(321) GUGGILLA @ GUMMADILLI LAKSHMI PRAMEELA Vs. GUGGILLA VENKATA RAMANJANEYULU[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 24 — Transfer of matrimonial proceedings — Principles applicable — Socio-economic conditions and convenience of wife — Wife sought transfer of divorce petition from Addanki to Narasaraopet — High Court observed that power under Section 24 must be exercised to meet the ends of justice — In matrimonial disputes, courts must consider economic status, social strata, and living conditions of parties — Given the socio-economic paradigm in Indian society, conv India Law Library Docid # 2457559
(322) KOMMIREDDI RAMACHANDRA RAO Vs. THE STATE OF A P[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Criminal Revision — Impleadment of victim and recording of compromise — Accused convicted under Section 324, Indian Penal Code — During pendency of revision, parties settled dispute amicably outside court — Injured victim filed application for impleadment and confirmed voluntary compromise, stating parties were residing peacefully and that he had no objection to accused being set free — Application for impleadment allowed and joint compromise memo placed on India Law Library Docid # 2457560
(323) S HARI KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. G SWETHA AND ANOTHER[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 — Pre-arrest bail — Matrimonial offences — Cruelty and Dowry allegations — Accused Nos. 2 to 6, being maternal uncles, parents, and sister of the husband, sought anticipatory bail — Husband was already granted regular bail — Complainant and husband resided separately as a nuclear family — Considering that allegations were leveled against the extended family and the husband was already on bail, pre-arrest bail was granted to the relatives sub India Law Library Docid # 2457561
(324) ALUGU SANGAIYA Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 480 and 483 — Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(C) — Bail — Failure to file charge sheet within 180 days — Accused in custody for 189 days — Second bail application — Charge sheet remained unfiled despite completion of 180 days of judicial custody, and no application was preferred by the prosecution seeking extension of remand beyond the statutory period — Accused having a fixed abode — Held, con India Law Library Docid # 2457564
(325) STATE OF H.P. Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Principles reiterated — Acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence of an accused — An appellate court should not interfere with an order of acquittal unless the trial court's findings are perverse, impossible, wholly unsustainable, or manifestly illegal — Where two reasonable views are possible based on the evidence adduced, the view favourable to the accused must prevail — Due weight must be given t India Law Library Docid # 2457575
(326) VANSH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 22, 29 and 37(1)(b)(ii) — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Bail — Commercial quantity — Recovery from co-accused — Allegation of conspiracy — Commercial quantity of Tramadol capsules recovered exclusively from co-accused's rucksack — No contraband recovered from applicant's personal possession — Applicant nabbed merely for accompanying co-accused — Held, apprehension together may raise suspicion, but suspicio India Law Library Docid # 2457576
(327) PREMIUM ACRES INFRATECH PVT. LTD. Vs. DEVI LAL BANGA AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaint — Scope and principles — Power to reject a plaint at the threshold is an extraordinary power requiring great care and circumspection — Court must look only into the plaint averments and accompanying documents, taking them to be correct in their entirety — Pleas in the written statement are wholly irrelevant — Objective of Order 7 Rule 11 is to weed out frivolous, meaningless, and abortive litigation to prevent abuse of judi India Law Library Docid # 2457582
(328) MANOJ KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 and Section 320 — Quashing of criminal proceedings based on compromise distinguished from compounding of offences — High Court's inherent power under Section 482 is distinct from the power of a criminal court to compound offences under Section 320 — While compounding is strictly circumscribed by Section 320, quashing under Section 482 is guided by whether the ends of justice justify the exercise of inherent power or prevent abuse of process of t India Law Library Docid # 2457586
(329) THE NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION Vs. BALDEV RAJ AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 21 Rule 11 and Section 151 — Execution of land acquisition award — Objection by judgment debtor — Executing court dismissed objections to decree holders' calculation of compensation without recording reasons or addressing contentions raised — Held, the court below neither dealt with the objections preferred by the judgment debtor nor examined the applicable legal provisions to ascertain correctness of decree holders' calculations — Such a summary and unre India Law Library Docid # 2457587
(330) PANKAJ RAI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Electricity Act, 2003 — Sections 82(5), 84, and 85 — Appointment of Chairman, State Electricity Regulatory Commission — Role of Selection Committee versus State Government — Suitability of candidates — A high-powered Selection Committee headed by a former High Court Judge is statutorily entrusted to evaluate suitability and recommend a two-member panel — The State Government, as appointing authority, cannot act as an appellate body over the Selection Committee's assessment of suitability or reje India Law Library Docid # 2457588
(331) SHEELA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 and Article 309 — Service Law — Judicial Review — Framing of Recruitment and Promotion Rules, including prescription of minimum educational qualifications, eligibility criteria, and promotional avenues, falls within the executive policy domain of the employer. Courts and tribunals cannot substitute their views or interfere unless the prescribed qualifications are arbitrary, irrational, or violate constitutional or statutory provisions. The rule-making au India Law Library Docid # 2457589
(332) PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363 and 366 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 6 — Suspension of sentence pending appeal — Arguable case — Victim resiled from her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and reaffirmed her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement asserting that she went to her maternal uncle's house voluntarily and no wrong was done to her — Trial Court convicted applicant primarily relying on medical evidence India Law Library Docid # 2457592
(333) NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA Vs. GIAN CHAND AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — Standard of 'sufficient cause' — Parity between State and private litigants — Appellant NHAI sought condonation of an inordinate delay of 4 years and 16 days in filing an appeal — Held, condonation of delay is a discretionary relief and not a matter of right — State instrumentalities cannot claim differential or over-lenient treatment compared to private litigants — Concepts such as liberal approach, justice-oriented approach, and substan India Law Library Docid # 2457596
(334) THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR, HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER Vs. SUMIT KUMAR[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 — Interest on delayed payments — Compound and penal interest — Entitlement of Authority — Allotment letter stipulated simple interest at 10% per annum on delayed installments — Authority charged compound interest at 18% per annum and issued resumption order — Held, the Authority is bound by terms of the allotment letter and cannot charge penal or compound interest on delayed payments — Calculation of outstanding dues at higher compound rate rendered India Law Library Docid # 2457603
(335) SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Premature Release — Applicable Policy — Date of conviction — Consideration of premature release under State Policy — Petitioner convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2008 sought premature release under the Haryana Government Premature Release Policy dated 12.04.2002 — State opposed premature release — Held, it is well settled that the claim of a life convict for premature release must be considered strictly in accordance with the policy prevailing on the date of conviction — State of H India Law Library Docid # 2457604
(336) STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Vs. SUNIL KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 120-B, 302, 323, 395, 396, 397, 460 and 201 — Dacoity with murder and criminal conspiracy — Complainant's house was looted by armed assailants who killed his wife and assaulted him — Former domestic maid conspired with co-accused to commit robbery — Identification of accused in Test Identification Parade held before Chief Judicial Magistrate and recoveries of stolen jewellery and cash pursuant to disclosure statements corroborated complainant's account — Circums India Law Library Docid # 2457606
(337) BAHADUR SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Constitution of India — Article 226 — Disciplinary Proceedings — Scope of Judicial Review — Supervisory jurisdiction — High Court does not sit as a court of appeal to re-examine or re-appreciate evidence recorded in departmental proceedings — Power of judicial review is restricted to examining whether the inquiry was conducted by a competent authority in accordance with statutory procedures and principles of natural justice — In the absence of procedural infirmity, patent error on the face of re India Law Library Docid # 2457607
(338) RAJESH PASWAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 28-10-2026 Railways Act, 1989 — Section 2(29) — Bona fide passenger — Proof and burden — Production of unreserved ticket — Belated production — Claimant sustained crush injuries resulting in leg amputation and was confined to bed followed by COVID-19 lockdown — Journey ticket subsequently produced was verified as genuine by railway authorities and issued at relevant station before incident — Initial burden discharged by sworn testimony — Belated production does not justify inference of procurement without India Law Library Docid # 2457613
(339) XXXX Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JK AND ORS.[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 28-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 3 and 4 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 64 — Quashing of Charge-sheet — Statutory age of consent — Consensual relationship with minor. Minor victim sought quashing of charge-sheet filed against accused, alleging consensual romantic relationship, solemnization of Nikah, and birth of a child. High Court held that the victim was around sixteen years old and fell within India Law Library Docid # 2457623
(340) HOTEL HAJR Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JK & ORS.[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT SRINAGAR] 28-10-2026 Administrative Law — Hired premises — Rent determination — Actual physical occupation versus registration — Hotel hired by Government for accommodating security forces — Audit Committee objected that halls and certain rooms were not registered with the Tourism Department — Respondents admitted physical use and occupation of 42 rooms and 13 halls — Held, respondents having actually occupied the accommodation cannot draw benefit from registration discrepancies to deny payment — State is liable to India Law Library Docid # 2457624