(1) M/S SIMRAN PHARMACEUTICALS AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 11-08-2026 Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — Sections 18-A, 23(4) — Supply of sample portion — Sample drawn from retailer, not manufacturer — Where the sample is drawn from a retailer or other person in the distribution chain rather than from the manufacturer's possession, the Drug Inspector's obligation under S. 18-A stands discharged upon delivering the requisite sample portion to the person whose India Law Library Docid # 2448888
(2) SHAZAD AHMED Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 11-08-2026 Service Law — Rehabilitation Employees Training (RET) Scheme — Selection Panel — Candidate not figuring in select panel — Entitlement to relief — Where the petitioner admittedly did not figure in the select panel prepared for engagement as RET Teacher, and the tentative panel under challenge was superseded by the Supreme Court's directions in Union Territory of J&K v. Saba Wani protecting only candidates already placed in select panels, no relief could be granted to him — India Law Library Docid # 2448889
(3) GHANSHAYAM DASS (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS Vs. KULWANT SINGH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 11-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Jurisdiction — Consequence of Court holding it lacks jurisdiction over subject matter — Held, Once a Court concludes it has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of a suit, it cannot decide any question on the merits and can only decide the question of jurisdiction; upon concluding lack of jurisdiction, the plaint must be returned for presentation before the proper forum, not India Law Library Docid # 2448890
(4) HARISH CHANDRA Vs. STATE[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-08-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 34 — Common intention — Distinguished from mere presence, similar intention or participation in a related act — Held, An inference of common intention must be a necessary inference from the circumstances proved and cannot be founded merely on association, presence or suspicion; persons acting with similar intentions during the same occurrence need not share a common intention regarding the particular offence — Where the accused was India Law Library Docid # 2448891
(5) THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION IN KERALA Vs. KARTHIK DEV R AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 11-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 114 r/w Order 47 Rule 1 — Scope of review jurisdiction — Held, Review jurisdiction cannot be equated with an appellate remedy and cannot be used for re-agitating issues already decided — An error apparent on the face of the record must be self-evident, needing no process of reasoning to detect; an erroneous decision cannot be "reheard and corrected" under India Law Library Docid # 2448892
(6) YASODA DEVI @ SUSHILA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. KAILASH KUMAR PANDEY AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-08-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 168 — Assessment of income in absence of documentary proof — Held, Absence of documentary evidence such as income-tax returns or land revenue records cannot by itself be a ground to discard the claimant's income altogether — Where oral testimony regarding occupation and earnings remains substantially unshaken in cross-examination, some element of guesswork is inevitable, and income must be assessed on the realities of facts and India Law Library Docid # 2448893
(7) STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Vs. SAJID ALI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 2(1)(d) — Proof of age of victim — Age of prosecutrix being a jurisdictional pre-requisite to invoke POCSO Act, prosecution must satisfactorily establish minority through reliable documentary proof — Birth certificate not corroborated by original entry in the birth register, and registration effected 13 years after birth without any traceable order of SDM permitting delayed registration, held insufficient to prove minority — India Law Library Docid # 2448823
(8) MOHAN @ SUNNY Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 232 — Mandatory compliance — Non-compliance of Section 232 Cr.P.C. does not ipso facto vitiate proceedings unless shown to have resulted in serious and substantial prejudice to accused — Accused failed to establish any prejudice caused due to non-compliance of Section 232 Cr.P.C. India Law Library Docid # 2448824
(9) MUKESH Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)[DELHI HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 300 Thirdly — Murder — Essential requisites — Prosecution must establish the presence of bodily injury, its nature, intention to inflict that specific injury, and that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death — Absence of motive or previous animosity is of no consequence when actus reus and required intent/knowledge are established — Single India Law Library Docid # 2448825
(10) SAILESHWAR ORAON @ MANDEEP @ KASAI @ SALESHWAR ORAON Vs. UNION OF INDIA[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43D(5) — Grant of bail — Armed cadre of proscribed terrorist organization — Accused alleged to have actively participated in assembling with weapons, planting IED explosives in forest area, and detonating them causing grave injuries to security personnel — Specific identification by protected witnesses and existence of multiple criminal antecedents India Law Library Docid # 2448986
(11) ASSAM CRICKET ASSOCIATION Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 173(8) — Further investigation — Necessity of seeking prior leave of Court — Merely making an endorsement in charge sheet by Investigating Officer that investigation will continue and supplementary charge sheet will be submitted whenever required does not amount to taking prior permission India Law Library Docid # 2448988
(12) MARYOM HAQUE AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 223(1), First Proviso — Applicability of procedure under Section 223 of BNSS to proceedings under Section 12 of DV Act — An application under Section 12 of DV Act is filed seeking quasi-civil reliefs such as maintenance, protection, and shared household orders — It is not a "complaint India Law Library Docid # 2448989
(13) SRI SURENDRA SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 10-08-2026 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Section 67(4) — Power to seal premises, almirahs, or electronic devices — Precondition of denial of access — The power conferred under Section 67(4) to seal or break open doors, almirahs, electronic devices, boxes, or receptacles can be exercised only where access to India Law Library Docid # 2448990
(14) WAHID KHAN Vs. STATE[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-08-2026 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 5(l) & 6 — Aggravated penetrative sexual assault on minor — Age determination — School Admission Register vs. Unattested Certificate / Statement under S. 161 CrPC — Admissibility — Held, a written certificate issued by a school principal during investigation constitutes a statement under S. 161 CrPC and is inadmissible in evidence — However, the extract of the Student Admission and Withdrawal Register India Law Library Docid # 2448747
(15) A V INTERNATIONAL AND ANOTHER Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE & ORS.[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-08-2026 Customs Act, 1962 — Sections 28, 28(9) & 28(9A) — Independent nature of Show Cause Notices (SCNs) originating from same investigation — Effect of interim stay on co-pending SCN — Held, two separate Show Cause Notices issued on different dates and dealing with distinct subject matters (e.g., one concerning seized goods and the other concerning earlier imports under Section 28) maintain their India Law Library Docid # 2448748
(16) XXXXX Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-08-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 (corresponding to Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482) — Scope of inherent powers of High Court — Concurrent findings of discharge by lower courts — Non-interference — Held, the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 528 BNSS cannot be invoked to conduct a re-appreciation of evidence or substitute its India Law Library Docid # 2448749
(17) PRAKASH CHANDRA AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-08-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay in filing appeal — Economic hardship — Beneficial legislation — Held, delay in filing an appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 can be condoned where the appellant belongs to an economically weaker section and was unable to contact counsel or secure timely legal advice due to paucity of funds — Keeping in view the India Law Library Docid # 2448750
(18) SMT.VIJAYA RIZBUD Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR MISHRA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 07-08-2026 Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 — Section 12(1)(f) — Bona-fide requirement for business — Scope of "Son" — Inclusion of Stepson — Eviction sought by landlady for setting up business of her stepson — Stepson was born to husband from his previous marriage — No inter-se dispute and stepson resided with landlady — Term "son" is flexible and must be given a contextual interpretation aligned with object of Act — Stepson India Law Library Docid # 2448809
(19) BALKAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 07-08-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 372 (proviso) and 378(4) — Victim's right of appeal against acquittal in complaint case — Held, a victim in a private complaint case has an independent right to file an appeal against an order of acquittal under the proviso to S. 372 Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions, and is not required to seek special leave under S. 378(4) Cr.P.C. — Insistence on special leave from the High Court would be contrary to legislative intent behind the proviso to S. India Law Library Docid # 2448811
(20) NEERAJ Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 07-08-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 21(c), 21, 27(a), 29, 62, 35 and 37 — Grant of Regular Bail — Commercial Quantity — Inordinate delay in trial vis-a-vis Fundamental Right under Article 21 — The petitioner sought regular bail in an FIR involving alleged commercial quantity of contraband under the NDPS Act — The court observed that out of 22 cited India Law Library Docid # 2448812