(421) HANSRAJ Vs. STATE OF U.P.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 — Section 7-A — Claim of juvenility can be raised at any stage, even after final disposal of the case. If found to be a juvenile, the court shall forward the person to the Board, and any sentence passed shall be deemed to have no effect — This provision applies retrospectively. India Law Library Docid # 2433689
(422) SANKAR PADAM THAPA Vs. VIJAYKUMAR DINESHCHANDRA AGARWAL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 and 141 — Dishonour of Cheque — Complaint against Chairman/Trustee of a Trust without impleading the Trust as an accused — Maintainability — Held, a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act is maintainable against a Trustee who has signed the cheque on behalf of the Trust, even if the Trust itself is not made an accused — The Trust does not possess independent legal status to sue or be sued. India Law Library Docid # 2433690
(423) VIJAYA KUMARI S AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 — Section 4(iii)(c)(I) — Age-restriction for intending couples — Retrospective application — Intending couples who commenced surrogacy procedures (including embryo creation and freezing) before the Act's commencement date (25.01.2022) are not subject to the age-restrictions under Section 4(iii)(c)(I). The Act, unless expressly or by necessary implication made retrospective, India Law Library Docid # 2433691
(424) REJANISH K.V. Vs. K. DEEPA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 233(2) — Appointment of District Judges — Eligibility for in-service candidates — Clause (2) not prescribing qualifications for those already in judicial service — Such candidates not barred from direct recruitment — Interpretation to the contrary renders first part of Clause (2) redundant. India Law Library Docid # 2433692
(425) THE COMMISSIONER TRADE AND TAX DELHI Vs. M/S SHANTI KIRAN INDIA (P) LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 — Section 9(2)(g) — Input Tax Credit (ITC) — Bona fide purchaser dealer paying tax to registered seller dealer — Seller dealer defaulting in depositing tax with government — High Court's interpretation of Section 9(2)(g) — Court reading down the provision to protect bona fide purchasers — India Law Library Docid # 2433693
(426) VIVEK YADAV Vs. AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA CHAIRMAN AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Recruitment Regulations — Manager (E-3) — Qualifications — Prescribed qualifications for Manager (E-3) include First Class MBA/B.Tech./B.E. or professional degree with relevant experience. For Manager (A.T.C.), specific engineering degrees in Electronics/Tele-communications/Radio Engineering/Electrical with specialization in Electronics or M.Sc. with specific India Law Library Docid # 2433694
(427) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) LUCKNOW Vs. M/S. KHURJA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-10-2025 Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 260A — Appeals to High Court — Charitable Purpose Registration — High Court dismissed revenue's appeals, stating issues were covered by earlier decisions, but failed to examine facts against the law. Supreme Court found impugned orders lacked factual elaboration and remanded for India Law Library Docid # 2433695
(428) LAKSHMAN SINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS Vs. MANOJ AND ANOTHER[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 09-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — The High Court can interfere in a second appeal only when a substantial question of law arises. India Law Library Docid # 2433839
(429) HARCHARAN (DIED) THR. LRS (A) NARENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 09-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Substantial Question of Law — A Second Appeal lies only if a substantial question of law is involved. In this case, the High Court found no substantial question of law, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. India Law Library Docid # 2433840
(430) LAKHAN MAHARAJ AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302/34 — Murder — Common intention — Appeal against conviction for murder — Collision between truck and scooter causing death of deceased — Appellants argued innocence, unreliable eye-witnesses, lack of mens rea or motive as they were acquitted of conspiracy, and that the driver attempted to avert the collision — Evidence of skid marks suggested attempts to avoid impact India Law Library Docid # 2433841
(431) PARVESH KUMAR @ MINTOO (MINOR) AND OTHERS Vs. RAJBIR[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — High Court’s jurisdiction is limited to substantial questions of law and not a third court of facts unless findings are perverse or based on no evidence. India Law Library Docid # 2433889
(432) HARCHARAN SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE COOP. BANK LIMITED AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Second Appeal — Scope — Plaintiff filed suit for damages for malicious prosecution after acquittal in a criminal case — Trial court and lower appellate court dismissed the suit — High Court can only interfere if findings of lower courts are perverse or based on misreading of evidence — Plaintiff failed to prove malice and lack of reasonable cause — Second appeal upheld the dismissal of the suit India Law Library Docid # 2433890
(433) RAMESH KUMAR Vs. JAGBIR SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166 and 140 — Motor Vehicular Accident — Compensation — Appeal for enhancement — Appeal filed against award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for enhancement of compensation — Sole issue for determination is quantum of compensation awarded. India Law Library Docid # 2433896
(434) HARDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 226/227 — Writ Petition for regularization — Petitioner sought regularization based on Supreme Court judgments and State policy claiming continuous service for over a decade — Petitioner was recruited as Home Guard/Volunteer and served for three decades as Driver/Gunman — State argued that petitioner was a volunteer under relevant Act and Rules and Home Guards India Law Library Docid # 2433897
(435) KULWANT SINGH Vs. JASWINDER KAUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 151 and Order XVIII Rule 4 — Examination of witnesses through video conferencing — Application allowed despite respondents being declared proclaimed offenders — Held, this does not bar criminal proceedings and is permissible in civil cases if necessary facilities exist — No India Law Library Docid # 2433939
(436) DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD. Vs. ASHA RANI AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 — Section 13(3)(a)(ii) — Eviction for landlord's own use or occupation — "Own use" to be interpreted broadly — Includes requirement for family members or dependents — Landlord is the best judge of their needs — Tenant cannot dictate alternative arrangements. India Law Library Docid # 2433940
(437) SAMPAT BAI @HAHS STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 read with Section 34 — Murder and common intention — appeals against conviction and sentence of life imprisonment — Prosecution failed to establish essential ingredients for death by poisoning — Lack of clear motive, proof of administering poison, possession of poison, and opportunity to administer poison — Post-mortem report inconclusive, cause of death uncertain — India Law Library Docid # 2433998
(438) BHIMA AND OTHER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 201 — Murder and Causing Disappearance of Evidence — Circumstantial Evidence — Burden of Proof — Prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt — No eyewitness — Circumstances did not form a complete chain — Lack of motive — Unreliable hearsay evidence — Doubtful extra-judicial confession — Infirmities in medical and recovery evidence — Benefit of doubt must go to the accused. India Law Library Docid # 2433999
(439) VACHNA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — Ocular and medical evidence — Discrepancy between FIR and charge-sheet — Interested witness — Absence of external injuries despite alleged fatal blow — Possibility of death due to fall — Uncertainty regarding cause of death, favoring the accused. India Law Library Docid # 2434000
(440) PUNAM CHAND Vs. RAJASTHAN FERTILIZERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 09-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope — A Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC lies only on a substantial question of law. Pure questions of fact, based on the appraisal of evidence, are not grounds for interference in second appeal where both lower courts have concurrently decided the matter. India Law Library Docid # 2434001