(681) SITAL PRASAD SHAW @ GUPTA AND ANOTHER Vs. ASHISH BHATTACHARYA AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 401 & 482 — Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 — Section 3(a) — Quashing of Proceedings — Delay — Abuse of Process — Criminal Revision application filed seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, pending since 1982 (approximately 43 years) — Held, continuation of prosecution after such inordinate delay, largely unattributable to the accused, constitutes a sheer abuse of India Law Library Docid # 2425162
(682) FERASAT Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 386 — Disposal of Appeal on Merits in Absence of Appellant/Counsel — An appellate court is empowered to hear and dispose of a criminal appeal on its merits after perusing the record and judgment of the trial court, even in the absence of the appellant or their counsel — Adjournment is not mandatory in such circumstances, following the principle laid down in Surya Baksh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 14 SCC 222 India Law Library Docid # 2425274
(683) STATE OF U.P. Vs. PUSHPENDRA ALIAS GABBAR[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference by High Court — Principles governing appeal against acquittal revisited — High Court’s power to re-appreciate evidence — Necessity to overcome double presumption of innocence (strengthened by acquittal) — Interference warranted only if trial court findings are patently perverse, based on misreading/omission of material evidence, or if only conclusion possible is guilt — Slowness of appellate court in India Law Library Docid # 2425270
(684) MITHU SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 197 — Sanction for Prosecution — Public Servant — Test of “Acting or Purporting to Act in Discharge of Official Duty” — The protection under Section 197 CrPC, requiring prior sanction for prosecuting a public servant (not removable save by or with the sanction of the Government), is available only when the alleged offence is reasonably connected with the discharge of official duty — The act complained of must fall within the scope and range of offic India Law Library Docid # 2425387
(685) STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. NAINA RAM[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal Against Acquittal — Scope of Interference — Principles Reiterated — An appellate court, in an appeal against acquittal, must recognize that acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence — While entitled to reappreciate evidence, the court must consider if the trial court’s view was a possible one based on the record — If plausible, the acquittal cannot be overturned merely because another view is possible — Interference is permissi India Law Library Docid # 2425417
(686) VIKRAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 300 Exception IV, 302, 304 Part I — Culpable Homicide vs. Murder — Sudden Fight — Knowledge vs. Intention — Where death is caused by a single blow with a sharp-edged weapon (spear) inflicted on the head (a vital part) during a sudden quarrel arising from a trivial issue (playing loud music during Holi), without premeditation or prior enmity between the parties, the act falls within Exception IV to Section 300 IPC — Although the accused lacked the intention to ca India Law Library Docid # 2425418
(687) KANHAIYA LAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE VYAVASTHAK MURLIWALA AGROTEK LIMITED[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Payment of Wages Act, 1936 — S. 2(vi)(b) — Factories Act, 1947 — S. 48 — “Wages” — Overtime Pay — Statutory Right — Remuneration payable for overtime work, mandated by Section 48 of the Factories Act for work exceeding prescribed weekly hours, falls squarely within the definition of “wages” under Section 2(vi)(b) of the Payment of Wages Act — The entitlement to overtime wages arises from statute and does not require a specific, separate contractual stipulation — An appellate court errs in law an India Law Library Docid # 2425419
(688) PURSHOTTAM SINDHI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 23-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304B — Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 113B — Dowry Death — Pre-requisites for Conviction and Presumption — To establish the offence of dowry death under Section 304B IPC and to invoke the statutory presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, the prosecution must first prove beyond reasonable doubt that soon before her death, the deceased woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives for, or in connection with, any deman India Law Library Docid # 2425440
(689) CHITARMAL YADAV AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. DEEPTI SINGH AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 23-04-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16 — Specific Performance of Contract — Lack of Title in Vendor — Effect of Setting Aside Foundational Mutation Entry — Where the vendors’ (defendant Nos. 1 and 2) claim to khatedari rights over the suit property was based solely on a mutation entry dated 17.05.1989, which was subsequently set aside in revenue proceedings vide order dated 26.12.2008 upon finding that the said entry was forged and title rightfully belonged to another (defendant No. 4, tracing t India Law Library Docid # 2425441
(690) FIROZ KHAN Vs. CHAIN SINGH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 23-04-2025 Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and Willingness — Proof Required — For a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale, the plaintiff must plead and prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform their part of the contract — “Readiness” refers to financial capacity, while “willingness” refers to the conduct of the plaintiff wanting performance — Failure to prove availability of funds or a consistent intent to perform, especially when coupled with prior conduct India Law Library Docid # 2425532
(691) DHARAM PAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 23(1) and Section 25 — Determination of Market Value — Admissibility of State’s Sale Deeds — Principle in Lal Chand vs. Union of India, (2009) 15 SCC 769 — In determining the market value of acquired land, sale deeds produced by the State are required to be taken into account, even if they reflect a price lower than the amount offered by the Land Acquisition Collector — The exclusion of such sale deeds by the Reference Court on the ground that they show a low India Law Library Docid # 2425545
(692) SACHIN AHLAWAT Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 19 — Sanction for prosecution —Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120-B — Criminal Conspiracy — Whether a public servant, against whom sanction for prosecution under the PC Act has been expressly declined by the competent authority (which denial has not been challenged), and who is not charged with any independent substantive offence under the IPC, can nonetheless be prosecuted solely for criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B IPC, when the sole object of th India Law Library Docid # 2425546
(693) SUNANDA SHARMA Vs. BAHURA DEVI CHOUBEY AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 16 Rule 2 — Application for summoning witness not in list — Whether maintainable — Trial Court rejected application to examine Sub-Registrar (not a listed witness) on the ground that the witness was not in the list of witnesses — Order 16 Rule 1A permits parties to bring witnesses without summons subject to Order 16 Rule 1(3) — Order 16 Rule 1(3) allows the court to permit a party to call an unlisted witness for sufficient cause — These rules are not in derogat India Law Library Docid # 2425667
(694) VIJAY KERKETTA AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 370 (as amended by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013) — Section 370(4) — Applicability of amended provision — Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 came into force w.e.f. 03.02.2013, introducing Section 370(4) prescribing life imprisonment for trafficking for exploitation etc. — Alleged offence committed twelve years prior to lodging of FIR (09.06.2015) — Charges framed under amended Section 370(4) on 20.11.2015 — Conviction under Section 370(4) — Illegality and constitu India Law Library Docid # 2425668
(695) PRADEEP JAIN Vs. M.D.TIWARI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Malicious Prosecution — Claim for compensation — Essential ingredients are showing that the proceedings were malicious, without reasonable and probable cause, terminated in plaintiff’s favour, and caused damage — Onus on plaintiff to prove absence of reasonable and probable cause, though slight evidence may discharge this — Mere innocence is insufficient, and malice alone does not infer lack of reasonable cause — Malice requires proof of spite, ill will, or improper motive. India Law Library Docid # 2425669
(696) PRAHLAD RATHOUR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (now Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) — Section 528 (formerly Section 482) — Inherent power of High Court — Quashing of proceedings — Limitation — Adjudication of questions of fact, appreciation of evidence, or examining reliability/credibility of versions do not fall within the ambit of Section 528 India Law Library Docid # 2425670
(697) SUNA RAM UIKEY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Murder — Throttling — Death due to respiratory failure from asphyxia caused by throttling, homicidal nature of death proved by medical evidence (postmortem report indicating extravasation under neck bruise and fractured hyoid bone). India Law Library Docid # 2425671
(698) DOMAR SINGH VERMA Vs. RAJARAM BAGHEL AND ANOTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 — Temporary injunction — Suit for Specific Performance of Contract — Essential ingredients for grant of temporary injunction are prima-facie case, strong likelihood of success, and a valid and enforceable contract — Burden on plaintiff to establish defendant’s obligation and validity of contract — Temporary injunction cannot be granted where facts are disputed by the defendant, creating doubts as to the existence of a concluded contract — Delay India Law Library Docid # 2425672
(699) TSEWANG RIGZIN Vs. LADAKH AMCHI SABHA[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 23-04-2025 Constitution of India — Article 227 — Supervisory jurisdiction of High Court over subordinate courts and tribunals — Alternative statutory remedy of appeal — Principles governing exercise of jurisdiction — High Court’s power is discretionary and to be exercised sparingly, generally limited to preventing subordinate courts from exceeding their authority or ensuring law is followed — Interference is warranted only in cases of patent perversity, gross and manifest failure of justice, or violation o India Law Library Docid # 2425817
(700) JUNGSHER Vs. ANITA DEVI[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 23-04-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Burden of proof — Presumption under Section 139 — When accused raises a probable defence casting doubt on complainant’s case or financial capacity, burden shifts to complainant to prove financial capacity and other relevant facts. India Law Library Docid # 2425893