(521) IBRAHEEM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 52-A, 43, 42, 50 — Bail Application — Non-compliance with Section 52-A and delay in sending samples to FSL are procedural irregularities that do not vitiate the trial or entitle the accused to bail, especially when the recovery is a chance recovery from a vehicle in a India Law Library Docid # 2447663
(522) PURSHOTTAM DAS AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 43, 41, 42, 50, 52A, 37 — Chance recovery — Search and seizure from a vehicle in transit on a public road falls under Section 43, not Sections 41 or 42, making compliance with prior information or warrant requirements unnecessary. India Law Library Docid # 2447664
(523) STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. PREMLAL[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 366 and 374 — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Murder — Death Reference and Appeal — Conviction based on circumstantial evidence — Failure to establish a complete chain of circumstances pointing solely to guilt — Reasonable doubt created by lapses in India Law Library Docid # 2447665
(524) VINOD KUMAR SARAF Vs. VILLAYATI RAM MITTAL AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Territorial Jurisdiction — A High Court retains territorial jurisdiction to entertain a Section 9 petition if substantial parts of the cause of action have arisen within its limits, even if the registered office of the partnership is elsewhere — This is particularly relevant when India Law Library Docid # 2447666
(525) DAYALU @ MUKESH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Circumstantial evidence — Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires the chain of circumstances to be complete and conclusive, leaving no room for doubt that the accused "must be" guilty, not merely "may be" guilty. India Law Library Docid # 2447762
(526) DEEPAKMANULAL GARG Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 173(2) and 173(8) — Investigation — Closure Report — District Collector's power to recall or reopen investigation — Held, Collector has no statutory jurisdiction under Cr.P.C — to direct recall of a Closure Report or reopen investigation once forwarded to the Magistrate. India Law Library Docid # 2447763
(527) T.SELLAMMAL Vs. PICHAIYAMMAL AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 6 — Daughters' coparcenary rights — Supreme Court in Vineetha Sharma's case held that daughters are coparceners by birth with equal rights as sons, irrespective of whether the father was alive on the date of the amendment (September 9, 2005) or the date of marriage. India Law Library Docid # 2447855
(528) CAPITAL GREENS FLAT BUYER ASSOCIATION Vs. DLF UNIVERSAL LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-07-2026 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Sections 71 and 72 — Execution Proceedings — Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Execution can be sought under the 2019 Act even if original complaints were filed under the 1986 Act, as the execution proceedings are governed by the law in force at the time of execution. India Law Library Docid # 2447860
(529) SHEN LONG BIO-TECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Finance Act, 2017 — Section 104 — Retrospective exemption from service tax on long-term lease of industrial plots — Refund claim — Assessee entitled to refund of service tax paid on upfront charges for industrial plots leased for 30 years or more, as per retrospective exemption under Finance Act, 2017. India Law Library Docid # 2447845
(530) V.BALASUNDARAM AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Review Petitions — Filed by third parties seeking to review a previous High Court order — Leave obtained from the Court — Review petitions dismissed as grounds raised were not sustainable and did not establish any error apparent on the face of the record. India Law Library Docid # 2447846
(531) G.S. MATIYANI AND SONS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Government Contracts — Tender — Technical evaluation — Non-responsive bid — Experience certificate without year-wise bifurcation — Bidder's experience certificate failed to disclose financial year-wise quantities as mandated for eligibility under Cl. 2.2A(d) of bid conditions — Held, discretion of Bid Scrutiny Committee to seek clarification under Cl. 21.1 limited to historical documents (audited accounts, tax clearance, PAN) and does not extend to core eligibility criteria — Documents submitted India Law Library Docid # 2447975
(532) MOHD IMRAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Service Law — Recovery of alleged excess payment — Retiral dues — Effect of subsequent quashing order — Recovery orders against petitioners for excess payment following promotion had earlier been set aside in connected writ petitions with direction against recovery — Recovery from petitioners' retiral dues, effected before the said judgment, held illegal being contrary to the binding decision — Respondents directed to refund recovered amounts within two months. [Paras 5, 7] India Law Library Docid # 2447976
(533) EIPROCON INTERNATIONAL (OPC) PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX AND ANOTHER[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Goods and Services Tax — Revocation of cancellation of registration — Quantification of tax liability — Petitioner's application for revocation rejected for non-deposit of reversed ITC; petitioner contended no order quantifying tax liability existed — Supplementary affidavit disclosed order dated 09.07.2025 passed under S. 74 quantifying liability, rendering petitioner's contention factually incorrect — Writ disposed of without interference, with liberty to challenge the quantification order and India Law Library Docid # 2447977
(534) KAMLESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Service Law — Equal pay for equal work — Contractual Data Entry Operators — Parity with U.P.N.L.-engaged staff — Petitioners, contractual Data Entry Operators under Samagra Shiksha, claimed parity in remuneration with similarly designated staff engaged through U.P.N.L. — Earlier representation held not maintainable being made through Union rather than individually — Petitions disposed of granting liberty to file fresh individual representations, to be decided within eight weeks in accordance wit India Law Library Docid # 2447978
(535) JAGNARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Pension — Rules 58, 59, Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 — Regularized Work-Charged Service — Non-Consideration — Retiree's claim for revised retiral benefits treating full service from initial joining rejected without addressing his subsequent regularization or the applicability of Rules 58 and 59. Held, Rule 59 is an enabling exception to Rule 58, under which continuous temporary/officiating service exceeding fifteen years is liable to be treated as pensionable even absent confirmation on a substanti India Law Library Docid # 2448089
(536) SURYDEV RAY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Public Distribution System — Compassionate Licence — Educational Qualification — Rejection of application for grant of Fair Price Shop licence on compassionate ground to a non-matriculate dependent of a deceased licensee challenged as discriminatory, contending the matriculation requirement under Clause 9(v) of the PDS Control Order, 2016 applies only to fresh appointments. Held, following a covered precedent, the Control Order does not exempt compassionate cases from the prescribed minimum educ India Law Library Docid # 2448090
(537) SHEKH YUNUS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[PATNA HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Writ Jurisdiction — Disputed Question of Fact — Rival Claims Between Institutions — Petitioner sought a declaration regarding the genuineness of his Madrasa's code as against an allegedly duplicate/fake Madrasa using an identical code with a different address. Held, disputes concerning the genuineness and validity of two institutions bearing rival claims to title/registration require oral and documentary evidence and cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction; such disputes are properly resolved India Law Library Docid # 2448091
(538) HAREKRISHNA PANDA @ HARE KRUSHNA PANDA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA (VIG)[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 — Sections 7(a), 13(1)(b) — CrPC, S. 482/BNSS, S. 528 — Quashing — Delay in investigation — Inherent jurisdiction to quash is to be exercised sparingly, only where allegations, taken at face value, disclose no offence or continuation amounts to abuse of process; explanation regarding source of intercepted cash and adequacy of documents furnished are matters for investigation/trial, not for quashing — Delay of over seven years in completing investig India Law Library Docid # 2448241
(539) SASHI BHUSAN PATEL Vs. MS. ASWATHY S, I.A.S., SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL AND MASS EDUCATION & ORS[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 12 — Wilful disobedience — Substantial compliance — Contempt jurisdiction is not to be invoked for every instance of delayed or imperfect compliance but only where disobedience is wilful, deliberate and contumacious; delay attended by a bona fide request for clarification on mode of implementation is administrative inertia, not contumacious defiance — Where the original order stood modified and the modified order was substantially complied with through a co India Law Library Docid # 2448242
(540) NARAYAN JANI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF ODISHA[ORISSA HIGH COURT] 14-07-2026 NDPS Act, 1985 — Section 37 — Bail — Commercial quantity — Successive bail application without change in circumstance — Renewal of bail prayer before trial court barely a month after refusal by High Court, without any change in circumstance, coupled with accused's non-surrender after grant of interim bail necessitating apprehension via NBWA, reflects adversely on conduct relevant to securing attendance at trial — Twin conditions under S. 37 NDPS Act not satisfied where allegations involve transp India Law Library Docid # 2448243