(101) VANTAGE INTEGRATED SECURITIES SOLUTION PVT LTD Vs. SPARK TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 37 — Scope of interference — Held, where Arbitrator found no contractual stipulation entitling appellant to unilaterally adjust/recover liquidated damages imposed on it by a third party against amounts admittedly payable to respondent, and such finding was based on interpretation of the Purchase Order and evidence on India Law Library Docid # 2448563
(102) OGULJEREN DERCHIYEVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA[DELHI HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Customs Act, 1962 — Ss. 80 and 125 — Interplay — Held, S. 80 constitutes a special statutory code governing return/re-export of goods forming part of passenger baggage, conditional upon a true declaration under S. 77, whereas S. 125 is a general discretionary provision for redemption of confiscated goods and does not itself authorise re-export of confiscated baggage irrespective of compliance with S. 80 — Discretion to permit redemption of "prohibited goods" under India Law Library Docid # 2448564
(103) KAVITHA KURUGANTI Vs. PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-08-2026 Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 — Sections 34(h) and 39(1)(iv) — Revocation on ground of vexatious action against farmers — Suits filed by breeder against individual farmers alleging infringement, whether vexatious/predatory so as to attract revocation under S. 34(h) — Held, mere filing of suits for protection of statutory rights conferred under the Act cannot per se be held intimidatory or vexatious — Allegation of vexatious suits India Law Library Docid # 2448639
(104) HRUDAYA KHARA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH[ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(ii)(B) — Bail — Non-Commercial Quantity — Second Bail Application — Bail may be granted on a second application to an accused found in possession of a non-commercial quantity of ganja, having no adverse antecedents, a fixed abode, and prolonged judicial custody without filing of charge sheet, notwithstanding an earlier co-accused-specific order — Relief granted subject to stringent conditions. [Paras 5-6] India Law Library Docid # 2448779
(105) SATYENDRA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 — Unlawful assembly and fatal assault — Non-proof of five or more persons forming unlawful assembly — Defective framing of charge — Investigation not pending against unknown persons under Section 173(8) CrPC — Specific individual role and common intention required to be evaluated — Where charge-sheet failed to show an unlawful assembly India Law Library Docid # 2448803
(106) STYLO MANDAVI Vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 8(1)(d) — Exemption from disclosure — Cheque Drawn Register — Information seeker requested certified copy of Cheque Drawn Register of Forest Department — Held, Cheque Drawn Register contains details involving commercial confidence and trade secrets, disclosure of which is likely to harm competitive position of a third party — Respondent failed to establish India Law Library Docid # 2448966
(107) STYLO MANDAVI AND OTHERS Vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Right to Information Act, 2005 — Sections 8(1)(d) and 7(9) — Exempted information — Disclosure of Cheque Drawn Register — Public Information Officer refused request seeking Cheque Drawn Register of Forest Department — Held, Cheque Drawn Register contains information including commercial confidence and trade secrets, disclosure of which is likely to harm competitive position of a third India Law Library Docid # 2448967
(108) KIRTI SAHU Vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 20(1) and first proviso — Imposition of penalty on Public Information Officer — Principles of natural justice — Mandatory requirement of distinct show-cause notice — State Information Commission imposed penalty under Section 20(1) on petitioner during appeal proceedings without issuing a separate show-cause notice proposing penalty or affording an effective hearing on India Law Library Docid # 2448968
(109) RAMTA BAI SAHU Vs. JOHANRAM SAHU[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Condonation of Delay — Criminal Revision — Delay of 130 days — Ground of financial constraints — Applicant sought condonation of delay on ground of poverty and lack of funds to arrange legal representation — Held, discretion to condone delay must be exercised cautiously upon demonstration of sufficient cause — Poverty, financial constraints, or ignorance of law do not by India Law Library Docid # 2448969
(110) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. P.D. ASATI (DELETED) AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(1)(c) r/w Section 13(2) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 471 r/w Section 34 — Appeal against acquittal — Allegations of illegal gratification and forgery — Complainant contractor admitted signing tender documents, Measurement Book, final bills, and cheque receipts without contemporaneous protest — Alleged telephonic demand of bribe India Law Library Docid # 2448970
(111) NAMAN GUPTA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 528 — Scope of inherent jurisdiction — Quashing of FIR, charge-sheet, and cognizance order — Power to quash criminal proceedings must be exercised sparingly, with circumspection, and only in exceptional cases — High Court while considering a quashing petition cannot conduct a mini-trial, evaluate evidentiary worth, or adjudicate disputed factual issues India Law Library Docid # 2448971
(112) ANGELIQUE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs. SOUTH EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6), Section 12(5) and Seventh Schedule — Appointment of Arbitrator — Statutory bar on unilateral appointment — Contractual clause empowering respondent to unilaterally appoint an arbitrator is invalid and contrary to Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Act — Unilateral appointment clauses in public-private contracts are arbitrary and India Law Library Docid # 2448972
(113) SMT. DURGA SAHU Vs. TRIVENI PRASAD SAHU[CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] 05-08-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 397, 401 and Section 125 — Condonation of delay — Delay of 213 days in filing criminal revision — Applicant pleaded being a housewife unaware of legal remedies against order dismissing her maintenance claim — Held, mere ignorance of law or lack of legal awareness does not constitute "sufficient cause" under Section 5 India Law Library Docid # 2448973
(114) AMRAVATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Vs. GANESH DADARAO ANASANE AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Environmental Law — Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026 — Institutionalisation & Environmental Compensation — Environmental governance requires institutionalizing enforcement mechanisms beyond framing rules — Under Rules 17 and 18, a Central Implementation Committee must be constituted to supervise implementation and formulate structured, objective guidelines for levying India Law Library Docid # 2448521
(115) K. BHARATHAMMA Vs. BANDARU SAKKU BAI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 18 Rule 17 & Section 151 — Scope and Parameters for Recalling Witness and Reopening Evidence — The power to recall and examine a witness under Order 8 Rule 17 is a discretionary power-cum-facilitator vested primarily in the court to clarify doubts or seeking clarifications regarding evidence already led — It cannot be routinely invoked at the instance of a party at the fag end of a trial to fill up lacunae, omissions, or gaps in evidence, nor to permit fu India Law Library Docid # 2448522
(116) KUNTEGOWDA Vs. THURUBAIAH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138, 118(a) and 139 — Presumption of Legally Enforceable Debt & Rebuttal by Accused — Once the execution of a cheque and the drawer's signature are admitted or proved, statutory mandatory presumptions arise under Sections 118 and 139 that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt — The burden shifts to the accused to disprove these presumptions by leading cogent direct or indirect India Law Library Docid # 2448523
(117) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SMT. THUNGALA DHANA LAXMI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 146, 147, 196 and 207 — Motor Insurance — Uninsured Vehicles & Mandatory Coverage — Public Interest Directions for Integration of Technology and Policy Reforms — Despite statutory mandate under Section 146 of the MVA, over 56% of vehicles on Indian roads remain uninsured, severely impeding prompt compensation to accident victims and drawing affected families into prolonged litigation — Recognising the safety of commuters India Law Library Docid # 2448524
(118) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. SRI DEVRAJ URS MEDICAL COLLEGE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 141 — Judicial Precedents — Retrospective Application — Judicial declarations of law by the Supreme Court operate retrospectively unless expressly stated to be prospective — The 11-Judge Bench decision in T.M.A. Pai Foundation (31.10.2002) declaring the subvention scheme unconstitutional took immediate retrospective effect, terminating executive India Law Library Docid # 2448517
(119) ARJUN JANI @ TUNTUN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Criminal Law — Access to Justice for Indigent Convicts — Constitutional Courts must adopt a proactive, liberal approach to condone inordinate delays in appeals filed by incarcerated, marginalized convicts to safeguard fundamental rights — High Court erred in refusing to condone a 3157-day delay in a jail appeal where the convict had already served 12 years of life imprisonment. India Law Library Docid # 2448518
(120) SPO/CONSTABLE IRB SATPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-08-2026 Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 — Section 12 — Effect of Probation on Service Career — Release of a convict on probation under Section 3 or 4 of the 1958 Act does not obliterate conviction — The "disqualification" under Section 12 refers strictly to statutory disqualifications under other laws and does not bar disciplinary action, removal from public service, or override constitutional provisions like Article India Law Library Docid # 2448519