Legal Cell

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1215 Discusses interpretation of statutes, scope of appellate review, and powers of tribunals to substitute findings. Legal Discussion: The Army Act, 1950: The judgment discusses several sections of the Army Act, 1950. Section 3(ii) defines "civil offence". Section 59 prescribes offences relating to Court Martial. Section 63, titled "Violation of good order and discipline", is central to the appeal; it applies to acts or omissions not specified in the Act but prejudicial to good order and military discipline, punishable by court-martial. Section 69 deals with "Civil offences", stating that any person subject to the Act committing a civil offence is deemed guilty under the Act and triable by court-martial, punishable as per clauses (a) and (b) of the same section. Section 70 states "Civil offences not triable by court-martial", specifying exceptions like murder or culpable homi...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Original) 2025:BHC-OS:18469 Clarifies the limited scope of judicial intervention under Section 11 and the powers of the arbitral tribunal. Legal Discussion: Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: The judgment extensively discusses several sections of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 11 is central, as the application concerns the appointment of an arbitrator. The court notes its limited jurisdiction under Section 11, stating it should only examine the existence of an arbitration agreement, citing "Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Stamp Act, 1899, in Re (2024) 6 SCC 1" and "SBI General Insurance Company Vs. Krish Spinning, (2025) 3 SCC (Civ) 567". The judgment refers to Section 11(6) and the limited scope of the court's power post the 2015 amendment, citing "Duro Felguera, S.A. v. Gangavaram Port Ltd., (2017) 9 SCC 7...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:44011-DB Discusses interpretation of beneficial legislation and the primacy of central legislation over company regulations. Legal Discussion: The Constitution of India: The judgment invokes Article 226, stating that the petitioner invokes the jurisdiction of the Court under this Article to challenge the termination of his service. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016: The judgment extensively discusses the Act. It mentions that the present case is governed by the provisions of this Act. It reproduces the Preamble of the Act, emphasizing that it is a beneficial legislation that prioritizes and recognizes the benefits provided for under the Act. The judgment refers to Section 2, specifically defining "barrier", "discrimination", "Government establishment", "person with benchmark disability", "person with disability", and "specified...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:44012-DB Discusses interpretation of rules, statutory duties, legitimate expectations, and constitutional articles related to writ jurisdiction. Legal Discussion: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India: The petitioners invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227, being aggrieved by the Tribunal's order. The court discusses whether it should interfere with the Tribunal's order under these articles, considering the delay in cadre review. The court ultimately declines to interfere with the Tribunal's order, citing sound reasoning and the nature of the directions issued by the Tribunal, and dismisses the writ petitions. Article 142 of the Constitution of India: The judgment refers to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's power under Article 142, particularly in the context of mitigating hardship and denial of legitimate rights when there's a dela...

High Court of Bombay, Nagpur (Criminal) 2025:BHC-NAG:10621 Discusses the evaluation of victim testimony, corroborating evidence, and the impact of delay in reporting sexual offenses. Legal Discussion: The Indian Penal Code, 1860: The judgment discusses Sections 376(2)(k), 376(2)(n), and 376(3) IPC, noting the appellant's conviction and the imposition of a 20-year rigorous imprisonment sentence for the offense under Section 376(3). It also mentions the appellant's conviction under Sections 323 and 324 IPC, detailing the sentences of simple imprisonment and fines imposed for each. The judgment refers to Section 506 IPC as invoked in the FIR. The court considered the maximum punishment prescribed under Sections 376(2)(k), 376(2)(n), and 376(3) IPC. The trial court held that the punishment as under section 376(3) of IPC is greater in degree. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act): The judgment refers to Section...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:43485 Discusses statutory interpretation, natural justice, jurisdictional issues, and promoter/society obligations, applicable across various legal domains. Legal Discussion: Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act ("MOFA"): The judgment discusses Section 3(2)(h) and Section 4(1A)(a)(v) of MOFA, stating they mandate the promoter to specify in writing the precise nature of the organization of flat owners. It notes that Clauses 2(O) and 13 of the MOFA agreement in this case did not comply with these provisions. Section 10 of MOFA is discussed in multiple contexts. Section 10(2) is cited as creating a statutory bar against forming a Co-operative Housing Society if the promoter has submitted the property to the MAO Act by executing a Deed of Declaration. It is also argued that Section 10 creates a statutory obligation on the Promoter/Developer to form an association of flat takers. The judgment also...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:43706-DB Discusses the principle against perpetuating illegality and the importance of adhering to statutory provisions. Legal Discussion: Maharashtra State Board of Nursing and Paramedical Education Act, 2013: The judgment refers to the Maharashtra State Board of Nursing and Paramedical Education Act, 2013 (referred to as “the 2013 Act”), stating it is squarely applicable to the nursing courses and colleges in question. The judgment quotes Section 24(1) of the Act, outlining the powers and duties of the Board, including: (c) prescribing and regulating standard guidelines for selection and infrastructure for nursing and Paramedical Education Institutions, requirements for staff, buildings, furniture, equipment, stationary, and other things required for diploma level courses; (d) prescribing and developing any book as a textbook and reference book, preparing or causing to be prepared any book and prin...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1210 Discusses interpretation of statutes, vicarious liability, binding precedent, and the legal status of trusts. Legal Discussion: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: The judgment extensively discusses Section 138, concerning dishonour of cheques, and Section 141, dealing with offences by companies. The core issue revolves around whether a complaint under the NI Act is maintainable against a trustee when a cheque issued on behalf of a trust is dishonoured, without the trust itself being named as an accused. The judgment analyzes the explanation to Section 141, particularly the phrase "association of individuals," and whether a trust falls within its ambit. It examines various High Court decisions interpreting these sections, including whether a trust is a juristic person capable of being prosecuted under Section 138. The court ultimately concludes that a complaint is maintainable against the trustee who si...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1212 Discusses interpretation of rules, application of natural justice, and fairness in administrative actions. Legal Discussion: The Constitution of India: The judgment refers to Article 309, specifically its proviso, as the source of power for the Governor of Jharkhand to frame the 2012 Rules regarding teacher appointments. "In exercise of powers conferred under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Jharkhand framed the 2012 Rules". Jharkhand Primary School Teacher Appointment Rules, 2012: The judgment extensively discusses the 2012 Rules. Rule 3 is mentioned as providing for a teacher eligibility test. "Rule 3 provides that for testing the eligibility for appointment on the post of Teacher in schools including government and aided non-governmental schools, an examination shall be held by the concerned authority". Rule 4 is discussed in detail, focusing on ...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Original) 2025:BHC-OS:18363 Discusses arbitrability of disputes, interpretation of arbitration agreements, and the interplay between arbitration and court proceedings. Legal Discussion: The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: The judgment extensively discusses Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It analyzes the power of a judicial authority to refer parties to arbitration when there is an arbitration agreement. The judgment refers to the 2015 Amendment to Section 8 and its effect on the court's power to examine the validity of the arbitration agreement. It notes that Section 8 requires the referral court to look into the prima facie existence of a valid arbitration agreement. The judgment also discusses Section 11 of the Act, contrasting its scope of inquiry with that of Section 8. The court notes that the scope of enquiry under Section 11 is narrower than Section 8. The judgment refers to ...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:43773 Provides detailed analysis of Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act and its applicability to unregistered firms. Legal Discussion: The Companies Act, 2013: The judgment mentions that Eskay Hospitality Services India Pvt. Ltd. is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. No specific sections of the Act are discussed. Constitution of India: The judgment refers to Article 227 of the Constitution of India, stating that the writ petition calls into question the legality, propriety, and correctness of an order dated 7 April 2025. The court's power of superintendence under Article 227 is invoked to examine the lower court's order. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: The judgment discusses Order VII Rule 11(1)(a) and (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Notice of Motion was taken out by the Petitioner – Defendant No.1 for rejection of the plaint und...

High Court of Bombay, Nagpur (Civil) 2025:BHC-NAG:10579-DB Clarifies jurisdictional limits for caste certificate issuance and inquiry under the Act. Legal Discussion: Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste Certificate) Act, 2000: The judgment discusses Section 4 of the Act, stating that the competent authority under this section, while issuing a caste certificate, is not entitled to make a detailed inquiry into the validity of the caste/tribe claim. The judgment also mentions Section 6, stating that the detailed inquiry is the job of the Committee constituted under this section. The court found that the Sub-Divisional Officer exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 4 by delving into the validity of the caste claim. The court directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to issue caste certificates ...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1208 Discusses constitutional interpretation, judicial appointments, and the doctrine of stare decisis. Legal Discussion: Constitution of India: The judgment extensively discusses Article 233, focusing on the appointment of district judges. It analyzes clause (1), which deals with the Governor's power to appoint, post, and promote district judges in consultation with the High Court. Clause (2), concerning eligibility, is scrutinized, particularly the requirement of seven years' practice as an advocate or pleader for those not already in service. The judgment interprets the phrase "a person not already in the service of the Union or of the State" in Article 233(2), debating whether it excludes judicial officers from direct recruitment. It also examines Article 233-A, validating certain appointments, and its implications for interpreting Article 233. Article 50, concerning the separation of the judic...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1209 Discusses retrospective application of statutes, vested rights, and constitutional rights related to reproductive autonomy. Legal Discussion: Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021: The judgment extensively discusses several sections of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021. Section 2 is referenced for definitions, specifically clauses (b) defining "altruistic surrogacy", (c) defining "appropriate authority" with reference to Section 35, (g) defining "commercial surrogacy", (h) defining "couple", (i) defining "egg", (j) defining "embryo", (l) defining "fertilisation", (m) defining "foetus", (n) defining "gamete", (r) defining "intending couple", (v) defining "oocyte", (zd) defining "surrogacy", (zf) defining "surrogacy procedures", (zg) defining "surrogate mother" with reference t...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1203 Discusses fair trial principles, evaluating circumstantial evidence, and handling forensic evidence, applicable across legal domains. Legal Discussion: The Indian Penal Code, 1860: The judgment discusses Sections 302, 201, 363, 366, and 354-B of the IPC. It notes that the trial court found the appellant guilty under these sections. The judgment analyzes the evidence presented by the prosecution to determine if the guilt was established beyond reasonable doubt, ultimately concluding that the prosecution failed to prove its case. The judgment highlights the importance of establishing a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances in cases based on circumstantial evidence. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: The judgment refers to Section 8 read with Section 7 and Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act. The trial court convicted the appellant under these provisions. The Supreme...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1205 Discusses principles of inherent jurisdiction, review powers, and fairness in investigations. Legal Discussion: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 156(3) CrPC was discussed in the context of the respondent-complainant lodging a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, which was forwarded to the police station under this section, leading to the registration of FIR No. 211 of 2023. The judgment also mentions that the respondent-complainant filed two more applications under Section 156(3) CrPC, which were allowed, leading to the registration of FIR No. 202 of 2024 and FIR No. 234 of 2024. The judgment also refers to Section 482 CrPC (mentioned as Section 528 BNSS [Section 482 CrPC] and Section 403 BNSS [Section 362 CrPC]) regarding the inherent powers of the High Court, stating that the High Court cannot review its own judgment under the guise of exercising inherent power, except to correct clerical e...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1207 Elucidates principles for interpreting instruments, determining stamp duty, and understanding surety contracts. Legal Discussion: The Indian Stamp Act, 1899: The judgment extensively discusses the applicability of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, specifically concerning the chargeability of stamp duty on instruments described as "Security Bond cum Mortgage Deed". The core issue revolves around whether such instruments should be charged under Article 40 or Article 57 of Schedule 1-B. The court emphasizes that the substance of the instrument, rather than its nomenclature, is the decisive factor in determining stamp duty. Section 2(17), defining "Mortgage-deed", is analyzed to determine if the instruments fulfill the characteristics of a mortgage deed. The court concludes that the instruments in question do satisfy these characteristics. Article 40 of Schedule 1-B, pertaining to "Mortgage-Deed...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1204 Discusses principles of vicarious liability, insurance liability, and the evaluation of evidence related to driving licenses. Legal Discussion: Motor Vehicles Act: The judgment refers to the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules made thereunder in paragraph 17, specifically mentioning that the renewal of a driving license is not an automatic renewal to be carried out within 30 days of the expiry of a driving license, as per the Act and Rules. The judgment notes the validity period of the license, originally issued, expired on 04.04.1994, and the renewal was on 11.08.1994. Law of Torts: The judgment discusses vicarious liability in paragraph 17, stating that the vicarious liability to satisfy the damages caused by the negligence of the employee is on the employer. It also mentions that even if the tort-feasor is the driver, the liability for any negligence of the driver rests on the owner of the vehicle, vicarious...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1201 Discusses burden of proof, interpretation of welfare statutes, and application of evidence in accident compensation claims. Legal Discussion: The Railways Act, 1989: The judgment extensively discusses Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, which embodies a no-fault liability regime for "untoward incidents." The court clarifies that compensation under this section is predicated on the victim being a "passenger." Explanation (ii) to Section 124-A, defining "passenger," is deemed relevant, including a person who has purchased a valid ticket for travelling or a valid platform ticket and becomes a victim of an untoward incident. The judgment emphasizes that proceedings under Section 124-A are not criminal trials and are governed by the principles of preponderance and probabilities. It also states that once the foundational facts of possession or issuance of a valid ticket and the occu...

Supreme Court of India 2025 INSC 1206 Discusses principles of evidence, statutory interpretation, appellate review, and the application of legal presumptions. Legal Discussion: The Indian Electricity Act, 1910: The judgment discusses Section 39, concerning "Theft of energy", elaborating on the dishonest abstraction, consumption, or use of energy. It highlights that Section 39 creates a fiction whereby such actions are deemed theft under the Penal Code, 1860. The court refers to Satya Narain Prasad v. Bhagwan Ramdas, emphasizing that Section 39 itself doesn't prescribe a sentence but creates an offense by raising a fiction. The judgment also discusses Section 44, "Penalty for interference with meters or licensee's works, and for improper use of energy", stating that the charge under this section rested on shaky grounds. It notes the absence of evidence showing the meter was injured or tampered with, and the lack of a prac...