(41) ROMELU RAM Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 07-10-2026 Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 — Section 8 — Preventive detention — Grounds of detention — Lack of material and non-application of mind — Petitioner was branded as an overground worker of banned outfits and a history sheeter without any criminal case ever registered against him or any specific outfit identified — Dossier merely relied upon two preventive proceedings under Section 129 of BNSS without any final order under Section 136, and two hearsay daily diary entries — Detention based India Law Library Docid # 2454951
(42) ROHIT SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 07-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 156(3), 397(2) and 482 — Revisional bar — Maintainability of petition under Section 482 — Order directing police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC is an interlocutory order against which a revision petition is barred under Section 397(2) CrPC — Accused has no right of hearing at that stage — However, where the order is alleged to have been passed without jurisdiction or in disregard of mandatory legal requirements, inherent powers under Section 482 India Law Library Docid # 2454917
(43) ANKUSH SHARMA Vs. U. T. OF J&K AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 07-10-2026 Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 — Section 471 — Using as genuine a forged document — Essential ingredients — To constitute an offence under Section 471, the prosecution must establish that the document is forged, that the accused used it as genuine, that the accused knew or had reason to believe it was forged, and that the accused used it fraudulently or dishonestly — Mere production of a fake document without establishing that the accused possessed the requisite knowledge or reason to believe it was fo India Law Library Docid # 2454928
(44) VIDHYA RAM AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 — Section 23 — Condonation of delay — Beneficial legislation — Delay of 210 days in filing appeal — Appellants were poor and illiterate persons from an economically weaker section who suffered paucity of funds to obtain timely legal advice — Held, considering the beneficial nature of the legislation and the economic hardships faced by the claimants, a liberal approach must be adopted — Appellants successfully established suffic India Law Library Docid # 2455095
(45) MANEESH MOUDGIL AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 420, 406, 467, 471 and 120-B — Quashing of FIR — Inherent powers — High Court cannot conduct a mini-trial — Power under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised sparingly and with circumspection — Court cannot assess probabilities, weigh credibility of witnesses, or resolve disputed questions of fact — Allegations of cheating, forgery, and conspiracy in procuring property documents and a registered Will from an ail India Law Library Docid # 2455098
(46) RAGHUNATH (NOW DECEASED) THR LR AND ANOTHER Vs. SH. BHARAT BHUSHAN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 12 Rule 6 — Judgment on admissions — Scope and applicability — Nature of power is discretionary and permissive — Court can determine legal consequences where foundational factual ingredients stand admitted, without requiring separate admission of legal propositions — In a suit for possession based on a Will for which uncontested Letters of Administration were granted, the execution and validity of the Will being undisputed, the Trial Court was fully compe India Law Library Docid # 2455101
(47) VIJAY PAL Vs. BHARAT SINGH[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Law — Suit for Declaration and Injunction — Lal Dora Land — Proof of Ownership and Possession — Delhi Land Reforms Act — Plaintiffs claimed ownership of an unconstructed plot in Lal Dora area based on long-standing ancestral possession without title documents — Revenue records reflected Gaon Sabha as owner — Held, even assuming formal title documents are absent in Lal Dora Abadi Deh, a party asserting ownership on the basis of possession must affirmatively establish continuous possession — India Law Library Docid # 2455102
(48) SMT. GUDIYA RAI Vs. VIPLAV RAI[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 24 — Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13 — Transfer of matrimonial proceedings — Convenience of wife — Wife sought transfer of divorce suit filed by husband from Family Court, Dantewada to Family Court, Kondagaon on grounds of distance and travel inconvenience — Settled legal principle that in matrimonial disputes, convenience of the wife is paramount — Relying on Supreme Court precedents, High Court held that the petition deserved to be allowed and t India Law Library Docid # 2455123
(49) TRILOKI PATEL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 320, 325 and 341 — Voluntarily causing grievous hurt and wrongful restraint — Appreciation of evidence — Accused assaulted the victim with a wooden stick over an unpaid grocery debt, resulting in injuries — Conviction based on credible testimonies of the injured victim and eyewitness husband, corroborated by medical testimony and X-ray report — Evidence confirmed a fracture of the distal end of the left radius bone — Fracture falls within the definition of griev India Law Library Docid # 2455125
(50) GAURMATI SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Service Law — Recovery of excess payment — Retired Class-III employee — Two advance increments granted in 1990 for undergoing sterilization received for decades — Recovery order issued after retirement without opportunity of hearing — Held, recovery of excess payment is impermissible from retired Class-III employees, particularly where payments were made for decades and no undertaking consenting to recovery was given — Case squarely covered under the parameters laid down in State of Punjab v. Ra India Law Library Docid # 2455128
(51) DURVASA PANDEY AND ANOTHER Vs. UMESH THAKUR AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 168 and Section 173 — Assessment of compensation — Death of minor child in road accident — Tribunal assessed notional income at Rs. 36,000 per annum — Held, a minor child who dies or suffers permanent disability in a motor accident cannot be treated as a non-earning individual merely due to absence of gainful employment — Loss of income must be computed adopting at least the prevailing notified minimum wages in the State — Monthly income of deceased 13-year-old India Law Library Docid # 2455129
(52) BARATI BHAGAT AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Law — Adverse Possession — Government land reserved for public utility — Plaintiffs claimed declaration of title by adverse possession over 1.50 acres of land, asserting continuous possession for over 70 years — State established that the land was allotted for a graveyard as per revenue records and nistaar patrak since 1957 — Held, adverse possession cannot be claimed over Government land reserved for public utility purposes such as graveyards, roads, or hospitals — Concurrent findings of India Law Library Docid # 2455130
(53) GOVIND PRASAD AND OTHERS Vs. SATYAPRAKASH GUPTA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Hindu Law — Joint Family Property — Nucleus and Burden of Proof — No presumption exists that a Hindu undivided family possesses joint property merely by virtue of jointness. The initial burden lies on the claimant asserting jointness to prove the existence of a joint family, joint income, and an adequate income-bearing nucleus. Once an adequate nucleus capable of acquiring the property is established, a presumption arises that the acquisition is joint family property. The burden then shifts to t India Law Library Docid # 2455132
(54) TAJ UDDIN TAPADAR ALIAS TAJ UDDIN Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 21(b) and 29 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 438 and 442 — Interim custody of conveyance — Contraband recovered directly from the registered owner while transporting it in the vehicle — Charge-sheet filed and cognizance taken — Registered owner sought interim zimma of vehicle pending trial — Release on superdari cannot be granted where the owner is arrayed as an accused and the reverse burden of proof remains u India Law Library Docid # 2455136
(55) SHREE SHREE SHIV RAM MANDIR Vs. PRADIP KUMAR ROY AND 4 ORS.[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 1 Rule 10(2) — Impleadment of party — Legal entity and juristic personality — Hindu Idol vs. Temple — Rejection of temple's impleadment application — High Court held that while a consecrated Hindu idol or deity may be recognized as a juristic person, the temple building housing the deity cannot be regarded as a juristic person capable of suing or being sued without proof that such personality was bestowed upon it — Constructing a private temple on private India Law Library Docid # 2455138
(56) KARAN ORANG Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Criminal Law — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 430(2) — Suspension of sentence pending appeal — Fixed-term sentence — Appellant was convicted under Sections 104 and 118 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years — Appellant had undergone custody for over one year and four months — Appeal hearing was likely to be delayed — Held, where an accused is sentenced to a fixed term, suspension of sentence should be considered liberally un India Law Library Docid # 2455143
(57) BABUL SINHA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Service Law — Departmental Proceedings — Principles of Natural Justice — Non-supply of enquiry report — Petitioner, a Head Constable, was dismissed from service without being furnished a copy of the enquiry officer's report, despite specifically raising an objection in his reply to the second show-cause notice — Held, furnishing the enquiry report to a delinquent employee before the disciplinary authority takes a final decision on penalty is an essential facet of reasonable opportunity of defenc India Law Library Docid # 2455146
(58) DWIPEN DEKA Vs. KUJENDRA DOLEY AND ORS.[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Non-compliance of directions — Delayed compliance by passing speaking order — Petitioner alleged violation of earlier contempt order directing authorities to complete enquiry and pass final order on entitlement to contractual payments within six months — During pendency of instant contempt proceedings, authorities issued a speaking order rejecting petitioner's claim due to structural collapse and lack of supervision — Held, although the order was passed beyond the India Law Library Docid # 2455147
(59) SMT. TARADEVO AND OTHERS Vs. JAGDISH PRASAD DUBEY AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of interference with concurrent findings of fact — Finding regarding possession over suit property — Courts below concurrently dismissed plaintiffs' suit upon evaluating oral and documentary evidence, holding that plaintiffs failed to prove possession — Held, a finding on possession is essentially a finding of fact — Where concurrent findings are based on evidence on record and suffer from no illegality or perversity, the Hig India Law Library Docid # 2455167
(60) SMT. MANJARI SHEKHAR Vs. KUNWARLAL AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 07-10-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Germane considerations — Valuation and Court Fees — Plaint to be read as a whole — Held, it is trite law that for deciding the question of valuation of a suit as well as liability for court fees at the threshold of Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, only the averments in the plaint are germane. The plaint is required to be read as a whole. The defence available to the defendants or pleas raised in their written statement cannot India Law Library Docid # 2455173