(361) SMT. REKHA Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Constitution of India — Articles 21, 21A, 39(e), 39(f) — Rights of Children Residing in Jail with Incarcerated Parent — Bail Jurisdiction — The fundamental rights of a child, including the right to life, dignity, holistic development, and education (Articles 21, 21A), are not extinguished when the child resides in jail due to the incarceration of a parent — Courts exercising bail jurisdiction must consider the collateral impact of denial of bail to the parent on the child’s rights and ensure th India Law Library Docid # 2425335
(362) RAJEEV YADAV @ RINKU Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 32(1) — Dying Declaration — Weight and Admissibility — A statement regarding a past threat allegedly made by the deceased to a witness (his brother), without details of timing and not made under expectation or in close proximity of death, lacks significant weight as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) for the purpose of deciding a bail application — Its admissibility and ultimate weight are matters for trial. India Law Library Docid # 2425336
(363) ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376 — Rape — False Promise to Marry — A distinction exists between a mere breach of promise to marry and a false promise made with mala fide intent from the inception solely to obtain consent for sexual intercourse — Only the latter falls within the ambit of rape — Subsequent refusal or inability to marry, especially when the relationship was consensual over time, does not automatically convert consensual sex into rape. India Law Library Docid # 2425337
(364) BANDU RAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 8 — Conduct of Accused — Accused promptly going to the police station after the incident, handing over the blood-stained weapon (Gandasa) allegedly used in the crime along with other items (pistol, cartridges), and making a written application confessing guilt, constitutes relevant post-offence conduct admissible under Section 8. India Law Library Docid # 2425338
(365) MANJEET SINGH @ INDER @ MANJEET SINGH CHANA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Constitution of India — Articles 21, 22(1) — Cr.P.C., Section 50 (BNSS, S. 47) — Right to be Informed of Grounds of Arrest — Communicating the grounds of arrest to the arrested person is a mandatory constitutional (Article 22(1)) and statutory (S.50 CrPC/S.47 BNSS) requirement — This information must be sufficient to allow the accused to understand the basis of the arrest and prepare a defence — Providing only a printed arrest memo without detailing the grounds violates this right. India Law Library Docid # 2425339
(366) UTTAR PRADESH STATE RD. TRANSPORT CORP. FAIZABAD AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. MEENA SRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Claim Petition — Standard of Proof — In motor accident claims, the standard of proof required is preponderance of probability, not proof beyond reasonable doubt — Strict proof of an accident caused by a specific vehicle in a specific manner may not be possible, and the Tribunal should adopt a holistic view. India Law Library Docid # 2425340
(367) SUMER SINGH Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Section 198 — Limitation for Suo Motu Cancellation (Rule 338, Appendix III) — Suo motu proceedings for cancellation of a lease/allotment by the Collector/Sub-Divisional Officer under Section 198(4) (prior to later amendments establishing different procedures) are governed by the limitation period prescribed in Appendix III read with Rule 338, which is typically three years from the date the officer first knew of the irregular allotment. India Law Library Docid # 2425341
(368) RAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Section 229-B — Suit for Declaration — Limitation — While Appendix III under Rule 338 prescribes limitation for suits for ejectment (S. 209), it specifies ‘none’ for suits for declaration under Section 229-B — Therefore, a suit under S. 229-B by a person in possession is generally not barred by limitation, unless their rights have been extinguished under law India Law Library Docid # 2425342
(369) DR. SHANKAR LAL BAMANIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Service Law — Transfer vs. Deputation — Consent — Cadre Post — Transfer is limited to equivalent posts within the same cadre/department, whereas deputation involves service outside the cadre/parent department, is temporary, and requires the employee’s consent — Transferring an employee from a cadre post (CM&HO/equivalent) to a post that is no longer part of the service cadre due to rule India Law Library Docid # 2425378
(370) SUNDER LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 439 — Bail — Right to Speedy Trial (Article 21) — Prolonged pre-trial incarceration violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 — When the trial progresses at a slow pace with no likelihood of conclusion in the near future (here, over 3 years in custody, 18 witnesses yet to be examined), the accused is entitled to be released on bail, balancing the presumption of innocence with the need for trial. India Law Library Docid # 2425379
(371) NENSI BHAI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 (Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528) — Quashing of FIR — Civil Dispute vs. Criminal Offence — The High Court should exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings where the allegations, taken at face value, primarily disclose a dispute of a civil nature and lack the essential ingredients of the criminal offences alleged — Continuing such criminal proceedings constitutes an abuse of process. India Law Library Docid # 2425380
(372) SH. RANU BHARGAV AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 A. Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — Section 34 — Vicarious Liability — Directors — Criminal liability under Section 34 cannot be fastened upon Directors (especially Additional/Non-Executive Directors) merely by designation, without specific allegations and proof that they were in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company’s business at the time of the alleged offence — Resignation prior to the relevant period (evidenced by Form-32) absolves liability. (Paras 2, 8, 9)B. Drugs and India Law Library Docid # 2425381
B. Drugs and
(373) SHRI SHAMARAM MAHANT AND OTHERS Vs. RAM DAYAL CHELA AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Trusts — Public Religious Trust — Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959 — A religious institution/Sampradaya running for centuries, having temples, disciples, and established traditions, falls within the definition of a public religious trust under the Act. India Law Library Docid # 2425411
(374) SAMDA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Tort Law — Compensation — Fatal Accident (Electrocution) — Assessment of Income — Minimum Wages as Basis — Where the claimants fail to adduce cogent evidence to prove the claimed income of the deceased (allegedly a skilled craftsman earning Rs. 21,000/- per month), but the trial court’s assessment (Rs. 5,200/- per month) is also found incorrect, the income should be assessed based on the minimum wages applicable to unskilled labour prevailing at the relevant time (Rs. 207/- per day in this case) India Law Library Docid # 2425431
(375) IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD. Vs. SMT MOHARI DEVI AND ANOTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Employees Compensation Act, 1923 — Section 30 — Scope of Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — Findings of Fact — An appeal to the High Court under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, against an order of the Commissioner is maintainable only if a substantial question of law is involved — The High Court’s appellate jurisdiction under this section is limited and distinct from a regular first appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — The Commissioner is the last India Law Library Docid # 2425432
(376) SALEEM Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Criminal Law — Appreciation of Evidence — Eyewitness Testimony (Police Officials) — Unnatural Conduct — Reliability — The testimony of police constables claiming to be eyewitnesses to an acid attack becomes unreliable and unsafe for basing a conviction when their subsequent conduct is highly unnatural — Such unnatural conduct includes: (i) failing to apprehend the alleged assailant at the scene of the crime; (ii) neglecting to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) or report the incident promptl India Law Library Docid # 2425433
(377) RAJ MOTORS, KUTCHERY ROAD, AJMER AND OTHERS Vs. RAJKUMAR HUF[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 47 — Execution of Decree — Objections — Satisfaction from Security Furnished During Trial — Insufficiency of Security — Objections filed by the judgment debtor under Section 47 CPC, requesting the executing court to satisfy the decree from the security furnished during the trial instead of attaching other properties, are liable to be dismissed if the court finds that the security furnished is insufficient for the complete satisfaction of the decree. India Law Library Docid # 2425434
(378) RIYAZ Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Criminal Law — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302/34, 394, 396 — Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25(1-B)(B) — Conviction and Sentence — Appeal Against — Appeals challenging judgments of conviction and sentences for dacoity with murder, murder with common intention, robbery, and illegal possession of arms, arising out of the same sessions trial but decided by separate judgments due to one appellant absconding during the initial trial. India Law Library Docid # 2425461
(379) SMT. SWATI PATEL Vs. BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-04-2025 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — Section 13(8) (Unamended and Amended) — Borrower’s Right to Redeem Secured Asset — Comparison with Section 60, Transfer of Property Act — The interplay between the borrower’s right to redeem under Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act (both unamended, applicable to pre-01.09.2016 sales, and amended) and the general right of redemption under Section 60 of the India Law Library Docid # 2425462
(380) KESAR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 09-04-2025 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 5-A — Hearing of Objections — Competent Authority — Delegation of Hearing — The requirement under Section 5-A(2) for the Collector to give the objector an opportunity of being heard personally or through pleader/authorized representative — Whether the hearing of objections by an Additional Collector, followed by a report to and decision/approval by the Collector/Commissioner, satisfies the statutory mandate — Principle that quasi-judicial power requiring pers India Law Library Docid # 2425463