After College Classroom Handout

LIST OF SUBJECTIVE TOPICS

IMPORTANT JUDGMENTS APRIL 2024

1. MAYA GOPINATHAN vs. ANOOP S.B., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 327

Name of the judgement
MAYA GOPINATHAN vs. ANOOP S.B., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 327
Date of the judgement
24th April, 2024
Name of the bench

c o m
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta
Facts of the case

rs .
The appellant got married to the respondent. It is her case that 89 sovereigns of gold were gifted to her by her family.

k e
Apart from this, after the marriage, her father had also given a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to her husband. It was argued
by her that on their wedding night, her husband took all the jewellery and entrusted the same to his mother for

n
safekeeping. While the family Court had allowed her petition and held that the respondents had misappropriated her
gold jewellery, the same was reversed by the High Court. Taking exception to this judgment, the appellant
approached the Supreme Court.
Issues

p r a
Whether the husband has a title over his wife’s stridhan property?

o
Important referred judgements

T
1. Rashmi Kumar v. Mahesh Kumar Bhada (1997) 2 SCC 397
It was observed that stridhan property does not become a joint property of the wife and the husband. The latter
“has no title or independent dominion over the property.” And the stridhan property is essentially what is gifted
to a woman before marriage, at3Qthe
tr-5O8O
7R6P
time
3U2T of marriage or at the time of bidding of farewell or thereafter.
Ratio of the case
Stridhan is an “absolute property” of a woman, and while the husband has no control over the same, he can use it in
times of distress. Nevertheless, he has a “moral obligation” to restore the same or its value to his wife.
Judgement
The Court had observed that the respondents had admitted that the appellant had brought stridhan with her after
the marriage. Observing this, the Court went on to examine the credibility of the respondent's claim that on the
wedding night, the appellant placed her jewellery in her almirah instead of entrusting the same to his mother.
Imperatively, the Court opined that it is a more plausible view that a newly married woman gives jewellery for
safekeeping rather than distrusting her husband and keeping it in her own locker. The Court therefore directed the
husband to make the said payment within six months.
6K
5E8J3B3J2B7E
2.tr- S V CHERIYAKOYA THANGAL v. S.V P POOKOYA & ORS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 309
Name of the judgement
S V CHERIYAKOYA THANGAL v. S.V P POOKOYA & ORS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 309
Date of the judgement 6P
8O3Q3U2T7R
2nd April, 2024 tr-5O

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 1 of 12
 Name of the bench
Justices M.M Sundresh and S.V.N. Bhatti.

Important sections
Section 32(2)(g) read with Section 3(i)of the Wakf Act, 1995.
Facts of the case
Both the litigating parties had claimed Mutawalliship of the Waqf. Ultimately, the Waqf Board held in favor of the
appellant, declaring him a Mutawalli. Aggrieved by such an order, the opposite party approached the tribunal. Having
no relief granted, the opposite party filed a revision before the High Court. While the High Court did not go into the
merits of the case, it set aside the judgment by ruling that the Waqf Board did not have the jurisdiction to decide this
issue. Thus, the tribunal directed matter to be decided afresh. Against this order, the appellants filed an appeal before
the Supreme Court.
Issues
Whether Waqf Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide the issue of mutawalli?
Ratio of the case
Only Waqf Board has jurisdiction to decide issue of mutawalli.

c o m
Judgement

rs .
Distinguishing the role of the Waqf Tribunal from that of the board, the Court said that the Waqf Tribunal is only an
adjudicating authority over a dispute while the Waqf Board is expected to deal with any issue pertaining to

k e
administration. The power of superintendence cannot be confined to routine affairs of a Waqf but it includes a
situation where a dispute arises while managing the property and that would certainly include a right of a person to

n
be a Mutawalli after all, it is the Mutawalli who does the job of administering and managing the Waqf.

Name of the judgement

p a
3. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs. JAYEETA DAS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 312

r
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs. JAYEETA DAS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 312
Date of the judgement
18th April, 2024
Name of the bench

To
Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
Important sections tr-5O8O3Q3U
2T 7R6P

Section 22 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008

Facts of the case
Proceedings were initiated by the session judge based on the preliminary investigation report which was challenged
before the High Court. The High Court quashed the UAPA proceedings holding that only a Special Court constituted
by the Central Government or the State Government as per the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 had the
exclusive jurisdiction to try the offences under UAPA. The High Court's decision was challenged before the Supreme
Court by the state government.
Issues
Whether the court of sessions has jurisdiction to try UAPA cases when the State has not designated any Special Court?
Important referred judgements
3J2B7E6K
1.8J3BBikramjit
tr-5E Singh v. State of Punjab (2020) 10 SCC 616
It has been held that for all offences under the UAPA, the special Court alone has the exclusive jurisdiction to try
such offences.
Ratio of the case
In the absence of the designation
2T7R6P of a special court by the state government, the Court of Sessions would have the
tr-5O8O3Q3U
jurisdiction to try offences punishable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 2 of 12
 Judgement
It was observed that the jurisdictional magistrate would be authorized to remand the accused in UAPA cases for the
period of 90 days, and the remand beyond the period of 90 days would be authorized by an express order of the
Sessions Court or the Special Court by virtue of Section 43D(2) of UAPA.
4. MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India And Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 286
Name of the judgement
MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India And Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 286
Date of the judgement
March 21st, 2024
Name of the bench
CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
Important sections
Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution
Facts of the case

c o m
rs .
The Bench in this case modified the Apex Court's previous order dated 19 April 2021 (M K Ranjith Singh and others
v Union of India (LL 2021 SC 220)), which ordered blanket directions for the undergrounding of high-voltage and
low-voltage power lines. However, the Union sought modification of the 2021 order, citing the need to balance the

k e
issue of the protection of the GIB with India's international commitment to reduce its carbon footprint. The Union
stated that installing solar panels is crucial in India's obligation towards international commitment. Observing that
it is best to leave the issue to the domain experts, the Court constituted the aforementioned committee, which is

Issues

r n
required to submit a report on or before July 31, 2024.

a
Whether in the absence of legislation in India regarding climate change mean that the people of India do not have a

o
Important referred judgements
p
right against the adverse effects of climate change?

T
1. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana
The Supreme Court in this case held that Articles 48A and 51A(g) must be interpreted in light of Article 21 which
provides that no person shall be deprived of his life and liberty except in accordance with the procedure
established by law. Any disturbance of 6P
2T7R the basic environment elements, namely air, water and soil, which are
tr-5O8O3Q3U
necessary for “life”, would be hazardous to “life” within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana, (1995) 2 SCC 577
The Apex Court had opined that the State, in particular has duty in that behalf and to shed its extravagant
unbridled sovereign power and to forge in its policy to maintain ecological balance and hygienic environment.
Article 21 protects right to life as a fundamental right. Enjoyment of life and its attainment including their right
to life with human dignity encompasses within its ambit, the protection and preservation of environment,
ecological balance free from pollution of air and water, sanitation without which life cannot be enjoyed.
Ratio of the case
There is a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change under Article 14 read with Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution.
Judgement 7E6K
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
The Court had observed that if climate change and environmental degradation lead to acute food and water shortages
in a particular area, poorer communities will suffer more than richer ones. The right to equality would undoubtedly
be impacted in each of these instances thereby violating Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The Court also cited
the example of indigenous groups and forest dwellers who could lose their homes and culture because their way of
life is closely linked to the land and resources they depend on.
7R6P
5O8O3Q3U2T
It therefore heldtr-that the right to a healthy environment encapsulates the principle that every individual has the
entitlement to live in an environment that is clean, safe, and conducive to their well-being. By recognizing the right

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 3 of 12
 to a healthy environment and the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, states are compelled to
prioritize environmental protection and sustainable development, thereby addressing the root causes of climate
change and safeguarding the well-being of present and future generations.
5. ANNAPURNA B. UPPIN & ORS. VERSUS MALSIDDAPPA & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 284
Name of the judgement
ANNAPURNA B. UPPIN & ORS. VERSUS MALSIDDAPPA & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 284
Date of the judgement
April 5th, 2024
Name of the bench
Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma
Important sections
Section 63 of the Partnership Act, 1932
Facts of the case

c o m
The case relates to the alleged non-payment of the respondent investment amount by the appellant(s). The

rs .
respondent had invested Rs. 5 lakhs in the partnership firm, wherein the appellant's husband was a partner to be
repayable after 120 months with interest @ 18% per annum. Respondent sought the premature release of the
invested amount but was asked to wait till the maturity period. However, when the amount was not returned even

Issues

k e
after the end of the maturity period, he filed a consumer complaint claiming the said amount.

n
Whether commercial transactions come within the purview of Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
Important referred judgements

r a
1. Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Suresh Chand Jain and Another, (2023) SCC Online
SC 877

p
It was observed that the remedy of Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court would be available to

Ratio of the case

To
an aggrieved party where the NCDRC has decided an appeal or a revision but no such remedy would be available
where it was an original complaint before the NCDRC.

Commercial transactions are outside the purview of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
tr-5O8O3Q3U
2T 7R6P
Judgement
It was observed that commercial disputes cannot be decided in summary proceeding under the 1986 Act but the
appropriate remedy for recovery of the said amount, if any, admissible to the complainant respondent, would be
before the Civil Court. The complaint was thus not maintainable.
6. CHANDAN VERSUS THE STATE (DELHI ADMN.)., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 288
Name of the judgement
CHANDAN VERSUS THE STATE (DELHI ADMN.), 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 288
Date of the judgement
April 5th, 2024
Name of the bench
7E6K
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and PB Varale
Important sections
Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
Facts of the case 6P
tr-5O 8O3Q3U2T7R
The appellant was charged with Section 302 of IPC for committing a daylight murder. The only direct eye-witness to
the incident narrates the entire sequence of events as to how the accused stabbed the deceased to death and how

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 4 of 12
 she watched from a short distance the act being committed before her, and how all this happened in quick time. A
blood-stained knife was recovered from the accused, a Forensic report revealed that the blood of the deceased was
found to be matching with the blood found on the knife, which was recovered from the accused/appellant.
Issues
Is motive significant when there is direct evidence proving the guilt of the accused ?
Important referred judgements
1. Shivaji Genu Mohite v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1973 SC 55
It was held that it is a well-settled principle in criminal jurisprudence that when ocular testimony inspires the
confidence of the court, the prosecution is not required to establish motive. Mere absence of motive would not
impinge on the testimony of a reliable eye-witness. Motive is an important factor for consideration in a case of
circumstantial evidence. But when there is direct eye witness, motive is not significant.
Ratio of the case
Motive is insignificant when there is direct evidence proving the guilt of the accused.
Judgement

c o m
While upholding the accused conviction for committing a day-light murder, the Supreme Court held that if there's a

rs .
direct ocular piece of evidence inspiring the confidence of the court then the motive behind the commission of the
offence would be of little relevance and the prosecution need not prove the motive of the accused in the commission
of the crime. It was observed that the argument of the defence that the prosecution has not been able to establish

k e
any motive on the accused for committing this dastardly act is in fact true, but since this is a case of eyewitness where
there is nothing to discredit the eye-witness, the motive itself is of little relevance.

n
7. KARIKHO KRI vs. NUNEY TAYANG, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 290
Name of the judgement

r a
KARIKHO KRI vs. NUNEY TAYANG, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 290
Date of the judgement

p
April 9th, 2024
Name of the bench

Important sections To
Justices Anirudhha Bose and Sanjay Kumar

of6Pthe People Act, 1951.

2T7R
Sections 90 and123 of the Representation
tr-5O8O3Q3U

Facts of the case

In this election petition, it was contended by the respondent/unsuccessful candidate that the Appellant/Karikho Kri
exercised undue influence by not disclosing three vehicles owned by Kri's wife and son while filing the nomination
for contesting the election. The vehicles were a Kinetic Zing Scooty, a Maruti Omni van and a TVS Motorcycle.
Issues
Whether electoral candidates have to mandatorily disclose every moveable property owned by them thereby giving
voters absolute right to know?
Important referred judgements
1. Surendra Kumar Bhilawe vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd, (2020) 18 SCC 224
The issue
7E6K
before the Apex Court in this case was as to whether an insurance company would be liable to cover
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
the claim arising out of an accident on the ground that the vehicle was sold to another long before the date of the
accident but the insured continued to be the registered owner of the vehicle. It was observed that the policy of
insurance was a comprehensive policy which covered third party risks as well and, therefore, the insurer could
not repudiate one part of the policy with regard to reimbursing the owner for losses when it could not evade
liability to third parties under
7R6P
the same contract of insurance.
2T
tr-5O8O3Q3U
Ratio of the case
Voters’ right to know is not absolute.
Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 5 of 12
 Judgement
The Court observed that it disagrees with the blanket proposition that the candidate is required to lay his life out
threadbare for examination by the electorate. His right to privacy would still survive as regards matters which are of
no concern to the voter or are irrelevant to his candidature for public office. In that respect, the non-disclosure of the
each and every asset owned by a candidate would not amount to a defect, much less a defect of a substantial
character. The Court opined that the candidate need not disclose each and every movable asset owned by himself or
his dependents, however, clarified that such a disclosure may be necessary if it has a substantial impact on his
candidature.
8. PATHAPATI SUBBA REDDY (DIED) BY LRS AND ORS vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA), 2024 LiveLaw
(SC) 288
Name of the judgement
PATHAPATI SUBBA REDDY (DIED) BY LRS AND ORS vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA), 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 288
Date of the judgement
April 8th, 2024
Name of the bench

c o m
Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal
Important sections
Sections 3 and 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

rs .
Facts of the case

k e
In this case, the court was deciding the plea of the Legal Heirs of a litigant who had challenged the decision of the

n
High Court, whereby the High Court had dismissed the litigant's application seeking condonation of delay in filing an

a
appeal against the dismissal of the reference petition by the Trial Court.
Issues

r
o
Important referred judgements
p
Whether merits of the case need to be considered in condoning delay?

T
1. Bhag Mal alias Ram Bux and Ors. vs. Munshi (Dead) by LRs. and Ors, (2007) 11 SCC 285
It has been observed that different provisions of Limitation Act may require different construction, as for
example, the court exercises its power in a given case liberally in condoning the delay in filing the appeal under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act,3Q
however,
2T7R6Pthe same may not be true while construing Section 3 of the Limitation
tr-5O8O 3U
Act. It, therefore, follows that though liberal interpretation has to be given in construing Section 5 of the
Limitation Act but not in applying Section 3 of the Limitation Act, which has to be construed strictly.
2. Ramlal, Motilal And Chhotelal vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd, A.I.R. 1962 SC 361
It was observed that even after sufficient cause has been shown by a party for not filing an appeal within time,
the said party is not entitled to the condonation of delay as excusing the delay is the discretionary jurisdiction
vested with the court. The court, despite establishment of a ‘sufficient cause’ for various reasons, may refuse to
condone the delay depending upon the bona fides of the party.
Ratio of the case
Merits of the case not required to be considered in condoning delay.
Judgement
The Supreme
7E6K
Court laid down eight principles by providing harmonious construction to Sections 3 and 5 of the
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
Limitation Act, 1963, namely,
a. Law of limitation is based upon public policy that there should be an end to litigation by forfeiting the right to
remedy rather than the right itself;
b. A right or the remedy that has not been exercised or availed of for a long time must come to an end or cease to
exist after a fixed period 7R
of 6P
time;
8O3Q3U2T
tr-5Oof
c. The provisions the Limitation Act have to be construed differently, such as Section 3 has to be construed in a
strict sense whereas Section 5 has to be construed liberally;

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 6 of 12
 d. In order to advance substantial justice, though liberal approach, justice-oriented approach or cause of
substantial justice may be kept in mind but the same cannot be used to defeat the substantial law of limitation
contained in Section 3 of the Limitation Act;
e. Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but
that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established
for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence;
f. Merely some persons obtained relief in similar matter, it does not mean that others are also entitled to the same
benefit if the court is not satisfied with the cause shown for the delay in filing the appeal;
g. Merits of the case are not required to be considered in condoning the delay; and
h. Delay condonation application has to be decided on the parameters laid down for condoning the delay and
condoning the delay for the reason that the conditions have been imposed, tantamount to disregarding the
statutory provision.
The Court had also clarified that courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause
had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient

9. State of Karnataka vs MN Basavaraja and others., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 293

c o m
cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence.

Name of the judgement

State of Karnataka vs MN Basavaraja and others., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 293
Date of the judgement

rs .
April 3rd, 2024
Name of the bench

k e
Justices Dipankar Datta and SVN Bhatti
Important sections

r an
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Sections 302, 304B, 498A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
Facts of the case

o p
T
The present case of that of a dowry death. The trial court in 2004 had acquitted the husband and his family of charges
including murder, cruelty, causing dowry death, and tampering with evidence. In 2010, the Karnataka High Court
upheld the acquittal but convicted the husband for cruelty/domestic violence. This led to the State's appeal to the
Supreme Court. 3Q3U2T7R6P
tr-5O8O
Issues
Whether evidence of family members in dowry death cases can be discarded saying they are interested witnesses.
Important referred judgements
1. Shamnsaheb M. Multtani vs. State of Karnataka, (2001) 2 SCC 577
It was observed that the composition of the offence under Section 304-B IPC is vastly different from the
formation of the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC and hence the former cannot be regarded as minor
offence vis-à-vis the latter.
Ratio of the case
Evidence of family members in dowry death cases can't be discarded saying they are interested witnesses.
Judgement 7E6K
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
The Supreme Court decided that testimonies from family members of the deceased in dowry death cases should not
be dismissed simply because they are considered interested witnesses. It was pointed out that a woman facing
harassment over dowry is likely to confide in her immediate family, making their testimony crucial for bringing the
culprits to justice. The Court noted that if the evidence of family members is discarded on the basis of bias, there
would be no reliable witnesses left to testify.
7R6P
2T
tr-5O8O3Q3U

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 7 of 12
10. KIZHAKKE VATTAKANDIYIL MADHAVAN (D) THR. LRS vs. THIYYURKUNNATH MEETHAL JANAKI., 2024
LiveLaw (SC) 293
Name of the judgement
KIZHAKKE VATTAKANDIYIL MADHAVAN (D) THR. LRS vs. THIYYURKUNNATH MEETHAL JANAKI., 2024 LiveLaw
(SC) 293
Date of the judgement
April 9th, 2024
Name of the bench
Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia
Important sections
Section 2 of the Hindu Widow’s Remarriage Act, 1856 and Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Facts of the case

o m
The case relates to the conveyance of the first husband's property by his wife (Chiruthey) through a lease deed over
which she doesn't hold the title. After the death of the first husband, the wife(Chiruthey) contracted a second

c
.
marriage. Through a second marriage, the wife gave birth to another son, who claimed some share in the property
vested in her mother from her first husband.
Issues

e rs
Whether property rights based on a deed executed by a person without title (before death) be enforced by his/her
successor?

k
n
Important referred judgements
1. Velamuri Venkata Sivaprasad (Dead) by lrs. vs. Kothuri Venkateswarlu (dead) by lrs. And Others [(2000)
2 SCC 139]

r a
It was observed that Section 2 of the Act of 1856 has taken away the right of the widow in the event of remarriage

p
and the statute is very specific to the effect that the widow on remarriage would be deemed to be otherwise

o
dead. The words “as if she had then died” are rather significant. The legislature intended therefore that in the
event of a remarriage, one loses the rights of even the limited interest in such property and after remarriage the

T
next heirs of her deceased husband shall thereupon succeed to the same. It is thus a statutory recognition of a
well-reasoned pre-existing Shastric law.
Ratio of the case
tr-5O8O3Q3U
2T7R6P
If a deed was executed by person without title, his/her successors cannot enforce rights on property based on such
deed.
Judgement
It was observed that if a document seeking to convey immovable property ex-facie reveals that the conveyer does
not have the title over the same, specific declaration that the document is invalid would not be necessary. The Court
can examine the title in the event any party to the proceeding sets up this defence. In the present case as Chiruthey
could not convey any property over which she did not have any right or title.
11. STATE OF U.P. vs. M/S. LALTA PRASAD VAISH C.A. No. 000151 / 2007 & Other Connected Matters
Name of the judgement
STATE OF U.P. vs. M/S. LALTA PRASAD VAISH C.A. No. 000151 / 2007 & Other Connected Matters
7E6K
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
Date of the judgement
Judgment reserved on March 14th, 2024. The case remains sub-judice.
Name of the bench
CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Abhay S. Oka, B.V. Nagarathna, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Ujjal
Bhuyan, Satish Chandra
tr-5O8O3QSharma
3U2T7R6Pand Augustine George Masih.

Important sections

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 8 of 12
 Entry 52 List I of Union List, Entry 8 List II of State List and Section 18G Industries (Development and Regulation)
Act, of 1951.
Facts of the case
The present matter pertains to the interpretation of Section 18G of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act,
195. Section 18G allows the Central Government to ensure that certain products related to scheduled industries are
distributed fairly and are available at reasonable prices. They can do this by issuing an official notification to control
the supply, distribution, and trade of these products. However, as per Entry 33 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to
the Constitution, the State legislature has the power to regulate trade, production, and distribution of products from
industries under Union control and similar imported goods.
The main contention of the State of Uttar Pradesh was that the term 'intoxicating liquor' should be given a wider
interpretation to include 'denatured spirit/ industrial alcohol' and the latter be brought under the state's law-making
powers.
Issues

State legislation's law-making powers.

c o m
Whether 'denatured spirit or industrial alcohol' can be brought within the meaning of 'intoxicating liquor' under

.
Important referred judgements
1. Synthetics and Chemical Ltd. vs. State of U.P, 1990 AIR 1927

rs
A seven-judge bench of the Indian Supreme Court had failed to address Section 18G's interference with the
concurrent powers of the State. Accordingly, in the 2024 case, the Supreme Court held that the decision in the

k e
Synthetics and Chemicals case (supra) with regard to the interpretation of Section 18-G of the 1951 Act is
allowed to stand, it would render the provisions of Entry 33 (a) of List III nugatory or otiose.
Judgement (Interim)

an
The 6 day-long hearing deliberated upon the interplay between the Union's law-making powers over 'controlled

r
industries' under Entry 52 List I, the State's powers to make laws on the subject of 'intoxicating liquor' under Entry

p
8 List II and the concurrent powers of Union and States on regulating trade, production, and distribution of products
from industries under Union control. The Court was essentially tasked to examine whether the Industries

alcohol.

To
(Development and Regulation) Act, of 1951 gave complete regulatory power to the Union on the subject of industrial

12. PURNI DEVI & ANR. vs. BABU RAM & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 273
Name of the judgement
tr-5O8O3Q3U
2T7R6P
PURNI DEVI & ANR. vs. BABU RAM & ANR., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 273
Date of the judgement
April 02, 2024
Name of the bench
Justices Sanjay Karol and Aravind Kumar
Important sections
Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963
Facts of the case
The case relates to the rejection of the execution application of the appellant seeking execution of the decree passed
in its favor by the trial court under Section 182 of the J&K Limitation Act. The decision of the trial court was affirmed
7E6K
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
by the High Court, following which the civil appeal was preferred before the Supreme Court.
Issues
Whether the period (18.12.2000 to 29.01.2005) diligently pursuing execution petition before the Tehsildar, would
be excluded for the purposes of computing the period of limitation or not?
6P
8O3Q3U2T7R
tr-5O judgements
Important referred
1. Consolidated Engg. Enterprises v. Principle Secy, Irrigation Department (2008) 7 SCC 169

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 9 of 12
 The Apex Court laid down the following conditions that must be satisfied before Section 14 can be pressed into
service:
(1) Both the prior and subsequent proceedings are civil proceedings prosecuted by the same party;
(2) The prior proceeding had been prosecuted with due diligence and in good faith;
(3) The failure of the prior proceeding was due to defect of jurisdiction or other cause of like nature;
(4) The earlier proceeding and the latter proceeding must relate to the same matter in issue; and,
(5) Both the proceedings are in a court.
Ratio of the case
The time consumed in contesting bonafide litigation by the litigant at a wrong forum (believing it to be appropriate)
would be excluded while computing the period of limitation under Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act.
Judgement
It was observed that Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act carves out an exception excluding the period of limitation
when the proceedings are being pursued with due diligence and good faith in a Court “which from defect of
jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, is unable to entertain it.”

o m
It was further observed that Section 14 of the Limitation Act is to be read as a whole. A conjoint and careful reading
of sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of Section 14 makes it clear that an applicant who has prosecuted another civil

c
.
proceeding with due diligence, before a forum which is unable to entertain the same on account of defect of
jurisdiction or any other cause of like nature, is entitled to exclusion of the time during which the applicant had been

rs
prosecuting such proceeding, in computing the period of limitation.

Name of the judgement

k e
13. Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and others v. State of Karnataka., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 316

Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and others v. State of Karnataka., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 316
Date of the judgement
April 19th, 2024

r an
p
Name of the bench
Justices B.R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta
Important sections

To
Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Facts of the case
The complainant's son (deceased) had gone to put up a bund (check dam) in their land along with other prosecution
witnesses. After completing the 8O3Q3U
tr-5Owork,
2T7R6P
all of them, including the complainant, proceeded to the village. Suddenly, the
accused persons appeared and said that the revenge would be taken from the complainant party for murdering one
Sangound. Thereafter, the accused persons murdered the complainant's son. FIR was filed and case was registered
against the accused persons. However, the trial Court held that the prosecution could not prove the charges levelled
against the accused beyond all manner of doubt and acquitted all the six accused. Challenging this acquittal, the State
filed an appeal before the Karnataka High Court. The High Court reverse the acquittal of the three accused persons
and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The accused/ appellants therefore appealed before the Apex Court.
Issues
Whether reversing of acquittal by the High Court was valid?
Important referred judgements
1. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Deoman Upadhyaya, AIR 1960 SC 1125
It was7Eobserved
6K that the statement of an accused recorded by a police officer under Section 27 of the Evidence
tr-5E8J3B3J2B
Act is basically a memorandum of confession of the accused recorded by the Investigating Officer during
interrogation which has been taken down in writing. The confessional part of such statement is inadmissible and
only the part which distinctly leads to discovery of fact is admissible in evidence.
2. Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1396
It was observed that 3U
mere
2T7Rexhibiting
6P of memorandum prepared by the Investigating Officer during investigation
tr-5O8O3Q
cannot tantamount to proof of its contents. While testifying on oath, the Investigating Officer would be required
to narrate the sequence of events which transpired leading to the recording of the disclosure statement.

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 10 of 12
 Ratio of the case
The scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in
favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:
a. That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;
b. That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record;
c. That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible
from the evidence available on record.
Judgement
The Court observed that that motive acts as a double-edged sword. Hence, the very fact that members of the
prosecution party were arraigned as accused in the murder of Sangound, this could also have been the motive for
the prosecution witness to rope in the accused appellants for the murder of Malagounda. Thus, in view of these
observations the Court held that the entire prosecution case comes under the shadow of doubt. The Court was also
of the view that the Trial Court's ruling did not suffer from any infirmity or perversity. Adding to this, the Court also

14. PHR INVENT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. UCO BANK AND OTHERS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 294

c o m
marked that the High Court was not justified in reversing the well- reasoned judgment of the trial Court.

.
Name of the judgement
PHR INVENT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. UCO BANK AND OTHERS, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 294
Date of the judgement
April 10th, 2024
Name of the bench

k e rs
n
Justices BR Gavai, Rajesh Bindal, and Sandeep Mehta
Important sections
Article 226 of the Indian Constitution
Facts of the case

p r a
Issues
o
Challenging the Debt Recovery Tribunal's (DRT) order of auction sale by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act, the
borrower filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the constitution before the High Court. The High Court allowed

T
the borrower's application and set aside the auction sale order of the DRT.

When can High Courts entertain Writ Petition under Article 226 despite existence of statutory remedies?
3Q3U2T7R6P
tr-5O8O
Important referred judgements
1. United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon and Others, 2010 (8) SCC 110
The Court in this case clearly observed that, while dealing with the petitions involving challenge to the action
taken for recovery of the public dues, etc., the High Court must keep in mind that the legislations enacted by
Parliament and State Legislatures for recovery of such dues are a code unto themselves inasmuch as they not
only contain comprehensive procedure for recovery of the dues but also envisage constitution of quasi-judicial
bodies for redressal of the grievance of any aggrieved person.
Ratio of the case
High Courts will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is
available to the aggrieved person or the statute under which the action complained of has been taken itself contains
a mechanism
2B7E6K
for redressal of grievance.
tr-5E8J3B3J
Judgement
The Supreme Court observed the following grounds of exceptions when the petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution can be entertained despite availability of alternative remedy:
i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question;
ii) it has acted tr-
in5O
defiance of7R
8O3Q3U2T the
6P fundamental principles of judicial procedure;
iii) it has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and
iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice."
Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 11 of 12
 The Apex Court stated that High Courts have continued to ignore the availability of statutory remedies under the
DRT Act and the SARFAESI Act and exercised jurisdiction under Article 226 for passing orders which have had
serious adverse impact on the right of banks and other financial institutions to recover their dues. Therefore, in
future the High Courts must exercise their discretion in such matters with greater caution, care and circumspection.

c o m
rs .
k e
r an
o p
T tr-5O8O3Q3U
2T 7R6P

7E6K
tr-5E8J3B3J2B

2T 7R6P
tr-5O8O3Q3U

Head Office: 127, Zone II, MP Nagar, Bhopal |+91-7676564400| https://www.toprankers.com Page 12 of 12