Criminal Appeal – Interim Bail – Appellant seeks interim bail for the purpose of finalizing accounts for filing returns under the Companies Act and Income Tax Act – Appellant currently incarcerated in Sabarmati Central Correctional Home – Interim bail granted for three days with specific conditions. [Para 1-6]

Interim Bail – Conditions – Appellant's release on interim bail subject to terms determined by the Trial Court – Permission granted to travel to Mumbai for three days under CBI escort at his own cost – Requirement to provide accommodation for the CBI team in Mumbai – Obligation to return to the correctional home after three days. [Para 6(i)-(iv)]

Decision – The present appeal allowed, impugned order set aside, and interim bail granted as specified with conditions – Pending applications also disposed of. [Para 7]

Criminal Appeal – Conviction based on dying declaration – Doubt regarding voluntariness and reliability – Lack of corroboration – Conviction not sustainable. The appeal questions the conviction based on a dying declaration recorded by an Executive Magistrate on 8th November 1991, three days after the incident. Doubts are raised concerning the voluntariness and reliability of the declaration, as it was suggested that the statement may have been influenced by the deceased's relatives. Discrepancies in the timing of medical examination and statement recording further cast doubt on the sequence of events. The absence of corroborating evidence weakens the credibility of the dying declaration, rendering the conviction unsustainable. [Para 10-12]

Dowry Death – Insufficiency of evidence to prove harassment due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry – Vague allegations without concrete support – Prosecution fails to establish the case under Section 304-B of IPC. The prosecution's case relied on the testimony of the deceased's relatives to establish harassment due to non-fulfilment of dowry demands. However, their evidence lacked specificity and concrete details regarding the alleged harassment. Vague allegations without substantial corroboration could not prove that the deceased was subjected to harassment related to dowry demands. Consequently, the prosecution failed to establish a case under Section 304-B of IPC. [Para 17]

Decision – Appeal allowed – Conviction and sentence quashed and set aside – Appellant acquitted of all charges – Bail bonds discharged. In light of the doubts surrounding the dying declaration and the insufficiency of evidence to prove dowry-related harassment, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction dated 14th September 1999, affirmed by the High Court, are quashed and set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges, and his bail bonds shall stand discharged. [Para 18]

Criminal Appeal – Interim Protection – Grant of interim protection to appellant Kahana Ram – Petitioner's father in detention for about six months – No sharp or blunt weapon used in the crime – Injuries simple in nature – Appellant's objection to the construction of Pond – Appellant to cooperate with the investigation – No arrest until next hearing – FIR registered under various sections of IPC and Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act – Interim order confirmed. [Para 1-5]

Bail – Release on Bail – Directions for bail if appellant Kahana Ram is arrested – Terms and conditions to be fixed by the trial court – Compliance with Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Decision – Impugned judgment/order set aside – Appeal allowed – Observations made for the purpose of disposal of the appeal, not as findings and observations on the merits of the case.

Anticipatory Bail – Appellant accused of offenses under Section 376(2)(n) and 406 IPC – Denial of anticipatory bail by lower courts – Appellant cooperated with the investigation – Charge sheet filed – Case for trial – Appellant granted anticipatory bail, subject to conditions imposed by the trial Court. [Para 1-3]

False Complaint – Allegation of false complaint by the respondent-complainant due to a failed marriage proposal – Appellant's cooperation with the investigation considered – Observations made in the order only for the purpose of considering anticipatory bail. [Para 4-5]

Release on Anticipatory Bail – Appellant released on anticipatory bail – Conditions to be imposed by the trial Court. [Para 6]

Criminal Appeal – Further Investigation – Appellant, widow of a Deputy Superintendent of Police, seeks further investigation into her husband's murder – Allegations of police abandonment and involvement of specific individuals – Special Magistrate orders further investigation – High Court's hyper-technical approach in distinguishing re-investigation from further investigation criticized – High Court's order set aside, confirming Special Magistrate's directive for further investigation. [Para 1-11]

Trial Proceedings – Trial court directed to continue proceedings in Session Trial No. 239 of 2014 related to the same incident – Final order to be deferred until completion of further investigation – Disposal of special leave petition in accordance with the above terms. [Para 12-13]

Criminal Appeal – Conviction under Part I of Section 304 and Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Acquittal by Trial Court – High Court's interference – Principles governing appeals against acquittal discussed. [Para 1-7]

Appellate Jurisdiction – Duty of the Appellate Court in appeals against acquittal – Re-appreciation of evidence – Possibility of the Trial Court's view – High Court's failure to record reasons and findings – Appellate Court's duty to consider the reliability of prosecution witnesses and their demeanour. [Para 8-10]

Investigation – Failure to investigate the grievous injury suffered by one of the accused – Serious lacuna in the prosecution's case – Prior complaint leading to anticipatory bail for certain witnesses – Property dispute between accused and complainant's family. [Para 11-14]

Decision – Impugned judgment set aside – Trial Court's conclusions deemed possible – Appellants directed to be set at liberty unless detained in connection with another case. [Para 15-16]

Consumer Protection – Medical Negligence – Blood Transfusion – Appellant, a former Indian Air Force employee, contracted HIV through a blood transfusion in a military hospital during his service – Allegations of negligence and reckless disregard for patient safety – Refusal to provide medical records and conduct of Court of Inquiry – Appellant claims compensation – Commission dismisses the complaint – Appellant appeals to the Supreme Court – Controversy regarding negligence, informed consent, and liability of the medical authorities – Medical records destroyed – Disputed findings of Medical Boards – Expert opinions questioned – Burden of proof in cases of medical negligence – Denial of employment opportunities due to HIV status – Mental agony and loss of confidence – Compensation sought. [Para 1-31]

Consumer Protection – Jurisdiction of Consumer Forum – Whether the appellant's case falls under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (CPA 1986) – Consideration of various regulations governing medical services for armed forces personnel – Application of CPA 1986 to services provided in government hospitals – Precedents highlighting the applicability of CPA 1986 to services provided by government or employer-funded institutions – Exercise of jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution to provide a remedy for contravention of fundamental rights – Role of the court in reaching out to injustice and ensuring justice according to law. [Para 43-55]

Medical Negligence and Liability – Appellant claimed negligence in blood transfusion resulting in HIV infection – Duty of care and standard of care in medical negligence cases – Application of res ipsa loquitur – Failure to prove adherence to safety standards – Vicarious liability of Indian Air Force and Indian Army established – Appellant entitled to compensation for injuries suffered. [Para 56-73]

Damages in Medical Negligence Case – Assessment of Compensation – Various Heads for Compensation Consideration – Mental Agony Compensation – Denial of Information and Premature Retirement Aggravating Factors – Appellant entitled to ₹50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only) for mental agony. [Para 74-84]

Medical Negligence - Compensation - Future Care - HIV Positive Condition - Duty of State Functionaries - Compensation awarded for medical negligence suffered by the appellant. [Para 88-94]

Medical Negligence - Compensation awarded to the appellant for medical negligence suffered, totaling ₹ 1,54,73,000/-, with joint and several liability imposed on the respondent organizations (IAF and Indian Army). Arrears related to disability pension to be disbursed within six weeks. [Para 92]

HIV Act - Directions issued to Central and State Governments for effective implementation of the HIV Act, including provisions related to diagnostic facilities, treatment, welfare schemes, property protection, information and education programs, and safe working environments. [Para 93]

Duty of State Functionaries - Acknowledgment of the duty of state functionaries, including the armed forces, to maintain high standards of safety, well-being, and medical fitness for personnel. Lack of dignity, honour, and compassion highlighted in the appellant's treatment. Compensation cannot fully restore dignity and honour. [Para 91]

Appreciation - Acknowledgment of the valuable assistance provided by the amicus, ASG, and the appellant's perseverance in seeking justice. Costs awarded to the appellant and honorarium to the amicus. [Para 94]

Decision - Appeal allowed, and pending applications disposed of in accordance with the provided directions. [Para 95]

Employment Compensation – Applicability of the 1923 Act to a Constable of Railway Protection Force (RPF) – Interpretation of Section 2(1)(n) – Whether a Constable of RPF is a "workman" despite being a member of the Armed Forces of the Union as per amended Section 3 of the 1957 Act – Consideration of the legislative intent and definitions. [Para 20(i)]

Alternative Remedy – Availability of compensation under Sections 124 and 124-A of the 1989 Act – Whether a claim under the 1923 Act is maintainable – Examination of the existence of an alternative remedy. [Para 20(ii)]

Workers' Compensation – Applicability of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 to Railway Protection Force (RPF) personnel – Interpretation of statutory provisions – Legislative intent – RPF personnel claimed compensation under the 1923 Act for injuries sustained in the course of their employment – Question of whether RPF personnel fall within the purview of the 1923 Act – Examination of relevant statutory provisions, including the 1923 Act, the Indian Railways Act, 1890, the Railways Act, 1989, and the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 – Definition of "workman" and "employer" under the 1923 Act – Historical changes in definitions – Impact of the change from "His Majesty’s naval, military or air forces" to "Armed Forces of the Union" – Analysis of the definition of "Railway Servant" under the 1989 Act – Legislative amendments to Section 3, Section 10, and Section 19 of the 1957 Act – Examination of Section 128 of the 1989 Act – Whether RPF personnel are excluded from the purview of the 1923 Act – Held - RPF personnel remain within the scope of the 1923 Act – Maintenance of claims under the 1923 Act despite alternative remedies under the 1989 Act – Section 128 preserves the right to claim compensation under the 1923 Act – The appeal is dismissed, and the interim order stands discharged. [Para 50-64]

Alternative Remedy - Availability of alternative remedy under the 1989 Act - Section 128 of the 1989 Act saving the right to claim compensation under the 1923 Act - Claim under the 1923 Act not barred by the existence of an alternative remedy. [Para 62-63]

Civil Appeal – Delay in payment of privilege leave encashment to retired employees – High Court's order directing payment of interest – Special leave petitions challenging High Court's orders – Petitioners' delay in releasing amounts payable – Division Bench dismissing Special Appeal – Affidavit filed by petitioners found unsatisfactory – Compliance with the impugned order – Special leave petitions dismissed with a clarification that it doesn't affirm the view of the learned Single Judge.