(321) HABEEN ALIAS HABIN ALIAS HABIB Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 [(as invoked in the order)] — Regular Bail — Factors for Grant — Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 / IPC S. 120-B. - In exercising jurisdiction invoked under Section 483 BNSS for grant of regular bail concerning offences under the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (Sections 3/13(1), 8/13(3)) and Section 120-B IPC, the Court considered the cumulative effect of several factors: (i) the period of c India Law Library Docid # 2425086
(322) ECOSAFE INFRAPROJECTS LLP, THROUGH ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER MR. SAMANVAY PARASHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 (RMMCR 2017) — Rules 9(1) proviso, 16(3), 21(6) — E-auction Notice — Period of Lease — Commencement Date — Environmental Clearance (EC) — Alleged Ambiguity — An e-auction notice clause specifying the period of a mining lease for mineral bajri (river sand) as five years commencing from the date of registration of the lease deed is not vague, ambiguous, or uncertain — This clause is perfectly aligned with the statutory scheme under RMMCR 2017, specifi India Law Library Docid # 2425384
(323) NAGAD NARAYAN AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Administrative Law — Principles of Natural Justice — Bias — Nemo Judex in Causa Sua (No one should be a judge in his own cause) — Appellate Authority — Distinction between ‘Post’ and ‘Person’ — Multi-member Body — The principle of nemo judex in causa sua, which prohibits a person from acting as a judge in a matter where they have an interest or have previously acted in a different capacity, applies to the individual decision-maker, not merely the post held — Where rules designate the India Law Library Docid # 2425385
(324) STATE Vs. JAVED KHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal Against Acquittal — Scope of Interference — Principles — An appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 CrPC, must adhere to established principles: (i) acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence; (ii) evidence must be comprehensively reappreciated; (iii) if two views are possible, the one favoring the accused should ordinarily prevail; (iv) if the trial court’s view is legally plausible, mere p India Law Library Docid # 2425386
(325) STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHER Vs. LACHU @ LAXMI NARAYAN[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 22-04-2025 M.P. Prisoner’s Release on Probation Act, 1954 — Section 2 & Rule 11 (M.P. Prisoner’s Release on Probation Rules, 1964) — Effect of Setting Aside Release Order in LPA — Bonafide Belief of Licence Continuance — Where a writ petitioner, convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to L.I., was released on probation by a Single Bench order, and this order was subsequently set aside in an L.P.A. directing him to surrender, his continued absence from prison cannot be deemed as part of the period of India Law Library Docid # 2425533
(326) CUREWIN HYLICO PHARMA PVT. LTD. Vs. CUREWIN PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 22-04-2025 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — Institution of Suit — Proper Valuation and Court Fees — Pre-institutional Mediation — A commercial suit is considered ‘duly instituted’ only after proper valuation, payment of requisite ad valorem court fees, and, where applicable (if no urgent interim relief is sought), exhaustion of the remedy of pre-institutional mediation as per Section 12-A of the Act — Until these conditions are met, the Commercial Court may not have full jurisdiction to proceed, and summons t India Law Library Docid # 2425534
(327) SHIVANI AND OTHERS Vs. BHERULAL AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (INDORE BENCH)] 22-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 8 Rule 6-A(1) — Filing of Counter-Claim — After Written Statement — A counter-claim is not barred from being filed merely because the defendant has already filed their written statement — Rule 6-A(1) requires that the cause of action for the counter-claim must have accrued to the defendant before the defendant delivered their defence or before the time limited for delivering the defence expired — The court, in its discretion, may allow a counter-claim to be fil India Law Library Docid # 2425535
(328) 63 IDEAS INFOLABS PVT. LTD. (TRADENAME NINJAKART) Vs. M/S MORE TRADING COMPANY AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)] 22-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of Plaint — Scope of Consideration — An application for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC must be decided solely on the basis of the averments made in the plaint and the documents annexed thereto — The court cannot consider allegations made by the defendant in their written statement or in the application for rejection itself — If the plaint, read as a whole, discloses a cause of action, it cannot be rejected under this provisi India Law Library Docid # 2425536
(329) ROSHAN LAL BHARDWAJ Vs. ASHOK SUD AND ANOTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 — Section 14(3)(c), Proviso — Eviction on ground of bona fide requirement for re-building/re-construction — Tenant’s right of re-entry — Scope and limitations — Proviso to Section 14(3)(c) grants right of re-entry only upon mutual agreement on new tenancy terms in a re-built building; requires presence of a re-built building and mutual agreement on new terms of tenancy for invocation — No evidence of India Law Library Docid # 2425891
(330) USHA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 — Section 145(1)(c) — Suspension of Pradhan — Validity — Allegations of illegalities and irregularities — Preliminary inquiry conducted, show cause notice issued, reply found unsatisfactory, leading to suspension — Suspension order issued following India Law Library Docid # 2425892
(331) DHARAM PRAKASH BHARDWAJ Vs. BABA JANG BAHADUR[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 — Section 24(5) — Revisional Jurisdiction of High Court — Scope under three Rent Control Acts (including H.P. Rent Act) similar, though wording varies — Wider than Section 115 CPC; not as wide as appellate power — Not a cloak for appeal in disguise — Rehearing of original issues impermissible India Law Library Docid # 2425899
(332) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. USMANKHANJI SAHIDKHANJI DAYMA[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 378(1)(3) — Criminal Appeal (acquittal) — Scope of interference — Appellate Court’s power is coextensive with trial court, can review and reappreciate evidence — No limitation on exercise of such power — Can reach own conclusions on facts and law — Expressions like ‘substantial and compelling reasons’ are ‘flourishes of language’, not curtailing power — However, in acquittal appeals, there is a ‘double presumption’ of innocence in favour of the accused — I India Law Library Docid # 2426101
(333) MALI KAPURJI VAGHAJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 43 Rule 1(u) — Appeal from Order — Nature of — Appeal against judgment and decree of appellate court remanding matter to trial court after joining State as party — Scope of appellate review under Order 43 Rule 1(u) involves examining whether the impugned order is erroneous, perverse, or arbitrary and if an error of law was committed in remanding the matter for fresh consideration India Law Library Docid # 2426102
(334) RAVINDRA NATUBHAI PATEL Vs. SATISHBHAI PARSHOTAMBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993 — Section 31(3) & (7) — Election disputes — Panchayat elections — Challenge to election result — Recounting of votes — Statutory framework mandates “inquiry” under Section 31(3) before ordering recount under Section 31(7)(b) — Tribunal’s power to scrutinize and compute votes under Section 31(7)(b) is dependent upon satisfactory inquiry and sufficient material/evidence presented — Bare allegations in election petition or small margin of victory India Law Library Docid # 2426103
(335) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHANA ARJAN VEDVA VAGHARI AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 378(1)(3) — Appeal against acquittal — Principles governing interference — Appellate Court has full power to review evidence but should be reluctant to interfere with acquittal unless conclusions are palpably wrong, based on erroneous law, or lead to grave injustice — Interference is not justified if trial court’s view of evidence is possible, even if appellate court might take a different view India Law Library Docid # 2426104
(336) ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. BHUPEN BHUYAN AND ANOTHER[GAUHATI HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 173 — Appeals — Challenge to Judgment and Award — Re-assessment of compensation under Section 166 where claim was converted from Section 166 to Section 163A — Appellant Insurer challenged compensation under various heads including physical pain, earning capacity, disability, and legal representatives’ ability to claim under Section 163A India Law Library Docid # 2426203
(337) KULDEEP Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 397 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope against Conviction — Discussion on the limited scope of the High Court's revisional jurisdiction under S. 397 Cr.P.C. when examining concurrent findings of conviction by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court — The revisional court's role is primarily confined to satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality, or propriety of the findings, sentence, or order and the regularity of the proceedings of the lower courts — Th India Law Library Docid # 2424863
(338) RAMESH SUNEJA Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025 Railways Act, 1989 — Ss. 123(c), 124-A — Untoward Incident — Accidental Fall from Train vs. Attempt to Alight — Bona Fide Passenger — Consideration of whether a fall from a moving train resulting in injury to a bona fide passenger constitutes an “untoward incident” under S. 123(c) liable for compensation under S. 124-A. Analysis contrasting the claimant’s consistent account of falling due to a push/jostling in an overcrowded compartment near a station with the Railways’ defence that it was an at India Law Library Docid # 2424864
(339) DR. ABHISHEK AGGARWAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) — Section 311 — Power to Summon Material Witness or Recall/Re-examine — Scope and Principles — The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is wide but must be exercised judiciously, with caution and circumspection, only to meet the ends of justice. Its objective is to discover the truth or obtain proper proof of facts essential for a just decision, not to fill up lacunae in the prosecution case resulting in prejudice to the accused or as an abuse of process. The c India Law Library Docid # 2425047
(340) AMARJIT KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. JAGJIT SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 21-04-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Just Compensation — Assessment — Overall Award vs. Component-wise Errors — While assessing appeals seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the appellate court must consider the overall ‘justness’ of the compensation awarded — Even if the Tribunal commits errors in calculating individual components enhancement is not warranted if the total compensation awarded is already adequate, just, or even excessive when view India Law Library Docid # 2425081