(201) HIMMATBHAI BHIKHABHAI VAGHANI AND OTHERS Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 26-02-2026 Mamlatdar Courts Act, 1906 — Section 5(3) — Suit for removal of obstruction to pathway — Cause of action arose much earlier — Suit filed after delay of more than two years — Mamlatdar has no jurisdiction to entertain suit filed beyond six months from date of cause of action — Rejection of suit by Mamlatdar and Deputy Collector on ground of limitation is correct — Petition dismissed. India Law Library Docid # 2440946
(202) VALAND SHANABHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI AND OTHERS Vs. NAVINBHAI GOVINDBHAI VALAND (NAI) AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 26-02-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Application for rejection of plaint was rejected by the trial court — The High Court held that a plaint can only be rejected if it does not disclose a cause of action or is barred by law — The court must read the plaint as a whole, and cannot reject it in part — If any part of the plaint is maintainable, the entire plaint cannot be rejected at the threshold — The High Court reiterated that the remedy under Order 7 Rule 11 India Law Library Docid # 2440947
(203) TURK FATMABAI RAMJU AND OTHERS Vs. MEMAN RUKAIYABAI OSHMAN LAKHANI AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 26-02-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope of — High Court cannot interfere with findings of fact by First Appellate Court, which is final court of facts, except where findings are erroneous, contrary to law, based on inadmissible evidence, or without evidence — High Court should not allow second appeal to become a "third trial on facts" or "one more dice in the gamble." [Paras 5.1, India Law Library Docid # 2440948
(204) TIRATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 26-02-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 363, 302 RPC — Circumstantial Evidence — Conviction based on circumstantial evidence and "last seen" theory requires a complete chain of circumstances pointing to guilt and excluding innocence. India Law Library Docid # 2441094
(205) MANZOOR AHMED @ FURQAN Vs. UT OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT (JAMMU BENCH)] 26-02-2026 Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 — Section 8(1) — Preventive detention — Grounds for detention — Security of State and maintenance of public order — Detaining authority’s subjective satisfaction is not subject to objective assessment by the High Court in writ jurisdiction — Past conduct with reasonable India Law Library Docid # 2441095
(206) RAJARAM SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 25-02-2026 Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 — Rule 16 — Disciplinary proceedings — Charge sheet — Delay — Inordinate and unexplained delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings or in concluding them can be a ground to quash, but only if it causes manifest prejudice to the delinquent employee — Mere delay, India Law Library Docid # 2440156
(207) AJAY KUMAR PANDVIA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 25-02-2026 Pension Rules, 1976 — Rule 9 — Withholding Pension — Opportunity of Hearing — Even if a statute doesn't expressly provide for a hearing, a retired employee must be given an opportunity to be heard before their pension is withheld or withdrawn, especially when it leads to adverse civil consequences, as pension is a right and not a bounty. India Law Library Docid # 2440272
(208) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. SUNIL SINGH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227 — Supervisory Jurisdiction — High Court can interfere with the orders of tribunals if they are illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law, where the tribunal has failed to consider relevant facts and applicable rules. India Law Library Docid # 2440273
(209) RAJESH PRASAD PANDEY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Regularization/Appointment of Daily Wage Employees — Employees with over 20 years of continuous service as daily wagers were considered for regularization based on Supreme Court judgments. India Law Library Docid # 2440274
(210) KALEEM Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 (Murder) — Conviction based on Dying Declaration — Trial Court's judgment of conviction and sentence upheld. The High Court found the dying declaration to be reliable and voluntary, corroborated by the First Information Report (FIR). Statements of witnesses consistently identified the India Law Library Docid # 2440275
(211) ATMA RAM Vs. SUNIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 100 — Second Appeal — High Courts should not interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless judgments below are perverse or based on no evidence. — High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence to substitute its own view for plausible findings of fact by the first appellate court. — In India Law Library Docid # 2440476
(212) SHEETAL DASS AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — Section 34 — Offences by companies — Vicarious liability — Directors and persons in charge of business — Complaint must contain specific averments detailing how the accused was in charge of and responsible for the company's business, not just a bald statement of their position India Law Library Docid # 2440477
(213) KESHAV CHANDEL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 528 — Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3) and 115(2) — Quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings on basis of compromise — Offence not heinous or involving moral turpitude — Compromise entered into between parties — Continuation of India Law Library Docid # 2440478
(214) STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. CHANDERBHAN AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 323, 325, 34 — Appeal against acquittal — High Court can only interfere with an acquittal if the judgment is perverse, based on misreading or omission of material evidence, or if no two reasonable views are possible. The trial court's assessment that there was a delay in reporting the incident India Law Library Docid # 2440479
(215) SANTOKH SINGH Vs. BALDEEP SINGH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Conviction — Revisional Court’s scope — A revisional court cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute its own findings for those of the lower courts unless there is a patent defect, an error of jurisdiction, or a perversity in the decision. India Law Library Docid # 2440480
(216) VISHAL SHARMA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICE (ED)[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 — Interim bail — Applicant sought interim bail on the ground of his sister-in-law's death and to be with his family — Court considered the death and applicant's need to mourn, granting ten days interim bail — Previous grant of interim bail was not misused — Conditions India Law Library Docid # 2440481
(217) RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) — Section 483 — Regular bail — Petitioner lodged FIR against for sexual assault — Allegations of victim voluntarily boarding petitioner's car and falsely implicating him for monetary gain — No medical evidence to support sexual intercourse — Victim alleged to have a history of filing India Law Library Docid # 2440482
(218) KAPIL DEV SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Administrative Law — Office Orders — Withdrawal of service benefits — An initial office order dated 17.03.2025, which withdrew certain service benefits after the enactment of a new Act, was subsequently declared infructuous and withdrawn by a later office order dated 10.09.2025 — The subsequent order directed the restoration India Law Library Docid # 2440378
(219) ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Service Law — Regularization of services — Claim for regularization denied due to lack of proof of employer-employee relationship — Appellants failed to produce appointment orders, attendance records, or proof of payment for services rendered — Merely possessing identity cards or handling receipt books does not establish employment — Previous litigation had also dismissed similar claims on the grounds India Law Library Docid # 2440379
(220) DEEPAK UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 25-02-2026 Transfer of Employees — Challenging transfer order — Appellant argued transfer was without consent — Court held transfer was due to exigency of service for expediting recovery proceedings of Non-Performing Assets — Employee's duty to serve employer — No malafide or arbitrary action alleged — Writ Court would not India Law Library Docid # 2440380