(981) JYOTI PRASAD AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 07-07-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 467, 120-B — Framing of charges — Discharge of accused — Prosecution evidence — Prima facie case — Inadequacy of evidence — Abuse of process of law — Court's power to quash proceedings when charges are groundless — Consistency with co-accused's discharge — Similarity of facts India Law Library Docid # 2428690
(982) STAYTING STAYTS, (OPC) PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. PREM AGRAWAL[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 — Section 20(f) — Execution of order for possession — Failure to pay rent as determined by Rent Tribunal — Landlord’s right to seek possession through execution proceedings — Rent Tribunal’s order directing tenant to pay rent and subsequent failure to comply — Landlord files execution application seeking possession — Executing Court issues order for delivery of possession — Court India Law Library Docid # 2428616
(983) THE CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR,, A.P. POWER GENERATION CORPORATION Vs. K VENU AND OTHER[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 2A(2) — Industrial Dispute — Maintainability — Direct approach to Tribunal by Workman — Andhra Pradesh State Amendment (32 of 1987) — Provision allows workman to directly apply to Labour Court for adjudication, notwithstanding Section 10 of the Act — High Court order permitting workman to approach Tribunal — Tribunal correctly entertained the direct India Law Library Docid # 2427534
(984) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. DAMERA VEERASWAMY NAIDU AND OTHER[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 47 Rule 1 — Review — Scope of — A review petition is concerned only with errors apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new and important matters, or “any other sufficient reason” analogous to the specified grounds — It cannot be an appeal in disguise or a re-hearing of the original matter — The review court does not sit in appeal over its own order nor re-hear the case on merits — Reiteration of arguments previously raised and rejected India Law Library Docid # 2427535
(985) ACARYA VISHVADEVANANDA AVADHUTA Vs. ANANDA MARGA PRACHARAKA SAMGHA AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 151 — Inherent Powers of Court — Application for injunction to restrain disturbance of spiritual congregation (Dharma Maha Sammelan - DMS) — Rejection of application by trial court and dismissal of appeal upheld — Court found no exclusive right of petitioner to hold DMS or evidence of disturbance by opposite parties — Past practice of both groups holding DMS on same venue on different dates acknowledged — Multiple prior litigations India Law Library Docid # 2427536
(986) NANU @ NARAYAN ADHIKARY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Criminal Procedure — Appeal against conviction — Murder (Section 302 IPC) — Circumstantial evidence — Dying Declaration — Delay in FIR — Scope of judicial review — The High Court reviews the trial court’s judgment to determine if the conviction under Section 302 IPC for murder, based primarily on a dying declaration and circumstantial evidence, is justified, considering issues such as delay in lodging India Law Library Docid # 2427537
(987) CONQUEROR INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED[DELHI HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Patent Law — Interim Injunction — Principles for Grant — For an interim injunction to be granted in a patent infringement case, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of infringement, balance of convenience in their favour, and that irreparable injury would be caused if the injunction is not granted. India Law Library Docid # 2427538
(988) CHANDULAL JIVRAJBHAI PADARIYA AND ANOTHER Vs. DINESHBHAI MANILAL DESAI[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Bombay Rent Act, S. 29(2) — Civil Revision Application — Scope — Court’s revisional jurisdiction circumscribed to examining whether Courts below acted within law, jurisdiction, and without material irregularity — Re-examination or re-appreciation of evidence, or substituting plausible alternative views, is impermissible unless findings are perverse — High Court cannot interfere with factual findings India Law Library Docid # 2427539
(989) BABU LAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR and proceedings — Public examination fairness — Allegations of fabricating educational credentials and impersonation in public examination — Court found prima facie cognizable offenses under IPC and Prevention of Unfair Means Act — Serious offenses concerning public employment integrity warrant trial — Petitioners not named in FIR but India Law Library Docid # 2428569
(990) HARKESH MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 207 — Supply of documents to accused — Includes electronic records — Accused has a right to obtain copies of all documents relied upon by the prosecution in the exact form they were prepared to ensure a fair trial — Failure to provide a clone copy of memory cards used for recordings, when the authenticity of the recording is questioned, violates the accused’s right to preparation of defence and fair trial. India Law Library Docid # 2428570
(991) SUNIL GUPTA Vs. BANK OF INDIA[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of Complaint — Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of Cheque — Scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. — High Court, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, cannot assume the powers of an appellate or revisional court, nor conduct a mini-trial — The court is India Law Library Docid # 2427540
(992) CCL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 102 — Criminal Revision — Principles of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 — Section 12 — Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law — Interpretation of “shall” — Mandatory nature — The word “shall” in Section 12(1) of the JJ Act implies that releasing a Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) on bail is generally mandatory, unless specific statutory exceptions are met. India Law Library Docid # 2427541
(993) ASIF AMIN CHALKOO AND OTHERS Vs. UT OF J&K[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 17A — Enquiry, inquiry, or investigation of offences relatable to recommendations/decisions of public servant — Mandatory nature — Previous approval of government is mandatory for conducting any enquiry, inquiry, or investigation into an alleged offence committed by a public servant under the PC Act, where the offence is relatable to any recommendation made India Law Library Docid # 2427542
(994) UT OF J&K AND OTHERS Vs. MRS. RAJINDER OBEROI[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (J&K) — Section 34 — Setting Aside Arbitral Award — Scope of Judicial Review — The power of the Court to interfere with an arbitral award is extremely limited, confined to the grounds enumerated in Section 34 of the Act. The Court is not to act as an appellate court, cannot re-appreciate evidence, or re-interpret agreement terms if the arbitral interpretation is plausible and reasonable. Not every error of law constitutes patent illegality. Courts should fo India Law Library Docid # 2427543
(995) WASEEM QURESHI Vs. STATE OF J&K AND ANOTHER[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (SRINAGAR BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Exoneration in Departmental Enquiry — Impact on Criminal Proceedings — While a criminal case and a departmental inquiry are distinct proceedings, if the charges are identical and the exoneration in the departmental inquiry is on the merits, indicating that the allegations are not sustainable and the person is innocent, then continuing with criminal prosecution amounts to an abuse of the court’s process. The standard of proof is high India Law Library Docid # 2427544
(996) UNION OF INDIA Vs. SITARAM SAHU AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 — Section 17(2) — Enhancement of Compensation — Award of Tribunal — Market Value — Comparison with Previous Awards — Onus of Proof — Where both parties fail to produce comparable sale deeds, the Tribunal can rely on the nearest available evidence, such as a previous judgment for a nearby acquisition, even if chronologically earlier, and make a reasonable estimation or “guesswork” to determine fair compensation. The Court confirmed the Tr India Law Library Docid # 2427545
(997) SMT. PUTTAMMA SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’S. AND OTHERS Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 21 — Execution Proceedings — Stay of Execution — Effect of pendency of Special Leave Petition (SLP) and ‘status quo’ order from Supreme Court — Where the subject matter of an execution petition is also a subject of a pending SLP before the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court has ordered parties to maintain “status quo with regard to the properties in question,” the India Law Library Docid # 2427546
(998) MANJUSHA K.P Vs. STATE OF KERALA[KERALA HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 — Section 7(2) — Grounds of detention — Supply of legible documents — Procedural safeguards — Detenu’s right to effective representation — The law mandates strict compliance with procedural formalities in preventive detention cases, particularly regarding the supply of documents. Where critical documents are supplied in an illegible and unreadable format, it constitutes a serious lapse by the detaining authority. This prevents the detenu from India Law Library Docid # 2427547
(999) M/S TANEJA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD. THROUGH MANOJ TANEJA Vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS (CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE) AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 04-07-2025 Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 — Eligibility — Finality of Adjudication — An application under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDR) is not maintainable if the tax dispute has attained finality before the introduction of the Scheme, specifically where appellate proceedings were concluded before June 30, 2019, or show cause notices heard and decided before this date as per Section 125 of the Finance Act. India Law Library Docid # 2427548
(1000) SRINWATI MUKHERJI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 04-07-2025 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) — Section 2(s) — “Shared Household” — Scope and Definition — A property under construction and not yet in possession of either party cannot be considered a “Shared Household” under Section 2(s) of the DV Act, even if an “Agreement for Sale” has been executed in joint names and only two installments remain unpaid. The definition requires actual or constructive residence, or a right to reside in a household that is in existence and India Law Library Docid # 2427549