Civil Law - Public Charities - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 92 - Maintainability of interim orders prior to leave - Whether Civil Court seized of a plaint under Section 92 can pass protective or preservatory interim orders pending disposal of the leave application - High Court held that the suit is stillborn without leave and the court lacks jurisdiction to pass interim orders - Supreme Court affirmed that Section 92 constitutes a special provision requiring leave as a mandatory condition precedent to the institution of a suit and no interim or supplemental proceedings can be entertained in the absence of a pending suit - Court acts as a gatekeeper under Section 92 - Held - Civil Court is not empowered to pass protective or preservatory interim orders pending disposal of the leave application - [Paras 1-61].

Civil Law - Supplemental Proceedings - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 94 and Order XL Rule 1 - Appointment of receiver - Whether appointment of a receiver can be made in an application seeking leave to sue - Court held that supplemental proceedings under Section 94 presuppose the existence of an underlying proceeding - An application under Order XL Rule 1 cannot be maintained as a supplemental proceeding because the original action does not mature into a proceeding until leave is granted - The expression before or after decree in Order XL Rule 1 presupposes the existence of a validly instituted suit - Held - Order XL has no applicability prior to the institution of a suit against public charities - [Paras 39-47].

Civil Law - Inherent Powers - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 151 - Resort to inherent powers - Whether Section 151 can be invoked to grant interim relief where Section 92 requires leave - Court held that the generality of inherent powers cannot override the special provision contained in Section 92 - Principle of generalia specialibus non derogants applies - Inherent powers can only be invoked where jurisdiction already exists - Held - Court cannot invoke Section 151 to circumvent the statutory safeguard of leave - [Paras 48-52].

Civil Law - Procedural Exigency - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 92 - Ex parte grant of leave - Whether notice is mandatory before grant of leave - Court held that while notice to proposed defendants ought ordinarily to precede the grant of leave it is not indispensable where facts disclose compelling urgency - Courts must exercise utmost care and record reasons in writing for dispensing with notice - Held - Suit instituted pursuant to leave granted without notice is not rendered bad in law or non-maintainable - [Paras 57-59].

Decision: Appeals dismissed - Held that a Civil Court is not empowered to pass protective or preservatory interim orders pending disposal of the leave application under Section 92 CPC - However, for compelling reasons recorded in writing, notice prior to the grant of leave may be dispensed with.

Civil Law - Arbitration - Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 - Section 17 and 37 - Unilateral appointment of Arbitrator - Appellants challenged the appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal alleging bias and lack of consent - Arbitral Tribunal passed interim orders freezing bank accounts and permitting takeover of properties - High Court dismissed the appeal filed under Section 37 on the ground of limitation for failure to file an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 - Supreme Court held that since the very initiation of the arbitration and the appointment of the Arbitrator were found to be non est in law for want of consent the impugned interim orders were set aside and the matters were restored - Held - Impugned order of the High Court set aside and a new Arbitrator appointed - [Paras 1-8].

Civil Law - Interim Measures - Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 - Section 17 - Arbitrary measures - The Supreme Court held that arbitration cannot result in an arbitrary measure particularly in the appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal - Where an appointment is challenged on the ground of bias and lack of consent the tribunal cannot pass interim orders affecting the properties and bank accounts of the parties - Held - Interim orders passed by the Tribunal are set aside and restitution of funds and properties directed - [Paras 2-6].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Impugned High Court order and interim orders of the Arbitral Tribunal set aside – Ms. Mayuri Raghuwanshi, Advocate, appointed as Arbitrator – Restitution of funds/properties directed with 18% compound interest at monthly rests if not complied with within one week.

Criminal Law - Kidnapping and Sexual Assault - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Section 6 - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 363 - Trial Court convicted appellant based on testimony of mother and private doctor despite lack of medical evidence of penetration - High Court confirmed conviction - Supreme Court found material inconsistencies in prosecution witness statements and noted that medical experts and FSL report completely ruled out penetrative act - Held - prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - conviction and sentence set aside - [Paras 3-10.2].

Criminal Law - Statutory Presumption - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 - Sections 29 and 30 - Reverse burden of proof - Scope and limitation - Presumption of guilt and culpable mental state does not absolve prosecution from establishing foundational facts - Once prosecution evidence lacks credibility and borders on perversity the presumption ceases to be effective - Held - presumptive provisions do not oust evidence favouring the accused and cannot override the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt - [Paras 7-9.2].

Evidence Law - Sterling Witness - Evaluation of testimony - Credibility - Prosecution witness must be of high quality and unassailable consistency from start to finish - Where evidence of witness is riddled with material improvements and contradictions it cannot be accepted as that of a sterling witness - Held - witness testimony here failed to withstand cross-examination and lacked corroboration - [Paras 5.6-5.9].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Judgment of the High Court and Trial Court set aside – Appellant acquitted of all charges and directed to be released forthwith unless required in other cases.

Criminal Law - Murder - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 302 and 34 - Appellant-State appealed against acquittal of respondents - Trial Court convicted respondents based on circumstantial evidence including witness testimony, alleged motive, and recovery of weapons and blood-stained clothes - High Court acquitted respondents finding the prosecution evidence inconsistent and the chain of circumstances incomplete - Supreme Court found that evidence of witnesses was unreliable and recoveries appeared stage-managed - Held - High Court rightly granted benefit of doubt as the chain of circumstances did not exclude every hypothesis consistent with the innocence of the accused - [Paras 1-21].

Evidence Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Standard of proof - In cases based solely on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be so complete as to exclude every hypothesis except that of the guilt of the accused - Evidence presented by prosecution including testimony of PW-2 and PW-3 failed to meet this high standard - Held - circumstantial evidence was weak and inconclusive - [Paras 11-12].

Evidence Law - Credibility of Witness - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Interested witness - Testimony of PW-3, a nephew of the deceased, was found untrustworthy due to his failure to disclose the alleged incriminating conduct of the accused to the informant at the earliest opportunity - Held - silence of a witness regarding a grave incriminating circumstance for a period of time renders the testimony of low value - [Paras 14-16].

Evidence Law - Recovery - Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 27 - Reliability of disclosure - Recoveries of blood-stained clothes and weapons made three days after arrest with suspicious witnesses and contradictory circumstances - Held - recoveries were stage-managed and artificial, failing to inspire confidence - [Paras 19-20].

Decision: Appeal dismissed - Judgment of acquittal by the High Court confirmed.

Service Law - Promotion - Rajbhasha Adhikari Recruitment Rules 2005 - Officiating service - Writ petitioners-respondents worked as Assistant Director (Official Language) or Rajbhasha Adhikari on officiating basis - High Court directed appellants to consider promotion based on rules existing prior to 2005 Rules - Supreme Court noted respondents never held regular appointments and had no vested right to promotion under the 2002 Rules which were never in operation - Applying the ratio in State of Himachal Pradesh and Others v. Raj Kumar (2023) 3 SCC 773 the Court held that there is no universal rule that vacancies must be filled by law existing on the date they arose and that the government is entitled to a policy decision for restructuring - Held - Impugned High Court judgment set aside and appeals allowed - [Paras 1-13].

Service Law - Vested Rights - Service Rules - Evolution of recruitment policy - Respondents sought promotion based on earlier administrative instructions and 2002 Rules - Court distinguished between provisional promotion and officiating capacity - Found that mere officiating service does not create a vested right for regular promotion under repealed or superseded rules - Policy change by government to internal competitive examination under 2005 Rules is fair and reasonable - Held - No obligation to fill vacancies as per old rules - [Paras 8-12].

Decision: Appeals allowed – The common impugned judgments passed by the High Court are set aside.

Civil Law - Motor Accident Claims - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166(2) - Territorial Jurisdiction - Claimant filed a claim petition at Chennai for an accident occurring in Chittoor Andhra Pradesh - Insurer raised objection to territorial jurisdiction - Tribunal at Chennai assumed jurisdiction on the basis of the insurer having an office in Chennai - High Court set aside the order holding that no part of the cause of action arose in Chennai - Supreme Court affirmed the High Court order holding that the provision under Section 166(2) regarding the place where the defendant resides does not include the insurer as a defendant and omits the place where the defendant carries on business - Held - Claim application must be filed in accordance with the statutory options provided in Section 166(2) and the Tribunal at Chennai lacked jurisdiction - [Paras 1-16].

Civil Law - Procedure - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166(2) - Right of Insurer to raise jurisdictional objection - Insurer impleaded as a party-respondent by the claimant - Held - Relying on United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shila Datta & Others, an insurer impleaded as a party-respondent is entitled to raise all contentions including an objection to the territorial jurisdiction of the Tribunal - [Paras 6-8].

Civil Law - Procedure - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 21(1) - Objection to territorial jurisdiction - Applicability of failure of justice test - Distinction between objection raised at initial stage vs appellate stage - Held - The requirement to demonstrate failure of justice under Section 21(1) of the Code is applicable when the objection is raised at the appellate stage after an award is passed and does not apply when the objection is raised at the initial stage of proceedings before the Tribunal - [Paras 10-14].

Decision: Civil Appeal dismissed - Order of the Madras High Court upheld - Proceedings to be transferred to the Tribunal at Chittoor for expeditious adjudication - [Para 16].

Writ Law - Judicial Review - Constitution of India 1950 - Article 226 - Maintainability of writ petition in land disputes - Appellant State issued notice for eviction under 1905 Act - Respondents approached High Court instead of availing statutory remedies of appeal and revision under 1905 Act - High Court entertained writ petition despite serious factual disputes regarding title and possession - Supreme Court held that writ jurisdiction is not the appropriate forum for determining disputed questions of title or possession - Order of the Single Judge and Division Bench set aside - Held - High Court erred in entertaining writ petition when alternative statutory remedies were available and factual controversy existed - [Paras 1-13].

Civil Law - Jurisdiction - Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act 1905 - Section 6 and 7 - Alternative Remedy - Respondents claiming possession through a Trust challenged eviction proceedings via writ petition - Previous proceedings established that title and possession were heavily contested - High Court failed to consider that the 1905 Act provides comprehensive remedy of appeal and further revision - Held - writ court ought not to have exercised jurisdiction in the teeth of pending civil disputes and available statutory mechanisms - [Paras 10-11].

Decision: Appeals allowed - Impugned orders of the Single Judge and Division Bench set aside - State action of locking the premises maintained - Liberty granted to the parties to pursue the pending civil suit on its own merits.

Writ Law - Selection Process - Constitution of India - Article 32 - Challenge to recruitment - Petitioners challenged the selection of Technician Grade-2 (Trainee) Electrical in UPPCL after an earlier Division Bench judgment directed a fresh result based on the timely submission of DOEACC certificates - Petitioners argued that the merit list contained mismatches and that OBC reservation was exceeded - Supreme Court noted that the petitioners confined their grievance to their merit position and failed to prove that candidates less meritorious than them were selected - Court also noted the suppression of material facts regarding identical petitions filed by some petitioners and dismissed the plea for a CBI investigation citing no evidence of wrongdoing - Held - Petition dismissed - [Paras 1-24].

Writ Law - Maintainability - Constitution of India - Article 32 - Suppression of material facts - Petitioner Nos. 8 to 18 had previously filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court for identical relief which was disposed of without disclosing the same in the present petition - Held - Non-disclosure of prior litigation amounts to suppression of material facts disentitling the petitioners to any relief - [Paras 12-21].

Writ Law - CBI Investigation - Constitution of India - Articles 32 and 226 - Requirement of pleadings - Petitioners sought an independent CBI inquiry into recruitment without lodging an FIR or providing specific evidence of manipulation - Held - Direction for a CBI investigation is not a matter of routine and requires sufficient material and specific allegations which are absent in the present case - [Paras 23-24].

Service Law - Reservation Policy - General Principles - Selection criteria - Contention that OBC candidates exceeded 50 percent quota - Held - Candidates from reserved categories who score higher marks than the last general category candidate are to be selected in the open category and are not to be counted against the reservation quota - [Para 13].

Decision: Writ petition dismissed – No order as to costs.

Civil Law - Debt Recovery - The Indian Contract Act 1872 - Banking Regulation Act 1949 - Section 35-A - Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India - Appellant-borrower challenged the High Court dismissal of writ petition regarding forcible repossession and sale of vehicle by finance company - Company repossessed vehicle in violation of loan agreement notice requirements and RBI Fair Practices Code - High Court dismissed writ on ground of delay - Supreme Court observed that the financier’s right to self-help repossession must be exercised within the bounds of law and RBI guidelines - Arbitrary repossession by 'goondaism' and breach of contract violates constitutional rights to livelihood - Held - High Court order quashed - Appellant entitled to compensation and refund - [Paras 1-30].

Civil Law - Banking/Finance - Reserve Bank of India Guidelines - Fair Practices Code - Repossession of Assets - RBI guidelines on fair practices carry statutory force - Repossession clauses must provide for notice and opportunity to cure - Forcible seizure without notice or signed memorandum by recovery agents is unlawful - Financial institutions are prohibited from using force or 'goondas' - Held - Repossession must be transparent and legal - [Paras 15-22].

Writ Law - Procedural Fairness - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 156(3) - Delay in filing - High Court erred in dismissing writ on ground of delay without considering the bona fide legal pursuit of the borrower via FIR and section 156(3) complaint - Held - Petition maintainable as there was no demonstrated prejudice to the company and the company's own actions warranted judicial scrutiny - [Paras 27-28].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Impugned High Court order quashed – Company directed to close loan accounts – Company to refund sale proceeds of Rs 4,50,000 with 6% interest – Company to pay Rs 10,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and loss of livelihood – Costs of Rs 50,000 awarded.