(581) MALLIKA BEGUM @ KHATUN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ of Certiorari — Scope of Judicial Review — High Court, in exercising certiorari jurisdiction, confines itself to examining the decision-making process; it does not act as an Appellate Tribunal, review or reweigh evidence, or substitute its own views for those of the inferior tribunal — A writ of certiorari is issued only if an error of law is apparent on the face of the record, or if the India Law Library Docid # 2437287
(582) SHRI GAUTAM ROY Vs. INDIAN BANK AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Petition — Scope of Judicial Review in Disciplinary Matters — High Court's jurisdiction under judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process, including whether the administrative authority committed a breach of the rules of natural justice — Where violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16(1) is found, it furnishes ground for judicial review of the Enquiry Report. India Law Library Docid # 2437288
(583) ABDUL KHALIQ SOFI Vs. MOHAMMAD SHAFI MIR AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 24-11-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Registration Act, 1908 — Section 49, Proviso — Evidentiary value of unregistered documents — Receipt of part consideration for purchase of immovable property — An unregistered receipt documenting payment cannot be admitted as evidence of an agreement to sell/transfer immovable property, even for collateral purposes, unless the receipt itself contains covenants relating to the sale India Law Library Docid # 2436245
(584) DR. JAHANGIR AHMED Vs. DR. MANOJ SHARMA AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 24-11-2025 Service Law — Selection and Appointment — Registrar (Tenure Post) in Indira Gandhi Govt. Dental College (IGGDC), Jammu — Challenge to appointment by a candidate claiming higher merit based on computation of academic marks — Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) setting aside the appointment of the petitioner (Dr. Jahangir Ahmed) and directing the appointment of the respondent (Dr. Manoj India Law Library Docid # 2436262
(585) NEERAJ KEWAT Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 24-11-2025 M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 — Rule 47(6) and 47(14)(b)(ii) — Family Pension — Entitlement of Son — Interpretation of Statutes — Substantive Provision vs. Definition Clause — Rule 47(6)(ii) clearly states that a son is entitled to family pension until he attains the age of 25 years, without imposing a condition of being unmarried — Explanation (b) to Rule 47(6) explicitly applies the marriage ineligibility criterion only to a daughter, not a son — While Rule 47(14)(b)(ii) India Law Library Docid # 2436389
(586) JHANAK SINGH Vs. SHRI SANDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 80 — Notice to Government or Public Officer — Purpose and object — The basic purpose of Section 80 CPC notice is to grant opportunity to public officers to reconsider the legal position and settle disputes without litigation, thereby saving public time and money; it is intended for the advancement of justice, not as a weapon against litigants. India Law Library Docid # 2436390
(587) ASHUTOSH SADH Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Compassionate Appointment — Governing Policy — The claim for compassionate appointment must be considered based on the policy prevalent at the time of the death of the deceased employee, not a subsequent policy, unless the subsequent policy is applied retrospectively — Policy dated 18.08.2008 was applicable as the employee died on 29.12.2008. India Law Library Docid # 2436391
(588) YASIN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) — Possession of Ganja (Intermediate Quantity) — Appeal against conviction — Death of Appellant 1 (A1) pending appeal — Appeal against A1 abates — Appeal regarding Appellant 2 (A2) proceeds — Prosecution evidence (PW1 to PW4 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P13) proves search and seizure of 1.500 kgs of ganja from A1 India Law Library Docid # 2436659
(589) GAJULA SIDDHARTHA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — Section 482 — Pre-arrest bail — Successive application after dismissal of earlier application — Maintainability — A successive bail application is maintainable, as an order refusing bail does not preclude another application on a later occasion, provided there are more materials, further developments, or different considerations; however, the subsequent India Law Library Docid # 2436183
(590) NURUL ISLAM AND OTHERS Vs. RAJASTHAN GOVT., THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 24-11-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 306(4)(b) — Pardon to an accomplice (Approver) — Detention in custody — Statutory mandate requires an approver to be detained in custody until the termination of the trial unless already on bail — This provision is designed to prevent the approver from becoming hostile after India Law Library Docid # 2437716
(591) HARJEET SINGH Vs. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Compassionate Appointment — Object and Interpretation of 'Indigent'/'Penurious Condition' — Compassionate appointment is a socio-welfare measure meant to alleviate sudden financial distress arising from the untimely death of a breadwinner, aimed at preventing destitution, not at waiting until destitution is established — The term 'indigent' in the context of compassionate appointment schemes cannot be India Law Library Docid # 2437725
(592) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PARSHOTTAMBHAI KANJIBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — High Court in an appeal against acquittal can interfere only when there are compelling and substantial reasons, such as when the judgment is perverse, without assigning reasons, or unreasonable and contrary to evidence — India Law Library Docid # 2437855
(593) CHANDUBHA SHIVUBHA MORI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 24-11-2025 Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 — Section 135D and Rule 108 — Revenue Entries — Jurisdiction of Revenue Authorities — A revenue authority's primary role is fiscal, and entries in revenue records do not confer or create title — Mutation entries must follow either documents of title (such as a registered sale deed) or orders of competent authorities under special enactments — Revenue authorities in RTS (Record of Rights, Tenancy and Agriculture Land Rules) proceedings cannot decide India Law Library Docid # 2437856
(594) IRFAN Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-11-2025 Criminal Law — Rape (IPC Section 376) and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO Act, Section 4) — Appeal against conviction — Appreciation of evidence of prosecutrix (victim) — Consistency of testimony — Allegations of rape against a victim aged less than 17 years by a building co-tenant — Victim's testimony India Law Library Docid # 2435959
(595) RAMESH CHANDRA AGARWAL Vs. DEVENDER YADAV AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-11-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Scope of Examination — The court, when considering an application under Order 7 Rule 11, must only examine the averments made in the Plaint and not the defense or disputed facts — Rejection is warranted only if the Plaint discloses no cause of action India Law Library Docid # 2435960
(596) SONALI JAIN Vs. DHEERAJ CHAUHAN AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-11-2025 Family Law — Custody of Minor — Best Interest and Welfare of Child — Paramount consideration is the minor’s physical, emotional, moral, and intellectual welfare, transcending the legal rights or emotional claims of the parents — Court must guard against the bitterness of matrimonial disputes clouding the judgment on the child's welfare. India Law Library Docid # 2435961
(597) MR. SUNNY SANGWAN Vs. DR. SAURABH SHANDILYA THROUGH HIS DULY CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY MR. NIKHIL PRASAD OJHA AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-11-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 8 Rule 1 — Written Statement — Timelines for filing — Extension of time beyond 90 days — Extension must be granted only in exceptional circumstances, by way of exception, and only if the defendant demonstrates bona fide reasons supported by credible material — Extension cannot be granted where delay stems from negligence, indifference, lack of India Law Library Docid # 2435962
(598) DEVENDER SINGH Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-11-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) — Demand and Acceptance of Illegal Gratification — Proof of demand is sine qua non for conviction — Mere proof of acceptance or recovery of currency notes without evidence of demand is insufficient to establish the offence — Conviction requires proof of prior demand for illegal gratification by the public servant as a fact in issue India Law Library Docid # 2435963
(599) SHANMUGAM Vs. STATE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 21-11-2025 Criminal Law — Murder — Conviction under Section 302 IPC — Marital discord and suspicion of fidelity as motive — Deceased and accused married for 19 years, separated due to fidelity suspicion and frequent quarrels — Accused habitually consumed alcohol and created problems — Prosecution established motive through evidence of deceased’s India Law Library Docid # 2436732
(600) K. THANGAVEL Vs. R. SENTHIL[MADRAS HIGH COURT (MADURAI BENCH)] 21-11-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds — Defence — Revision filed against concurrent lower court judgments confirming conviction — Accused did not deny the issuance of the cheque, the signature on the cheque, or the dishonour of the same — Allegation by accused that complainant lacked capacity to lend large sum and that there was no legally enforceable India Law Library Docid # 2436733