India Law Library

ive

User not Logged..

India Law Library AI
Lex AI Legal Document Intelligence Assistant

Latest Cases

1
2
3
4
5
»
Last

(1) CHANDRAKALA MAHORE Vs. UNION OF INDIA[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) — Regular bail — Embezzlement of land acquisition compensation funds — Cloned and forged cheques — Applicant, a 62-year-old retired Assistant Grade-II, detained for over a year — Investigation concluded and final report submitted — Only 4 out of 130 witnesses examined — Considering the
India Law Library Docid # 2452031

(2) HIMMAT SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 11-09-2026
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 379 [corresponding to Section 340, Cr.P.C., 1973] read with Section 215(1)(b) [corresponding to Section 195(1)(b), Cr.P.C.] — Bar to taking cognizance — Document forged outside court precincts — Petitioners contended that FIR for forged will produced in civil proceedings was barred without a written complaint by Court under Section 379 BNSS — Repelling contention, High Court held that procedure under Section 340 Cr.P.C. or Section 379 BNSS appli
India Law Library Docid # 2452033

(3) KISHAN GAMBHIR Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 11-09-2026
Service Law — Contractual employee — Stigmatic termination — Requirement of regular departmental enquiry — MGNREGA Policy, Clause 7.2 — Petitioner working as contractual Assistant Accounts Officer was terminated on allegations of irregular payments without holding a regular departmental enquiry — Held, where an order of termination attributes misconduct, dereliction of duty, or financial irregularities, it casts a stigma on the conduct, character, and work of the employee, affecting future emplo
India Law Library Docid # 2452141

(4) RAJEEV DANDOTIYA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 11-09-2026
Service Law — Regularization — Parity in date of regularization — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14 and Article 226 — Petitioner was engaged as Jail Warder on temporary basis with artificial breaks and subsequently regularized from 16.12.2008 — Similarly situated persons and juniors were granted regularization w.e.f. 04.07.2003 pursuant to Court orders — Held, when similarly situated employees have been granted regularization from a specific anterior date, denial of identical treatment to
India Law Library Docid # 2452143

(5) RAM NARESH SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 11-09-2026
Service Law — Regularization — Retrospective date of regularization — Parity — Constitution of India, Articles 14 and 226 — Petitioner, initially engaged as temporary Jail Warder with artificial one-day breaks, was regularized w.e.f. 16.12.2008 — Counterparts and juniors were granted regularization w.e.f. 04.07.2003 under High Court orders — Held, similarly situated employees must be treated alike — Denial of retrospective regularization from 04.07.2003 to the petitioner while granting it to ide
India Law Library Docid # 2452133

(6) SRI GNANASHEKAR M. Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 305 and 107 — Abetment of suicide of child — Necessary ingredients — Positive act and mens rea — Minor boy committed suicide after accused retained his volleyball which broke their shop window and asked him to bring his father — Held, to sustain conviction under Section 305, ingredients of Section 107 must be established beyond reasonable doubt — Mere refusal to return the ball or asking the child to call his father does not constitute instigation or abetment —
India Law Library Docid # 2452179

(7) MR. PRASHANT KUMAR JOSHI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Legal Metrology Act, 2009 — Section 49 — Offence by company — Non-joinder of company as accused — Maintainability of prosecution against employees — Complaint filed against the petitioner (General Manager — Legal) without arraying the company as an accused — Held, under Section 49 of the Act, when an offence is committed by a company, the company along with the nominated person or person in charge is deemed guilty — Prosecuting employees without impleading the company violates statutory requirem
India Law Library Docid # 2452181

(8) GHANSHYAM PATIDAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 — Right to speedy trial — Prolonged pre-trial detention — Held, the right to a speedy trial is an essential facet of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 and is not eclipsed by the gravity of the offence. Prolonged incarceration of an undertrial without reasonable progress in trial converts pre-trial detention into punishment. Where the St
India Law Library Docid # 2452183

(9) ROSHAN LAL @ ROSHAN LAL BAKSHI Vs. KAPIL MOHAN[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Scope of second appeal — Substantial question of law — Jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC is strictly confined to substantial questions of law — Re-appreciation of evidence or possibility of an alternative view on facts does not justify interference — Concurrent findings of fact on possession, access to passage, and encroachment cannot be disturbed in second appeal unless perverse, based on no evidence, or arrived at by ignoring material evidence
India Law Library Docid # 2452186

(10) BALWINDER SINGH ALIAS BABBU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 21, 29, 37 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Regular bail — Commercial quantity — Recovery of 1 Kg 8.15 grams of heroin — Accused incarcerated for over one year and two months — Seventeen prosecution witnesses cited but none examined — Delay in trial not attributable to accused — No other criminal antecedents shown — Rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act stands diluted i
India Law Library Docid # 2452188

(11) GIAN CHAND GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 205 and 482 — Exemption from personal appearance — Order rejecting exemption application set aside — Petitioner was a 74-year-old retired public servant residing approximately 200 kilometers away from the trial court — His identity was not in dispute, he was duly represented by counsel, and he raised no objection to evidence being recorded in his absence — Held, requiring physical appearance
India Law Library Docid # 2452165

(12) RAMWATI AND OTHERS Vs. RAM KUMAR SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of interference with concurrent findings of fact — Jurisdiction under Section 100 is not a third appellate jurisdiction — Interference is permissible only in exceptional circumstances where findings recorded by courts below are perverse, based on no evidence, or founded on misreading of material evidence — A substantial question of law must be debatable and material, not merely a question of appreciation or re-appreciation of
India Law Library Docid # 2452166

(13) GURDEV SINGH ALIAS GAJU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 37 — Right to speedy trial — Prolonged incarceration — Rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act: The right to a speedy trial is an integral facet of personal liberty under Article 21 and is not eclipsed by the gravity of the offence. Inordinate pre-trial detention without reasonable progress converts custody into punishment. Where the State fails to ensure an expeditious trial, the statutory embargo u
India Law Library Docid # 2452168

(14) NIRAJ SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Tender Law — Essential eligibility criteria — Strict compliance — Expression of Interest invited to run Jan Aushadhi Generic Drug Store requiring minimum seven years' experience in pharmacy or government hospital — Held, terms laying down essential conditions of eligibility must be punctiliously and rigidly enforced by the employer and cannot be treated as ancillary or subsidiary conditions open to deviation — A Jan Aushadhi Generic Drug Store cannot be permitted to be operated by an individu
India Law Library Docid # 2452236

(15) BALDEV THAKUR Vs. GANGA SAGAR[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — An accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and an order of acquittal reinforces that presumption — If two reasonable views are possible based on the evidence on record, the view favourable to the accused must prevail — The appellate court should interfere with a judgment of acquittal only when the finding is perverse, wholly unsustainable, or manifestly illegal resulting in a miscarri
India Law Library Docid # 2452237

(16) SURINDER KUMAR @ ARJUN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 16 — Vesting of acquired land in Government — Claim for return or revesting of land — Permissibility — Once an award is passed and possession is taken, the acquired land vests absolutely in the Government free from all encumbrances — Erstwhile landowners do not retain or acquire any legal right to seek revesting or restitution of possession, even if the land remains unutilized or is diverted to another public purpose — Valid compulsory acquisition cannot b
India Law Library Docid # 2452242

(17) APURAV DHIMAN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF H.P.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 21, 25 and 29 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Sections 161 and 162 — Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 25 — Bail — Evidentiary value of co-accused's confession — Petitioners implicated solely on disclosures made by co-accused — Held, confessional statements made to a police officer during investigation are hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act and Section 162 Cr.P.C., and are not saved by Section 67 of the NDPS Act — Such
India Law Library Docid # 2452243

(18) SUJAN SINGH Vs. ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 163-A and Second Schedule — Maintainability of claim petition — Annual income ceiling — Claim under structured formula — To invoke Section 163-A of the Act, the limitation of income is Rs. 40,000/- per annum, which acts as a strict upper cap — The petitioner specifically pleaded his income as Rs. 10,000/- per month, bringing his annual income to Rs. 1,20,000/- — Held, considering the statutory cap and established precedent, the Tribunal committed no illegali
India Law Library Docid # 2452249

(19) JAN KALYAN SANGHARSH SAMITI Vs. STATE OF HP[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Letters Patent Appeal — Administrative Law — Creation and location of Sub-Tehsil — Scope of judicial review in policy matters — The decision to create and locate administrative headquarters or a Sub-Tehsil is an executive policy decision based on diverse geographical, administrative, and financial considerations. A High Court in writ jurisdiction cannot evaluate the comparative merits of competing locations or sit in appeal over governmental discret
India Law Library Docid # 2452250

(20) RAJESH BHATIA AND OTHERS Vs. RAM RATTAN AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026
A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 17, 18, 21 and 58 — Admission — Evidentiary value — Admission regarding ownership — Plaintiffs' witness admitted during cross-examination that defendants were absolute owners since 1968, but qualified it by stating they were residing therein — Held, an admission must be accepted or rejected as a whole and cannot be split up to rely solely on the inculpatory portion — Furthermore, mere admission cannot confer, create, or extinguish title to immovable proper
India Law Library Docid # 2452251

1
2
3
4
5
»
Last