ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(121) MONU @ VINESH Vs. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI[DELHI HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 34 — Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25 and 27 — Murder — Bail — Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the nature of the offense, evidence, and circumstances — The applicant claims he was not present at the crime scene and was in at a pre-wedding ceremony in other state — He argues that there is no direct evidence linking him to the crime, and he has been in custody for a long time without the trial concluding —The prosecution opposes bail,
India Law Library Docid # 2418425

(122) MANJINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7 — The petitioner is accused under Act, 1988 — He seeks permission to go abroad as his son is in critical condition in a New Zealand hospital — Whether the petitioner should be allowed to travel abroad given the pending investigation and the risk of him not returning — The petitioner is willing to provide an affidavit detailing his properties and comply with stringent conditions to ensure his return — The State does not oppose the petitioner's reques
India Law Library Docid # 2418380

(123) SUKHWANT SINGH DHILLON @ SANDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 341, 323, 148, 149 and 37 — Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25 and 27 — Bail — Whether the petitioners should be granted anticipatory bail despite being part of an unlawful assembly and the need for custodial interrogation to trace co-accused — The petitioners argued that no specific injury was attributed to them, and they were not directly involved in the alleged crime — They also mentioned that a co-accused had already been granted interim bail — The State argued
India Law Library Docid # 2418381

(124) MR. SUBODH LEVI Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT (GOA BENCH)] 07-10-2024
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 22(c), 50 and 52A — The appellant was convicted for possession of LSD — The appeal raised issues regarding non-compliance with Sections 50 and 52-A of the NDPS Act and the possibility of tampering with the contraband — The appellant argued that he was not informed of his right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, discrepancies in the evidence, and delays in sending the contraband for testing — The state argued tha
India Law Library Docid # 2418791

(125) VINISHA SAWANT Vs. MAHENDRA SAWANT AND ANOTHER[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 379, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 497, 500 and 504 — The petitioner seeks to quash an FIR filed by her husband for various offenses under the IPC — The FIR was registered following a Magistrate's order — The main issue is whether the Magistrate's order directing the registration of the FIR is legally tenable after taking cognizance of the complaint and directing an inquiry under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C — The petitioner argues that the Magistrate's order is invalid
India Law Library Docid # 2418792

(126) MR. NATVAR T. PATEL AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — Section 45 — Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 — Section 227 — The case involves the regularization of unauthorized construction over a municipal Nallah/drain, affecting access to the Housing Complex — Whether the regularization order by the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) was legal and valid under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act (MRTP Act) and other relevant laws — The petitioners argued that the regularization was a
India Law Library Docid # 2418793

(127) SMT. JULIA RODRIGUES AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT. CHANDRA GULAB ADVANI AND OTHERS[BOMBAY HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 — Section 15 — The petitioner (now represented by her heirs), filed a petition challenging the decree that set aside an eviction order against the respondents, who allegedly sublet the premises unlawfully — The main issue is whether the transfer of the laundry business by Defendant No.1 to Defendant No.2 constitutes unlawful subletting under the Bombay Rent Act — The petitioner argues that the transfer was a facade to sublet the premi
India Law Library Docid # 2418794

(128) BAJAJ AUTO FINANCE LIMITED Vs. RAGHUNATH (DECEASED), HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 07-10-2024
Motor Accident Claims — The case involves Petitioner-Finance company and the legal representatives of respondent regarding liability for compensation in a motor accident — The main issues are whether the previous court order ignored Supreme Court judgments and whether the appeal can be decided based on those judgments — The petitioner argues that the previous court order is incorrect and contrary to Supreme Court rulings, Godavari Finance Company Vs. Degala Satyanarayanamma & Ors., (2008) 5 SCC
India Law Library Docid # 2418815

(129) DEVENDRA VERMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 07-10-2024
Mining Lease — Cancellation of — The petitioner's grandfather was granted a mining lease in 1999 — The lease was canceled in 2004 due to non-compliance with a payment notice — Subsequent appeals and revisions were dismissed as time-barred — The main issue is whether the appeal against the lease cancellation, filed after 17 years, should be considered valid — The petitioner argued that the order canceling the lease was not served on them, and thus they were unaware of it — The respondents contend
India Law Library Docid # 2418816

(130) LAXMAN SINGH Vs. SAYAR SINGH AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 07-10-2024
Khatedari rights — Determination of — Appellant, filed a revenue suit seeking declaration of khatedari rights — The defendants disputed his legal status as the adopted son of ‘P’ — Whether the Revenue Court had jurisdiction to decide the legal status of appellant as the adopted son of ‘P’ — The appellant argued that the Revenue Court should not have delved into his legal status as an adopted son since it was not the primary issue in the revenue suit — The respondents maintained that the legal st
India Law Library Docid # 2418817

(131) ARJUN SAH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — Section 30(a) — The petitioner seeks the release of his seized car, which was confiscated due to the recovery of 1.5 liters of beer, violating the Act 2018 — Whether the seizure of the vehicle and the subsequent legal actions were justified given the small quantity of beer recovered — The petitioner claims no involvement with the seized liquor, argues the seizure was improperly conducted, and highlights the lack of evidence proving intoxicatio
India Law Library Docid # 2419255

(132) HARI KISHAN SHARMA @ HARI MAHARAJ AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 — Encroachment on public land — The appellants are challenging the show-cause notices issued under the Act, 1956, for alleged encroachment on public land — Whether the appellants have a valid claim over the land and if the summary proceedings for eviction under the Encroachment Act are permissible — The appellants argue that the land has been in their possession for a long time, citing previous legal decisions in their favor and claiming res judicata — Th
India Law Library Docid # 2419262

(133) SANTU PASWAN @ SINTU PASWAN Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 07-10-2024
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376 — Rape of Minor — The reliability of the victim's testimony, the delay in reporting the incident, and the lack of physical evidence were major issues — The appellant argued that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and lacked credibility — Appellant highlighted the absence of physical injuries and the delay in filing the FIR — The prosecution maintained that the victim's age and her consis
India Law Library Docid # 2419265

(134) SHANKAR RAJAK Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 05-10-2024
Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2005 — Rule 9(7) — The appellant a suspended constable, sought reinstatement after three months of suspension without a charge-sheet being issued — Whether the appellant should be reinstated due to the lack of a charge-sheet within the stipulated three-month period — The appellant argued that his suspension should be revoked as no charge-sheet was issued within three months, citing applications made after the period expired — The
India Law Library Docid # 2419259

(135) KRISHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452, 506, 120-B —Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 — Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 — Section 3(2)(v) — The appellant is seeking bail — He is accused in a case involving multiple charges, including murder, conspiracy, and violations of the Arms Act — Whether the appellant should be granted bail despite being accused of serious crimes, given that he was not present at the scene of the crime — The app
India Law Library Docid # 2418382

(136) SAJJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-10-2024
Salary Deductions —The petitioner, a driver in the respondent-State, filed a civil suit in 2010 to prevent salary deductions for alleged excess petrol consumption — The suit was dismissed in 2014, and subsequent appeals and applications were also dismissed until 2024 — The main issue is whether the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to cross-examine DW1, despite previous adjournments and the trial court's orders treating the cross-examination as nil — The petitioner argued that not
India Law Library Docid # 2418383

(137) MANOJ DHANKAR Vs. NEEHARIKA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-10-2024
Guardianship and Wards Act, 1980 — Section 25 — Appellant and Respondent married in 2012, and they have a son, ‘L’ — Due to marital differences, they filed for divorce, but the petition was withdrawn —Husband sought custody of their son, which was denied by the Family Court —The main issue is whether appellant should be granted custody of his minor son — Petitioner argued for custody of his son and sought video calls and the child's return from Ireland to India — Respondent opposed the custody p
India Law Library Docid # 2418384

(138) HARJINDER KAUR Vs. SATNAM SINGH AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-10-2024
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 and 142 — Dishonour of Cheque — The main issue was whether the conviction and sentence should be upheld despite the petitioner having paid the compensation amount and resolved the matter amicably with the complainant — The petitioner argued that the compensation had been paid, the matter was resolved amicably, and she was a poor lady with no source of income, making it difficult to comply with the Supreme Court's directive to pay 15% of the cheque
India Law Library Docid # 2418385

(139) RATI BAI Vs. SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 04-10-2024
Service Law — Termination —The petitioner was terminated from her job on 01.10.2003 — She challenged this termination, and the Labour Court dismissed her claim on 07.11.2013 — The case was remanded back, and a fresh award was passed on 15.02.2016, which is now under challenge —The main issue is whether the petitioner's delay in approaching the court should bar her from getting relief — The court emphasized that delay and laches can be grounds for refusing relief — It cited several Supreme Court
India Law Library Docid # 2418386

(140) SMT. SATYAWATI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 04-10-2024
Property Dispute — Adverse Possession — The plaintiffs claimed ownership of property based on adverse possession and a gift deed (Baksheeshnama) from the former ruler of Chhatarpur estate —The main issues were whether the plaintiffs could be declared owners by adverse possession and whether the eviction order against them was valid — The plaintiffs argued that they had been in continuous possession of the house for over 65 years and that the property was gifted to their ancestor by the former ru
India Law Library Docid # 2418311