Penal Code – Criminal Conspiracy – Evidence – Prosecution's case based on inference of conspiracy to commit murder – Proof required beyond reasonable doubt – No credible ocular evidence – Discrepancies in witness testimonies – Court emphasized the need for direct or inferred evidence showing agreement to commit the crime – Absence of meeting of minds between accused for conspiracy – Appeals allowed, convictions set aside [Paras 1-18].

Penal Code – Murder – Last Seen Doctrine – Prosecution's reliance on last seen doctrine insufficient without corroborating evidence – Recovery of blood-stained clothes and knife not adequate to establish guilt – Court underscored the importance of conclusive evidence linking accused to the crime – Benefit of doubt given to the accused [Paras 16-18].

Decision:

Appeals allowed – Convictions under Sections 120B and 302 IPC set aside – Accused acquitted – Directed to be released unless required in other cases [Para 18].

Criminal Law – Abetment to Suicide – Instigation – The court examined the requirements for proving abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. It emphasized that mere utterance of words or a single instance of harassment may not constitute instigation. Persistent and continuous harassment, coupled with the utterance of words suggesting suicide, can be sufficient to infer instigation. In the present case, the appellant's continuous harassment and humiliation of the deceased led to his suicide, as evidenced by the suicide note and statements of the deceased's family members [Paras 1-16].

Criminal Procedure – Quashing of Prosecution – While dealing with a quashing application under Section 482 CrPC, the court cannot form a firm opinion but only a tentative view to see if the charges can evoke the presumption of guilt. The court dismissed the appellant's plea for quashing the chargesheet, noting the consistent and persistent nature of harassment and the specific allegations made against the appellant [Paras 14-16].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – High Court's decision upheld – Observations made in the judgment not to affect the trial's outcome [Para 16].

Penal Code – Criminal Conspiracy, Murder, and Evidence – Conviction based on circumstantial evidence – Essential to establish motive and ensure that all links in the chain of evidence are conclusive and point towards guilt – Court affirmed findings of lower courts – Appellant failed to provide explanations for incriminating circumstances during examination under Section 313 CrPC – Recovery of articles and call records supported prosecution’s case – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-25].

Criminal Procedure – Examination of Accused – Obligation of the accused to explain incriminating circumstances when examined under Section 313 CrPC – Court noted failure of the appellant to explain presence at crime scene and other evidence linking him to the crime – Statements from police recoveries upheld as credible despite absence of independent witnesses [Paras 20-25].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Convictions under Sections 120B, 201, 302, 34, and 404 IPC upheld – Court found the chain of evidence complete and the appellant’s explanations inadequate [Para 25].

Trust Law – Government Accommodation – Cancellation of Allotment – Cancellation of the allotment of Government Accommodation Nos. 1 and 2 to the Martyrs Memorial Trust was challenged – The District Collector, acting as Secretary of the Trust, wrote to himself recommending the cancellation – Alleged misuse of position and political pressure from the ruling party – High Court’s brief and unreasoned order dismissing the writ petition filed by the Trust was set aside – Supreme Court directed fresh consideration after response from the respondents [Paras 1-24].

Judicial Review – Due Consideration – Courts must ensure detailed reasoning and application of mind while adjudicating matters – Hasty or cryptic decisions undermine the justice delivery process – Supreme Court emphasized the need for seriousness in addressing each matter, ensuring thorough examination of the issues raised [Paras 21-22].

Decision:

Appeal allowed – Impugned High Court order set aside – Writ Petition restored for fresh consideration and disposal by the High Court of judicature at Allahabad – Parties to bear their own costs [Para 24].

SAFEMA – Forfeiture of Property – Illegally Acquired Property – Property forfeited under SAFEMA if acquired by persons involved in smuggling or foreign exchange manipulation – SAFEMA's stringent provisions aim to discourage illegal activities by forfeiting such properties – Forfeiture order upheld as the property was transferred after issuance of SAFEMA notice, rendering the transfer null and void under Section 11 [Paras 22-28].

Constitutional Law – Due Process – Principles of Natural Justice – Appellants' claim of being bona fide purchasers not sufficient to invalidate forfeiture – SAFEMA places a moratorium on property transfers after notice issuance – Appellants not entitled to notice as the property transfer was prohibited by law [Paras 23-28].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Forfeiture order under SAFEMA upheld – Sale of property by vendors after issuance of SAFEMA notice deemed null and void – Appellants cannot claim any legal right to the property [Para 29].

Right to Education – Implementation of RTE Act – School Infrastructure – Directions to ensure proper infrastructure including toilets, drinking water, classrooms, and staff appointments – Emphasis on providing a clean and healthy environment for children – Failure of some states to comply with directives – Supreme Court orders immediate implementation within six months [Paras 1-10].

Constitutional Law – Article 21A – Right to Free and Compulsory Education – Courts must ensure states comply with constitutional mandate – Statutory bodies like National Commission for Protection of Child Rights tasked with monitoring and reviewing safeguards and recommending measures for effective implementation – Non-compliance can lead to further judicial intervention [Paras 7-10].

Decision:

Writ petition disposed of – Directions to all states to implement necessary measures for school infrastructure within six months – Applicability extends to all schools, state-owned or privately owned, aided or unaided, minority or non-minority – Aggrieved parties may seek further judicial intervention if directions are not fully implemented [Para 10].

Right to Information – Exemption of Personal Information – Information relating to the personal matters of a public servant, such as service career details, assets, and liabilities, is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act – Disclosure of such information must serve a larger public interest – Appellant failed to establish bona fide public interest – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-16].

Privacy and Public Interest – Performance of an employee/officer is a matter between the employee and employer – Disclosure of personal information without public interest constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy – Income tax returns also qualify as personal information exempt from disclosure unless larger public interest is demonstrated [Paras 13-14].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Information requested qualified as personal information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act – No larger public interest established – Disclosure would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy [Para 16].

Civil Procedure – Special Leave Petition – Withdrawal and Finality – An SLP withdrawn without liberty to file afresh precludes subsequent challenge under Article 136 – Review petition rejection not appealable under Order 47 Rule 7 CPC – Earlier SLP withdrawal bars re-litigation on the same grounds [Paras 1-12].

Town and Country Planning – Unauthorized Construction – Coastal Regulation Zone – Legal implications of unauthorized constructions within CRZ areas and the powers of municipal and planning authorities to issue stop work notices and revoke permissions – Court did not express opinions on the merits of these issues [Para 12].

Decision:

Appeals dismissed – Earlier withdrawal of SLP without liberty to refile renders subsequent appeals not maintainable – Rejection of review petition not appealable under Article 136 due to Order 47 Rule 7 CPC [Paras 8-12].

Banking Regulations – Pension Eligibility – Resignation vs. Retirement – Officers who resigned before the implementation of the Canara Bank Pension Regulations, 1995, are not entitled to pension benefits as resignation does not equate to retirement under the Regulations – Distinction between resignation and voluntary retirement upheld – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-21].

Pension Regulations – Application and Interpretation – The term 'retirement' under the 1995 Regulations includes voluntary retirement but explicitly excludes resignation – Regulatory definitions and the absence of specific provisions for resignation in pension eligibility clauses examined – Legal precedents confirming the distinction between resignation and retirement referenced [Paras 13-20].

Decision:

Appeals dismissed – Resignation does not qualify for pension benefits under the Canara Bank Pension Regulations, 1995 – No pre-existing right for pension established for appellants who resigned before the regulation's effective date [Paras 20-21].