(901) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. MERAMAN KARA MER AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Appellate court can interfere in acquittal only in exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances and the judgment is found to be perverse — The court must bear in mind the presumption of innocence of the accused, which is bolstered by the trial court's acquittal — Interference should be India Law Library Docid # 2437901
(902) NITINBHAI MAVJIBHAI SINOJIYA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 — Section 65 — Non-Agricultural (NA) Permission — Scope of Authority — The competent authority while considering an application for NA permission under Section 65 only has the power to ascertain if the applicant is the 'occupant' of the land and is not empowered to examine or determine the applicant's title to the land in question. India Law Library Docid # 2437902
(903) HEIRS L.R. OF DECD. THAKARDAKODARJI VIRAJI AND OTHERS Vs. MARWADI CHAMPAKLAL MANGILAL AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of Jurisdiction — Substantial Question of Law — The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 is circumscribed and can be exercised only in relation to a substantial question of law—A question of law is 'substantial' if it is debatable, not settled by law or binding precedent, and materially affects the rights of the parties India Law Library Docid # 2437903
(904) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. DEVKUMAR SURYAWANSHI AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of interference — Appellate court must consider whether the trial court’s view is a possible one, particularly when evidence on record has been analyzed — An order of acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused (double presumption) — Appellate court must be relatively slow in reversing an India Law Library Docid # 2437912
(905) KARIMAN (DIED) THROUGH LR AND OTHERS Vs. JAINATH (DIED) THROUGH LRS: AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 65 — Suit for Possession of Immovable Property based on Title — Limitation Period — Adverse Possession — The limitation period for a suit for possession of immovable property based on title is twelve years, commencing from the date when the defendant's possession becomes adverse to the plaintiff (Article 65) — Where the plaintiff became aware that the defendant was in India Law Library Docid # 2437913
(906) M.A. RAFI (DEAD ) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. EJAZURRAHMAN AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Concurrent Findings of Fact — The concurrent finding of both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove their plea of ownership based on an oral Hiba (gift), cannot be interfered with in a Second Appeal unless found to be perverse. India Law Library Docid # 2437914
(907) RAMANUJ SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHILAI THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 96 — First Appeal — Setting aside of Trial Court Judgment — Declaration of Title, Possession, Demolition and Injunction — Property declared surplus under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (ULCRA) — Challenge to ULCRA orders: Status and Effect after Repeal — Where ULCRA proceedings were challenged pre-Repeal Act, and subsequent India Law Library Docid # 2437915
(908) LAKSHAY JAIN Vs. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) — Sections 20/22/25/29 — Regular Bail — Successive Bail Application — Maintainability — A court can entertain successive bail applications only upon a demonstrable change in circumstances that was not available or considered at the time of dismissal of the earlier application. India Law Library Docid # 2437886
(909) PARVESH MANN @ SAGAR MANN Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Criminal Procedure — Judgment — Pronouncement of Judgment after conclusion of trial — Transfer of Judicial Officers — Duty of transferred officer to pronounce reserved judgments/orders — Where final arguments concluded and matter reserved for judgment by Predecessor Judge, who was subsequently transferred — Administrative orders mandated transferred officer to pronounce reserved judgments/orders within 2-3 weeks, notwithstanding transfer — Order by Successor Judge directing re-hearing of final India Law Library Docid # 2437887
(910) SHRI SARVESH PURI Vs. SHRI RISHAB KUMAR[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 read with Section 138(b) — Dishonor of Cheque — Statutory Notice — Timelines — Section 138(b) mandates the payee to issue a legal demand notice to the drawer within thirty days of receiving information about the cheque's dishonor from the bank — Failure to issue the legal notice within the statutory 30-day period renders the notice invalid and prevents the cause of action under Section 138 from crystallizing — Where the cheque was dishonored on May India Law Library Docid # 2437888
(911) TALAT KOUSER AND OTHERS Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT AT JAMMU] 05-01-2026 Land Acquisition — Writ of Mandamus for Payment of Compensation — State Land Acquisition Act — Right to Property (Article 300-A of Constitution of India) — Petitioners sought payment of assessed compensation (Rs. 8,97,000/-) plus interest for 1.4 kanals of land acquired under an award dated 08.09.2014 for national highway widening — Non-payment resulted from default by Indenting Departments (PW(R&B) India Law Library Docid # 2437939
(912) IRFAN ALI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 05-01-2026 Rajasthan Contractual Hiring to Civil Service Posts Rules, 2022 — Eligibility for Absorption/Engagement — Machine with Man/Computer Operator — Petitioner sought appointment/absorption under Rules of 2022 based on existing service as Computer Operator — Eligibility mandated appointment under Mukhyamantri Nishulk Nirogi Rajasthan Yojana (Dava) (MNDY Scheme) — Petitioner failed to provide appointment India Law Library Docid # 2437940
(913) GANGESHWAR LAL SHRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) — Sections 318(4), 316(2), 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) — Quashing of FIR/Criminal Proceedings — Grounds for quashing — Allegations of siphoning, diversion, and misappropriation of funds entrusted for film production — Whether dispute is civil (breach of contract) or criminal (criminal breach of trust) — Court not to conduct mini-trial or evaluate veracity of evidence at threshold — FIR and India Law Library Docid # 2437946
(914) ANKIT KUMAR MEENA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 244(1), Fifth Schedule, and Article 243-ZC(1) — Scheduled Areas — Application of State Municipal Law — Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 — Sections 3 and 329 — Inclusion of Scheduled Area within Municipal Limits — The constitutional scheme does not create an absolute constitutional embargo on the application of State legislation in Scheduled Areas; general laws, enacted under State legislative competence (Entry 5, List II, Seventh Schedule) continue to appl India Law Library Docid # 2437947
(915) ANITA ASHOK MAPUSKAR AND OTHERS Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER OF MUMBAI AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 53 — Show Cause Notice — Legality and Vagueness — Notice issued under Section 53(1) read with Section 52(1)(h) and (d) of MRTP Act alleging unauthorized development of residential structures — Notice appeared incongruous, vaguely alleging unauthorized India Law Library Docid # 2437961
(916) STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. PREM CHAND (DECEASED) AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Indian Forest Act, 1927 — Section 42 — Read with Himachal Pradesh Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978 — Rules 11 and 20 — Cognizable Offence — Reference to Larger Bench — Whether the offence under Section 42 of the Indian Forest Act read with Rules 11 and 20 of the H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules is non-cognizable — Section 64 of the Indian Forest Act empowers any Forest Officer or India Law Library Docid # 2438013
(917) NIKHIL Vs. M/S SHOURYA INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6, Rule 17 — Amendment of Pleadings — Allowing amendment before filing of written statement and commencement of trial — Amendment sought to correct a typographical/clerical error in the Khasra number of the suit property and consequential change in area — Suit at initial/nascent stage, amendment application filed immediately after institution of suit and before written statement filed — India Law Library Docid # 2438014
(918) KALU RAM @ CHANDEY RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 20(b)(ii)(B), Section 50 — Conviction and Sentence — Standard of Proof — Higher degree of assurance is necessary to convict an accused under the NDPS Act due to stringent punishments, high bail standards, and presumption of guilt — Scrupulous compliance with safeguards, especially Section 50, is mandatory. India Law Library Docid # 2438015
(919) ARVIND RAJTA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT (ED)[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 45 — Bail — Requirement of Twin Conditions — Violation of Article 21 (Right to Speedy Trial) — While Section 45 imposes stringent twin conditions for bail, these rigours must be harmonized with the constitutional right to speedy trial under Article 21, particularly when prolonged incarceration occurs without the likelihood of trial conclusion within a reasonable time — India Law Library Docid # 2438016
(920) PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-01-2026 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1988 (PIT NDPS Act, 1988) — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Preventive Detention — Challenge to detention order passed under Section 3(1) of PIT NDPS Act, 1988 due to repeated involvement in drug trafficking cases — Ground for detention: apprehension of continued prejudicial activity (illicit drug trafficking) if released on bail — Despite petitioner being released after six months of detention (as extend India Law Library Docid # 2438017