(661) KEVAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Appreciation of Evidence — Related and Interested Witnesses — Prior Enmity — Testimony of witnesses who are both related to the deceased and harbor prior hostility against the accused must be scrutinized with greater care and circumspection to rule out exaggeration or false implication. Mere natural presence near the scene is insufficient to establish that they actually witnessed the occurrence. Where ocular testimonies suffer from material contradictions, India Law Library Docid # 2453020
(662) SUNIL Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 3, 4 and 29 — Penetrative sexual assault — Contradictory testimony and medical evidence — Reverse burden of proof — Presumption under Section 29 POCSO Act is activated only after the prosecution proves foundational facts constituting the offence — Victim initially stated to the examining doctor and Investigating Officer that she did not know if rape occurred — Physical examination revealed no India Law Library Docid # 2453021
(663) ANKIT Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 319 — Summoning of additional accused — Standard of proof — Nature of power — Power under Section 319 is extraordinary and discretionary, to be exercised sparingly and with caution — Standard of proof required is higher than a mere prima facie case applied at the time of framing charges, but short of proof beyond reasonable doubt — Requires strong and cogent evidence which, if left unrebutted, would lead to conviction — Power can be invoked at any s India Law Library Docid # 2453022
(664) BHAVNA PANDIT Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Bar Association Elections — Representation of Women Lawyers — Supreme Court directions — Plea of ignorance of judicial orders — Supreme Court in Deeksha N Amruthesh mandated at least 30% representation for women lawyers in Bar Association governing bodies across India — Bar Association contended that the order came to its notice after the election schedule had already been notified — Held, respondents being an association of lawyers are expected and presumed to be aware of Supreme Court orders g India Law Library Docid # 2453024
(665) RAKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14 and 16 — Recruitment of Special Educators — Challenge to advertisement restricting eligibility to candidates "presently working" on a contractual, daily-wage, or outsourced basis — Petitioners worked until 2019 and held valid RCI registrations — Held, equality of opportunity operates only among eligible candidates within a legitimately identified class. The classification directly emanated from Supreme Court directions to screen the existing pool of work India Law Library Docid # 2453025
(666) DR. APARUPA SEN GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 11-09-2026 Medical Education — Compulsory Government Service Bond — Automatic discharge on delay — Petitioner completed post-graduate course under bond obligation, obtained NOC for post-doctoral certificate course on condition of deferred placement, and claimed automatic discharge of bond due to appointment beyond three months — Held, unlike Madhya Pradesh rules, Uttar Pradesh has no statutory provision for deemed discharge — Compulsory medical bonds serve public interest under Article 21 and cannot be ext India Law Library Docid # 2453026
(667) THE STATE OF BIHAR Vs. HIMANSHU SHEKHAR @ MUKESH[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 413 (Proviso) and 419(1), (3) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of appellate interference — Presumption of innocence — Presumption of innocence is strengthened by an order of acquittal passed in favour of the accused. The appellate court is generally slow to disturb findings of fact recorded by the trial court unless such conclusions are palpably wrong, totally perverse, or wholly unsustainable in law. Wher India Law Library Docid # 2453114
(668) M/S WINDLAS BIOTECH PVT. LTD Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — Sections 3, 15 and 30A — Codeine classified as intoxicant — Valid drug license versus excise permit — Consignment of codeine cough syrup seized during transit — Petitioner contended that it held valid drug manufacturing licenses under Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, accompanied by GST invoices and e-way bills — Held, Codeine is notified as an intoxicant under the Act and cannot be transported into Bihar without a permit from the Collector — Valid drug li India Law Library Docid # 2453115
(669) M/S NXTIFY TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Customs Act, 1962 — Section 110(5) — Provisional attachment of bank accounts — Statutory preconditions — Prior approval mandatory — Petitioner challenged debit freeze and provisional attachment of bank accounts during investigation of third-party fraudulent exporters — Held, power under Section 110(5) is drastic and coercive, requiring strict compliance with substantive and procedural safeguards — Proper officer must form an opinion based on tangible material and obtain prior approval of Princip India Law Library Docid # 2453118
(670) M/S WINDLAS BIOTECH PVT. LTD Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — Sections 3 and 30A — Classification of Codeine as intoxicant — Seizure of codeine-based cough syrup — Claim of valid drug license — Notification dated 18.10.2016 classified preparations containing codeine as intoxicants, prohibiting manufacture, transport, import, or export without permit issued by the Collector — Held, possessing a valid drug manufacturing license under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, GST invoices, or e-way bills cannot substitute mandato India Law Library Docid # 2453120
(671) NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S TRINA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Electricity Act, 2003 — Sections 126, 127 and 135 — Theft and unauthorized use of electricity — Restriction of assessment period by Appellate Authority — Inspection revealed physical tampering of meter seals and mechanism, leading to FIR under Section 135 — Appellate Authority restricted final assessment to 24 days against 365 days — Petitioner challenged order contending that under Section 126(5), where duration is unascertainable, assessment applies to the prescribed preceding period — Held, p India Law Library Docid # 2453122
(672) MAHAVIR PUMPS MANUFACTURING PVT. LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Government Contracts — Tender Process — Expiry of Bid Validity — Procedural Irregularity — Bid process continued beyond initial 180-day validity period without formal written extension under Clause 15.2 of the Bid Document — Challenge by unsuccessful bidder — Held, non-compliance with the formal extension mechanism constitutes a mere procedural irregularity and not an illegality going to the root of the tender process — Judicial review in contractual m India Law Library Docid # 2453128
(673) CHANDAN KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 2024 — Section 3(1) and 3(2) — Externment and restriction of movement — Natural justice and procedural integrity — Service of show-cause notice granting barely two days to reply — Show-cause notice was served on the petitioner giving him merely two full days to furnish an explanation and appear — Held, granting two days' time does not constitute a reasonable opportunity to tender an explanation or consult and be defended by a counsel of choice as mandated by Section India Law Library Docid # 2453131
(674) THE STATE OF BIHAR Vs. HIMANSHU SHEKHAR @ MUKESH[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 413 and 419 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened by an order of acquittal. The appellate court should be slow to interfere with findings of fact recorded by the trial court, which had the advantage of seeing witness demeanour. Interference is not justified unless the trial court's conclusions are palpably wrong, totally pervers India Law Library Docid # 2453148
(675) THE GENERAL MANAGER, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY AND OTHERS Vs. PRAPHULL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. SIDHARTH CONSTRUCTION AND TRADING PVT. LTD. (J.V.)[PATNA HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34, 34(2A) and 37 — Indian Contract Act, 1872 — Section 73 — Setting aside of Arbitral Award — Patent illegality — Award passed on no evidence — Contractor claimed substantial damages including machinery hire, establishment costs, and loss of profit — No documentary evidence, invoices, or oral testimony adduced to prove expenditure or actual injury suffered — Held, damages cannot be awarded as a matter of course without substantiating the claim t India Law Library Docid # 2453149
(676) DR. ATUL SARDANA AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506 — Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12 — Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Quashing of proceedings — Matrimonial dispute — Multiple criminal proceedings and domestic violence case initiated by wife against husband and relatives — During pendency, parties executed a settlement agreement and dissolved marriage by mutual consent — Wife agreed to withdraw al India Law Library Docid # 2453185
(677) M/S AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 16(1) — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 8 Rule 1 and Order 8 Rule 10 — Commercial suit — Written statement — Mandatory outer limit — Maximum period to file written statement in a commercial dispute is 120 days from the date of service of summons — Court has no power to extend time beyond 120 days — Defendant forfeits right to file written statement upon expiry of 120 days, and the court cannot take it on record — Rejection of belated written stateme India Law Library Docid # 2453186
(678) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. SMT. HEERA DEVI AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Identity of driver — Standard of proof — Criminal court acquittal — Proceedings before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal are independent of criminal proceedings, and the judgment of a criminal court is not binding upon the Tribunal — Standards of proof applicable in a claim petition differ from those in a criminal trial — Insurance Company failed to prove an unlicensed minor was driving the vehicle — Deposition of the driver asserting he drove the vehicle, supported b India Law Library Docid # 2453187
(679) SMT. POONAM DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Comprehensive or Package Policy — Death of owner travelling as passenger — Claim petition dismissed by Tribunal holding owner cannot claim compensation for own death — Sustainability — Vehicle was driven rashly by another person — Policy was a Passengers Carrying Commercial Vehicle Policy B Package with separate premium paid covering nine passengers — Held, deceased was not driving and his status as a passenger cannot be disregarded — Under a package policy with expres India Law Library Docid # 2453188
(680) THE PUNJAB TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND OTHERS Vs. AGGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 11-09-2026 Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 — Section 25 — Civil Revision — Eviction and mesne profits — Modification of decree pursuant to amicable settlement — Trial Court decreed landlord's suit, directing eviction and awarding mesne profits at Rs. 1,000/- per day — In revision, both parties filed affidavits arriving at an amicable settlement to end protracted litigation — Revisionists undertook to hand over vacant and peaceful possession within three months, and respondents agreed to reduce mesn India Law Library Docid # 2453157