3]

Fundamental right to privacy - Not absolute - Must yield to compelling public interest - Right to privacy of accused not violated by judicial order compelling voice sample - Right to privacy subject to compelling public interest - No violation of fundamental right to privacy under Article 20(3) of Constitution in collection of voice sample for investigation of crime. [Para 2]

Testamentary matter - Original Will not traceable - Request for copy of Will and probate - Destruction of Records Act, 1917 - Court cannot order investigation into the fate of the Will based on mere guesswork - Relief cannot be granted when the petitioner has not seen the copy of the Will and is unaware of its contents. [Para 23]

 Preservation of Will - Obligation of respondents to furnish details and records - Original Will should be kept in safe custody or returned to the executor after probate - However, if the original Will is not traceable after a long period of time, relief cannot be granted without proper evidence. [Para 16, 22]

Probate proceedings - Executor's fulfillment of responsibilities - Executor obtained probate, filed inventory, and submitted final accounts as required by law - No complaints regarding improper distribution of assets - Dismissal of the Writ Petition upheld. [Para 18]

Lack of evidence - Petitioner's limited knowledge of the Will's contents - Court unable to order investigation or provide relief - High Court's decision not to grant relief affirmed. [Para 23]

Special Leave Petition dismissed - No costs. [Para 23]

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Interpretation of 'complainant' - Multiple consumers filing joint complaint - Whether falls under Section 12(1)(a) or Section 12(1)(b) - Held, the definition of 'complainant' under Section 2(b)(i) of the 1986 Act includes multiple consumers - Joint complaint falls under Section 12(1)(a) - Broad and inclusive interpretation to be given - Plural interpretation of 'complaint' is maintainable. (Para 19)

 Pecuniary jurisdiction - Determination - Aggregate value of goods or services and compensation claimed - Determinative factors - Held, for determining pecuniary jurisdiction, the aggregate value of goods or services and compensation claimed in the complaint is relevant - Total value in case of joint complaints to be considered. (Para 21, 22)

Representative capacity - Joint complaint by multiple consumers - Maintainability - Held, a joint complaint by multiple consumers seeking redressal for their own grievances without representing other consumers having the same interest is maintainable under Section 35(1)(c). (Para 35)

Technical approach - Detrimental to consumerism - Held, a pedantic and hyper-technical approach should be avoided as it would cause damage to the very concept of consumerism. (Para 23)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Compliance with directions of State Registrar - Effect on proceedings - Held, compliance with the directions of the State Registrar and amendment to bylaws, without prejudice to contentions, should lead to the revival of proceedings. (Para 14)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Procedural issues and legal disputes - Adjournment of proceedings - Effect - Held, procedural issues and legal disputes should not unduly delay the proceedings - National Commission directed to proceed expeditiously. (Para 23)

Section 302 of the IPC - Property dispute - Conviction for murder - Eyewitness testimony - Credibility of witnesses - appellant challenged his conviction for murder along with two co-accused - the murder of a person named Durga in the context of a property dispute - trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the conviction was upheld by the High Court - appellant argued - falsely implicated due to the property dispute and questioned the credibility of the witnesses, specifically one witness who had a personal interest in the case – Court examined the evidence and found the eyewitness testimony to be reliable and consistent - motive behind the crime and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction -appellant directed to surrender and serve the remaining sentence. (Para Numbers: 1, 2, 8, 10, 11)

Probation - Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Section 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - Benefit of probation - Appellant convicted for gambling - Appeal filed seeking probation - Appellant not a habitual offender - No subsequent offenses committed - Appellant's age at the time of the incident considered - Granting of probation warranted - Appeal allowed - Appellant directed to be released on probation under Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) upon entering into a bond with two sureties ensuring good behavior and maintenance of peace during the sentence's duration - Failure to comply with conditions would result in serving the sentence.(Para No. 1-8)

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Revisional Power – Opportunity of hearing to proposed accused – Violation of sub-section (2) of Section 401 of the Code – Appellants contend that while exercising revisional power, the High Court should have given opportunity of hearing to the proposed accused as they would be prejudiced by the order – Appellants rely on the interpretation of sub-section (2) of Section 401 in Manharbhai Muljibhai Kapadia v. Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel & Others (2012) 10 SCC 517 – High Court allowed revision filed by complainant against dismissal of application under Section 156(3) of the Code – Direction to register FIR against appellants – Proposed accused not served notice of revision proceedings – Violation of sub-section (2) of Section 401 – Order set aside – Matter remitted back to High Court to decide revision afresh. ( Para No.2 & 6)

§ Sexual harassment inquiry - Procedure to be followed - Importance of fair and impartial inquiry process - Inadequate understanding by the Executive Council (EC) of the role of the first committee as an inquiry authority - Procedural lapses in the subsequent inquiry proceedings - Violation of principles of natural justice - Decision to terminate services quashed. (Para 1, 70-72)

§ Committee's misunderstanding of its role - EC's failure to verify legal position - Procedural fairness sacrificed for expeditious disposal - Non-compliance with prescribed inquiry procedure - Importance of adhering to principles of natural justice. (Para 66-69)

§ Balance between victim's rights and delinquent employee's rights - Fairness in procedure necessary for both parties - Proviso of "as far as practicable" to be interpreted pragmatically - Calibrated approach required. (Para 69)

§ Procedural lapses in inquiry proceedings - Glaring defects in process - Undue anxiety leading to rushed hearings and inadequate time for defense preparation - Detrimental effect on fairness of the process. (Para 71)

§ Legitimacy of decision dependent on fairness of process - Decision not withstand judicial scrutiny - Fair procedure guarantees fair outcome - Anxiety for fairness causing greater harm in this case. (Para 72-73)

§ Proceedings conducted by the committee fell short of prescribed norms - Exercise of discretion by the committee improper - Violation of principles of natural justice - Impugned judgment quashed. (Para 73)

§ Directions for a fair inquiry process - Remand of matter to Complaints Committee - Adequate opportunity to be afforded to the appellant for defense - No adjournment sought by appellant - Submission of report by the committee - Completion of entire process within three months - Application of principles of natural justice and relevant rules. (Para 77)

§ Reflection on the working of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (PoSH) Act - Importance of properly constituted internal complaints committees - Lapses in enforcement - Need for strict compliance and proactive approach - Education and awareness programs for complainants and committee members. (Para 74-76)

§ Implementation of directions - Time-bound verification of constitution and composition of ICCs/LCs/ICs - Availability of information on websites - Orientation and capacity-building programs - Inclusion in the annual calendars of various bodies and authorities - Responsibilities of the Union of India, state governments, and other entities - Affidavits for reporting compliance to be filed within eight weeks. (Para 77)

Appeal Allowed.

Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Bail - Grant of bail in connection with scheduled offences under the PML Act - Appellant, Directorate of Enforcement, challenged the High Court's decision to grant bail to the respondent accused - Appellant contended that the High Court failed to consider the rigour of Section 45 of the PML Act and the seriousness of the scheduled offences - It was argued that the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate was still ongoing - High Court's decision was based on the completion of investigation and filing of chargesheet for the predicated offences – Held - High Court erred in not considering the rigour of Section 45 of the PML Act and the nature of allegations - Investigation for scheduled offences under the PML Act is distinct from investigation for predicated offences - Merely filing chargesheet for predicated offences cannot be a ground for releasing accused on bail for scheduled offences - High Court's decision set aside - Matter remitted back to the High Court for fresh consideration of bail applications in light of the observations made - Appeals allowed. (Para 1-8)

Designation of Senior Advocates in India - Historical and Legal background - Origin of distinguished class of senior pleaders - Serjeants-at-Law and King's/Queen's Counsel in the United Kingdom - Introduction of Senior Advocates in India as a mark of excellence and recognition of professional eminence. (Para 1-2)  Criteria for designation of Senior Advocates - Evolution and development of criteria over the years - Parameters of ability, standing at the Bar, special knowledge, and experience in law - Discretion of higher judiciary in designating Senior Advocates. (Para 3-6)

2017 Judgment and Guidelines - Petition challenging the existing system of designation - Flaws in objectivity, fairness, and transparency - Introduction of Permanent Committee and objective assessment criteria - Point-based format for evaluation - Importance of constitution and functioning of the Committee. (Para 8-11)

Voting by secret ballot - Role and limitations of secret ballot in designation process - Exceptional circumstances for resorting to secret ballot - Importance of transparency and selection over election. (Para 15-20)

Cut-off marks - Publication and communication of cut-off marks - Difficulties in prescribing cut-off marks in advance - Flexibility in determining the number of successful applicants based on overall evaluation and interview process. (Para 21-22)

Points assigned for publications - Debate on the significance and quality of publications in assessing advocacy skills - Reduction of points allocated for publications from 15 to 5 - Inclusion of teaching assignments and guest courses delivered at law schools. (Para 23-28)

Criteria on account of various parameters - Role of reported and unreported judgments in designation process - Assessment of the advocate's role in the proceedings rather than the number of appearances - Consideration of quality of synopses filed in court. (Para 29-35)

Specialization and diversity - Recognition of specialized tribunals and expertise in specific fields of law - Concessions for advocates specializing in such areas - Importance of diversity in gender and first-generation lawyers for encouraging merit-based designations. (Para 35-37)

Personal interview - Need for a personal and in-depth examination of candidates - Assessment of articulation, precision, and suitability during interviews - Streamlining the number of interviews for efficiency. (Para 38-41)

General aspects - Frequency of designation process - Inclusion of younger advocates - Power of suo motu designation - Limited scope of the present judgment in fine-tuning guidelines. (Para 42-48)

Pending applications - Consideration of pending applications under the new guidelines - Opportunity for candidates to update or replace their applications - Expeditious processing of pending applications by the Secretariat. (Para 49)

Objective of the designation process - Providing better assistance to litigants and the courts - Continuous improvement in the designation process. (Para 50)