ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(421) MAHESH THAKUR Vs. OM PRAKASH BHARTIA AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 12A — Pre-institution Mediation — Dispensation based on Urgent Interim Relief — Test for Contemplation — The requirement under Section 12A(1) for mandatory pre-institution mediation is exempted if the suit “contemplates any urgent interim relief” — The word “contemplate” means the plaint, documents, and facts must show and indicate the need for urgent interim relief — The test is not whether urgent relief is immediately required at the moment of filing, but
India Law Library Docid # 2425199

(422) TAPAS BISWAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 106 — Circumstantial Evidence — Last Seen Together Theory — Corroboration — The theory of ‘last seen together’ is a crucial piece of circumstantial evidence — Where the prosecution establishes through credible witnesses (including close relatives of the accused like wife and father-in-law, and independent witnesses like a rickshaw puller) that the accused was last seen with the deceased victim shortly before her death, and the accused fails to provide any explanation
India Law Library Docid # 2425201

(423) ARNAB GOSWAMI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 153A — Promoting Enmity Between Different Groups — Essential Ingredients — Live TV Debate — Panelist’s Comment — To constitute an offence under Section 153A IPC, the act must promote, or attempt to promote, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will between two or more distinct religious, racial, language, or regional groups or castes or communities — Where a controversial statement targeting a community is made by a panelist during a live television debate,
India Law Library Docid # 2425202

(424) PAWAN KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-04-2025
Constitution of India — Article 142 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of Proceedings — Non-Compoundable Offences — Settlement/Compromise — The Supreme Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, can quash criminal proceedings, including chargesheet and cognizance order, even for non-compoundable offences (including Sections 354-C, 376, 506 IPC and Sections 67-A, 66-C IT Act), based on a settlement agreement arrived at between the accused and
India Law Library Docid # 2425293

(425) WASEEM RIAZ Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 102 — Seizure by Police — Police officers can seize any property under Section 102 CrPC if it is found under circumstances creating suspicion of the commission of any offence (not limited to theft).
India Law Library Docid # 2425343

(426) NIRMAL @ MOTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Arms Act, 1959 — Section 2(1)(i), Section 7 — “Prohibited Arms” — Proof — To sustain a conviction under Section 7 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt, through cogent scientific evidence (like a ballistic expert report or technical specifications), that the seized weapon falls within the specific definition of “prohibited arms” under Section 2(1)(i) (automatic firearms) — Mere recovery of a firearm (like a country-made revolver) and an armoure
India Law Library Docid # 2425375

(427) DHALA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 306 read with Section 107 — Abetment of Suicide — Essential Ingredients — Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused, with a clear mens rea, instigated the deceased or intentionally aided the commission of suicide through a positive act, proximate to the time of suicide, which left the deceased with no other option — Mere allegations of harassment, strained relations, or arguments without direct/indirect incitement are ins
India Law Library Docid # 2425376

(428) RATAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 — Rules 3(d), 4(a) — Eligibility for Open Air Camp — Interpretation of ‘Ordinarily’ — The use of the word ‘ordinarily’ in Rule 3, which lists categories of prisoners generally ineligible for open air camp (including convictions under Sec 392-402 IPC), implies that the restriction is not absolute — Eligibility can still be considered based on other factors.
India Law Library Docid # 2425377

(429) MANAGING COMMITTEE, D.A.V. UCHH MADHYAMIK VIDAYALAYA, KESARGANJ, AJMER RAJ. Vs. SAURABH UPADHAYAYA AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 08-04-2025
Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 — Sections 2(i), 18, 19 — Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Rules, 1993 — Rule 39 — Termination of contractual/fixed-term/temporary employees — Applicability of Section 18 — Maintainability of Appeal under Section 19 — The provisions of Section 18 of the Act of 1989, which mandate a reasonable opportunity of being heard and prior approval of the Director of Education for removal, dismissal, or reduction in rank, and
India Law Library Docid # 2425430

(430) DR.FAREED AHMED AND OTHERS Vs. LOCAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 08-04-2025
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 — Sections 2(n), 4, 6, 9, 13, 18 — Constitution of Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) — Jurisdiction of Local Complaints Committee (LCC) — The legality and validity of proceedings undertaken by a Local Complaints Committee (LCC) when an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) was already constituted by the employer (Bank) — The interpretation of Section 9 regarding when
India Law Library Docid # 2425510

(431) BHUPENDRA SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. RAMANAND (DIED) THROUGH LRS (A) SMT. GOMTI SHARMA AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 08-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 20 Rule 12(1)(c)(iii) — Mesne Profits — Restriction of Three Years from Date of Decree — Rationale and Applicability — The rationale behind restricting the recovery of future mesne profits to a period of three years from the date of the decree (to discourage decree-holders from delaying execution) — The applicability of this three-year restriction even when the decree
India Law Library Docid # 2425511

(432) RAGHURAJ GURJAR ALIAS RAJU Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 08-04-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) — Section 528 [Corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973] — Quashing of FIR — Scope of Interference — Disputed Questions of Fact — The limited scope of jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS for quashing an FIR, particularly when the grounds for quashing involve disputed questions of fact such as consent, which the High Court cannot embark upon an inquiry into at the initial stage.
India Law Library Docid # 2425512

(433) KAYYAM KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 08-04-2025
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Sections 14-A(2), 18, 18-A — Anticipatory Bail — Bar under Section 18 and 18-A — Exception when No Prima Facie Case is Made Out — The scope of an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicability of the bar under Sections 18 and 18-A of the Act against granting anticipatory bail (under Section 438 Cr.P.C.) in offences under the Act. The exception to this bar, as laid down in
India Law Library Docid # 2425513

(434) RAMLAL AND OTHERS Vs. DIPALI AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 08-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference — Concurrent Findings of Fact — Absence of Substantial Question of Law or Perversity — The limited jurisdiction of the High Court in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, particularly when there are concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and the first appellate court — The necessity for a substantial question of law or a demonstration of perversity in the findings of the courts below for interference
India Law Library Docid # 2425514

(435) VIKRAM ALIAS BUDDHU LAL Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 08-04-2025
M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 — Sections 5(a), 5(b), 6, 8 — Externment Order — Grounds for Judicial Review under Article 226 — The limited scope of judicial review by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution against an externment order passed under the M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 — Interference is warranted primarily if the District Magistrate failed to follow the procedure under Section 8(1), or if there was no material for passing the order, or if there was no formati
India Law Library Docid # 2425515

(436) HUTU ANSARI @ FUTU ANSAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-04-2025
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(r) & (s) — “Public View” Requirement — For an offence under Section 3(1)(r) (intentional insult/intimidation) or Section 3(1)(s) (abuse by caste name) of the SC/ST Act, the act must occur “within public view” — Where a key prosecution witness (PW-1, complainant’s husband) explicitly states in evidence that only immediate family members were present during the alleged incident and no other
India Law Library Docid # 2424332

(437) SOHOM SHIPPING PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-04-2025
Insurance Law — Marine Insurance — Special Condition — “Voyage should commence & complete before monsoon sets in” — Implied Waiver / Non-Materiality — Where a marine insurance policy covers a voyage (Mumbai to Kolkata) for a specific period (16.05.2013 to 15.06.2013) which overlaps with the officially defined monsoon/foul weather season (commencing 1st May East Coast / 1st June West Coast), a special condition requiring the voyage to both commence and complete before the monsoon sets in is deeme
India Law Library Docid # 2424333

(438) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. PARK LEATHER INDUSTRIES LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-04-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Pleading and Evidence — Rejoinder — A respondent/complainant cannot introduce new factual evidence, such as a surveyor's report assessing quantum of loss, for the first time in a rejoinder and expect the opposing party (appellant/opposite party) to have denied it in their earlier written statement/reply — The adjudicatory body cannot base its findings on the premise that the opposing party failed to deny evidence that was not before it when its pleadings
India Law Library Docid # 2424334

(439) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs. RAM KISHORI GUPTA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-04-2025
Res Judicata / Constructive Res Judicata — Applicability to SEBI Proceedings — The principles of res judicata and constructive res judicata, based on public policy ensuring finality, apply to proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and its Whole-Time Members (WTMs) — SEBI cannot pass multiple final orders imposing penalties on the same cause of action against the same parties based on the same show-cause notice, particularly after an earlier order (imposing debarment
India Law Library Docid # 2424335

(440) KUNCHAM LAVANYA AND OTHERS Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Claim Petitions — Standard of Proof — In motor accident claim proceedings, the standard of proof required to establish the involvement of a vehicle and negligence is based on the preponderance of probabilities, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt as required in criminal cases.
India Law Library Docid # 2424336