(581) RAHUL SIVASANKAR Vs. CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT BY STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 153A — Promoting Enmity Between Different Groups — Essential Ingredients — Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19(1)(a)) — To constitute an offence under Section 153A IPC, the words spoken or written must be uttered with a clear, manifest intention to promote disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different religious, racial, linguistic, or regional groups or castes or communities — Criticism of government policy or actions, such as analyzi India Law Library Docid # 2424383
(582) SRI C.N.GOVINDARAJU MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. VAISHNAVI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — Section 175(3) — Reference of Private Complaint for Police Investigation — Mandatory Procedure — Hearing of Police Officer — Section 175(3) BNSS introduces mandatory procedural requirements before a Magistrate orders investigation on a private complaint — Unlike Section 156(3) CrPC, the Magistrate must now, inter alia, consider the submissions of the concerned police officer prior to issuing directions for investigation — Failure to comply with t India Law Library Docid # 2424393
(583) PRABHU Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (KALABURAGI BENCH)] 17-03-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Jurisdiction — Interference with Show Cause Notice/Notice of Enquiry — Exceptions — Ordinarily, a writ petition challenging a mere show-cause notice or a notice of enquiry issued by a statutory authority is not maintainable, as it does not constitute a final adverse order affecting rights — The proper course is for the noticee to reply and raise objections, including jurisdictional ones, before the authority — However, the High Court may interfere India Law Library Docid # 2424441
(584) T.VINOTH KUMAR Vs. S. SEKAR AND OTHER[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 149 — Liability of Insurance Company — Breach of Policy Condition — No Valid Driving License — Pay and Recover Principle — In a third-party claim arising from a motor accident, the insurer cannot be completely exonerated from its liability to pay compensation to the victim merely because the driver of the insured vehicle (who was also the owner in this case) did not possess a valid driving license at the time of the accident — Following the principles India Law Library Docid # 2424431
(585) JEMINI ANIL AND OTHERS Vs. FOOD SAFETY OFFICER PALA CIRCLE AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 — Sections 42(2), 46(3) Proviso — Timelines for Analysis & Reporting — Mandatory vs. Directory — The time limit of 14 days for the Food Analyst to analyse a sample and send the report (S.42(2), S.46(3)) and the requirement under the proviso to S.46(3) to inform reasons for delay are procedural. Non-compliance is not fatal to prosecution unless it causes prejudice to the accused, particularly concerning the right to get the second sample analysed. India Law Library Docid # 2424555
(586) APPU JOSEPH AND ANOTHER Vs. MAYINKUTTY AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Property Law — Title vs. Revenue/Resurvey Records — Resurvey records, being revenue records, do not confer title nor extinguish pre-existing title — Title based on valid documents prevails over incorrect entries in resurvey records — A suit based on title disputing resurvey findings is maintainable. India Law Library Docid # 2424556
(587) SUBHASH EKKA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 94 — Determination of Victim’s Age — Proof of Minority — In a prosecution under the POCSO Act, the burden is on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was below 18 years of age on the date of the incident — Where the primary evidence relied upon is a school admission register entry, but the person who made the entry or provided the d India Law Library Docid # 2424708
(588) RUPINENI VENKATA KRISHNA RAO Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Scope of Interference — High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, cautiously, and sparingly — Court should refrain from acting as an appellate or revisional court or making premature decisions, especially when allegations, such as kidnapping potentially supported by evidence like CCTV footage or messages, necessitate a full-fledged investigation to ascertain truth. India Law Library Docid # 2424723
(589) BHUPATHI GATTUMALLU Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Delay in Lodging Complaint — Justification — Petitioners sought quashing of FIR registered for offences including kidnapping, extortion, wrongful restraint, and criminal conspiracy — Complaint lodged nearly six years after the alleged incident (Nov 2018) — Petitioners contended delay was unexplained and fatal, while complainant attributed delay to fear of accused No. 1 and lodged the complaint only after accused No. 1’s arrest in an India Law Library Docid # 2424754
(590) KOLIPAKA SAI KUMAR Vs. KAPIL CHILTS KAKATIYA PVT. LTD.[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Chit Funds Act, 1982 — Section 71 — Execution of Award/Order — An order or award passed by the Registrar or nominee, or by the State Government in appeal, for payment of money under the Act is executable either (a) as a decree of a Civil Court upon a certificate issued by the Registrar, or (b) as arrears of land revenue, subject to the prescribed limitation for the latter mode — The procedure involves the decree-holder applying to the Registrar for execution, who then forwards the application an India Law Library Docid # 2424784
(591) POTLURU HEMALATHA Vs. P. PRASAD[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 149 — Liability of Insurer — Private Vehicle — Unauthorized Passenger Defence — An insurer cannot be absolved from liability to pay compensation to third-party claimants (legal representatives of deceased) solely on the ground that the deceased was travelling as an unauthorized passenger in a private insured vehicle, contrary to policy terms — Liability is fixed jointly and severally on the owner and insurer. India Law Library Docid # 2424812
(592) V.SURYA RAO Vs. C ANJI REDDY AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and Willingness — Essential Requirement for Specific Performance — The grant of specific performance necessitates the plaintiff demonstrating, through evidence, continuous readiness and willingness to perform their essential obligations under the contract from the date of the agreement through to the final decision of the suit — A mere assertion of readiness and willingness in the plaint, without substantiation by evidence covering all releva India Law Library Docid # 2424815
(593) GUDIMELLA SANDHYA Vs. STATE OF A P REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND ANOTHER[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 397 & 401 — Revisional Jurisdiction Against Acquittal — The High Court, in exercising its revisional jurisdiction against an order of acquittal, particularly when invoked by a private complainant, acts under circumscribed limits — It will not ordinarily interfere unless there is a manifest illegality, perversity in the findings, a glaring defect in procedure, or a gross miscarriage of justice. India Law Library Docid # 2424874
(594) S. VIJAYA BHARATH Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7 & 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) — Proof of Demand — Foundational Requirement — For sustaining a conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the prosecution must establish, beyond reasonable doubt, the foundational fact of demand of illegal gratification by the accused public servant — The mere recovery of tainted currency, even if proved, is insufficient to prove guilt under Section 7 in the absence of conclusive India Law Library Docid # 2424877
(595) MANDI ROJASHRI Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Petroleum Rules, 2002 — Rule 144 — Scope of Inquiry for No Objection Certificate (NOC) — Public Interest and Safety Paramount — The scope of inquiry by the District Authority under Rule 144 of the Petroleum Rules, 2002, for granting a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for storing petroleum products is primarily confined to aspects concerning public interest and public safety — This includes assessing lawful possession, impact on public facilities (schools, hospitals), traffic density, conformity wi India Law Library Docid # 2424880
(596) K.N. RAMARAJU Vs. SRI G GANAPATHI AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 6 Rule 17 — Pre-trial Amendment — Liberal Approach — Courts are required to adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for amendment of pleadings filed before the commencement of trial — Such amendments should generally be allowed if they are necessary for determining the real questions in controversy, provided they do not cause irreparable prejudice to the opposing party, divest them of any advantage accrued due to admission, or fundamentally alter India Law Library Docid # 2424882
(597) DILIP KUMR DEY AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 17-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — S. 498A — Proof of Cruelty — Appreciation of Evidence in Domestic Offences — In cases involving allegations of cruelty under Section 498A IPC, which often occur within the confines of the home, the court may need to rely significantly on the testimony of witnesses from the deceased’s paternal family (informant, parents) — The primary duty of the court is to carefully scrutinize such evidence for consistency, ruling out exaggeration and false implication — Corroboration from in India Law Library Docid # 2425220
(598) M/S. STRATEGIC INFRA SERVICES PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS) M/S. STRATEGIC OUTSOURCING SERVICE PVT. LTD. Vs. MPHASIS LIMITED[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 14-03-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 16, Section 34(2)(b)(i) — Arbitrability of Disputes — Allegations of Fraud — Jurisdiction of Arbitrator — The jurisdiction of an Arbitral Tribunal to decide disputes arising from an agreement containing an arbitration clause is not ousted merely because one party levels allegations of fraud (inducement to enter agreement, non-disclosure) against the other — Such jurisdiction is displaced only if the allegations of fraud are serious and India Law Library Docid # 2424381
(599) M/S. BRUNTON DEVELOPERS, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT THE FALCON HOUSE Vs. UNITED BREWERIES (HOLDINGS) LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 14-03-2025 Companies Act, 1956 — Sections 536(2), 537 (Corresponding to Companies Act, 2013 — Sections 334(2), 335) — Disposition of Property Post Commencement of Winding Up — Voidability — Validation by Court — Any disposition of a company’s property (including sale) made after the commencement of winding-up proceedings, unless the Court/Tribunal orders otherwise — Similarly, a sale held without leave of the Court/Tribunal after commencement of winding up is void under Section 537 (now S. 335) — India Law Library Docid # 2424385
(600) CELINE MARTINA Vs. T. JOSEPH ATHISAYAM (DIED) BY LRS AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 14-03-2025 Succession Act, 1925 — Wills — Joint Will vs. Mutual Will — Revocability — A Will executed jointly by two or more testators in a single document, disposing of their property (whether held jointly or separately) to a third party, effective after the death of both, is considered a joint Will if it lacks reciprocal benefits conferred between the testators themselves — It does not become a mutual Will (implying irrevocability after the death of one testator who has received a benefit) merely because India Law Library Docid # 2424432