(281) THANDAVA YOGESH Vs. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 243D(6) and 243T(6) — Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 — Sections 9 and 15 — Local body elections — Reservation for Backward Classes — Ceiling limit of 50% — State restored 34% reservation in Panchayats and 33.33% in Urban Local Bodies, causing aggregate vertical reservations for SCs, STs, and BCs to breach 50% — Validity — Any breach of the 50% ceiling must be founded on substantial facts and empirical inquiry conducted by a dedicated commission as p India Law Library Docid # 2454984
(282) KAMBHAMAPATI MADHUSUDHANA RAO Vs. JARUGULA LOKANARAYANA AND ANOTHER[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 397 and 401 — Revisional jurisdiction — Interference with concurrent findings of conviction — Scope of revisional power is limited and does not warrant an in-depth roving re-examination of evidence. However, the High Court is justified in interfering with concurrent convictions where the findings of the lower courts are perverse, glaringly unreasonable, wholly unreliable, or vitiated by non-consideration of material evidence. Revisional court set a India Law Library Docid # 2454985
(283) AMBATI LAKSHMI Vs. BANKA NARASAMMA AND OTHERS[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 — Amendment of Plaint after Commencement of Trial — Suit for declaration of title and perpetual injunction — Application seeking amendment to include reliefs for recovery of possession and mandatory injunction dismissed by Trial Court on grounds of lack of due diligence and commencement of trial — High Court held that procedural law is intended to facilitate substantive justice and not to obstruct it — Object of rules of procedur India Law Library Docid # 2454989
(284) PRAVINBHAI HARIBHAI MASALIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 — Regular Bail — Factors for consideration — Court must exercise bail jurisdiction based on well-settled principles, considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, apprehension of tampering with witnesses or evidence, likelihood of securing the presence of the accused at trial, character and antecedents of the accused, and the larger interest of the public or State. India Law Library Docid # 2455004
(285) THE GUJARAT STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD Vs. VARSANGBHAI HARIBHAI CHAUHAN AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Proviso to Section 372 and Section 378 — Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 413 and Section 419 — Appeal against acquittal — Status of complainant — Complainant in a cheque dishonour case is a "victim" having suffered the direct impact of the offence — Complainant has an independent and unconditional right to prefer an appeal against acquittal before the immediately superior Sessions Court under th India Law Library Docid # 2455015
(286) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PRAKASHKUMAR MANILAL MEWADA (SUTHAR)[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 419 (Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 378) — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Principles reiterated — Appellate Court can interfere with an acquittal only in exceptional cases where compelling circumstances exist and the judgment is palpably perverse — Acquittal by the trial court bolsters the presumption of innocence of the accused — Routine interference must be avoided where a plausible alternative view is possible — India Law Library Docid # 2455026
(287) SATISH KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 Constitution of India — Article 243D — Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 — Sections 15 & 16 — Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 — Rules 7 & 9 — Reservation of Sarpanch office — Distinction between vertical and horizontal reservation — Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Backward Classes is category-based and vertical, whereas reservation for women operates horizontally across those vertical categories — Women's reservation does not form an independent compartme India Law Library Docid # 2455047
(288) M/S RAJASTHAN PATRIKA PVT LTD AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 499, 500, 501 and 502 — Criminal defamation — Corporate criminal liability — Essential ingredients — Defamation requires an imputation made with intention, knowledge, or reason to believe that it will harm reputation — A newspaper-owning company cannot be held liable for defamation unless it is specifically established that its Board of Directors or management possessed the requisite intention or knowledge — In the absence of specific averments or evidence establishin India Law Library Docid # 2455048
(289) SURENDRA KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. SUNIL KUMAR AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope and test of substantial question of law — Second appeal lies to the High Court only upon satisfaction that a substantial question of law is involved. As clarified in Santosh Hazari, a substantial question of law must be debatable, not previously settled by binding precedent, and must materially impact the decision and rights of the parties. The High Court is bound to satisfy itself about the existence of such a question and form India Law Library Docid # 2455049
(290) SMT SHANTI DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. SMT SHAIL KUMARI AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order XXII Rule 3, Rule 11 and Section 151 — Death of appellant — Non-substitution of legal representatives — Partial abatement — Appellant No. 2 expired leaving behind legal heirs, yet appellants sought deletion of his name rather than substitution within the prescribed 90 days — Respondents prayed for abatement of appeal as a whole — Held, since legal representatives were available but not brought on record, deletion cannot be permitted — However, as the cause of a India Law Library Docid # 2455050
(291) RAI CHAND CHOUDHARY Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 National Highways Act, 1956 — Control of National Highways (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002 — Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Road safety — Right of Way (ROW) and highway demarcations — Standards prescribed by Indian Roads Congress recognize centreline, road land boundary, building line, and control line — Right of Way forms an operational corridor essential for traffic flow, visibility, emergency access, and road widening — All occupations within Right of Way or road land boundary are per se illegal and India Law Library Docid # 2455051
(292) AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT VIMLA DEVI AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — Civil first appeal — An application was filed seeking condonation of a 106-day delay in filing an appeal against an award under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 — The High Court, upon considering the reasons stated in the application, condoned the delay of 106 days conditional upon payment of Rs. 3,000/- as costs to Munshi Sangh, Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur, within four weeks. India Law Library Docid # 2455052
(293) SHUBHAM KHANDELWAL THROUGH SHUBHAM TRADING COMPANY Vs. S.K. TRADEMARK THROUGH PROPRIETOR GAURAV AND ANOTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 01-10-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 and 147 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 438 and 442 — Compounding of offence — Revision against conviction — Petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act and sentenced to six months' imprisonment with Rs.1,50,000/- compensation, which was affirmed in appeal — During pendency of revision, parties amicably settled the dispute and petitioner paid Rs.1,50,000/- via demand draft to the complainant, who had no objection India Law Library Docid # 2455054
(294) REZINA KHATUN Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 — Section 111(2) and Section 129 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 243-O(b) and Article 243F — Assam Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1995 — Rule 62(4) — Pre-existing disqualification — Removal of elected Ward Member by District Commissioner — Allegation of child marriage — Disqualification existed on date of nomination — Competence of District Commissioner — Held, disqualification existing at the time of submitting nomination papers amounts to improper acceptance India Law Library Docid # 2455137
(295) TUMEZ UDDIN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Election Law — Panchayat Election — Challenge to election of returned candidate — Pre-existing disqualification at the time of submission of nomination paper — Proper remedy — Allegations of false declarations regarding educational qualification and involvement in child marriage — Acceptance of nomination despite pre-existing disqualification constitutes improper acceptance of nomination — Improper acceptance forms part of the election process and can exclusively be challenged by way of an elect India Law Library Docid # 2455148
(296) MD. KUDDUS ALI Vs. THE ASSAM STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (ASWC) AND ANR[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Service Law — Transfer — Scope of Judicial Review — Assam State Warehousing Corporation (Staff) Regulations, 1989, Clause 12(vii) — Petitioner, a Grade-IV employee, challenged his transfer order — Held, transfer is an incident of service and an employee holding a transferable post has no vested legal right to remain posted at a particular station — Court will not interfere with a transfer order unless it is shown to be vitiated by mala fides or made in violation of statutory rules — An employee India Law Library Docid # 2455160
(297) RAJA PRASAD RAY @ RAJA KUMAR PRASAD Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 375 and 376 — Rape — Ingredients of offence — Voluntary consent — Prosecutrix and petitioner were in a prolonged romantic relationship and resided together as husband and wife in a rented room for multiple years — Prosecutrix conceived multiple times during cohabitation — Statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC established that she participated in sexual acts of her own volition — Record devoid of any evidence indicating sexual acts were committed against India Law Library Docid # 2455162
(298) BAITUN NESSA BIBI AND OTHERS Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD AND ANR[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Compensation in fatal accident — Future prospects — Permanent Government Employee — Deceased aged 51 years was serving as a Lat Mandal under the Government of Assam — Tribunal failed to make any addition towards future prospects while computing loss of dependency — Held, relying on the Constitution Bench judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, an addition of 15% of the actual income towards future prospects is mandatory where the dece India Law Library Docid # 2455163
(299) JUVENILE "X" THROUGH HIS FATHER Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 12 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2) and 3(5) — Bail to juvenile in conflict with law — Parity and non-discrimination — Co-accused adults were granted regular bail — Seriousness of alleged offence or age above 16 years is not a valid ground to deny bail under Section 12 — Section 12 applies uniformly to all juveniles without discrimination — Rejection orders set aside and juveni India Law Library Docid # 2455222
(300) MUKESH BILUNG AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 01-10-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376(D) — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 4, 8 and 12 — Gang rape of minor — Sole testimony of prosecutrix — Solitary evidence of the prosecutrix is sufficient to sustain conviction provided it inspires confidence, appears trustworthy, and is of sterling quality — Minor victim's detailed testimony was consistent with her initial fardbeyan and corroborated by her mother to whom she promptly disclosed the incident — Absence of signs India Law Library Docid # 2455223