This week’s roundup will traverse various High Courts to convey important legal developments such as illegal mining at Satluj River, Narayan Sai’s Humanitarian Bail to meet his father Asaram Bapu, delayed declaration of Morni Hills as reserved forest, Muslim women’s right to khula divorce, Palghar MLA Rajendra Gavit’s second marriage, and much more.
ACQUITTAL
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Police constable’s conviction in 31-year-old prisoner escape case, overturned
In a criminal revision petition filed by the accused against the conviction under Section 223 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) for the escape of undertrial prisoners, the Single Judge Bench of Farjand Ali, J. holding that criminal negligence under 223 of the IPC requires a substantial deviation from the standard of care expected out of reasonable person and the actions of the accused were driven by humanitarian concerns and not with intent or recklessness to facilitate escape, set aside the conviction and sentence order against the accused. Read more HERE
ADVERTISEMENT
DELHI HIGH COURT | Ghadi detergent directed to remove derogatory phrases targeting Surf Excel from its advertisements
In a petition filed by Hindustan Unilever Ltd., the plaintiff seeking an injunction against defendant, from disparaging the plaintiff’s product i.e. Surf Excel detergent, Pratibha Singh, J., stated that while telecasting commercials for its ‘Ghadi’ detergent powder, reference made by the defendant to the ‘competitor’s product’ in the advertisement, could be clearly taken to be plaintiff’s product ‘Surf Excel’. The Court found such advertisements to be derogatory and accordingly, directed the defendant to remove all the derogatory phrases from the advertisements and then telecast it. Read more HERE
ADVOCATES
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | Advocate barred from practising and entering its premises for three years
In an application filed by an Advocate to recall the contempt order dated 10-04-2025, whereby the he was sentenced to six months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000 and was issued a notice to show why he should not be restrained from practicing in the High Court at Allahabad and Lucknow for three years, the Division Bench of Vivek Chaudhary and Brij Raj Singh, JJ., noting no improvement in the Advocate’s behaviour even after being punished for contempt before, rejected his application of recall and barred him from practicing and appearing before the Allahabad High Court and its Lucknow Bench for a period of three years. He was also sentenced to six months imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2000 and was restrained from entering the Court premises during the 3 years’ period. Read more HERE
ANIMALS, BIRDS AND FISHES
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | West Bengal Govt directed to ensure no elephants are illegally/unlawfully transported from its borders
In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Cape Foundation highlighting the illegal transportation of elephants from the State of West Bengal, the Division Bench of Ravi Krishnan Kapur*, Arindam Mukherjee, JJ, held that the ownership of those elephants vested with the State of Bengal and directed the State to take steps to ensure that no further incidence of illegal transportation of elephants takes place. Read more HERE
ARBITRATION
GUJARAT HIGH COURT | Delay in curing registry defects under Section 34 and its impact on arbitration applications
In a batch of appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’) against the setting aside of the arbitral award passed in favour of the appellants, the Division Bench of Sunita Agarwal*, CJ. and Pranav Trivedi, J., partly allowed the appeals, holding that a delay in curing registry defects under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not render the application time-barred, provided the application was initially filed within the statutory limitation period. The Court delved into various aspects of an arbitration proceeding, such as the limitation on Section 34 appeals, the demand of exorbitant fees by the Arbitrator(s), the applicability of the doctrine of severability on arbitral awards, and much more. Read more HERE
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | Arbitrator cannot be impleaded in proceedings under S. 36(2) of A&C Act until prima facie case of fraud/corruption is established
While adjudicating upon an interlocutory application seeking impleadment of arbitrator to the proceedings under Section 36(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’), a Single Judge Bench of Aniruddha Roy, J*, held that where allegations of fraud or corruption have been raised against an arbitrator, the arbitrator cannot be impleaded to the proceedings until a prima facie case of fraud or corruption is established against him. Read more HERE
GAUHATI HIGH COURT | Retd. District and Sessions Judge, Nagaland appointed as an arbitrator in lottery printing dispute with Nagaland Government
In a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 11(5) read with Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’) for appointment of an arbitrator, Yarenjungla Longkumer, J., opined that the dispute between the parties was arbitrable in nature. Therefore, the Court referred parties to the arbitration and accordingly, appointed Khape Koza, Retired District and Sessions Judge of Nagaland, as an arbitrator to arbitrate the dispute between the parties, subject to his consent and disclosure. Read more HERE
BAIL
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Merely stating bail proposal of accused is “under consideration” not sufficient to deprive co-accused benefit of parity
The present bail application was filed by the appellant under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’), who was charged for multiple offences under Sections 306, 387, 506(2), 427 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), as well as charges under the provisions of Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (‘MCOCA’). A Single Judge Bench of Amit Borkar, J., held that the applicant was entitled to bail based on parity with the co-accused, who had already been granted bail by the same Court on the similar grounds. Read more HERE
GUJARAT HIGH COURT | Temporary bail granted to Narayan Sai on ‘humanitarian grounds’ to meet ailing father Asaram Bapu
In an application filed by Narayan Sai seeking grant of bail, the Division Bench comprising of Ilesh J. Vora* and P. M. Raval, JJ, allowed Narayan Sai to be released on temporary bail of 5 days to meet his ailing old father Asaram Bapu. The bail was granted on humanitarian grounds considering that the father and son had not met each other personally since Narayan Sai’s incarceration in 2013. Read more HERE
BLACK MAGIC/ WITCHCRAFT
KERALA HIGH COURT | State Govt’s stand sought on law prohibiting black magic, witchcraft and sorcery
In a petition highlighting the need to enact laws prohibiting the practice of black magic, the Division Bench of Nitin Jamdar, C.J.* and Basant Balaji, J., directed the State Government to file an affidavit regarding its stand on the necessity and urgency of enactment of the laws prohibiting the practice of black magic, witchcraft or sorcery, and other inhuman, evil and sinister practices in the name of so called supernatural or magical powers or evil spirits. Read more HERE
CONVICTION
SIKKIM HIGH COURT | Life sentence of grandson confessed to killing 82-year-old grandmother by slitting her throat, upheld
In a criminal appeal, the appellant who was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Special Division-I, Gangtok District, Sikkim (‘trial court’) under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) for murdering his grandmother (‘the deceased’) by slitting her throat with a sharp object, challenged the conviction and pleaded not guilty to the allegations. A Division Bench of Meenakshi Madan Rai* and Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, JJ., upheld the trial court’s decision, holding that even if the Court excluded the extra-judicial confession, though made entirely voluntarily by the appellant to the prosecution witnesses, the other evidence on record would establish that the prosecution had proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt through forensic evidence and consistent eyewitnesses. [Navin v. State of Sikkim, 2025 SCC OnLine Sikk 59] Read more HERE
CRIMINAL TRIAL
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT | Interim stay ordered on investigation against Bokaro Steel Plant officials in a protester’s death
In an application filed to quash the First Information Report (‘FIR’) registered under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 103, and 161(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’) against Director in charge Bokaro Steel Plant and the Executive Director (P&A) Bokaro Steel in connection with the death of a protester, the Single Judge Bench of Ananda Sen, J., passed an interim order directing the respondents not to proceed with the investigation and further no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners. Read more HERE
CULTURAL RIGHTS AND PERSONAL LAW
MADRAS HIGH COURT | Condition requiring vehicle pass for devotees attending Lord Muruga’s religious conference, set aside
In an appeal filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 13-6-2023, the Division Bench of G.R. Swaminathan* and K. Rajasekar, JJ, held that the condition imposed by an Assistant Commissioner of Police restraining entry of vehicles into Madurai amounted to restriction of freedom of movement under Article 19(1)(d) of Constitution. Thus, the Court set aside the condition which required vehicle pass for devotees attending the Lord Muruga’s religious conference. Read more HERE
MADRAS HIGH COURT | Houses cannot be used as prayer halls without permission from authorities
In a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 20-1-2024, wherein the petitioner was directed to close down the prayer house within 10 days, N Anand Venkatesh, J., stated conducting prayer meetings in a prayer hall requires obtaining permission from the authority concerned under the relevant rules. The Court stated that the petitioner cannot, as a matter of right, have a prayer hall to conduct prayer meetings without obtaining any permission, and accordingly dismissed the present writ petition. Read more HERE
TELANGANA HIGH COURT | Muslim Woman have absolute right to demand divorce by khula
In a petition filed by the husband seeking to declare the impugned order passed by Respondent 2, wherein the marriage between him and his wife was dissolved, as null and void, the Division Bench of Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.* and B.R. Madhusudhan Rao, stated that the wife’s right to demand khula was absolute and does not have to be predicated on a cause or acceptance of the demand by the husband. Therefore, the Court found the petition to be misconceived and contrary to established legal principles, and accordingly, dismissed the same. Read more HERE
CUSTODY
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | “Gender-sensitive, emotionally intelligent, & child-centered judicial approach required in custody of minor girls”: Minor daughter’s custody granted to mother
In an application filed by the applicant-wife against the rejection of her appeal filed against the Trial Court’s orders granting the wife only visitation rights for her minor daughter (‘the child’), the Single Judge Bench of Vinod Diwakar, J., allowed the application, granting the custody of the child to the wife. The Court held that the husband first orchestrated a fabricated story to remove the child from wife’s care and then made the wife move out of the couple’s home solely to connivingly retain custody of the child. Read more HERE
CUSTOMS
BOMBAY DELHI HIGH COURT | Why Article 24 of AIFTA did not deprive customs authorities to issue show cause notices
The Division Bench of M.S. Sonak* and Jitendra Jain , JJ., heard a writ petition wherein the petitioner challenged the show cause-cum-demand notices issued under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 (‘the Act’), in the context of benefits under Customs Notification No. 46 of 2011 dated 1-6-2011 concerning the imports of “Tin Ingots” from Malaysia. The Court while dealing with alleged misuse of preferential trade benefits under the ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement (‘AIFTA’), held that Article 24 of AIFTA did not deprive customs authorities of their power or jurisdiction to issue a show cause notice. The Court dismissed the petition and held that the authorities were yet to adjudicate the matter, and it was not for this Court to make any observations that would prejudice the interest of the petitioners or the respondents. [Purple Products (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2367] Read more HERE
EDUCATION LAW
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | CLAT | Constitutional validity of Domicile-Based Reservation at NLU Jodhpur, upheld
In a writ petition filed by petitioner, a resident of West Bengal and a CLAT 2024 aspirant, challenging the constitutional validity of Notification S.O. 123 dated 26-12-2022 issued by the State of Rajasthan and the Resolution dated 22-01-2022 passed by the Executive Council of National Law University (NLU), Jodhpur, thereby introducing a 25% horizontal domicile-based reservation in undergraduate and postgraduate law programs at NLU Jodhpur, a Division Bench of Pushpendra Singh Bhati* and Chandra Prakash Shrimali, JJ., upheld the validity of the impugned notification and resolution introducing domicile-based reservation. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | Equivalency certificate from State Universities’ not required for degrees from national institutions like IGNOU
In a writ petition challenging the decision of LBS Centre for Science and Technology mandating an equivalency certificate for petitioner’s Master’s degree from Indira Gandhi National Open University (‘IGNOU’), to be obtained from Kerala State University as per the State Eligibility Test (‘SET’) Prospectus., the Single Judge Bench of D. K. Singh, J. held that insisting on an equivalency certificate for degrees obtained from Central Universities recognized by the University Grants Commission (‘UGC’), as required in the prospectus of the State Eligibility Test (‘SET’), is ultra vires the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. The Court emphasized that such a condition undermines the authority of nationally recognized institutions and runs contrary to both the UGC Regulations and the National Education Policy. Read more HERE
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT | ‘Personal choice to prepare for competitive exams doesn’t warrant extension of professional course’; MBA completion beyond prescribed period, denied
In a writ petition filed by a student seeking permission to complete his MBA course after having dropped out during the fourth semester to prepare for competitive examinations, a Single Judge Bench of Ajay Mohan Goel, J. dismissed the plea. The Court noted that the petitioner had failed to complete the MBA program within the prescribed maximum duration of six years. Consequently, he ceased to be a candidate for the course upon the expiry of this statutory period. The Court held that a student’s personal decision to prepare for competitive examinations, at the cost of not appearing for semester exams, did not entitle them to an extension of the academic timeline. It further emphasised that professional courses such as the MBA are governed by strict academic schedules, and personal choices cannot be grounds for relaxation of these regulations. Read more HERE
ELECTION LAW
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Disclosure of second marriage not a ground to unseat an elected candidate: Election of Palghar MLA Rajendra Gavit, upheld
In an interim application filed by MLA Rajendra Gavit seeking rejection of the Election Petition under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’), wherein the petitioner challenged his General Election 2024 to the State Assembly on the ground that he had disclosed details of his second wife by adding an extra column in the form which was not as per the original format, a Single Judge Bench of Sandeep V. Marne, J., held that an election cannot be declared void under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (‘RP Act’) solely because the candidate added a column in the election affidavit to disclose his second marriage. Read more HERE
ENERGY, POWER AND ELECTRICITY
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | State has no legislative competence to levy tax on minimum tariff for supply of electricity
The single Judge Bench of Anant Ramanath Hegde, J., declared Section 3(1) of the 1959 Act, as amended by Act No.7 of 2003 and Act No.5 of 2004, imposing tax on electricity charges as unconstitutional. The Court further clarified that only the tax on ‘minimum tariff’ has been held unconstitutional and not the tax collected on the consumption of electricity. The Court held that supply of electricity to the consumer to ensure availability of electricity for consumption, does not amount to consumption or sale, unless the electricity consumed by the consumer, and the State has no legislative competence under Entry 53, List II of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution to levy tax on minimum tariff. The State is competent to levy tax under Entry 53, List II of Seventh Schedule only on actual consumption or sale of electricity. Read more HERE
ENVIRONMENT LAW
KERALA HIGH COURT | Ban imposed on plastic use in hills, weddings and public events
In a suo motu writ petition concerning unregulated and irresponsible disposal of plastic waste which has been causing widespread plastic pollution, the division bench of Bechu Kurian Thomas* and Gopinath P., JJ., after giving anxious consideration to the negative impact of plastics on the environment, held that it was necessary to prohibit single-use plastics in the hilly areas of the State. Read more HERE
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | “Lamentable illustration of classic administrative lethargy”: State’s failure to notify Morni Hills as Reserved Forest since 1987, rebuked
In a public interest litigation filed seeking settlement of forest dwellers in the Morni Hills area as per the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (‘Revenue Act’) and the Punjab Settlement Manual and incidental directions, the Division Bench of Sheel Nagu, CJ., and Sumeet Goel*, J., allowed the petition, holding that the Forest Settlement Officer (‘FSO’) was vested with the power to, inter alia, conduct survey, make demarcations, make maps, and act as a Civil Court as per Section 8 of the Forest Act, 1927 (‘Forest Act’). The Court also condemned the governmental lapse of failing to notify Morni Hills as a Reserved Forest under Section 4 of the Forest Act as per the notification issued almost 38 years ago in 1987. Read more HERE
SIKKIM HIGH COURT | Periodic inspection of pharma companies suggested for effluent discharge: draft Springs and Groundwater Bill reviewed
While considering the instant Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which was initiated in 2017 to address the concerns regarding the discharge of effluents by pharma companies situated at Singtam; the Division Bench of Biswanath Somadder, CJ.*, and Meenakshi Madan Rai, J., suggested that the competent authority of the State Government should carry out periodic inspection of all companies including the existing pharma companies within the State of Sikkim in order to find out whether they were still actually discharging effluents or not. Read more HERE
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | ‘Humanity has suffered enough environmental damage’; Anticipatory bail plea of man accused of illegal mining at Satluj River, rejected
In an anticipatory bail application filed regarding an FIR registered under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023(‘BNS’) and Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (‘MMDR Act’) due to alleged illegal mining in river Satluj, the Division Bench of Sheel Nagu*, CJ., and Sumeet Goel, J., rejected the application, holding that the humanity has suffered enough environmental damage, especially to the Satluj river and the environment at large, the offence of illegal mining in rivers had to be taken seriously. Read more HERE
FAMILY AND PERSONAL LAWS
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Will and four Codicils of Ratan Naval Tata interpreted
A Single Judge Bench of Manish Pitale, J., dealt with an originating summon under Rule 238 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 (‘the said Rules’), which was related to the Will and the Codicils executed by Ratan Naval Tata (‘the deceased’). Though there was no dispute amongst the parties, the Court interpreted the said Will and the Codicils as the parties wanted clarity on few questions as to the effect of the fourth Codicil on the Will and the way the Will was to be read along with the four Codicils. Read more HERE
HOTELS
GUJARAT HIGH COURT | Registration/permission from authorities is mandatory to use premises either as PG Hostels or Home Stays
In a petition challenging a notice by the Court ordering the petitioners to vacate the subject premises used as a P.G. hostel, a Single Judge Bench of Mauna M. Bhatt, J.*, held that registration or permission from the authorities concerned is mandatory for operation and use of premises as PG Hostels or Home Stays. Read more HERE
INDUSTRY, TRADE, DEVELOPMENT AND BUSINESS LAWS
DELHI HIGH COURT | Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator
In a petition for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’), a Single Judge bench of Jyoti Singh, J*, held that the statutory mechanism given under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and Development Act, 2006 (‘MSMED Act’) is not a mandatory provision. However, once the party invokes the jurisdiction, the mechanism for dispute resolution provided in Section 18 will come into play and the party cannot abandon the procedure and seek appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11 of Arbitration Act. Read more HERE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
DELHI HIGH COURT | Interim injunction granted to Domino’s in trade mark infringement case
In an application for permanent injunction filed by Domino’s and its group companies (‘the plaintiffs’) against several fast-food joints with deceptively similar trade marks/names, a Single Judge Bench of Saurabh Banerjee, J* opined that in disputes involving edible products, the threshold for establishing deceptive similarity is lower than that applied in other cases. Thus, the Court granted interim injunction in favour of Dominos and restrained Defendants 1-15 from infringing the plaintiffs’ trade mark. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Relief granted to Anjana Om Kashyap in personality rights suit over Deepfake YouTube Channel
A suit was filed by TV Today Network Limited (plaintiff), a prominent Indian media conglomerate, along with an oral impleadment of Ms. Anjana Om Kashyap, its Managing Editor for Special Projects, as Plaintiff 2 seeking injunctive reliefs concerning the unauthorized use of the identity and image of Plaintiff 2 through a deceptively similar YouTube channel. Prathiba M Singh, J., held that the plaintiffs had made out a prima facie case for the grant of an ad-interim injunction as the mimicry of plaintiff 2’s name (with just a missing letter “p”), usage of her photograph, and potential use of her voice and persona for content dissemination and commercial monetization was not only illegal but also violative of her personality rights. Read more HERE
JUDICIARY
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT | State Judicial Academy directed to impart extensive training to a Magistrate in bail matters
In an anticipatory bail application filed by accused which was rejected taking into consideration the fact that it was a complaint case and summons were already issued; the single Judge Bench of Ananda Sen, J., noting the subsequent custody of the accused person by the Magistrate despite the Supreme Court’s guidelines on anticipatory bail in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773, highlighted the Magistrate’s lack of awareness and necessity of judicial officers being sensitized to judgments concerning personal liberty. Therefore, the Court directed the State Judicial Academy to provide extensive training to the concerned Magistrate in Supreme Court’s guidelines enshrined in Satender Kumar Antil (supra) and Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273. Read more HERE
ORISSA HIGH COURT | Permanent Debarment of higher judiciary aspirant from Government Service over procedural lapse, quashed
In the present writ petition, the petitioner, challenged the validity of Rule-18(2) and Rule 19(1) proviso of the Orissa Superior Judicial Service and Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 2007 (‘2007 Rules’) and the order passed by the Government which rejected his appointment as a Civil Judge under the Orissa Public Service Commission (‘OPSC’) and permanently debarred him from future government employment due to non-compliance of 2007 Rules. The Division Bench of Dixit Krishna Shripad* and M.S. Sahoo, JJ., upheld the constitutional validity for the 2007 Rules, but found that the permanent debarment of the petitioner from future employment was disproportionate as it was vitiated by lack of reasons. Read more HERE
MEDICAL AND HEALTH LAW
KERALA HIGH COURT | ‘An enactment cannot be struck down merely on account of alleged arbitrariness’; Kerala Clinical Establishments Act upheld
In a batch of writ petitions challenging various provisions of the Kerala Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2018 (‘the Act’) and the Rules framed thereunder on grounds of unconstitutionality and arbitrariness, the Single Judge Bench of Harisankar V. Menon, J., held that an enactment cannot be struck down merely on account of alleged unreasonableness or arbitrariness. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petitions, which included objections to provisions such as the mandatory display of fees charged by clinical establishments for their services. Read more HERE
MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | 12-year-old rape victim permitted to terminate 29 weeks pregnancy
The Division Judge Bench of Nitin W. Sambre and Sachin S. Deshmukh, JJ., considered a writ petition wherein the 12-year-old petitioner prayed to be allowed to terminate her 28 to 29 weeks pregnancy. Her cousin uncle was accused of raping her. The Court, after considering the opinion of the Medical Board, and noting that there was no life threat to the petitioner, permitted her to undergo medical termination of pregnancy (‘MTP’) by taking recourse to the safety protocol. Read more HERE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | ‘Right to life includes right to create life’; Minor’s right to retain pregnancy against mother’s wishes, upheld
In writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by the petitioner seeking the termination of her 17-year-old minor daughter’s pregnancy under Sections 3 and 5 of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (‘MTP Act’), which allegedly resulted from rape, a Single Judge Bench of Chandra Prakash Shrimali, J., relying on Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn., (2009) 9 SCC 1 and prioritizing the reproductive autonomy of the minor dismissed the petition. The Court held that despite her minority, her clear and mature decision to continue the pregnancy and raise the child superseded her mother’s desire for termination. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Unmarried woman allowed to abort 25-week pregnancy citing reproductive freedom and mental distress
The present petition was filed by the petitioner who sought permission for medical termination of her 25-week pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (‘MTP’) Act, 1971, citing grave injury to her mental health as it resulted from a failure of contraceptive measures. The Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and Dr. Neela Gokhale, JJ., recognising the right of the petitioner to reproductive freedom, autonomy over her body and right of choice, permitted abortion at 25-weeks noting that the continuance of the pregnancy shall adversely affect an already disturbed psychological condition of the petitioner. Read more HERE
NARCOTICS, INTOXICANTS AND LIQUOR
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Suo Motu PIL registered on Drug Sales near schools in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
The Court initiated a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) after taking cognizance of disturbing news reports published in Dainik Sakal dated 14-6-2025 and 16-6-2025 which exposed the illegal sale of banned items, which were described as drugs and cigarettes, as well as e-cigarettes near schools and colleges in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. The Division Bench of Ravindra V. Ghuge and Y.G. Khobragade, JJ., held that the matter raised serious concerns targeting young students and a judicial intervention to safeguard them from drug abuse was required. Read more HERE
PMLA
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Maharashtra Minister and Senior NCP Leader Chhagan Bhujbal’s CA discharged in money laundering case
A Single Judge Bench of R.N. Laddha, J., heard a revision application by Shyam Radhakrishna Malpani (‘the applicant’) challenging the order dated 17-3-2021 of the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge) rejecting the discharge application filed by him in a money laundering case against Bhujbal’s in connection with the Maharashtra Sadan scam. The Court opined that it would be unreasonable to expect the applicant, merely by virtue of being an auditor to assume the role of an investigator or to be under an obligation to examine and investigate the genuineness of the documents provided to him by the companies’ authorised persons. The Court held that there was no substantive proof to establish the applicant’s involvement in the said scam, thus quashed the impugned order dated 17-3-2021. Read more HERE
POCSO
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Accused can’t said to be “brutal” though “barbaric”; Death sentence commuted to 25 yrs imprisonment in 4-yr-old minor rape case
In a criminal appeal against the conviction and death sentence of by the Special Judge (POCSO), Khandwa, for the rape and attempted murder of a four-year-old girl under various sections of IPC and POCSO Act, a Division Bench of Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra,* JJ., upheld the conviction for grave offences against a minor, but declined to confirm the death sentence, emphasising that the case did not meet the “rarest of rare” threshold necessary for imposing capital punishment. Read more HERE
POLICE
KERALA HIGH COURT | Police cannot invade homes of history-sheeters at odd hours under pretext of surveillance
In a criminal miscellaneous case filed by an alleged history sheeter seeking quashing of first information report (‘FIR’) registered against him for obstructing the police from performing their official duties, punishable under Section 117(e) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011, the Single Judge Bench of V.G. Arun, J. held that under the guise of surveillance, the police cannot engage in late-night visits or forcibly enter the homes of history-sheeters. Read more HERE
PATNA HIGH COURT | S. 197 CrPC : Police officer, allegedly exceeding official duty, is safeguarded by prior sanction if acts reasonably linked to official functions
In a petition filed by the accused police officer against an order denying discharge under Section 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code (‘CrPC’) for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, and 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), the Single Judge Bench of Chandra Shekhar Jha, J., placing reliance on G.C. Manjunath v. Seetaram, (2025) 5 SCC 390, and D.T. Virupakshappa v. C. Subash, (2015) 12 SCC 231, and observing that allegations of misconduct against public servants, even if exceeding official duties, remain protected by Section 197 of the CrPC if a reasonable nexus exists between their discharge of official functions; and quashed the complaint against the accused police officer. Read more HERE
PROPERTY LAW
DELHI HIGH COURT | No embargo under S.44 of TPA to sell unpartitioned/undivided share in joint property
In a petition challenging an order dated 9-4-2018 (‘impugned order’), wherein the suit for specific performance filed by Respondent 1 was partly decreed in his favour in terms of the compromise arrived between Respondent 1 and Respondent 4, Amit Mahajan, J., held that there is no bar under Section 44 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (‘TPA’) to sell undivided share in the joint property. The Court stated that the Respondent 4 being the co-owner of the suit property, had the right to enter into a settlement with Respondent 1 with respect to her undivided share in the suit property. Further, the rights of the petitioner would not be affected in the suit property and would not cause any prejudice to the petitioner. Therefore, the Court set aside the said impugned order. Read more HERE
SARFAESI
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | Rejection of UCO Bank’s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects, upheld
A petition was filed by UCO Bank (petitioner) challenging the order dated 04-12-2024 passed by the District Magistrate, Cooch Behar, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) seeking assistance in taking physical possession of a mortgaged property was rejected. Gaurang Kanth, J., held that there is no infirmity in the impugned order dated 04.12.2024 and granted the petitioner to file a fresh application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before the District Magistrate, duly supported by an appropriate affidavit strictly in compliance with the first proviso to Section 14(1) of the Act, read with the relevant Rules and Notifications. Read more HERE
SCS, STS, OBCS, AND OTHER MINORITIES
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Rejection of issuance of a Scheduled Caste certificate by Raigad District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, upheld
In the present writ petition, the petitioner sought quashing of the order passed by the District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee (Scrutiny Committee) rejecting the petitioner’s application for caste certificate and pursued a declaration and validity certificate that he belonged to ‘Chambhar’ Scheduled Caste community of his mother’s side. The Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and Dr. Neela Gokhale*, JJ., upheld the order of the Scrutiny Committee after no evidence was brought on record to demonstrate that by virtue of his mother being a member of the Scheduled Caste, the petitioner faced any deprivation or disadvantage. Read more HERE
SENIOR CITIZENS
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Son & daughter-in-law’s eviction order under Senior Citizens Act restored emphasising on protection of life & property of the elderly
In a writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners aggrieved by the Appellate Tribunal’s order under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (the ‘ Senior Citizens Act’), challenged the decision of the Appellate Tribunal setting aside the order passed by the Senior Citizens Tribunal (the ‘Tribunal’) which had ordered eviction of the son and daughter-in-law from the house owned by the petitioners. A single Judge Bench of Prafulla S. Khubalkar, J., held that the Appellate Tribunal had displayed an indifferent attitude towards the issues raised by the senior citizens and found the order unsustainable in law which deserved to be set aside. Read more HERE
TAX
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | Eden Gardens Stadium not a ‘public place’; Kolkata Municipal Corporation’s ₹51 Lakh Tax demand on Cricket Association of Bengal, quashed
In an appeal filed by Calcutta Municipal Corporation (appellants) challenging the judgment and order dated 24-04-2015, whereby the petition of the Cricket Association of Bengal (respondent 1) was allowed, the Division Bench of Arijit Banerjee and Kausik Chanda, JJ., dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the Single Judge quashing a demand notice dated 27-03-1996, whereby the Kolkata Municipal Corporation had levied advertisement tax of Rs. 51,18,450/- on the Cricket Association of Bengal under Section 204 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. Read more HERE
TERRORISM
JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT | Return ordered of 63-year-old woman deported to Pakistan after Pahalgam terror attack
In a writ petition filed on behalf of a 63 years old woman who was deported to Pakistan following the Pahalgam terrorist attack seeking that she be retrieved back to Jammu and Kashmir considering her age and health concerns, a Single Judge Bench of Rahul Bharti, J., directed the Government of India to bring the woman back from her deportation, after considering the exceptional nature of facts and circumstances of the case. Read more HERE
TRANSGENDER RIGHTS
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT | [Transgender Rights] Whether S. 498-A IPC complaint by trans-woman in a heterosexual marriage legally maintainable?
The instant petitions were filed by the petitioners (Accused Nos.1, 2 & 3 and 4 respectively) under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking quashment of proceedings against them in a complaint before the Court of II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole, for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J., quashed the criminal proceedings for lacking the essential ingredients to constitute the alleged offences and held that a trans woman in a heterosexual relationship has the right to be recognised as a woman and a spouse for the purposes of matrimonial and penal law. Read more HERE
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | Transgender Person directed to file fresh passport application; Mandated due consideration of Identity Card be duly considered
A petition was filed by the petitioner seeking relief in connection with the issuance of a passport to a transgender individual. Amrita Sinha, J., held that the transgender identity card of the petitioner shall be considered at the time of consideration of the petitioner’s application for passport. Read more HERE
WOMEN’S RIGHTS
MADRAS HIGH COURT | Wife does not need husband’s permission or signature to apply for passport
In a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to issue a fresh passport in the name of the petitioner without insisting on the signature of her husband, the Single Judge Bench of N. Anand Venkatesh, J., observed that the petitioner, after marrying her husband, did not lose her individuality. The Court affirmed that a wife could always apply for a passport without requiring the permission or signature of her husband in any form. The Court further directed the Passport Office to process the petitioner’s application and issue a passport in her name, provided the petitioner satisfied the other necessary requirements. The Passport Office was ordered to complete this process within four weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the order. Read more HERE
