(161) THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. THE GOVERNOR OF TAMILNADU AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-04-2025 Governor's Powers under Article 200 are Limited and Exclusive — When presented with a Bill, the Governor must choose one of only three mutually exclusive options under the substantive part of Article 200: assent, withhold assent, or reserve for Presidential consideration. India Law Library Docid # 2424501
(162) HARDYAL INDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Factors Considered — Prolonged Investigation & Cooperation — Anticipatory bail may be granted where the investigation against the appellant has remained incomplete for a considerable period (over two and a half years), even after an initial closure report was rejected and further investigation ordered, particularly when coupled with the fact that the appellant has joined the investigation when called upon (thrice in this instance) India Law Library Docid # 2424552
(163) AWADHESH SINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 — Rule 23-A (inserted w.e.f. 23.03.2016) — Applications for Quarry Lease filed before Amendment — Ineligibility — As per Rule 23-A(2)(a) of the Rules of 2015, all applications for the grant of a quarry lease received prior to the commencement of the Amendment Rules (i.e., before 23.03.2016) became ineligible upon the coming into force of the amendment. An application filed on 06.05.2015, therefore, became ineligible by operation of law, and its rejection ba India Law Library Docid # 2424713
(164) KAVILAS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Circumstantial Evidence — Last Seen Theory — Time Gap — In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstance of ‘last seen together’ is a relevant factor, but conviction cannot be based solely on it, especially when there is a significant time gap between when the accused and deceased were last seen together and when the deceased was found dead — A substantial gap weakens the probative value of the last seen evidence, as it does not exclude the possibilit India Law Library Docid # 2424714
(165) ARJUN DEVANGAN Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2) — Illegal Possession of Liquor — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt — Independent Witnesses Turning Hostile — In a prosecution for illegal possession of liquor under the Excise Act, where independent seizure witnesses (PW-1, PW-2) do not support the prosecution case regarding the time, place, and manner of seizure from the accused, and there are material contradictions between their testimonies and that of the investigating police officer (PW-7), the pros India Law Library Docid # 2424715
(166) SANTOSH KUMAR CHOUHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. NATWAR SHARMA AND ANOTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation — Dependency — Claim by Married Siblings — Adult siblings (brother and sister) of a deceased person, who are married and maintain their own separate families, are generally not considered dependents for the purpose of awarding compensation for loss of dependency under the Motor Vehicles Act, unless specific evidence is adduced to prove their financial dependency on the deceased’s income — Mere assertion of dependency is insufficient, especial India Law Library Docid # 2424716
(167) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. GOPU AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-04-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Sections 6 & 2(l) — Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Legal Disability (Minority) — Extension of Limitation Period — Applicability to Appeals from MACT Award — The extension of limitation period granted under Section 6 of the Limitation Act, 1963, on account of legal disability (such as minority), applies only to the institution of a ‘suit’ or the making of an ‘application for the execution of a decree’ — Given that Section 2(l) explicitly states that a ‘suit’ does India Law Library Docid # 2424739
(168) KAMANURI NARASIMHA RAO Vs. STATE OF AP[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 397 & 401 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope against Conviction — The High Court’s revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C., particularly against concurrent findings of conviction upheld by the appellate court, is circumscribed — The High Court will not act as a second appellate court to re-appreciate evidence — Interference is warranted only in exceptional cases involving manifest illegality, findings based on no evidence or overlooking India Law Library Docid # 2424828
(169) PRAMOD KUMAR TIWARI Vs. PREMLAL GAUTAM AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Deductibility of Family Pension — The amount of family pension received by the dependents of an employee, who died in a motor vehicle accident during the subsistence of his employment, is not deductible from the deceased's income when calculating the loss of dependency for determining compensation under the Act — The High Court's view affirming such deduction is set aside. India Law Library Docid # 2424849
(170) NUTULAPATI RAVIKANTH Vs. NUTULAPATI NARAYANA RAO (DIED) THR. LRS.[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Bringing Legal Representatives on Record — Sufficient Cause — Consideration of sufficiency of cause for delay (herein 635 days) in applying under Order 22, Rule 4 CPC, based on asserted lack of awareness of a respondent’s death, particularly in contexts involving strained familial relations and alleged non-intimation by opposing counsel India Law Library Docid # 2424895
(171) M. DANIAL PRATAP AND ANOTHER Vs. SRI R. VENKAT RAO[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — Requirement for admission of a second appeal hinges entirely on the existence of a substantial question of law; mere appreciation of facts, documentary evidence, or challenge to concurrent findings of fact by lower courts does not suffice — The onus is on the appellant to demonstrate such a question. India Law Library Docid # 2424896
(172) SHRI LOVEE NARULA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Bail — Interim Bail — Extension — Humanitarian Grounds vs. Bail Condition Violation — Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, S.45 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Where interim bail was granted on medical grounds related to the petitioner’s father who subsequently passed away, the Court may extend the interim bail for a limited period on humanitarian grounds, considering the petitioner’s need to perform post-cremation rituals and support his grieving mother — Such ex India Law Library Docid # 2424938
(173) ASSOCIATED BROADCASTING COMPANY PVT. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Judicial Review — Interim Orders of Specialized Tribunals (TDSAT) — Scope of Interference — The High Court’s power of judicial review under Article 226 against orders, particularly interim orders, of specialized tribunals like the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) is supervisory and circumscribed — Interference is generally not warranted unless there is a serious dereliction of duty, flagrant violation of fundamental principles India Law Library Docid # 2424939
(174) PRITAM SINGH SINCE DECEASED THROUGH HIS LR REPRESENTED BY S BAKSHISH SINGH Vs. STATE OF GNCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Sections 244, 245 & 246 — Warrant Case Instituted Otherwise than on Police Report — Discharge/Framing of Charge — Evidence Considered — In a warrant trial instituted otherwise than on a police report, the Magistrate considers discharge (Section 245) or framing of charge (Section 246) only on the basis of evidence recorded under Section 244 Cr.P.C. (post-summoning, pre-charge evidence adduced by prosecution) — Evidence recorded during the pre-summoning st India Law Library Docid # 2424995
(175) STATE Vs. MANISH YADAV[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Sections 227 & 228 — Framing of Charge/Discharge — Principles — Prima Facie Case — The standard for framing charges requires the court to evaluate the material and documents produced by the prosecution to determine if, taken at face value, they disclose the existence of all ingredients constituting the alleged offence(s) — The court must sift and weigh the evidence for this limited purpose, identify if a prima facie case is made out, and proceed to frame India Law Library Docid # 2424996
(176) RAHUL ALIAS PUNEET ALIAS PHILLIPS Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 — Rules 1197, 1200 & 1223 — Furlough — Eligibility and Considerations — Overcoming Past Adverse Incident — Grant of first furlough to a life convict despite rejection by competent authority based on re-arrest in multiple cases during a previous emergency parole (Covid-19 period) — High Court considered the totality of circumstances, emphasizing the petitioner’s conduct subsequent to the incident cited for denial — Factors weighing in favour of grant include: (i) Sustaine India Law Library Docid # 2424997
(177) DR. ANU NAYYAR Vs. THE STATE OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERITORY OF DELHI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 482 — Quashing of Proceedings — Medical Negligence (Section 304A IPC) — Supplementary Charge Sheet Based Solely on Medical Council Findings — Criminal proceedings initiated via a supplementary charge sheet and consequent summoning order under Sections 304A IPC etc., against a Radiologist (Petitioner), based solely on the findings/observations of the Medical Council of India’s (MCI) Ethics Committee regarding ‘deficiency of service’ or ‘unethical India Law Library Docid # 2424998
(178) UOI Vs. JASBIR SINGH[DELHI HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — Scope of Judicial Review — Findings of Fact — Delay in Contract Execution — The Court, while examining a challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34, cannot reappreciate evidence or substitute its view for that of the arbitrator on findings of fact, such as the attribution of delay in the execution of a works contract — Interference is warranted only if the finding is based on no evidence, is perverse (such that no reasonable person could India Law Library Docid # 2424999
(179) JYOTI Vs. DARSHANA RANI (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 144 — Restitution — Applicability upon Setting Aside of Ex Parte Decree — The doctrine of restitution enshrined in Section 144 CPC is squarely applicable when a party obtains possession of property in execution of an ex parte decree, and subsequently, that ex parte decree is set aside and the suit is ultimately dismissed — The court which passed the original decree is obligated, upon application by the party dispossessed under the ex parte decree, to cause r India Law Library Docid # 2425067
(180) NISHA SHARMA Vs. BIMALJEET KAUR @ JASVIR KAUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 2 Rule 2 — Bar of Suit — Requirements for Establishing Plea — Identity of Cause of Action — To successfully invoke the bar under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, the defendant bears the burden of establishing, not merely by inference but through satisfactory proof: (i) that the second suit is in respect of the same cause of action as the previous suit; (ii) that based on that cause of action, the plaintiff was entitled to more than one relief in the earlier suit; and (iii) India Law Library Docid # 2425068