(841) V. SANTHAKUMARI, FORMERLY HEAD CLERK Vs. REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT, MADRAS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Natural Justice — Fair Enquiry — Non-Supply of Documents / Non-listing in Charge Memo — In disciplinary proceedings, failure to list certain documents (like internal communications or CCTV footage) in the annexure to the charge memo does not automatically vitiate the enquiry if the core evidence (CCTV footage) was shown to the delinquent and their counsel, opportunities for cross-examination and adducing defence evidence based on such India Law Library Docid # 2424456
(842) MINI AND ANOTHER Vs. BINU AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 163A — Accident Arising out of the Use of Motor Vehicle — Expression has a wider connotation than “caused by” — Does not require direct or proximate causal relationship, but accident must be connected with the use of the vehicle — Negligence of the owner/driver need not be pleaded or established by the claimant. India Law Library Docid # 2424595
(843) CHEEKILODE PREMALATHA Vs. K.V. ABDURAHIMAN[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Civil Procedure — Doctrine of Merger — Principle that an inferior court’s decree/order merges into the decree/order of a superior court upon disposal of an appeal or revision, making the superior court’s decision the operative one — Applies even if the appeal was limited to a specific aspect (like costs), rendering the appellate decree the one from which time limits generally run. India Law Library Docid # 2424596
(844) STATE OF KERALA Vs. REJI. S[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 306, 307, 308 — Pardon to Accomplice (Approver) — Approver granted pardon must make a full and true disclosure at every stage required — Failure to do so (by wilful concealment or giving false evidence) leads to forfeiture of pardon. India Law Library Docid # 2424597
(845) BALU Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 72 & 161 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 432, 433, 433A — Premature Release/Remission — Powers and principles governing premature release of convicts — Includes constitutional power, statutory power of remission/commutation, and remission under jail manuals/state rules. India Law Library Docid # 2424637
(846) XXX AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 154, 190, 482 — Second FIR — Registration of a second FIR by the same informant against the same accused regarding the same cognizable offence or occurrence, subsequent to an earlier FIR where investigation is underway or completed, is impermissible and constitutes an abuse of process. India Law Library Docid # 2424638
(847) KASHMIRI LAL SHARMA Vs. HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-04-2025 Service Law — Retirement Age — Persons with Disabilities — Discrimination — Constitution of India, Art. 14 — Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 — Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Office Memorandum (OM) extending retirement age from 58 to 60 years only for visually impaired employees, while excluding employees with other benchmark disabilities specified under the PwD Acts (like locomotor disability), India Law Library Docid # 2424656
(848) AJITHA JAYAKUMAR Vs. ABRAHAM AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 39 Rule 2A — Consequence of Disobedience of Injunction — Rule provides discretionary powers (“may”) to the court — Measures include attachment of property (limited to one year) and civil imprisonment (limited to three months) — Primary intent is to ensure compliance with court orders, though punitive element exists. India Law Library Docid # 2424639
(849) G.VISWANATHAN Vs. ABRAHAM SALAMMA AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Lease vs. License — Distinction — Lease involves transfer of an interest in property coupled with exclusive possession, whereas license is a mere permission to do something on the property without transfer of interest or exclusive possession — Determined by the substance of the agreement, not just nomenclature. India Law Library Docid # 2424640
(850) ABRAHAM AND OTHERS Vs. AJITHA JAYAKUMAR AND OTHERS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Sections 122 & 123 — Gift/Settlement Deed — Essentials include transfer without consideration, donor, donee, subject matter, transfer, and acceptance — For immovable property, requires a registered instrument signed by/for donor and attested by at least two witnesses. India Law Library Docid # 2424641
(851) ARIF MASOOD Vs. DHRUV NARAYAN SINGH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-04-2025 Election Petition — Transfer between High Courts — Consent of Parties — Election petition pending before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh transferred to the High Court of Delhi based on the consent fairly stated by learned senior counsel for both parties. India Law Library Docid # 2424647
(852) MADAN LAL AGRAWAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 — Section 68(2) — Food Safety and Standards Rules, 2011 — Rule 3.1.1 — Adjudication Proceedings — Requirement of Inquiry and Reasonable Opportunity — Section 68(2) of the FSS Act, 2006, read with Rule 3.1.1 of the FSS Rules, 2011, mandates that the Adjudicating Officer must hold an inquiry before imposing a penalty for contravention of the Act/Rules/Regulations — This inquiry necessitates giving the person charged a reasonable opportunity of making representat India Law Library Docid # 2424720
(853) GIRIGIRI KARANCHANDAR, KARAN Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Extra-Judicial Confession — Evidentiary Value and Corroboration — An extra-judicial confession is traditionally considered a weak piece of evidence and requires careful scrutiny — It must be voluntary, truthful, and inspire confidence — While corroboration is not an absolute rule, an extra-judicial confession gains significant credibility and evidentiary value if supported by a chain of cogent circumstances and other prosecution evidence — Factors such as the person to whom India Law Library Docid # 2424788
(854) NARAYANA RAO KARNATI Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Constitution of India — Article 226 — Alternative Efficacious Remedy — Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (Act, 1999) — Sections 6 & 7(3) — Writ Petition Maintainability — Where a special statute, such as the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999, provides for the constitution of a Special Court (under Section 6) and specifically allows any person claiming an interest in attached property to make an objection before such Sp India Law Library Docid # 2424789
(855) K. CHANDRASHEKAR RAO Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of Proceedings — Lack of Prima Facie Case — Specific Allegations — Criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against an accused (A.15) when the complaint and the statements of all witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., even if taken at face value, do not attribute any specific overt act or direct role to the said accused in the India Law Library Docid # 2424790
(856) GUDIPATI VENKANNA Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 397 — Circumstantial Evidence — Last Seen Theory — Insufficiency for Conviction — In cases resting purely on circumstantial evidence, the chain must be complete and incapable of explanation on any other hypothesis than the guilt of the accused — The circumstance of ‘last seen’ alone, particularly with a significant time gap (approx. 25 hours) between the alleged sighting and the discovery of the deceased’s body, is insufficient to form the basis for a conviction India Law Library Docid # 2424831
(857) ANNALURU YOGA MYTHRI Vs. PALAGRI VINAYA DEVI[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Scope of Enquiry — The determination of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of plaint is confined strictly to the averments made in the plaint itself, taken as true in their entirety — The Court cannot consider the defendant’s defence, written statement, or any external documents or evidence at this stage. India Law Library Docid # 2424832
(858) SINGIREDDY SRINIVAS REDDY Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 — Section 306 — Quashing of Charge Sheet — Prima Facie Case — For determining whether a charge sheet under Section 306 IPC should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC, the court must examine if the allegations in the complaint, witness statements, and collected materials, even if taken at face value, make out a prima facie case reflecting the essential ingredients of the offence. India Law Library Docid # 2424833
(859) V. SURENDRA BABU, HYDERABAD Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS, HYD AND OTHERS[TELANGANA HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Service Law — Disciplinary Proceedings — Principles of Natural Justice — Vagueness of Charges — Charges framed against a delinquent employee must be definite, distinct, and based on specific allegations, accompanied by a statement of allegations, list of documents, and list of witnesses as per applicable regulations — Failure to provide such specific particulars renders the charges vague and vitiates the enquiry for want of adequate opportunity to defend. India Law Library Docid # 2424842
(860) P.V. MUDHUN REDDY @ PEDDIREDDI VENKATA MIDHUN REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 03-04-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 (Anticipatory Bail) [Corresponding to Cr.P.C. Section 438] — Requirement of Reasonable Apprehension— The exercise of power to grant anticipatory bail requires the applicant to demonstrate a “reason to believe” — founded on concrete facts and reasonable grounds relating to a specific offence — that they are likely to be arrested for a non-bailable offence — Mere vague or general allegations, fear based on media reports, or apprehension India Law Library Docid # 2424892