Insurance Liability – Goods Vehicle – Appellant insurance company challenged liability to pay compensation for injuries to claimant traveling in goods vehicle – Claimant employed as driver in another vehicle, traveling as spare driver – Supreme Court ruled insurance policy did not cover spare driver in goods vehicle, only primary driver and cleaner were covered [Paras 3-18].

Provisions of Motor Vehicles Act – Section 147 Interpretation – Pre-1994 amendment, insurance not required to cover owner’s representative in goods vehicle – Claimant not covered under policy as he was not engaged in driving vehicle at the time of accident [Paras 11-16].

Article 142 – Equitable Relief – In special circumstances, Supreme Court directed insurance company to pay compensation first and recover from vehicle owner later – Considered claimant’s prolonged suffering and disability [Paras 19-25].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Insurance company directed to pay compensation to claimant and recover from vehicle owner as per prescribed procedure [Para 25].

Lokayukta Appointment – Consultation Process – Appointment of Justice R.A. Mehta as Lokayukta challenged – Appellant contended that Governor acted without aid and advice of Council of Ministers – Supreme Court held that the Governor's actions were in accordance with statutory requirements – Emphasized importance of consultation with Chief Justice, who holds primacy in appointment process [Paras 3-16, 18-21].

Governor's Discretion – Statutory Authority – Court noted that the Governor, while acting as a statutory authority, is not bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers – Differentiated between roles under constitutional and statutory functions – Affirmed Governor's decision based on Chief Justice's recommendation [Paras 17, 23-25, 29-30].

Primacy of Chief Justice's Opinion – Interpretation of "Consultation" – Court upheld that Chief Justice’s recommendation holds primacy in Lokayukta appointments – Clarified that "consultation" means concurrence when statutory provisions grant primacy to Chief Justice – Validated Justice Mehta's appointment [Paras 20-21, 28].

Decision: Appeals dismissed – Appointment of Justice R.A. Mehta as Lokayukta upheld – Governor acted within legal framework, following required consultation process [Paras 31-32].

Criminal Procedure - Revisional Jurisdiction - Conviction Overturning Acquittal - Appellants, acquitted of charges under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 IPC, challenged their conviction by the High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC - High Court convicted appellants, sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment and fines - Supreme Court held High Court's actions unsustainable, as revisional powers do not extend to converting acquittals to convictions [Paras 5-8].

Condonation of Delay - Limitation Act, Section 5 - Delay in filing revision applications before High Court - High Court condoned delays without proper justification - Supreme Court found condonation application lacked sufficient cause - High Court's decision to condone delay deemed inappropriate [Paras 6-7].

Evidentiary Matters - Pledged Gold Ornaments - Prosecution's failure to produce register of gold articles pledged - No identification chits on exhibited gold articles - Trial court's acquittal based on lack of evidence to prove pledged articles were fake upheld [Para 7].

Decision: Appeals allowed - High Court's judgments and orders dated 16/11/2010 and 22/3/2011 set aside - Convictions and sentences imposed by High Court annulled.

Sentencing – Social Consequences and Culpability – Appellant sold spurious liquor leading to one death and severe illness in multiple individuals – High Court enhanced sentence considering the severe impact of the appellant’s actions – Supreme Court affirmed that the harmful consequences are relevant for determining the sentence​​.

Kerala Abkari Act – Sections 55, 57A – Punishment – Appellant convicted under Sections 55(a), 55(i), 57A, and 58 – Minimum sentence under Section 57A(2)(ii) upheld – Enhanced sentence justified due to death and grievous hurt caused by the spurious liquor sold by the appellant​​.

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – High Court’s enhancement of sentence from two years to five years rigorous imprisonment justified – Sentence reduced to three years rigorous imprisonment considering the reduction in a similar case – Fines imposed by lower courts remain unchanged​​.

Workmen’s Compensation – Death during Employment – Deceased, a truck driver, died due to health issues while on duty – Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner awarded compensation – High Court set aside the award – Supreme Court restored Commissioner’s award, finding a causal connection between the stress of driving and the death, and upheld the adoption of the appellant [Paras 9-28].

Adoption Validity – Legal Requirements – Adoption deed's validity questioned due to lack of registration and formal ceremony – Supreme Court upheld adoption based on evidence of the adoption deed, witness testimonies, and ration card entries showing the deceased as the adoptive father – Reiterated that registration of adoption deed not mandatory under Section 17 of Registration Act [Paras 10-16].

Compensation Entitlement – Employment Connection – Deceased’s death occurred during continuous driving – Supreme Court found driving a material contributory factor to the death, fulfilling the requirement for compensation under Section 3 of Workmen's Compensation Act [Paras 17-28].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court's order set aside – Commissioner’s order restored – Compensation awarded to appellant as the deceased's adopted son.

Criminal Law – Hostile Witness – Court's Approach – Testimony of a hostile witness is not to be rejected entirely – Court can rely on parts of the testimony that are credible – Appellant's daughter, although declared hostile, provided testimony supporting the prosecution's case about the appellant's presence and actions during the incident​​.

Murder Conviction – Section 302 vs. Section 304 – Single Blow – The appellant killed his wife with a wooden log in a fit of anger suspecting her character – The incident involved a single blow – Court held that not all cases with a single blow necessarily fall under Section 302 IPC – Considering the factual scenario, the nature of the offence, and circumstances, the conviction under Section 302 IPC was altered to Section 304 Part-I IPC​​.

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC set aside – Appellant convicted under Section 304 Part-I IPC – Sentence of life imprisonment substituted with 10 years imprisonment.

Criminal Law – Appreciation of Evidence – Hostile Witness – Court is not precluded from taking into account the statement of a hostile witness entirely – Testimony can be relied upon to the extent it is corroborated by reliable evidence – Witnesses react differently under different situations, and their testimony should be scrutinized accordingly​​.

Conviction Based on Eyewitness Testimony – Delayed Examination – Sole eyewitness testimony found unreliable due to unnatural conduct and delayed reporting of the incident – Conviction based on such testimony is unsustainable​​.

Decision: Appeal allowed – Conviction and sentence set aside – Appellants acquitted and ordered to be released unless required in connection with any other case.

Government Contract – Petroleum Dealership – Cancellation of Allotment – Authority empowered to appoint is the competent authority to decide on discarding the panel and fresh selection – Multiple rounds of interviews and complaints led to findings of irregularities – Fresh selection preferable over rearranging a vitiated panel​​.

Selection Process – Inquiry and Complaints – Investigation revealed errors in the evaluation of financial capability and non-compliance with required documents – Fresh selection recommended by the competent authority based on investigation findings​​.

High Court Interference – Article 226 – High Court should not interfere with the decision of the competent authority to cancel the selection when irregularities are detected – Fresh selection process upheld​​.

Decision: Appeal allowed – Order of the Bombay High Court set aside – Competent Authority given liberty to re-advertise and make a fresh selection in accordance with law.

Retiral Benefits – Withholding due to Criminal Proceedings – Appellant retired from Punjab National Bank (PNB) and his gratuity, leave encashment, and pension commutation were withheld due to pending criminal proceedings – Acquitted of charges and sought interest on delayed payment of benefits​​.

Payment of Gratuity Act – Section 7(3A) – Interest on Delayed Payment – Employer required to pay gratuity within 30 days from the date it becomes payable – If delayed, interest at the rate notified by the Central Government – Proviso allows withholding interest if delay due to employee’s fault and with controlling authority’s approval – Appellant not at fault due to acquittal, entitled to interest on delayed gratuity​​.

Regulation 46 of PNB Pension Regulations – Withholding Gratuity – Gratuity can be withheld during pending judicial proceedings – Provision does not negate entitlement to interest for delayed payment if employee not at fault – Entitlement under Gratuity Act overrides provisions under Regulation 46​​.

Decision: Appeal allowed – Appellant entitled to interest on delayed payment of gratuity at the rate notified by the Central Government or 8% if no rate notified – PNB directed to pay interest and costs to the appellant​​.