(821) D K RAVI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(2) — The appellant was convicted for collecting illegal gratification of Rs. 40,000 while working as a First Division Assistant in the Excise Commissioner's Office, Mysuru — Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant under Section 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of the Act, 1988 — The appellant argued that the money was given by his brother for a medical operation and not as a bribe — He also contended that there was n India Law Library Docid # 2416367
(822) B. KOTRESH Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 18-07-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 155(2) — No police officer shall investigate a non-cognisable case — The petitioner was accused of playing the matka game — The police conducted a raid, seized money and items, and filed a complaint — Whether the police followed the mandatory requirements under Section 155(1) and (2) of Cr.P.C. for investigating a non-cognizable offence — The complaint is misconceived, and the police did not comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 155(1) a India Law Library Docid # 2416371
(823) DR. SABEEL AHMED @ MOTU DOCTOR Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 300 — Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Sections 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18 and 20 — Petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order by the Special Court for NIA cases in Bengaluru, which dismissed his application for discharge under Section 300 of Cr.P.C. — Whether the petitioner can be tried again in Bengaluru for the same set of facts for which he was acquitted by the Delhi court — The petitioner argued that being tried again in Beng India Law Library Docid # 2416387
(824) SRI. SOMESH @ SOMA (A1) Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 201 and 302 — The petitioner was apprehended for his involvement in a murder case and has been in judicial custody since March 16, 2024 — Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. — The petitioner argued for bail, citing a precedent where bail was granted despite multiple criminal cases — The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner's involvement in multiple serious criminal cases and his attempt to assault police offic India Law Library Docid # 2416372
(825) SHRI SAMIULLA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DHARWAD BENCH)] 18-07-2024 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 359 and 528 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 326, 504, and 506 — Quashing of Proceedings — Voluntarily causing grievous hurt — Whether the proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed based on a compromise between the parties — Both parties have settled their dispute amicably and filed a compromise petition under Section 359 read with Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Respondent No. 2 agreed to withdraw the co India Law Library Docid # 2416374
(826) ARUNKUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (KALABURAGI BENCH)] 18-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — 323, 324, 504 and 506 — Quashing of Criminal Proceedings — The petitioner argue for quashing the proceedings due to the absence of necessary ingredients for the alleged offences and claim the proceedings are a counterblast — The respondents argue that there is sufficient material to prosecute the accused for the alleged offences — Both criminal petitions are dismissed — The court found sufficient material to prosecute the accused and emphasized that conflicting judgments India Law Library Docid # 2416381
(827) M/S POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 18-07-2024 Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 — Sections 95, 97 and 98(2) — The petitioner engaged in electricity transmission, sought an advance ruling on whether transportation of goods is exempt under a specific notification — The AAR rejected the application, stating the petitioner was not the supplier — Whether a recipient liable to pay tax on reverse charge basis can seek an advance ruling — The petitioner argued that there is no restriction in Sections 95 and 97 that only suppliers can seek ad India Law Library Docid # 2416478
(828) AGARWAL POLYSACKS LIMITED Vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Income Tax Act 1961 — Section 147 —Petitioner sold 13 plots in cash during FY 2019-20 — The Revenue issued a notice for reassessment, claiming the income from these sales escaped assessment — Whether the petitioner was given a fair opportunity to be heard and whether the reassessment was justified — The petitioner argued no opportunity of hearing was given and their reply was not considered — They also claimed no knowledge of the sales as they were conducted by a power of attorney holder — The R India Law Library Docid # 2416493
(829) YOUNAS ALI AND OTHERS Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376, 109 and 506 — The petitioners sought bail under Section 438 Cr.PC in a case involving allegations of rape and abetment — Whether the petitioners should be granted anticipatory bail given the severity of the allegations — The petitioners claimed the FIR was based on a concocted story and that they have been cooperating with the investigation — The respondents argued that the petitioners' release would impact the investigation and the complainant's safety — T India Law Library Docid # 2416563
(830) AJMER SINGH Vs. MEWA SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 23A and Order 6 Rule 17 — Remand of cases by appellate courts — The dispute involves the inheritance of property left by late ‘C’ — The plaintiff claims a registered Will dated 03.03.1981 in favor of the plaintiff and defendant No.1, which the defendants contested — The correctness of the First Appellate Court’s order allowing the respondents' application to amend the plaint and remitting the matter back to the trial Court — Petitioner Argues that India Law Library Docid # 2416628
(831) UTTAR HARYANA BIJI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. Vs. THE INDIAN EXPRESS PVT. LTD AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 18-07-2024 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 — Section 22-C — Cognizance of cases by Permanent Lok Adalats — The case involves a billing dispute regarding excessive electricity charges during the COVID-19 pandemic — Whether the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) had jurisdiction to adjudicate the billing dispute — The petitioner argued that the dispute was a technical billing issue, not related to the supply of electricity, and should be resolved by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum — T India Law Library Docid # 2416629
(832) DURGESH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 17-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363 and 366-A —Quashing of FIR —Compromise between the parties — The petitioner's minor daughter had gone missing, and the petitioner was accused of making her elope with him — However, the daughter had already married the petitioner and had two children with him — The mother of the daughter, respondent No.2, and the daughter, respondent No.3, stated that they had resolved to settle the dispute amicably and did not wish to prosecute the case further — The court India Law Library Docid # 2416086
(833) RAJWANT SINGH Vs. PARGAT SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) THR LRS AND ANOTHER[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Motor Vehicles Act, 1998 — Section 166 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 — Rash and Negligent driving — Appeal against the award of the Tribunal — The Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs. 1,56,000 along with interest @ 7.5% to the legal representatives, who died due to injuries sustained in a road accident caused by the appellant's rash and negligent driving — The High Court rejected the appellant's arguments that the mechanical reports of both vehicles showed no dama India Law Library Docid # 2416111
(834) KARTAR SINGH Vs. BHUPINDER KAUR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Damages for malicious prosecution and defamation —The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff-appellant, against the defendant-respondents — The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.50,000/- as damages for malicious prosecution and defamation against the defendants — The plaintiff, a retired Army personnel, claimed that his wife, the first defendant, had left their home and filed false complaints against him, resulting in his humiliation and arrest — However, both the tr India Law Library Docid # 2416112
(835) VINOD YADAV AND OTHERS Vs. MAMTA YADAV[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 37 Rule 4 — Power to set aside decree— Suit for recovery of money — The defendant had failed to appear in the proceedings despite being served with summons and had later filed an application under Order 37 Rule 4 CPC to set aside the judgment and decree passed against them — The court found that the defendant had not provided any "special circumstances" to justify their non-appearance and had failed to raise any triable issue to disentitle the plaintiff f India Law Library Docid # 2416117
(836) T.R. SAWHNEY SHOPPING PVT. LTD. Vs. NAGENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 7 Rule 11 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 14 —The High Court has dismissed a civil revision petition filed by petitioner against the respondents — The petitioner had challenged an order allowing the respondents' application under Section 14 of the Act, 1963, which sought to exclude the period spent before the District Forum and State Commission — The court found that the respondents had not exercised "due diligence" and "good faith" in pursuing remedies India Law Library Docid # 2416118
(837) CHANDER BHAN Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Public Premises (Eviction of the Unauthorised Occupant) Act, 1971 — Sections 4 and 9 — The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to prohibit the DDA from raising a boundary wall on or around an agricultural land that he claims to possess by virtue of a General Power of Attorney (GPA), Will, and Receipt executed by his predecessor-in-interest — The DDA, however, argues that the petitioner has no legal right, title, or interest in the subject property, which is a part of Zone "O" of the Master India Law Library Docid # 2416119
(838) SH DADASO JAGTAP AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT SATWANT KAUR SARNA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Amendment of pleadings — Seeking possession of a property and damages — The petitioners challenge an order passed by the Additional District Judge allowing the respondent No. 1/plaintiff's application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code to amend the plaint by adding new defendants and seeking rectification of a General Power of Attorney (GPA) deed — The Court sets aside the impugned order and allows the petitioners to proceed with the suit as o India Law Library Docid # 2416120
(839) MANGAL AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Public Premises (Eviction of the Unauthorised Occupant) Act, 1971 — Sections 4 and 9 — The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by seven petitioners who claimed to be in authorized possession of agricultural land since 1962 — The court found that the petitioners had no legal right to claim possession or right to cultivation over the land, which is part of the Yamuna River floodplains and is required to be rid of encroachments in the larger public interest — The court also noted that the la India Law Library Docid # 2416121
(840) SMT. AMRIT KAUR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE AND OTHERS[DELHI HIGH COURT] 16-07-2024 Succession Act, 1925 — Section 276 — Petition for probate — Multiple Wills — The case revolves around a testamentary petition filed by petitioner the two daughters of late ‘G' seeking grant of letters of administration in respect of a purported Will dated 7th November 1994 — The petitioners claim that the Will was executed by the testator in the presence of three attesting witnesses and that it revokes all previous Wills and codicils — The objectors to the petition are the sons of the testator w India Law Library Docid # 2416122