(541) JEMABHAI GHUGHABHAI KANZARIYA SINCE DECD. THROUGH LHRS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Service Law — Government Resolutions dated 17.10.1988 and 15.09.2014 — Daily wagers and piece-rate workers — Entitlement to regularisation and pensionary benefits — Deceased employee served in the Forest Department for 22 years, comprising both daily wage and piece-rate basis — State counted only 7 years of daily wage service, excluding 9 years of piece-rate work exceeding 240 days annually — Held, State authority cannot ignore actual working days of a piece-rated worker by altering status from India Law Library Docid # 2452988
(542) THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER Vs. M/S DHARIWAL INDUSTRIES PVT LIMITED[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Central Excise Rules, 2002 — Rule 21 — Remission of duty — Goods unfit for consumption or marketing — Injunction by civil court — Assessee was restrained by an ad-interim injunction from using the trademark "Manikchand", leading to goods lying unutilized and becoming unfit for human consumption — Assessee applied for duty remission and destruction of stock under Rule 21 — Revenue failed to physically verify the condition of the goods — Held, as the assessee was legally barred from marketing the India Law Library Docid # 2452989
(543) RAMESH Vs. STATE[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 134 — Rape — Sole testimony of prosecutrix — Appreciation of evidence — Conviction for rape can be based on the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix only if it inspires confidence and is of sterling quality — Where the prosecutrix's narrative is unsupported by medical evidence, demonstrates material prevarications regarding the sequence of assault, and the surrounding circumstances are improbable, the court cannot mechani India Law Library Docid # 2452998
(544) SHRI COLONIZERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. ABHA GUPTA[ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (LUCKNOW BENCH)] 16-09-2026 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 11 — Res Judicata and Constructive Res Judicata — Question of jurisdiction and pure point of law — Maintainability of appeal — Erroneous decision in earlier round of litigation between the same parties holding special appeal maintainable does not bar a challenge to jurisdiction in subsequent proceedings — Res judicata cannot confer jurisdiction upon a court which inherently lacks it — Erroneous decision on an issue of law relating to jurisdiction or statutory India Law Library Docid # 2452999
(545) ANISH BABU VENUGOPAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Companies Act, 1956 — Section 58A(9) and 58A(10) — Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948 — Section 25(2) and 25(3)(b) — Criminal liability of Nominee Director — Non-compliance with Company Law Board (CLB) order for repayment of deposits — Applicant was appointed as a nominee director on behalf of IFCI under a loan agreement — Under Section 25(3)(b) of the IFC Act, a nominee director does not incur liability merely by reason of being a director — Applicant acted as a non-executive, independent India Law Library Docid # 2452984
(546) STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS Vs. JYOTIKABEN W-O MOHANLAL CHUNILAL PRAJAPATI AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Law of Torts — Negligence — Fatal accident — Occupier's liability — Deceased visited State premises to inspect scrap materials for a public auction along with his brother who paid tender fees — Dilapidated gantry crane under State supervision collapsed, causing fatal injuries — State's contention that deceased was a trespasser rejected, holding him to be a lawful invitee — Public authorities owe a duty of care to maintain safe premises — Collapse of structure under exclusive control of the autho India Law Library Docid # 2452986
(547) STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. UPENDRA RATILAL PATEL AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Scope of appellate interference — Principles reiterated — An appellate court has full power to review, re-appreciate, and reconsider the evidence on which an acquittal is founded — However, an order of acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused — Where two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the acquittal re India Law Library Docid # 2452987
(548) THAKUR ASHOK KUMAR PRASAD Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 311(2) — Disciplinary Proceedings — Ex-parte enquiry — Non-supply of enquiry report — Natural justice — Show-cause notices returned unserved with postal endorsement of residence elsewhere, yet authorities proceeded ex-parte — Delinquents dismissed without being furnished copies of ex-parte enquiry reports — Held, right to receive enquiry officer's report is an indispensable component of reasonable opportunity — Failure to supply report caused grave prejudice India Law Library Docid # 2453119
(549) SRI SARYUG MOCHI @ SARAUG MOCHI Vs. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER(MUNICIPALITY) AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 — Section 18(1)(m) and Section 18(2) — Disqualification for more than two children — Effect of Supreme Court interim stay — Difference between quashing and stay of operation — High Court Division Bench previously quashed Election Commission's disqualification order — Supreme Court subsequently stayed operation of High Court's judgment with condition permitting elected persons to continue — Commission disqualified petitioner again in a subsequent election relying on evid India Law Library Docid # 2453123
(550) MD. SAHANAWAZ AKHTAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Arms Act, 1959 — Section 14 — Arms Rules, 2016 — Grant of arms licence — Absence of threat perception — Petitioner's application for an arms licence was rejected by the licensing authority and appellate authority primarily due to lack of threat perception — Held, right to bear arms is not a fundamental right but a statutory privilege regulated by law — An arms licence cannot be denied solely on the ground that the applicant does not face a specific threat or imminent danger — Refusal requires re India Law Library Docid # 2453124
(551) M/S. SEPL-LLC SPHERE Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Government Contracts — Tender Process — Scope of Judicial Review — Interference with Tender Committee decision — Petitioner challenged the rejection of its techno-commercial bid for a railway tender — High Court held that the writ court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, will not sit as an appellate authority over the evaluation or decision of the Tender Committee — Where sufficient and valid grounds exist showing that the bid failed to comply India Law Library Docid # 2453130
(552) SACHIDANAND Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of delay — Letters Patent Appeal filed with 1275 days delay — Appellant pleaded lack of knowledge and non-communication of Single Judge order for over 31/2 years — Held, it is unbelievable that appellant sat idle without inquiring about his case — Even after excluding the COVID-19 pandemic period, an unexplained delay of nearly two years remained — Law aids the vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights under the maxim "vigilantibus non dorm India Law Library Docid # 2453133
(553) SMT. RAJDEEP MALA KUMARI @ RAJDEEP MALA Vs. SUNIL KUMAR AND OTHERS[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 — Jurisdiction of Lok Adalat — Property disputes — Partition at pre-litigation stage — Lok Adalats have no jurisdiction to entertain property disputes or contentious matters, including partition, even at a pre-litigation stage on the basis of a compromise — In the absence of proof of title, identity of parties, and genuineness of claims, no decree or award for title or partition can be passed — Award passed in a pre-litigation partition case dealing with self India Law Library Docid # 2453134
(554) PAWAN KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439(2) — Cancellation of anticipatory bail — Supervening circumstances — Accused secured anticipatory bail exclusively upon a mediated settlement agreement, but failed to pay any amount within the stipulated period — Accused subsequently evaded court process until coercive measures were adopted — Held, obtaining bail upon an assurance never intended to be honoured, coupled with sustained abscondence and evasion of justice, destroys the foundation of India Law Library Docid # 2453135
(555) RAJIV KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 406 — Criminal breach of trust — Essential ingredients — Entrustment of property — Complainant paid part of sale consideration under an agreement for sale of land, but petitioner allegedly failed to execute sale deed — Discharge application rejected — Held, essential requirements under Section 406 IPC are entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation or conversion thereof — Amount paid towards sale consideration under an agreement cannot, without anythin India Law Library Docid # 2453139
(556) PASHUPATI PANDEY @ PASUPATI NATH PANDEY Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 190 and 482 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 304B and 201/34 — Taking of cognizance differing from police report — Dowry death — Police submitted closure report exonerating petitioner-husband — Jurisdictional Magistrate took cognizance of offences — Petitioner challenged cognizance alleging lack of reasons assigned while differing from closure report — Held, where factual aspects require determination at trial and charges have already been frame India Law Library Docid # 2453143
(557) BIRENDRA KUMAR @ KUNAL KUMAR @ VIRENDRA KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 306 and 107 — Abetment of suicide — Essential ingredients — Offence under Section 306 IPC requires proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or incitement in close proximity to the suicide — Clear mens rea intending to push the victim to a position of having no choice but to commit suicide is indispensable — Stray domestic disputes, assault, or mere harassment do not constitute abetment — Acts of desperation cannot be brought within the ambit of Section 30 India Law Library Docid # 2453144
(558) SHANTI SWARUP SHARMA @ SHANTI SWAROOP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[PATNA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Criminal liability of non-signatory — Quashing of proceedings — Complainant alleged that petitioner issued a refund cheque that was dishonoured with the endorsement "payment stopped by drawer" and was signed with a name variation — Petitioner contended that he was neither the drawer nor the signatory to the cheque — Held, statutory liability under Section 138 of the Act is strictly confined to the drawer of the cheque — In the absence of the petit India Law Library Docid # 2453145
(559) ANUJ AGARWAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Service Law — U.P. State Electricity Board Employees Seniority Regulations, 1998 — Regulation 8(3) — "Result of any one selection" — Meaning of — Vacancies for recruitment year 2008-09 under direct recruitment and promotion quotas were determined simultaneously — Selection process for direct recruits concluded in subsequent year due to administrative delays — Held, "one selection" does not mean selection completed within one single recruitment year — Recruitment from both sources initiated again India Law Library Docid # 2453182
(560) BALBIR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 16-09-2026 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 341 and 506 — Quashing of FIR and cross-DDR — Compromise between parties — Parties involved in cross-cases arising from the same incident resolved disputes amicably — Judicial Magistrate verified the compromise and submitted a report recording satisfaction that the settlement was genuine, voluntary, and arrived at without any undue influence or coercion — State counsel raised no dispute reg India Law Library Docid # 2453198