1. To establish a charge of conspiracy, the prosecution must prove the
existence of an agreement or meeting of minds between two or more persons to
commit an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means. Such an agreement must
be established either by direct evidence or by circumstances which unerringly
point towards a common design.

2. The plaint can be rejected on the ground of limitation only,
where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be
barred by any law. ‘Law’ within the meaning of Order 7 Rule
11(d) of the CPC must include the law of limitation as well.

3. Any Rules/Legislation framed cannot enlarge the scope of its parent statute and cannot travel beyond the Preamble or the object for which the said Rules/Legislation is framed.

4. Without impleading firm or issuing notice to the firm, the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is maintainable against the partner of the firm.

5. Non-compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is not per se fatal to the prosecution case, and conviction can be sustained if the overall evidence on record credibly establishes recovery and possession of contraband, with courts required to assess such procedural lapses in light of the totality of evidence rather than on technical grounds alone.

6. The review jurisdiction under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC is extremely limited and cannot be invoked for rehearing or reappreciation of the merits, as the review Court does not sit in appeal over its own order. A rehearing on merits is impermissible, the power of review being an exception to the rule of finality of judgments, exercisable only to prevent miscarriage of justice or to correct grave and palpable errors.

7. The account book is a private and unilateral record maintained by one party and such record cannot be treated as substantive evidence under Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to impose liability for enforcement of a legal right without independent and corroborative evidence.

8. A prospective accused has no vested right to be heard prior to initiation
of criminal proceeding as the Cr.P.C (BNSS) does not provide for right of
hearing to the prospective accused before the registration of an FIR.

9. Even if there is any sort of procedural illegality in conducting the
search and seizure, that evidence itself will not become inadmissible
unless the search and seizure was in complete defiance of the law and
procedure or the evidence collected has been tempered with or
interpolated.

10. The owner/employer of a project, being the author of the tender documents, is best placed to understand the requirements of the project and to interpret the terms and conditions contained therein. In matters relating to interpretation of tender conditions and evaluation of bids, Courts ought to exercise restraint and
should not substitute their own interpretation in place of that adopted by the owner/employer, unless the decision is shown to be arbitrary, irrational, mala fide, or in violation of statutory provisions.