Education Law - Adherence to Schedule for Counselling and Admissions - Supreme Court mandates fixed and consistent admission schedule for technical courses to ensure transparency and fair opportunity for students.

Counselling and Admissions - Adherence to Fixed Schedule: Supreme Court emphasized the importance of adhering to a fixed schedule for counselling and admissions as outlined in AICTE regulations. The schedule ensures proper standards in technical education and provides students with certainty. [Paras 1-6, 26]

Role of AICTE - Approval Process: Clarification of AICTE's role in granting approvals for technical institutions, stating its authority to ensure maintenance of standards without directly controlling universities. [Paras 7-10, 22-23]

Impact of Non-Adherence - Consequences and Remedies: Non-adherence to the admission schedule results in significant consequences, including jeopardizing student interests and educational standards. The Court extended the time for online counselling for 2014-2015 to mitigate the impact. [Paras 5, 23-25]

Public Interest - Special Considerations for 2014-2015 Academic Year: Given the special circumstances of 2014-2015, including uncertainties about AICTE's authority and state bifurcation, the Court provided extensions to ensure fair opportunity for students and institutions. [Paras 22-23]

Future Compliance - Mandate for Subsequent Years: The time schedule fixed in Parshvanath Charitable Trust case is declared mandatory for future years to prevent recurrence of similar issues. Authorities are cautioned to ensure timely action and cooperation to maintain educational standards. [Paras 28-29]

Decision: The Supreme Court extended the time for online counselling till 20th October 2014. Specific instructions were given for the separate section of admitted students to attend extra classes, ensuring they meet attendance requirements. The adherence to the fixed schedule from Parshvanath Charitable Trust case was mandated for future years. [Para 26-30]

Criminal Law – Negotiable Instruments Act – Summary Trial vs. Summons Trial – Criminal appeals arising out of convictions for dishonour of cheques – Appeals challenging the High Court's order for de novo trials due to successive Magistrates handling the evidence recording process – Held that de novo trial should be ordered sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances to avoid miscarriage of justice – Emphasis on speedy trial as per Article 21 of the Constitution – Matters remanded to the High Court for reconsideration on merits. [Paras 1-64]

Negotiable Instruments Act – Section 138 – Procedure – Analysis – Held – If a case is substantively tried as a summons case with detailed evidence recorded, de novo trial may not be necessary even if the case was triable summarily – Substantial justice must not be compromised by procedural technicalities. [Para 23-44]

De Novo Trial – Exceptional Circumstances – Analysis – Held – De novo trial to be ordered only when there is grave miscarriage of justice or procedural irregularity affecting the core of the case – High Court to conduct thorough scrutiny before remanding for de novo trial. [Para 44-59]

Decision – Remand for Consideration on Merits – Appeals allowed – High Court judgments set aside – Cases remanded to High Court for reconsideration on merits – Direction for expeditious disposal within three months due to prolonged litigation period of nearly 14 years. [Paras 63-64]

Family Law - DNA Test in Matrimonial Disputes – The High Court's order directing a DNA test to establish paternity in a divorce case alleging infidelity – DNA test held crucial to substantiate the husband's allegations under Section 13(1)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act – Supreme Court upholds the High Court’s directive, emphasizing the need to balance the right to privacy with the necessity of reaching the truth – Offers the wife the option to comply or refuse the test, with potential adverse presumption under Section 114(h) of the Indian Evidence Act if she declines. [Paras 1-13]

Legitimacy of Child - Presumptions and DNA Evidence – The Supreme Court reiterates the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, which can be rebutted by conclusive DNA evidence – Cites that modern scientific advancements provide precise tools for such determinations – Stresses that conclusive scientific proof should prevail over legal presumptions in the interest of justice. [Paras 8-10]

Right to Privacy vs. Pursuit of Truth – While considering the delicate balance between an individual's right to privacy and the court's duty to uncover the truth, the Supreme Court permits the use of DNA testing in circumstances where it is indispensable to resolving the matter at hand – Acknowledges the potential emotional and social implications but prioritizes the need for accurate and just adjudication. [Paras 9, 11]

Decision - Conditions for DNA Testing – Supreme Court validates the High Court's direction for a DNA test, offering the wife the liberty to accept or reject the test – Refusal to comply may lead to adverse inference under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, thus preserving the individual’s privacy while upholding the judicial process. [Para 12-13]

Service Law – Continuation of Departmental Proceedings After Retirement – Interpretation of Rule 10 of the West Bengal Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971 – Civil Appeal against High Court order stopping departmental proceedings post-retirement – High Court held proceedings could not continue without pecuniary loss to the State – Supreme Court interprets Rule 10 to allow continuation for “grave misconduct or negligence” even without pecuniary loss – High Court’s order set aside, Tribunal’s order to proceed with departmental proceedings upheld. [Paras 1-7]

Continuation of Proceedings Post-Retirement – Analysis – Held – Departmental proceedings can proceed after retirement for grave misconduct or negligence during service, even if there is no pecuniary loss to the Government – High Court erred in its interpretation that proceedings could only continue for pecuniary loss. [Paras 5-6]

Decision – Interpretation of Rule 10 – Proceedings Allowed – Departmental proceedings against the respondent are permissible and to continue post-retirement for grave misconduct or negligence – Matter remanded to High Court for adjudication on merits. [Paras 6-7]

Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction of Civil Courts - Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 - Applicability - Civil Appeal against High Court order dismissing suit for declaration and possession of Shamilat Patti Sayar land - High Court held civil suit not maintainable as the dispute pertains to shamilat deh land, falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of revenue authorities as per Sections 7 and 11 of the Act - Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing the necessity of approaching the Collector for such disputes, not the Civil Court - Appeal dismissed. [Paras 7-10]

Possession and Ownership of Shamilat Land - Legal Framework - Analysis - Supreme Court analyzed the nature of Shamilat Patti Sayar land, which is common village land and cannot be individually owned or possessed - Highlighted provisions of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, particularly Sections 7 and 13, which restrict civil court jurisdiction and vest authority in revenue officials - Reiterated the need to protect common village lands from being misappropriated as private property through collusive suits. [Paras 4-8]

Decision - Dismissal of Civil Suit - Supreme Court held the civil suit filed by the appellants for declaration and possession of the disputed land was not maintainable under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 - Directed that grievances regarding possession of Shamilat deh land should be addressed before the appropriate revenue authorities - Civil Appeal dismissed with directions to approach the Collector as per statutory provisions. [Para 10]

Constitutional Law – Articles 14, 226, 39 – Allocation and Resumption of Public Land – Land allotted for educational purposes – Non-utilization – Resumption of land by State – Special leave petitions challenging the resumption of land by the State of Haryana, initially allotted to Raunaq Education Foundation for setting up an educational complex. The foundation failed to utilize the land as intended, leading to resumption by the State. The High Court and Single Judge found no merit in the foundation's contentions and upheld the State's decision. The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions, affirming the resumption order. [Paras 1-14]

Public Interest – Use of Public Land – Failure to Comply with Conditions – Held – The foundation's failure to construct the educational complex and use the land for the intended public purpose justified the resumption. The Court found the foundation's proposal to construct a school for underprivileged children unconvincing, given its track record of non-compliance. [Para 10-14]

Decision – Dismissal of Special Leave Petitions – Court upheld the resumption of land, emphasizing the need for transparent and non-arbitrary allocation of public land, in accordance with constitutional mandates. The foundation's failure to fulfill its promises and the adverse impact on the village justified the resumption. [Paras 13-14]

Criminal Law - Dowry Death and Cruelty - Conviction under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act - Criminal Appeal against High Court Order-Criminal appeal challenging the High Court's reversal of the trial court's acquittal. The High Court convicted the appellant under Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 498A and 304B IPC for dowry demands and cruelty leading to the suicide of his wife within a year of marriage. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing the presumption of dowry death under Section 113B of the Evidence Act when cruelty is established soon before the death. [Paras 1-21]

Presumption of Dowry Death - Interpretation of Section 304B IPC and Section 113B Evidence Act -Reiterates that once the prosecution establishes the basic facts of dowry demand and cruelty, the presumption of dowry death under Section 113B is mandatory. The burden then shifts to the accused to rebut this presumption. The court found that the appellant's defense failed to provide credible evidence to counter the prosecution's case. [Paras 13-18]

Evidence and Witness Testimony - Evaluation and Credibility-Detailed analysis of witness testimonies, highlighting the consistency and credibility of the prosecution witnesses. The court dismissed the appellant's claims of false deposition and lack of dowry custom in their community, emphasizing the direct evidence of cruelty and dowry demands. [Paras 8-11, 19-20]

Decision - Upholding High Court's Conviction-The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's conviction of the appellant for dowry death and related offenses. The trial court's acquittal was deemed perverse and based on conjecture and surmises, lacking proper appreciation of evidence. [Para 21]

Criminal Law – Conviction under Section 376(2)(g) IPC – Appeal against High Court’s affirmation of conviction and sentence – Prosecution established involvement of Om Prakash and Kartar Singh in gang rape – Sufficient evidence confirming the victim’s age below 16 years – Consent immaterial due to victim’s age – Convictions and sentences affirmed. [Paras 1-10]

Role of Accused in Abetment – Analysis – Conviction of Chhoti under Section 109 IPC upheld – Chhoti's act of luring the victim to her house facilitated the commission of rape by Om Prakash and Kartar Singh – Evidence supports intentional aiding – Conviction justified under third clause of Section 107 IPC. [Paras 11-15]

Delay in Lodging FIR – Explanation – Delay of 20 days in filing FIR justified by victim's minority and fear – Testimonies of the victim and her mother consistent and reliable – No adverse inference drawn from delay. [Paras 7-8]

Decision – Appeals Dismissed – Supreme Court upholds the conviction and sentences of Om Prakash and Kartar Singh for gang rape, and of Chhoti for abetment – Sentences deemed appropriate – Appellants to be taken into custody to serve remaining sentences. [Paras 16-17]

Criminal Law - Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence – Criminal Appeal challenging the appellant's conviction for murder under Sections 302 and 201 IPC – Alleged motive that the appellant wanted to hasten his inheritance from the deceased – High Court and Sessions Court convicted the appellant based on circumstantial evidence – Supreme Court examined the credibility of the evidence and circumstances, including medical opinions on the cause of death – Held that there was significant doubt about whether the death was due to smothering or cardiac arrest – Benefit of doubt granted to appellant – Conviction overturned. [Paras 1-25] Motive and Opportunity - Analysis of Evidence – Held – Supreme Court noted that the alleged motive, based on the appellant's unwillingness to marry a Christian woman as stipulated in the will, was insufficient to prove intent to murder – Consideration of the appellant’s role as a caretaker and beneficiary of the will, indicating a lack of clear motive – Critical examination of evidence recovery and the appellant’s conduct, which did not conclusively support the prosecution’s theory. [Para 19-27] Decision - Acquittal of Appellant – The appeal allowed and conviction set aside due to insufficiency of evidence and improper inference by the lower courts – Appellant acquitted and ordered to be released forthwith. [Para 34]