(541) VINOD RAGHUVANSHI Vs. AJAY ARORA[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 391 — Additional Evidence in Appeal — Scope and Limitations — The power vested in the appellate court under Section 391 Cr.P.C. to take additional evidence is discretionary and must be exercised sparingly — It is primarily intended for situations where the party seeking to adduce evidence was prevented from doing so during the trial despite due diligence, or where new facts necessitating such evidence came to light later — The core objective is to ensure j India Law Library Docid # 2424137
(542) SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER (CELLULAR) THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER MR. MRUGESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL SHAH AND OTHERS Vs. RAJAT SINGH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Unauthorized Absence — Wilfulness — While unauthorized absence from duty does not always equate to wilful absence, especially if caused by compelling circumstances beyond the employee's control, the principle requiring the disciplinary authority to establish wilfulness (Krushna Kant B Parmar) is not an absolute rule — In cases of prolonged unauthorized absence, particularly where leave applications were rejected or not sanctioned, and the employee fails t India Law Library Docid # 2424138
(543) GOPAL KRISHNA Vs. ANANDPALSINGH S/O GYANPALSINGH DECEASED THROUGH LRS DEEPAK SINGH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 58(c) — Mortgage by Conditional Sale — Interpretation of Document — A document titled "Shartiya Frokhtnama" containing an explicit condition for reconveyance upon repayment of the consideration amount within a specified period (five years) constitutes a mortgage by conditional sale under S. 58(c), not an outright sale — The interpretation considers the specific terms embedded within the document itself, the legal maxim "once a India Law Library Docid # 2424139
(544) YADWINDER SINGH Vs. LAKHI ALIAS LAKHWINDER SINGH & ANR. ETC[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 26-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 319 — Power to Summon Additional Accused — Basis — Evidence During Trial — Examination-in-Chief — The power under Section 319 CrPC to proceed against any person not arraigned as an accused is triggered if it appears from the evidence during the course of any inquiry or trial that such person has committed an offence — This "evidence" refers to material recorded by the court, including statements made during examination-in-chief — The court is not re India Law Library Docid # 2424111
(545) KEWAL SINGH KANG AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Liberal Approach vs. Negligence & Lack of Bona Fides — While Section 5 of the Limitation Act empowers courts to condone delay upon demonstration of “sufficient cause” and generally calls for a liberal, justice-oriented approach, this discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily or to revive stale claims where negligence, inaction, or lack of bona fides is apparent — The acceptability of the explanation, not merely the len India Law Library Docid # 2424173
(546) MOHAMMAD SALIM AND OTHERS Vs. ABDUL KAYYUM AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 8 Rule 1A(3) — Registration Act, 1908 — Sections 17 & 49 Proviso — Admissibility of Unregistered Partition Deed — Collateral Purpose — While Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC requires a defendant to produce documents relied upon with the written statement, and mandates leave of court for later production, such leave may be granted even at a subsequent stage — An unregistered partition deed, though compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act and in India Law Library Docid # 2424174
(547) VIJAY PAL YADAV Vs. MAMTA SINGH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 26-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 41(1)(b)(ii) — Arrest — Safeguards — Police Conduct — Rights of Accused — The law requires that even individuals accused of offenses must be treated in accordance with legal procedures, ensuring the protection of their person and dignity — Evident high-handedness by police during investigation, potentially flouting safeguards concerning arrest as outlined in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Another, (2014) 8 SCC 73, and involving allegations of physical abuse, India Law Library Docid # 2424203
(548) KAMAL MEENA Vs. STATE[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7, Section 13 — Essential Ingredients — Demand and Acceptance — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt — To sustain a conviction under Section 7 (read with Section 13) of the PC Act, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the twin essential ingredients: (i) demand of illegal gratification by the accused public servant, and (ii) subsequent acceptance of the same by the accused — This proof can be based on direct evidence India Law Library Docid # 2424157
(549) TEJARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended by Act 16 of 2018) — Section 17A — Requirement of Prior Approval for Investigation — Stage of Challenge — Framing of Charge — The requirement under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for obtaining previous approval from the competent authority before conducting any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation into an offence alleged against a public servant relatable to official functions or duties, while mandatory for initiating such acti India Law Library Docid # 2424166
(550) JODHPUR VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. ANJEEV KUMAR AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 — Section 22-C(8) — Electricity Act, 2003 — Section 135 — Jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat — Offence of Electricity Theft — The jurisdiction of a Permanent Lok Adalat established under Chapter VI-A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, is expressly barred by Section 22-C(8) from deciding any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law — Where the dispute arises India Law Library Docid # 2424223
(551) PRAHLAD SAHAI MEENA Vs. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ADMN. KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Service Law — Regularization — Consideration Pursuant to Final Court Orders — Estoppel — Educational Qualification — After judicial directions to consider an employee’s case for regularization attain finality (having been upheld up to the Supreme Court), the employer is precluded from denying or withdrawing regularization by belatedly invoking the employee’s alleged lack of prescribed educational qualifications as an afterthought, especially where this ground was not raised during previous exten India Law Library Docid # 2424210
(552) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. THE BOARD OF REVENUE RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 26-03-2025 Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 — Sections 9, 10 & 15 — Jurisdiction of Revenue Courts — Barred — Where proceedings for eviction from public premises are initiated by the Estate Officer under the Act of 1971, Section 15 explicitly bars the jurisdiction of any court, including Revenue Courts established under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, to entertain any suit or proceeding challenging the eviction order — The exclusive remedy against an order passed by the Estat India Law Library Docid # 2424258
(553) SACHIN DHONDIRAM CHAVAN Vs. TRUPTI SACHIN CHAVAN[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13-B — Divorce by Mutual Consent — Withdrawal of Consent — Distinction between Original and Converted Petitions — A distinction exists regarding the unilateral withdrawal of consent in petitions for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — While consent can generally be withdrawn unilaterally in a petition originally filed under Section 13-B until the decree is passed, the situation differs if the petition was initially India Law Library Docid # 2424278
(554) MORRIES ENERGIES LIMITED Vs. SUMIT AGARWAL AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 141 — Vicarious Liability of Directors/Officers — Requirements — For fastening vicarious liability on a director or officer of a company accused of an offence under Section 138, the complainant must establish that such person falls under either sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 141 — Sub-section (1) requires the person to be “in charge of, and responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company” at the time the offence India Law Library Docid # 2424298
(555) SMT. S.SAVITHRAMMA Vs. SMT.S.PADMAVATHAMMA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 85 — Presumption as to Powers of Attorney — Execution and Authentication by Notary Public — Section 85 creates a mandatory presumption (“shall presume”) regarding the due execution and authentication of a document purporting to be a power of attorney, provided it is executed before and authenticated by a Notary Public (or other specified authorities) — Once the original notarized power of attorney is produced, the burden shifts to the party disputing its validity to India Law Library Docid # 2424356
(556) CHIF COMMERCIAL MANAGER (PS & CATG) SOUTHERN EASTERN RAILWAY AND OTHERS Vs. NILANJANA SINHA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-03-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Deficiency in Service – Railways – Denial of Concession to Differently-Abled Person – Disability Certificate – The denial of a 50% rail fare concession by one Railway reservation office (Howrah) to a differently-abled person (Mongolian baby, 75% disability) and her escort, citing non-mentioning of the specific nature of handicap and overwriting on the Disability Certificate, constitutes deficiency in service, especially when another reservation office (Azimganj) u India Law Library Docid # 2424491
(557) N.S. KRISHNAMOORTHI AND OTHERS Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Land Law — Grama Natham — Nature and Ownership — Occupied vs. Unoccupied — Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (Act III of 1905) — Section 2 — Grama Natham land, historically set apart for village habitation, does not automatically vest with the Government under Section 2 of Act III of 1905 if it is occupied as a house-site or backyard — Such occupied Natham, where occupation has been longstanding and recognized through transactions, is considered the private property of the occupant — Only u India Law Library Docid # 2424458
(558) SONIKA AND OTHERS Vs. MAHENDER NATH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 26-03-2025 Motor Accident Compensation — Assessment of Income — Prospective Income from Confirmed Job Offer — Where the deceased had secured a confirmed job offer (Sailor in Indian Navy) with a defined higher salary prior to the fatal accident, the compensation for loss of dependency should be calculated based on this prospective income, rather than the lower income from his temporary private employment at the time of death India Law Library Docid # 2424537
(559) T.C. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR (DIED) Vs. BIJU RAMESH AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 59 — Suit to Cancel or Set Aside Instrument — Commencement of Limitation Period for Executant — For a suit seeking cancellation or setting aside of an instrument (or a declaration that it is sham, which is akin to setting aside) governed by Article 59 of the Limitation Act, the limitation period is three years — When the suit is filed by the executant of the instrument, the time from which the period begins to run (“when the facts entitling the plaintiff to have th India Law Library Docid # 2424587
(560) A.K. SAMSUDDIN AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTEHRS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 26-03-2025 Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) — Section 3 — Offence of Money Laundering — Continuing Offence — Article 20(1) Constitution of India, 1950 — Retrospectivity — The offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA is a continuing offence — Criminal proceedings under Section 3 are maintainable even if the predicate (scheduled) offence was committed before the PMLA came into force or before the specific predicate offence was included in the Schedule to the PMLA, provided that India Law Library Docid # 2424588