(81) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. NARAYAN PARDHI[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Penal Code, 1860 — Section 354 — Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty — Essential ingredients are assault or criminal force on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty, or knowledge that such outrage is likely — Held, accused used criminal force by catching the victim's hand and pressing her breast, intending to outrage her modesty — Trial court's acquittal on grounds of material India Law Library Docid # 2442337
(82) MADAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2026 Regularisation of contractual/ad hoc employees — Notifications dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, which sought to regularise the services of Group 'B', 'C', and 'D' employees were found to be valid as they aimed to provide benefits to employees left out from a previous regularisation policy and had clear criteria for eligibility such as working on sanctioned posts and possessing necessary qualifications. India Law Library Docid # 2442360
(83) VENU GOPALAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Anticipatory Bail — Section 482 — Prima facie case — Court considers the sequence of events, including a prior complaint by the appellant alleging extortion, and the subsequent FIR filed by the respondent as a potential "counter blast" to avoid a financial settlement. This suggests a need for further scrutiny before denying anticipatory bail, especially when combined with the India Law Library Docid # 2442323
(84) NIRMAL KUMAR Vs. NARENDER KUMAR (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS L.RS. AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 18 Rule 3 & Section 151 — Rebuttal Evidence — Scope of — A party beginning can reserve evidence on issues where onus lies on the other party to lead in rebuttal — This right to lead evidence in rebuttal arises only when the defendant has led evidence on issues where the onus is upon them — Evidence that could have been led in the affirmative by the plaintiff cannot be allowed as rebuttal evidence, as this would lead to an unending process — India Law Library Docid # 2442467
(85) GOBIND RAM Vs. LALA MATHURA PRASAD TRUST AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 — Section 13(2)(i) proviso — Deposit of Rent (Section 23) Rules, 1976 — Rule 11 — Eviction for non-payment of provisional rent — Tenant's obligation upon refusal of rent by landlord — Tenant must deposit rent in Controller's Court if landlord refuses tender — Failure to deposit leads to eviction — Tenant's application beyond two years of provisional assessment India Law Library Docid # 2442468
(86) RATTAN LAL AND ANOTHER Vs. SHANTI RANI AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 — Section 13 — Eviction — Bonafide necessity — Subletting — Concurrent findings of Rent Controller and Appellate Authority upheld in revision — Personal necessity established even after death of some landlords, as one landlord remains and his business expansion need persists — Subletting proved by absence of rent note for alleged oral tenancy to the India Law Library Docid # 2442469
(87) SMT. VANDANA VIRMANI AND OTHERS Vs. RAHUL YADAV AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — Appeal filing delay — Family dispute leading to delay in filing appeal due to original documents being with father-in-law — Held, such reason does not constitute sufficient cause for condoning over 300 days of delay — Cardinal principle that delay of each day must be explained — Application for condonation dismissed. India Law Library Docid # 2442470
(88) M/S ARLINGA GALLERIA (INDIA) PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS RMZ GALLERIA (INDIA) PVT. LTD.) Vs. MRS. ARUNA NANDA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-04-2026 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 47(iv)(d) — Territorial Jurisdiction — Complaint filed in Delhi while property in Bangalore — Consumer Protection Act, 2019 came into force before filing of complaint, making Section 47(iv)(d) applicable — This provision allows filing of complaint where the complainant resides, India Law Library Docid # 2442556
(89) ASLAM KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Inherent powers of High Court — Quashing of proceedings — Abuse of process — Constitutional guarantee of speedy justice — Petitioner sought quashing of FIR registered in 2004 for offence under Section 379 IPC, alleging inordinate delay in investigation without substantive material against him — FIR did not name petitioner, others were prosecuted and India Law Library Docid # 2442624
(90) MAGHA RAM Vs. STATE[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives — Essential ingredients — Demand for dowry — Cruelty, either physical or mental, with the intention to coerce the woman — Mere general allegations are not sufficient — Concrete evidence of specific acts of cruelty, including date and time, is necessary — For establishing cruelty, direct evidence is most crucial — However, the court also India Law Library Docid # 2442625
(91) JAI NARAYAN VYAS UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS Vs. M/S SAWAI ENGINEERS, THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR, SAWAI RAM JANGID[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 & 37 — Scope of interference — The court's power to set aside an arbitral award is very limited and supervisory, not appellate — Interference is only justified in cases of patent illegality, perversity, jurisdictional error, or conflict with the grounds specified in the Act — The court cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute its own conclusions for those of India Law Library Docid # 2442626
(92) KISAN @ KISHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 342 — Appeal against conviction for murder and wrongful confinement — Prosecution case — Complainant alleged that accused assaulted her husband with an iron rod after consuming liquor, dragged his body and absconded — Trial court convicted accused for offences under Sections 302 and 342 IPC — Defence submissions: Accused falsely implicated due to personal India Law Library Docid # 2442627
(93) M/S GYANKEER TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Section 74 — Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 11A — Show Cause Notices — Reopening of settled issues — Advance Ruling — Binding effect — Jurisdiction — The issuance of show cause notices under Section 74 of the CGST Act and Section 11A of the Central Excise Act to reopen allegations of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts, when these allegations have already been considered and rejected in a prior Advance Ruling and India Law Library Docid # 2442628
(94) STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. JITENDRA @ JITU[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 16-04-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 363, 376AB — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 3/4, 5(J)(iv)(i)(M)/6 — Conviction for murder, abduction, and sexual assault of a minor — Trial court's judgment and sentence — Appeal against conviction and death reference for confirmation — Court's re-appreciation of evidence. India Law Library Docid # 2442629
(95) EX. SQN. LDR. R. SOOD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2026 Air Force Act, 1950 — Section 19 — Air Force Rules, 1969 — Rule 16 — Administrative action after discharge from criminal court — Initiation of administrative action for disciplinary purposes is not permissible if the matter has already been decided by a criminal court by way of discharge, as discharge signifies no sufficient grounds for India Law Library Docid # 2442311
(96) CANARA BANK Vs. KAVITA CHOWDHARY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2026 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Banking — Cheque Presentation — Bank's failure to re-present cheques within their validity period after they were returned due to a bank strike constitutes negligence and a deficiency in service, as banks have a duty of due diligence in handling customer deposits. India Law Library Docid # 2442312
(97) THE STATE OF KERALA Vs. K.A. ABDUL RASHEED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2026 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) — Demand and Acceptance of Bribe — Ingredients for establishing guilt of public servant under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) include proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, which are sine qua non — While acceptance of bribe was admitted, the proof of demand was the crucial aspect in this case. India Law Library Docid # 2442313
(98) BHARTIYA MAZDOOR SANGH, U.P. AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2026 Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA) — Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) - Repeal of SICA and Abatement of Proceedings - Companies whose proceedings were pending before BIFR/AAIFR could approach NCLT within 180 days of IBC enactment - Failure to do so results in abatement and revival of earlier orders, like winding up recommendation. India Law Library Docid # 2442314
(99) J&K ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION AGENCY Vs. RASH BUILDERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Seat vs. Venue — Distinction between "seat" and "venue" of arbitration is central to determining court's supervisory jurisdiction — The "seat" is the juridical home of arbitration, determining the curial law and exclusive supervisory jurisdiction — The "venue" is merely a geographical location for convenience of hearings and does not confer jurisdiction or alter the seat. India Law Library Docid # 2442320
(100) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SMT. SAVITA SANDILYA AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 15-04-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28) — Definition of motor vehicle — Hyva (Truck) used in mining and construction is a motor vehicle — Vehicle is mechanically propelled and adapted for use upon roads, and does not fall under any exception — Even if used on private roads, it is considered a motor vehicle if suitable for road use — Exemption for vehicles used exclusively in factories or enclosed premises does not apply India Law Library Docid # 2442338