IMPORTANT DECISIONS (25.10.2017)*

*IMPORTANT DECISIONS (25.10.2017)*

*Arbitration award - Court not to reappraise material on record and substitute its own view in place of  Arbitrator's view. (2014(3) APEX COURT J 595 (S.C.)*

*Condonation of delay -  Delay of 75 days in filing application for restoration of suit is not an inordinate delay and ought to have been condoned by the trial Court. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 728 (P&H)*

*Contraband - Search by Inspector functioning as DSP but not holding post on regular basis - Search and seizure cannot be equated to status of Gazetted officer. (2014(1) Criminal Court Cases 051 (S.C.)*

*Death by poisoning - Viscera report - It is of vital importance - If viscera report is not received, concerned Court must ask for explanation and must summon concerned officer of FSL to give an explanation as to why viscera report is not forwarded to investigating agency/court. (2014(3) APEX COURT J 097 (S.C.)*

*Delay of 30 days in recording statement of PW2 - Delay not fatal  as testimony of PW2 completely corroborates the version of eye witness in all material details of incident particularly since there was change of investigating officer. (2017(3) Apex Court Judgments 030 (S.C.)*

*Dishonour of cheque - Examination of complainant as a witness is mandatory - Provision of S.145 of NI Act relating to evidence on affidavit does not relate to the stage before issuance of process u/s.204 Cr.P.C. - Cognizance taken on the basis of affidavit of complainant set aside. (2010(1) Civil Court Cases 206 (Rajasthan)*

*Gun shot - No scientific or medical evidence to corroborate version of PW1 in Court that bullet is still lodged in his chest - Nothing to indicate as to whether bullet was removed from the body of PW1 or not - Weapon of offence not recovered - Shell of fired cartridge not recovered from the spot - No blood found at the spot - Accused acquitted. (2017(3) Criminal Court Cases 585 (Delhi)*

*Illegal gratification - Enquiry by accused as to whether money had been brought or not - By no means constitute demand. (2017(3) Apex Court Judgments 073 (S.C.)*

*Rash and negligent driving - Failure to prove that it was accused who was driving the vehicle - Merely because accused was engaged as a driver of offending vehicle, ipso facto cannot be substitute for express proof of fact that vehicle infact was driven by accused at the time of accident - Accused acquitted. (2017(3) Criminal Court Cases 656 (H.P.)*

*Senior Citizens -  Appeal at the instance of daughter-in-law is maintainable. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 807 (P&H)*