
2025 SCC Vol. 2 Part 4
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 319 — Summoning of additional accused: Principles of law
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 319 — Summoning of additional accused: Principles of law
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 7, 34 and 37 — Arbitration agreement — Bindingness of, on non-signatory — Group of Companies Doctrine
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 11, 8 and 11 — Parties to arbitration proceedings — Arbitration agreement/clause
Advocates Act, 1961 — S. 24(1)(f) — Enrolment Fees: Charging of enrolment fees in excess of statutory stipulation under Advocates Act, 1961
“Even a single day’s delay in grant of bail to a person who is otherwise entitled to it amounts to violation of his fundamental right to life and liberty.”
Arbitration Act, 1940 — S. 29 — Interest on interest or compound interest: Post award interest on interest awarded is not grantable
by Mrinal Shankar† and Dharma Tej Koneru††
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 32(2)(c) and S. 25(c) — Power of Arbitral Tribunal under S. 32(c)
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 37 — Interference with award by Court: Law regarding limited jurisdiction of Court
(2023) 1 HCC (All) GST — Search and Seizure — Determination of Tax — Challenge against the order wherein tax of Rs
Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 — S. 4(1)(f) — Suit for misdelivery of cargo and maritime claim by
Constitution of India — Arts. 32, 21, 14 and 226 — Writ petition by the victim challenging grant of remission or premature
The Court pointed out that a paramour of an accused cannot be dragged into proceedings under Section 498A of IPC as the said accused would not become a relative or a member of the family as is necessary under Section 498A of IPC.
The Court opined that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC though wide should not be capriciously or arbitrarily exercised but should be exercised in appropriate cases to do real and substantial justice. Thus, quashing of charge sheet or setting aside summoning order on appreciation of evidence is not justified.
The Gauhati High Court noted that after completion of the investigation, the petitioner was not examined under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to enable him to personally explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him, nor was his statement recorded.
The Court opined that the husbands/fathers are many times not depositing the arrears of maintenance for years together and they have no fear or burden to pay the interest on that amount of maintenance and this is a serious legal mischief.