(621) SUNKARI TIRUMALA RAO AND OTHERS Vs. PENKI ARUNA KUMARI[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Partnership Act, 1932 — Section 69 — Maintainability of a suit filed by partners of an unregistered firm, specifically for the recovery of money — Supreme Court determined that Section 69(1) is mandatory, prohibiting suits among partners of an unregistered firm to enforce a right arising from a contract, unless the suit is for the dissolution of the firm or for rendition of accounts — The court found that the suit filed by the petitioners for recovery of money fell under this prohibition, as it India Law Library Docid # 2421926
(622) MUSHEER ALAM Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 13(1) (e) read with 13(2) — The court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner to appear before the CBI Court and furnish bail — The court noted that the investigation was complete and a charge sheet had been filed — The court observed that the Investigating Officer had not arrested the petitioner during the investigation — The court questioned the practice in Uttar Pradesh State of arresting individuals after the charge sheet is filed — The India Law Library Docid # 2422165
(623) THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. SURVENDRA KUMAR @ SUNIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 8 —Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 — Double Murder — Acquittal — The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed a High Court judgment acquitting respondents in a double murder case involving a property dispute — The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony from the victims' sons and the discovery of firearms, but no ballistic report was obtained — The High Court overturned the Trial Court's conviction, citing unreliable eyewitness accounts a India Law Library Docid # 2422381
(624) IRFAN ALIAS BHAYU MEVATI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 DNA Evidence — Requirement of Expert Testimony — DNA evidence in criminal trials requires testimony from expert scientists who conducted the analysis to explain methodology, analysis, and conclusions. India Law Library Docid # 2422640
(625) RAKESH KUMAR RAGHUVANSHI Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8, 15 and 54 — Conscious Possession under the NDPS Act — The court reaffirmed that conscious possession is a crucial element for conviction under the NDPS Act — Conscious possession implies that the accused not only had physical control over the contraband but was also aware of its presence and nature — This concept has been emphasized in several earlier judgments, and this case reiterates its importance — The court held that the pr India Law Library Docid # 2421893
(626) SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINHA Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 397(1) and 482 — In a case involving a home buyer's complaint against developers for deceptive practices, the Trial Court issued a cognizance order, later dismissed on appeal — The developers then filed a second revision in the High Court, which quashed the criminal proceedings — The issues were the maintainability of the second revision and the justification of quashing the proceedings — The court found that while a second revision is generally no India Law Library Docid # 2422051
(627) BISWAJIT DAS Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 468, 120(B), 271, 465 and 420 — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) — Scope of Appeal and Limited Notice — The Supreme Court held that even if a limited notice is issued at the initial stage of an appeal, the Court is not precluded from expanding the scope of the appeal during the final hearing — The Court has the discretion to consider all points raised by the appellant, especially when substantial justice demands it — This is in l India Law Library Docid # 2421843
(628) VIJAY @ VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 201 and 300 — Applicability of Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC — The court examined whether the appellant's actions fell under Exception 1 of Section 300 of the IPC, which reduces the crime from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder if the offender was deprived of self-control due to grave and sudden provocation — The court held that for Exception 1 to apply, the provocation must be both grave and sudden, and the accused must have acted in the heat India Law Library Docid # 2421844
(629) THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. MAHENDRA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 164 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 366 and 376(g) — The Supreme Court heard an appeal against a trial court judgment that convicted the respondents — The main issue was whether the trial court's decision to rely solely on the evidence of the prosecutrix (the victim) was correct, given that there were material contradictions in her statement —The respondents argued that the trial court should not have relied solely on the prosecutrix's evidence, India Law Library Docid # 2422211
(630) OM PRAKASH AMBADKAR Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 156(3) — The Court clarified that Section 156(3) empowers a Magistrate to order an investigation if a cognizable offence is alleged but not registered by the police — However, the Magistrate must apply his mind and ensure that the allegations constitute a cognizable offence before issuing such an order India Law Library Docid # 2422212
(631) DALIP KUMAR @ DALLI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363, 366-A, 366, 368, 376 and 149 — Abduction and Sexual assault — Medical and witness testimony — Prosecution failed to provide adequate evidence to substantiate the charges of abduction and abduction with intent to commit illicit intercourse — The court found that the testimonies, particularly the prosecutrix's own account of voluntarily accompanying the appellant, lacked the necessary elements to prove forced abduction — Additionally, the absence of crucial w India Law Library Docid # 2422215
(632) DEEN DAYAL TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Brutal murder of wife and four minor daughters — The facts revealed that the appellant was found inside the locked house with a blood-stained axe, and the bodies of his family members were discovered in pools of blood — The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including witness testimonies, recovery of weapons, and postmortem reports, which indicated that the victims died from multiple incised wounds caused by sharp-edged weapons — The issue before the India Law Library Docid # 2422056
(633) SEETABEN LAGHDHIRBHAI Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363, 366 and 376 — Acquittal — The Court acquitted the appellant of all charges, overturning her convictions — It found no evidence that she abetted rape, as there was no proof of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid — Similarly, the court ruled she did not harbor an offender, as there was no reliable evidence she knew of the crime — The victim's contradictory testimony further weakened the case — The decision applies only to the appellant and does not af India Law Library Docid # 2422164
(634) PADAM CHAND JAIN Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 45 — Bail — The twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA cannot override constitutional safeguards under Article 21 of the Constitution — Prolonged pre-trial detention is not justified, especially in cases with extensive documentary evidence already seized and numerous witnesses to be examined — The court may grant bail if the accused is not a flight risk, the main evidence is documentary and secured, and the accused has already been release India Law Library Docid # 2422693
(635) ASHOK ANANDRAO AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025 Matrimonial Law — Settlement —The appellants sought the dissolution of marriage based on a settlement agreement dated 06.04.2024, under which Rs. 12,00,000 had already been paid — The Supreme Court considered the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage and the settlement terms, exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage — The Court also quashed criminal proceedings and disposed of the appeals, treating the settlement as an undertaking to the Court India Law Library Docid # 2421813
(636) DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025 Jharkhand Superior Judicial Services (Recruitment, Appointment and Condition of Service) Rule, 2001 — Rules 4 and 5 — Suitability vs. Comparative Merit — The court has emphasized that for promotions based on merit-cum-seniority (specifically the 65% quota for promotion), the suitability of each candidate should be tested on their own merits, and a comparative assessment is not appropriate — This means that if a candidate meets the minimum suitability criteria, they should not be denied promotion India Law Library Docid # 2421643
(637) CUDDALORE POWERGEN CORPORATION LTD. Vs. M/S. CHEMPLAST CUDDALORE VINYLS LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 2 Rule 2 — Cause of Action — The phrase "cause of action" is defined as the facts that give a party the right to judicial interference — It includes every fact which, if traversed, the plaintiff must prove to obtain a judgment — The cause of action does not depend on the defense or the relief claimed but refers to the grounds on which the plaintiff asks the court to arrive at a conclusion in their favor. India Law Library Docid # 2421644
(638) RAJEEB KALITA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21, 32, 47 and 48A — A writ petition under Article 32 sought toilet facilities in all Indian courts for all genders and disabilities, arguing it's essential for dignity under Article 21 — The Supreme Court agreed, citing Article 47 and 48A, and international laws — It found the lack of facilities violated fundamental rights and ordered High Courts and State Governments to construct and maintain separate, accessible toilets, forming committees to oversee impl India Law Library Docid # 2421645
(639) RAVI KANT AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025 Election Commission of India 2016 instructions — The court declined to address the petitioners' specific requests, such as halting construction, removing statues, ordering a CBI investigation, or seeking compensation from the BSP and Chief Minister, as the Election Commission of India (ECI) had already addressed the core issues India Law Library Docid # 2422162
(640) SHASHI BALA @ SHASHI BALA SINGH Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Sections 44 and 45 — Bail for Women under the PMLA — A woman accused under the PMLA is exempt from satisfying the stringent twin conditions for bail under Section 45(1)(ii) of the Act, pursuant to the first proviso to Section 45(1) — Instead, her bail application shall be treated as one under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. or Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (BNSS), with the first proviso to Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. (or Section 480 of the BNSS) applying, all India Law Library Docid # 2422692