(501) MANISH Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 30-09-2026 National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 — Section 21 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 308(4) and 111(3) — Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 3, 25, 25(1AA) — Denial of bail — Appeal — Firing of 35 rounds at hotel and extortion demand of Rs. 5 crore — Prima facie case — Consideration of bail does not warrant meticulous examination or mini-trial — Statements of witnesses in sealed cover connecting accused with organised criminal activity — Serious nature and gravity of accusation, flight risk, an India Law Library Docid # 2455055
(502) OM PRAKASH Vs. AYODHYA PRASAD[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 30-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Scope and exercise of jurisdiction in Second Appeal — Test of "substantial question of law" — High Court is not required to examine rival contentions on merits at the threshold stage — Second appeal is maintainable only if it involves a substantial question of law — To qualify as substantial, a question must be real, essential, debatable, not settled by binding precedent, and must have a material bearing on the decision affecting the rights of parties — India Law Library Docid # 2455056
(503) M/S RASHTRADOOT H.U.F. Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 30-09-2026 Constitution of India — Article 226 — Maintainability of writ petition — Alternative statutory remedy — Violation of principles of natural justice — Petitioner challenged assessment orders without availing remedy of statutory appeal under Section 16 of Rajasthan Lands and Buildings Tax Act, 1964 — Held, the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedy is a self-imposed restriction and not an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction — High Court can entertain a writ petition under Article 226 when the impug India Law Library Docid # 2455057
(504) JAGDISH SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Criminal Jurisprudence — Appeal against acquittal — Principles and scope of interference — Presumption of innocence — Power of High Court to reappreciate evidence in acquittal appeals is qualified — Acquittal cannot be reversed merely because a different view is plausible — If appreciation of evidence yields two equally plausible views, the view favouring the accused must prevail — Interference by the appellate court is warranted only when the trial court's judgment is perverse, contrary to the India Law Library Docid # 2455224
(505) NASEEM KHAN @ LALLU KHAN @ LALU KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 — Inherent power of High Court to quash criminal proceedings based on compromise — Scope and applicability — Principles reiterated from Supreme Court precedents — High Court possesses wide inherent powers to secure ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of court — Criminal proceedings can be quashed where dispute between parties is personal in nature, does not involve heinous offence India Law Library Docid # 2455225
(506) M/S KOLESHWARI INFRACONS PVT. LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Administrative Law — Principles of Natural Justice — Suspension of contractor's registration — Debarment and Blacklisting — Petitioner's registration was suspended without a specific show-cause notice proposing debarment — Suspension of registration carries serious civil and commercial consequences and virtually amounts to blacklisting — A valid show-cause notice clearly indicating the precise proposed action, either expressly or by necessary implicati India Law Library Docid # 2455226
(507) ARMAN ANSARI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — Section 12 — Grant of bail to juvenile in conflict with law — Principles applicable — Bail to a juvenile is a rule and refusal is an exception — Section 12 overrides the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and any other law in force — Bail can be denied only under three statutory exceptions: likelihood of association with known criminals, exposure to moral, physical or psychological danger, or where release would defeat the ends of just India Law Library Docid # 2455228
(508) KAILASH RAM AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 106 and Section 114 — Circumstantial evidence — Matrimonial home death — Reverse burden — Deceased wife found dead due to asphyxia by throttling inside the matrimonial home — Accused-husband had motive due to deceased being issueless and his recent second marriage — Husband absconded immediately after incident and offered no explanation regarding circumstances of death — Where homicidal death occurs within four corners of matrim India Law Library Docid # 2455229
(509) RAJ KUMAR BHAGAT @ RAJKUMAR BHAGAT Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43D(5) — National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 — Section 21(4) — Regular Bail — Ambush of police convoy resulting in death of Superintendent of Police and police personnel — Proviso to Section 43D(5) creates a statutory bar on granting bail if accusations under Chapter IV/VI are prima facie true based on the case diary or police report — Court is required to examine broad probabilities without conducting a mini-trial — Case diary specificall India Law Library Docid # 2455230
(510) JAINUL ANSARI @ MD. JAINUL ANSARI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER[JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376(2)(n) — Rape — Determination of age and consent — Prosecutrix was medically and radiologically determined to be over 18 years of age. Medical examination revealed no external injuries, signs of struggle, or evidence of recent intercourse, while allegations of pregnancy termination were unsubstantiated by medical records. Long-standing physical relationship between two consenting adults without complaint indicates consensual intimacy. Where the prosecutrix is India Law Library Docid # 2455231
(511) JSW STEEL LIMITED Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Sections 5, 8 and 26 — Constitution of India — Articles 226 and 227 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 — Maintainability of writ petition against interlocutory order — Adjudicating Authority confirmed Provisional Attachment Order — Appellate Tribunal declined piecemeal remand and listed appeal for final hearing granting liberty to raise all issues — Writ petition challenged said order — Held, PMLA provides a comprehensive, self-contained a India Law Library Docid # 2455282
(512) M/S BIOGENETIC DRUGS PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. SURJEET KUMARI AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Labour and Service Law — Wrongful Termination — Back Wages — Burden of proof regarding gainful employment — A workman seeking back wages following illegal termination is only required to plead or state that he was not gainfully employed during the period of enforced idleness. Once such an averment is made, the onus shifts to the employer to specifically plead and prove through cogent evidence that the employee was gainfully employed and drawing similar emoluments. The Labour Court erred in placi India Law Library Docid # 2455345
(513) BENGAL CHEMICALS & PHARMACEUTICAL LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. BIOGENETIC DRUGS PVT. LTD.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 — Sections 15, 16, 17 and 24 — Conflict between general and special statutes — Overriding effect of MSMED Act — The MSMED Act is a special enactment governing specific disputes and, by virtue of Section 24, overrides the general provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1996 and private contractual agreements — Once an entity is proven to be a small enterprise with delayed payments, the statu India Law Library Docid # 2455368
(514) KULDEEP SHARMA Vs. M/S SHAKUN CHIT FUND & LEASING LTD.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 148 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389 — Suspension of sentence pending appeal — Power to waive pre-deposit of compensation — Appellate court possesses limited discretion to exempt an appellant from depositing a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation amount in exceptional circumstances — While Section 148 is generally mandatory, an exception must be made upon recording specific reasons if imposing the deposit condition would be unj India Law Library Docid # 2455370
(515) GANGA RAM & ORS. Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 300A — Right to property — Forcible dispossession without compensation — Petitioners' land utilized for road construction without formal acquisition or compensation — State claimed land was provided voluntarily on public demand under oral consent — Held, right to property is a constitutional and human right under Article 300A — State cannot deprive citizens of property without authority of law and due process — Unsubstantiated plea of oral or implied consent India Law Library Docid # 2455371
(516) JOHN VADASSERY Vs. THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARKS[KERALA HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Trade Marks Act, 1999 — Section 145 — Trade Marks Rules, 2017 — Rule 19 — Authorisation of trademark agent — Stamp duty liability — Petitioner contended that an ordinary unstamped authorisation in Form TM-M suffices and does not constitute a power of attorney — Held, neither the Trade Marks Act nor the Rules control stamp duty liability, which is a fiscal measure to secure State revenue — Authorisation under Section 145 empowers the agent to act, accept service, and appear before the Registry, b India Law Library Docid # 2455380
(517) UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR AND ANOTHER Vs. DR.C.VISWANATHAN[KERALA HIGH COURT] 30-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Service Law — Delay and Laches — Stale claim for retrospective promotion — Employee sought promotion to Selection Grade Lecturer from 1994 via representation made in 2017, sixteen years after retiring in 2001 — Held, promotional claims must be raised within a reasonable period — A judicial direction to consider a belated representation does not revive a dead claim or generate a fresh cause of action — Rejection of such representation does not cure lach India Law Library Docid # 2455388
(518) MANGAL BUILDERS AND ENTERPRISES LIMITED AND ORS. Vs. WILLIAMSON MAGOR & COMPANY LIMITED AND ANR.[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 29-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Section 2(1)(c)(7) — Rejection of plaint — Jurisdiction — In a suit for recovery of possession with mesne profits upon lease expiry, defendant sought rejection of plaint alleging the suit property was commercial — Held, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of plaint must be considered prior to other applications, including applications for injunction or summary judgment, as it strikes at the root India Law Library Docid # 2454310
(519) AKASH M.V. AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER[KERALA HIGH COURT] 29-09-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 447(2) Proviso — Transfer of Criminal Case — Condition precedent — Application rejected by Sessions Judge — High Court's jurisdiction — Proviso to Section 447(2) explicitly requires that an application for transfer within the sessions division must first be made to and rejected by the Sessions Judge — This requirement operates solely as a condition precedent to invoke the High Court's transfer jurisdiction — It does not require the party to chal India Law Library Docid # 2454240
(520) BHUTORIA BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 29-09-2026 Letters Patent, 1865 — Clause 12 — Suit for land — Claim for damages — Distinction — Plaintiff sought a money decree for damages suffered due to customs authorities retaining possession of tenancy premises following search and seizure — Plaintiff did not seek any declaration of title in respect of the immovable property situated outside jurisdiction — Held, the suit was essentially a claim for damages and did not constitute a "suit for land" within the meaning of Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, India Law Library Docid # 2454317