(701) JYOSTNAMAYEE MISHRA Vs. THE STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Orissa Subordinate Architectural Service Rules, 1979 — Rule 7 — Promotion vs. Direct Recruitment — The post of Tracer in the Orissa Subordinate Architectural Service is to be filled 100% by direct recruitment as per the Orissa Subordinate Architectural Service Rules, 1979 — The Rules do not provide for promotion from the post of Peon to Tracer — Therefore, an employee in the feeder cadre (Peon) is not entitled to claim promotion to a post (Tracer) that is required to be filled exclusively by dir India Law Library Docid # 2421841
(702) NITIN ARJUN MORE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 394, 395, 397, 120(B) and 201 — Bail — Supreme Court granted bail to the appellant considering that he had been in custody since August 2023, the charges had not yet been framed, and a co-accused had already been granted bail— The Court emphasized that the appellant should not misuse his liberty, influence witnesses, or tamper with evidence, and any violation of these conditions would result in the cancellation of bail. India Law Library Docid # 2421933
(703) KAMLESH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section(s) 8, 22 and 29 — Bail — Supreme Court granted bail to the appellant due to the long period of incarceration (since March 2021), the slow pace of the trial, and the absence of independent witnesses to the seizure — The Court clarified that the observations made in the order and the grant of bail should not be treated as findings on the merits of the case. India Law Library Docid # 2421934
(704) GIRDHARI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 374(2) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376(2)(f) — Modification of Sentence — Supreme Court modified the sentence of the appellant from life imprisonment to 20 years of imprisonment, considering that he had already served nearly 18 years and was 64 years old — The Court found that the ends of justice would be met with this modification. India Law Library Docid # 2421937
(705) VIKAS SHARMA Vs. SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT LOKAYUKT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7 — The Supreme Court suspended the sentence and granted bail to the appellant pending the appeal before the High Court, as he had already served 8 months of his 4-year sentence — The Court relied on the precedent set in Shivani Tyagi vs. State of U.P., which allows for the suspension of sentences in similar circumstances. India Law Library Docid # 2421938
(706) PARINEE REALTY PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. NARENDRA A. POPAT (HUF) AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Supreme Court directed the Maharashtra RERA Authority to expedite the proceedings and decide the matter within four weeks — The Court upheld the High Court's status quo order but emphasized that the petitioners should have been given an opportunity to file a reply before the order was passed. India Law Library Docid # 2421939
(707) ILAMARAN Vs. STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 52A — Bail — Supreme Court granted bail to the petitioner pending the disposal of the Special Leave Petition, as he had already served 2 years of his 5-year sentence — The Court also noted that the issue of the applicability of Section 52A of the NDPS Act was pending before a larger bench and tagged the present petition with the related case. India Law Library Docid # 2421942
(708) RAJESWARI Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 420 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 4 — Burden of Proof on the Prosecution — The prosecution is required to establish its case with consistent and credible evidence, especially in cases concerning allegations of dowry demands — The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case "beyond a reasonable doubt" India Law Library Docid # 2422095
(709) PRITHIVIRAJAN Vs. THE STATE REP BY THE INPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 90 417, 376 & 506 Part I — False Promise of Marriage — Appellant was charged with sexual offenses under IPC for allegedly engaging in sexual relations under a false promise of marriage — The key issue was whether this constituted rape under Section 376 IPC or a consensual relationship, and whether to quash the criminal proceedings — The prosecution argued that the false promise invalidated the consent, while the defense claimed it was a consensual relationship India Law Library Docid # 2422054
(710) PRASANTH M.P. Vs. THE MANAGER, AIDED MUSLIM lower PRIMARY SCHOOL KULAMUKKU AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 20-01-2025 Service Law — Interference with Disciplinary Proceedings — The Supreme Court generally does not interfere with the findings of disciplinary proceedings unless there is a compelling reason to do so. India Law Library Docid # 2422587
(711) SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. SANTOBAI AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 19 — Condonation of Delay — The Supreme Court held that a substantial delay of 2,422 days in filing an application under Order 41 Rule 19 of the CPC (for restoration of an appeal dismissed for non-prosecution and non-payment of court fees) cannot be condoned without sufficient reason, emphasizing that parties must remain vigilant in pursuing their cases, and a mere two-year delay in discovering the dismissal afte India Law Library Docid # 2422637
(712) BHUDEV MALLICK ALIAS BHUDEB MALLICK AND ANOTHER Vs. RANAJIT GHOSHAL AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 136 — Decree for Permanent Injunction can be Executed at any Time Upon Breach — A decree for permanent injunction is not subject to a limitation period and can be executed at any time when the judgment-debtor tries to disturb the peaceful possession of the decree-holder or creates obstruction in the enjoyment of the property. (Paras 39, 41, 42) India Law Library Docid # 2422406
(713) BALBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. BALDEV SINGH (D) THROUGH HIS LRS AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 28 — Rescission in certain circumstances of contracts for the sale or lease of immovable property, the specific performance of which has been decreed — The trial court initially decreed four suits for specific performance, requiring plaintiffs to deposit the balance sale consideration within 20 days — The first appellate court reversed this, but the High Court restored the trial court's decree in second appeals — Plaintiffs then deposited the balance after the India Law Library Docid # 2421739
(714) U. SUDHEERA AND OTHERS Vs. C. YASHODA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Jurisdiction of the High Court in Second Appeals — The High Court's jurisdiction to hear a second appeal is dependent on the existence of a substantial question of law — Section 100 of the CPC specifies that an appeal can only be made to the High Court from a lower appellate court's decree if the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved. India Law Library Docid # 2421740
(715) THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS Vs. VIKASH TIWARY @ BIKASH TIWARY @ BIKASH NATH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Prisoners Act, 1900 — Section 29 — Jharkhand Jail Manual — Rule 770(b) — Administrative Power of Transfer — The Inspector General of Prisons has the authority to transfer prisoners within the state, based on Section 29 of the Prisoners Act, 1900 and Rule 770(B) of the State Jail Manual — This power is subject to the orders and control of the State Government. India Law Library Docid # 2421741
(716) VIMAL BABU DHUMADIYA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 32 and 136 — Jurisdiction under Article 32 — The court reaffirmed that a writ petition under Article 32 cannot be used to declare a High Court judgment as illegal — If a party feels aggrieved by a High Court judgment, the appropriate remedies are to either file a petition for recall of the judgment or to challenge it under Article 136 before the Supreme Court India Law Library Docid # 2421742
(717) MAHENDRA AWASE Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 306 — Abement to suicide — To convict someone under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for abetment of suicide, there must be clear evidence that the accused actively instigated, encouraged, or aided the deceased in committing suicide — The accused must have had the intention (mens rea) to push the deceased into a situation where suicide was the only option India Law Library Docid # 2421743
(718) MUKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE THROUGH REP., BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Bail — Unjustified Financial Condition for Anticipatory Bail – The High Court of Madras imposed a condition requiring the appellants to deposit a total sum of Rs. 30,00,000 (₹10,00,000 each) as a prerequisite for granting interim anticipatory bail — The Supreme Court found this condition to be unjustified and disproportionate, particularly in the context of anticipatory bail, which is meant to protect the liberty of the accused pending trial. India Law Library Docid # 2421745
(719) SANTOSH MALLUR NAGRAJ @ SANTOSH Vs. THE STATE BY JEEVAN BHEEMA NAGAR POLICE STATION AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 6, 8 and 12 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Bail — The Supreme Court granted bail to the petitioner, who was in custody since 16.01.2024 — The Court considered the fact that the investigation had been completed, and the trial was yet to commence — The Court emphasized that the decision to grant bail was based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case, without e India Law Library Docid # 2421746
(720) ARJUN JALBA ICHKE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 354 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 4, 8 and 12 —Bail — Delay in Trial and Prejudice to the Accused — The Court considered the fact that the appellant had been in incarceration for three and a half years without the charges being framed or the trial progressing significantly — This delay was seen as prejudicial to the appellant's right to a speedy trial, which is a fu India Law Library Docid # 2421747