(981) SHIVNARAYAN SINGH @ MASTER Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 — Section 21(4) — Grant of regular bail — Prolonged incarceration without trial progress — Appellant detained since May 2023 under Arms Act, Explosive Substances Act, and CLA Act — Only one witness examined out of seven, with no witness produced for nearly one year — Held, though Article 21 must be balanced against the gravity of the charge, prolonged incarceration resulting from the prosecution's lethargy in prod India Law Library Docid # 2451885
(982) RAMJI PRASAD Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 387 and 120-B — Extortion and criminal conspiracy — Appreciation of evidence — Credibility of informant — Informant testified that the petitioner demanded Rs. 10 lakhs as extortion on behalf of associates and threatened his life — Testimony was corroborated by another witness and call detail records — Minor discrepancies and relationship of witnesses held not fatal, as they did not affect the root of the prosecution case — Evidence of the victim inspired confidence re India Law Library Docid # 2451886
(983) NARAYAN SAHU Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25(1-B)(a) — Explosive Substances Act, 1908 — Section 4 — Conviction — Recovery of firearm and explosives — Police raid conducted upon secret information resulted in apprehension of appellant and seizure of a loaded country-made pistol from his person and four crude bombs from his house — Sergeant Major report confirmed the firearm was functional and forensic report confirmed the seized articles were explosives — No valid license produced — Prosecution established guilt India Law Library Docid # 2451887
(984) ASHOK DAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 307 — Attempt to murder — Essential ingredients — Intention or knowledge — Informant sustained grievous head injury from an iron rod blow during a sudden scuffle over a money transaction — Intention precedes the act and must be gathered from all surrounding circumstances and not solely from resulting injuries — Assault occurred without premeditation in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel — Requisite intention or knowledge to commit murder was not establis India Law Library Docid # 2451888
(985) M/S SK ELECTRICALS Vs. RITES LTD. AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Territorial Jurisdiction — Contractual Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause — Ouster of Writ Jurisdiction — Respondent challenged maintainability on the ground that the contract specified Kolkata courts as having exclusive jurisdiction — Held, a contractual jurisdiction clause cannot ipso facto oust the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 — Scrutiny under Article 226 is a vital constitutional safeguard of the rule of law and ca India Law Library Docid # 2451889
(986) RAJEEV KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Service Law — Promotion — Equivalence of Educational Qualifications — Judicial Review — Scope — Petitioners holding AMICE qualification from Institution of Civil Engineers (India), Ludhiana claimed equivalence with AMIE for 10% promotional quota to the post of Assistant Engineer — Held, determination of educational equivalence is an exclusive technical and academic matter for the State, recruiting authority, or specialized expert bodies — Courts cannot India Law Library Docid # 2451890
(987) MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWALLA @ MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 138 and 146 — Cross-examination — Effect of failure to cross-examine on specific testimony — Unchallenged testimony accepted as true — If a party desires to impeach the credibility of a witness or dispute the correctness of a statement, the witness must be given an opportunity to explain by having their attention drawn to the contested part in cross-examination — Where the complainant's assertion regarding the execution and signature of an agreement was not q India Law Library Docid # 2451891
(988) SALLA VEERA REDDY Vs. M. KRISHNA REDDY[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Contract Act, 1872 — Section 55 — Specific performance — Agreement of sale — Limitation and time as essence — Agreement stipulated payment of balance consideration within six months of resolution of dispute before Revenue Authorities — Litigation attained finality before Supreme Court on 26.03.2007, notice issued on 22.02.2008, and suit filed on 26.03.2008 — Held, suit was filed within three years and not barred by limitation — In contracts relating to sale of India Law Library Docid # 2451902
(989) SHAGUFTA YASMIN Vs. MD. AMIR KHAN[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Family Courts Act, 1984 — Section 19(1) — Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order V — Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 — Sections 7 and 25 — Custody of minor child — Ex parte proceedings — Family Court allowed father's custody suit ex parte without following the CPC mandate to secure mother's appearance — Mother was regularly appearing in concurrent maintenance proceedings in the same court complex without being informed of the custody suit — Passing an ex parte decree hurriedly in a sensitive chi India Law Library Docid # 2451910
(990) KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Vs. MRS. GEETHA M AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Service Law — Recruitment Process — Non-disclosure of material facts — Cancellation of candidature — Candidate serving as Police Sub-Inspector failed to disclose her status as a government servant in online applications for both preliminary and main examinations for Gazetted Probationers posts — Fact disclosed only during document verification after qualifying both stages — Held, candidate is under a bounden duty to disclose all relevant information when submitting the application — Candidate wh India Law Library Docid # 2451913
(991) THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER Vs. SRI J NANDA KISHORE AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 — Review Jurisdiction — Locus standi to file review based on liberty granted by Supreme Court — Trial Court decreed suit against State and BDA, directing compensation and allotment of sites under incentive scheme — High Court dismissed RFAs filed by both — State alone challenged decree before Supreme Court via SLP, which was dismissed granting liberty only to State to seek review on a limited point — BDA did not challenge t India Law Library Docid # 2451935
(992) SOMASHEKAR J.R. AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE BY GORUR POLICE AND ANOTHER[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 406 — Criminal Breach of Trust — Quashing of charge sheet — Borrower availed bank loan specifically for purchasing equipment, and the bank disbursed money directly to the supplier — Borrower subsequently cancelled the purchase order, secured refund of the money into his personal account without the bank's knowledge, and misappropriated the funds — Held, failure to purchase the equipment and dishonestly retaining refunded money in breach of the loan agreement prim India Law Library Docid # 2451936
(993) MADHYA PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDYUT VITARAN COMPANY LIMITED Vs. DULARI AND ANOTHER[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 07-09-2026 Law of Torts — Electrocution — Strict Liability of Electricity Undertaking — Fatal accident caused by snapping and falling of live 11 KV electric wire — Claim for compensation — Electricity company engaged in transmitting high-tension electricity undertakes an inherently hazardous activity exposing human life to foreseeable risk — Principle of strict liability applies squarely to electricity transmission entities irrespective of negligence or precautions taken — Electricity board is held strictl India Law Library Docid # 2451982
(994) SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT Vs. BRAJENDRA PRASAD PANDEY[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — State or Government entities — Parity with private litigants — Condonation cannot be claimed as a matter of right or presumed on the ground of bureaucratic lethargy — The State is judged by the same standards as private litigants and must establish bona fide, cogent, and sufficient cause showing reasonable diligence — Habitual reliance on procedural red-tape, administrative bottlenecks, or routine movement of files does not constitute "su India Law Library Docid # 2452019
(995) PARMESHWAR GOPE Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 377 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Unnatural sexual offence between spouses — Quashing of FIR — Respondent wife alleged that applicant husband subjected her to unnatural sexual acts during pregnancy during their subsisting marriage — Held, allegations of unnatural sexual acts between husband and wife during the subsistence of a valid marriage cannot constitute an offence under Section 377 IPC — Principles in Navtej Singh Johar and Umang Si India Law Library Docid # 2452024
(996) THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. SUDHIR UPAHDYAY[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — State application — Standard of sufficient cause — Evolution of jurisprudence — State or its instrumentalities cannot claim preferential indulgence or special treatment merely due to bureaucratic complexities, institutional inertia, or red-tapism — Condonation remains an exception, not the rule — Courts must insist on parity between Government and private litigants — Routine procedural movement of files and bureaucratic lethargy cannot be India Law Library Docid # 2452026
(997) DR. MANAS NAYAK Vs. DR. RHYTHM SURATI[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-09-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 94 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125 — Maintenance proceedings — Truthful disclosure of assets — Parties in maintenance proceedings must make complete and truthful disclosure of income, assets, liabilities, and expenditure as mandated in Rajnesh v. Neha — Wife claimed no income or assets, but subsequent material indicated an undisclosed joint bank account and a bank locker — Held, when material placed on record raises legitima India Law Library Docid # 2452034
(998) SMT MONIKA KUSHWAH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 07-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 420 — Cheating — Essential ingredients — Requirement of dishonest intention at inception — Complainant voluntarily contributed funds to a registered society's bank account and was subsequently removed as Treasurer — Allegation that petitioners refused to return deposited money — Held, to constitute cheating, deception and dishonest inducement must exist at the inception of the transaction — Subsequent dispute regarding internal management or refusal to refund con India Law Library Docid # 2452035
(999) SMT. RANI DANDOTIYA Vs. KALI CHARAN PACHORI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 07-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 — Temporary injunction — Suit for declaration and partition — Distinction between ancestral and self-acquired property — Plaintiff sought injunction over multiple lands claiming them to be undivided ancestral property — Lower Appellate Court vacated injunction regarding properties prima facie acquired by defendant in his individual name via registered sale deeds, while maintaining injunction over lands recorded in the name of the common a India Law Library Docid # 2452039
(1000) SMT. RANI DANDOTIYA Vs. KALI CHARAN PACHORI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 07-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, Order 43 Rule 1 — Temporary Injunction — Interference with Trial Court's discretion — Scope of appellate review — Trial Court granted a blanket injunction over all suit properties treating them as ancestral joint family property — Lower Appellate Court vacated injunction for parcels purchased by defendant No. 1 under registered sale deeds, while maintaining it for parcels recorded in the ancestor's name — Held, the principle in Wander Lt India Law Library Docid # 2452040