This week’s roundup delves ino various legal developments across High Courts such as, 2017 kharif crop damage case, who is an ideal Hindu wife, Dabur Meswak Trademark suit, Rights of LGBTQ+, Indore-Dewas Highway Jam, and much more.
ABETMENT TO SUICIDE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | Writing ‘wife needs his death’ and that ‘she tortured him’ in suicide note not enough; Abetment to suicide case quashed against wife
In a criminal petition filed by a wife seeking to quash a complaint and First Information Report (‘FIR’) in the case relating to abetment to suicide of her husband, a Single-Judge Bench of S. Vishwajith Shetty, J., quashed the FIR for abetment of suicide and held that the wife’s alleged torture and a statement in a suicide note that she ‘needs his death’ do not, in themselves, constitute a direct act of instigation necessary to establish the offence under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’). The Court referring to various Supreme Court pronouncements noted that to convict a person for abetment to suicide, an active act or direct act which leads deceased to commit suicide finding no other option is required and the act must reflect intention of the accused to push deceased into such a position that he commits suicide. Read more HERE
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE, LIVESTOCK AND MARKETS
GUJARAT HIGH COURT | Relief granted to farmers in 2017 kharif crop damage case; Directs SBI to pay 7.5 crores insurance claim
While determining the maintainability of a Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) regarding the insurance claims of farmers registered under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (‘PMFBY’), whose kharif crops had been damaged by the floods in Gujarat in 2017, the Division Bench of Sunita Agarwal, CJ* and D.N. Ray, J, directed SBI General Insurance Company Ltd (‘Insurance company’) to disburse the pending claim settlement money amounting to approximately Rs. 7.5 crores within a period of three weeks. Read more HERE
ANIMALS, FISH, AND BIRDS
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Suo motu cognizance taken of stray animal menace on public roads; Issues directions to Municipal bodies for their removal
The Court took suo motu cognizance and initiated a Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) concerning the stray animal menace specifically dogs and cows, which endanger public safety on city roads and highways. The Division-Bench of Kuldeep Mathur and Ravi Chirania, JJ., noting significant increase in dog bite incidents and accidents caused by stray animals, issued a set of directions to various governmental and municipal bodies to address the problem immediately. The Court directed the Municipal bodies to undertake a special drive to remove stray dogs and other animals from city roads while ensuring that minimum physical harm is caused to them. It also directed the National and State Highways Authorities to conduct regular patrolling to remove stray animals from highways to ensure free vehicular movement. Read more HERE
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT | Stray Cattle on Roads and Highways | NHAI directed to file affidavit amid rising accidents endangering cattle and human lives
In a public interest litigation filed regarding the menace of cattle roaming on roads and highways, the Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha, CJ., and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J., took note of the recent incidents of cattle death due to road accidents and directed the National Highway Authority of India (‘NHAI’) to file an affidavit regarding the measures taken by it concerning the stray cattle issue. Read more HERE
ORISSA HIGH COURT | Directed appointment of competent authority to ensure workability of Odisha Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1960
The petitioner, Gau Gyan Foundation, filed a Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) seeking enforcement of the Odisha Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1960 (the ‘1960 Act’), alleging that despite the enactment of the prohibitory law as a State Legislation, its implementation had not been ensured in true spirit and cow slaughter continued unbated in the State. The Division Bench of Harish Tandon, CJ., and M. S. Raman, J., held that the 1960 Act, being a Special Act has an overriding effect on the other State laws and imposes a complete prohibition on cow slaughter, irrespective of customs and usage. The Court ruled that the State Government could not evade its responsibility and must appoint the competent authority under Section 2(a) of the 1960 Act within three weeks to ensure the Act’s workability. Read more HERE
BAIL
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Police Stations are meant to be symbols of safety: Bail denied to ex-MLA who opened fire inside station premises
In a bail application filed by an ex-MLA who opened fire in the precincts of Police Station upon his political rivals, the Single Judge bench of Amit Borkar, J, refused to grant bail pointing out that the accused, if released, is likely to abuse the liberty granted to him or interfere with the fair course of justice. It was held that the CCTV footage and ballistic report being objective and technical in nature, lent credible and substantial prima facie material to justify the denial of bail, especially in a case involving serious offences punishable under Section 307 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 30 of the Arms Act, 1959. The defence of sudden rage did not withstand scrutiny and the material on record disclosed a pre-planned and violent act, which cannot be condoned at the stage of bail. Court also opined that granting bail to the applicant when he has such political influence and has himself made clear admission to his crimes in interview to the private news channels, would undermine the faith of the public in the criminal justice system. Read more HERE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Bail granted to young mother of 5-year-old charged with double murder
In an bail application filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) by the accused, a young mother of 5-year-old charged with double murder, the Single-Judge Bench of Farjand Ali, J., granted her bail holding that her prolonged pre-trial detention, the arguable nature of the circumstantial evidence against her, and her vulnerable status as a young woman and mother of a 5-year old, rendered continued incarceration unjust and constitutionally impermissible. The Court emphasized that the purpose of bail is to ensure the accused’s presence at trial, not to serve as pre-trial punishment. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Sexually assaulting minor boys a heinous crime; Bail denied
In a case where the applicant, accused of raping two minor boys, sought regular bail in connection with an FIR under Sections 377 and 506(II) read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), and under Sections 3, 4, 5(g), 6, 7, 8, 9(g), 10, 11(ii), 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’), and Section 67-B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (‘IT Act’), a Single Judge Bench of Madhav J. Jamdar, J., held that the applicant could not be granted bail due to his active involvement in the serious and heinous crime of raping minors with sufficient material-on-record to establish a prima facie case against him. Read more HERE
CITIZENS, MIGRANTS AND ALIENS
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Batted for amendments to citizenship laws for children born abroad to Indian parents; extended Australian minor’s Visa
In a civil writ petition filed by an Australian minor child born to Indian parents challenging the rejection of her visa extension application, a Single-Judge Bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., directed the respondent to extend the petitioner’s visa without insisting on a No Objection Certificate (‘NOC’) from her mother. The court held that the best interest of the child is the paramount consideration and that a five-year-old girl, whose parents are Indian citizens, cannot be treated as an illegal migrant or be separated from her father due to matrimonial disputes. The Court further urged the Ministry of Home Affairs to look into the pathways to secure the best interest of such children born abroad from the wedlock of Indian citizen parents and revisit the relevant provisions of laws to make amendments where necessary. Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Aadhaar Card, Voter ID, PAN not sufficient to prove citizenship if entered into India illegally
The present application was filed by the applicant seeking regular bail in connection with offences under Sections 335, 336(3), and 340 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’), Sections 3(a) and 6(a) of the Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950, and Sections 3(1), 3(2), and 14 of the Foreigners Order, 1948. The applicant was accused of suppressing his foreign nationality and using forged Indian identity documents like Aadhaar and PAN to falsely claim Indian citizenship. A Single Judge Bench of Amit Borkar, J., held that relying on identity documents like Aadhaar, PAN, or Voter ID without verifying how they were obtained could not establish lawful citizenship. Given the crucial stage of investigation and serious allegations of national security, illegal entry, and forged documents, the Court found granting bail neither proper nor prudent. Read more HERE
CRIMINAL TRIAL
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Incorrect order wherein accused was ‘accidentally’ granted bail recalled
In a bail application filed by an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 296, 115(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Single Judge Bench of Rajesh Kumar Gupta, J., recalled the last order wherein due to a typographical error, the bail application of the accused was allowed whereas that of the co-accused was denied. Read more HERE
MADRAS HIGH COURT | ‘“Undetected report” did not terminate investigation’; Further probe directed into Facebook post insulting Lord Krishna
The petitioner filed a criminal revision petition under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), challenging the Judicial Magistrate’s order that accepted the final report as ‘undetected’ and closed the case related to a Facebook post containing insulting language and an image of Lord Krishna. A Single Judge Bench of K. Murali Shankar, J., held that an undetected report was merely an interim report that did not terminate investigation. The Court set aside the Magistrate’s order and directed the police to complete the investigation within three months. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | ‘Glaring lapses indicate negligence’; Charges against building owner in Anaj Mandi Fire case, upheld
The present petition was filed to assail the order dated 12-9-2024 (‘impugned order’) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (‘Sessions Court’), for offences punishable under Sections 304/308 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). By way of the impugned order, the Sessions Court framed charges against the petitioner-accused for offence under Sections 304 (Part II)/308/35/36 IPC, and alternatively, under Sections 304-A/337/338/35/36 IPC. A Single Judge Bench of Dr. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., opined that the petitioner’s daily presence at the building, ownership of other floors, his role in sub-letting portions of the premises for earning money, lack of safety mechanisms and not rectifying the defects in the building despite a prior incident of fire, all point to his active participation in committing acts which led to the unfortunate incidents in question. Thus, the Court dismissed the petition stating that the material on record disclosed a prima facie case against the petitioner. Read more HERE
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | CBI Probe into Sandeshkhali Murders | High Court’s direction for Investigation not open to challenge by prospective suspects or accused
In an appeal filed by TMC leader Shahjahan Sheikh accused in 2019 Sandeshkhal ipost-poll violence case, against a Single Judge’s order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (‘CBI’) to conduct further investigation, the Division Bench of Debangsu Basak* and Prasenjit Biswas, JJ., held that an accused or prospective suspect had no legal right to be heard at the investigation stage or to challenge the appointment of investigating agency. The Court reaffirmed that the direction for an investigation by the CBI passed by the High Court, was not open to challenge by a prospective suspect or an accused in a criminal case. Read more HERE
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | ‘Maintainability of petition and desirability to entertain it is as distinct as chalk and cheese’: Criminal revision petition held maintainable despite accused not in custody
In a criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner-convict challenging the order of sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bathinda (‘JMIC’) and judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda (‘ASJ’), a Single Judge Bench of Sumeet Goel, J., opined that the difference between maintainability of a petition and desirability to entertain it was as distinct and stark as the difference between chalk and cheese. The Court stated that neither Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) (Sections 438 and 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), nor indeed any extant rules framed by this High Court on its administrative side, contained any provision or even a subtle hint suggesting non-maintainability of a revision petition in the absence of petitioner having surrendered before the Appellate Court. The Court thus held that the criminal revision petition against the judgments of conviction (as also an application for suspension of sentence, etc.) was maintainable before this Court, without the petitioner having surrendered or being in custody, in the absence of any rule in the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules/Orders proscribing such maintainability. Read more HERE
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | Downloaded copies of bail order sufficient for immediate release, no need to wait for certified copy
An application was filed by a convict in a kidnapping case, under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’), seeking suspension of sentence in First Information Report under Sections 364-A, 307, 379-B and 482 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). The Division Bench of Anoop Chitkara and Mandeep Pannu JJ. allowed the same and held that a downloaded copy of a bail or suspension of sentence order is sufficient for securing the release of an accused. The Court further clarified that when the certified copy of the order is not immediately provided by the Registry, the downloaded copy must be accepted by the Court before whom the bail bonds are furnished. Read more HERE
UTTARANCHAL HIGH COURT | ‘Does S. 482 BNSS takes precedence over stricter State amendment to S. 438 CrPC?’ Matter referred to larger bench
In a batch of anticipatory bail applications filed by the applicants, the Single-Judge Bench of Alok Kumar Verma, J., while hearing a preliminary objection on their maintainability, referred the matter to a larger bench. The Court held that the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) should prevail over the earlier Uttarakhand State Amendment to Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’). The Court noted that the BNSS, being a more liberal law, is beneficial to the accused and should apply regardless of when the case originated. Read more HERE
CRUELTY
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Can remarks on wife’s clothing and cooking amount to cruelty under S. 498-A IPC?
In a criminal application regarding quashing of First Information Report, charging the husband and the in-laws under the provisions of cruelty, the Division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi* and Sanjay A. Deshmukh, JJ., quashed the proceedings and held that when the relationship gets strained, exaggerations are made but such omnibus allegations if accepted as cruelty, would be an abuse of process of law. Read more HERE
DIVORCE
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | “An Ideal Hindu Wife”: Woman lauded for living with in laws despite husband deserting her for 19 years; denied relief to husband
In an appeal filed by a police officer against the judgment passed by the Family court rejecting his divorce plea filed under Section 13(1)(1-a)(1b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘HMA’), the Division Bench of Vivek Rusia and Binod Kumar Dwivedi*, JJ., rejected the appeal, holding that there was nothing which could form a basis for inferring cruelty on the part of the wife, rather it was the husband, who inflicted cruelty on her by deserting her. Read more HERE
GUJARAT HIGH COURT | Written agreement not necessary for divorce by ‘Mubaraat’ under Muslim Law
In an appeal against the Family Court order dated 19-4-2025, wherein the appellants’ plea for declaration of dissolution of marriage by ‘Mubaraat’ was dismissed, the Division Bench of A.Y. Kogje* and N.S. Sanjay Gowda, JJ, held that an agreement of ‘Mubaraat’ was not required to be in a written format to be considered a valid procedure for divorce by mutual consent.Thus, the Court remanded the case back to Family Court, holding that the Family Court had jurisdiction under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (the Act) to adjudge the suit. Read more HERE
FILMS AND CINEMA
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Online sale of movie tickets not separate business’: Levy of entertainment duty on convenience fee exceeding Rs. 10, upheld
In a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of seventh proviso in Section 2(b) of the Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act, 2014 (‘MED Act’), the Division Bench of M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain*, JJ., dismissed the petition and upheld the challenged provision to be intra vires and within State’s legislative competence. The Court opined that Entry 62, List II of the Seventh Schedule, deals with taxation on entertainment and matters incidental thereto. Thus, making of law for determining the measure of tax is a power within the competence of the State under Entry 62 List II of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and therefore, the challenged amendment is not a colourable exercise of power by the State. Furthermore, it was also emphasised by the Court, that merely changing the mode of sale from counter to online does not mean that selling tickets online constitutes a separate business activity. Further, splitting the transaction or styling it as a separate activity having no nexus or connection with payment for admission, or calling it by some other name, cannot be grounds to either strike down the levy or declare that it would not be attracted. Read more HERE
HOUSING
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Apartment with higher proportionate area must contribute to common area maintenance charges proportionately
In a dispute regarding levying maintenance charges of the apartment in terms of Section 10 of the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 (‘the Apartment Act’), the Single Judge Bench of Milind N. Jadhav, J., upheld the order passed by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Society and held that the petitioners cannot obstruct the implementation of the Apartment Act. The Apartment Act stated that common profits of the properties to be distributed amongst and the common expenses, to be charged to the apartment owners according to the percentage of the undivided interest in the common area and facilities. Thus, member holding an apartment with a higher proportionate value and size must contribute to the common area maintenance charges proportionately. Read more HERE
INCOME TAX
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Advance/Loan amount used for purposes other than business execution is taxable as deemed dividend
In the present appeal, the appellant challenged the order passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’), which included the advance amount taken by him under the ambit of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) as deemed dividend. The Division Bench of Alok Aradhe, CJ., and Sandeep V. Marne*, J., opined that utilization of advance for execution of a particular business transaction was a sine qua non for exclusion of the amount of loan or advance from the ambit of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, therefore such advance in the instant case should be treated as deemed dividend. The Court thus dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the ITAT. Read more HERE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
DELHI HIGH COURT | Interim injunction granted to financial services platform ‘INDmoney’ in trade mark infringement case
In a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction filed by INDmoney, alleging that defendant 1 had infringed their registered trade mark and scammed unsuspecting customers out of their hard-earned money, the Single Judge Bench of Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J, held that the illegal use of INDmoney’s trade mark by defendant 1 amounted to infringement of the registered trade mark. Therefore, the Court restrained defendant 1 and its representatives from using INDmoney’s trade mark, word mark or any deceptively or confusingly similar mark, in any manner that would constitute trade mark infringement, passing off or misappropriation of INDmoney’s registered trade mark and services. Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Explained | Dabur Meswak Trademark suit: Rs 12,00,000 cost imposed for 48 day delay in filing Written Statement by VI-John quashed
The present petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution by VI-John Healthcare India LLP (‘VI-John’) being aggrieved by the order dated 6-2-2025 (‘Second Impugned Order’) passed by the Trial Court, whereby the application seeking condonation of 48 days delay in filing the written statement (‘Application’), in a suit claiming infringement of Trade Mark, copyright, passing off and damages to the tune of Rs 2,50,000 was allowed, subject to payment of Rs 25,000 per day of delay, without considering the grounds contained in the Application and in absence of any serious objection from Dabur India Ltd (‘Dabur’). A Single Judge Bench of Tejas Karia J., allowed the petition, condoned the delay in filing written statement and set aside First and Second impugned orders, insofar as they imposed costs for delay, stating that the delay in filing the written statement was well within the prescribed 120 day limit and was supported by justifiable reasons stated in VI-John’s Application. Read more HERE
JUDICIARY
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | Plea of 2016 Civil Judge exam candidate disposed after Recruitment Committee calls him for viva-voce following dispute over 3 marks
A petition was filed by a Judicial services candidate , who appeared for Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate exam, regarding modification of marks obtained in the mains examination of 2016 and calling for viva-voce. The Division Bench of Sheel Nagu* CJ. and Sanjeev Berry J. disposed of the same as upon rechecking and re-evaluating, the marks concerned were modified and the Recruitment Committee of the High Court decided to invite the petitioner for viva-voce. Read more HERE
MEDICAL AND HEALTH LAW
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT | ‘Pathetic situation in State’s biggest hospital’; Health department’s response sought on poor condition of Govt. hospitals, especially AIIMS Raipur
In a suo motu public interest litigation (‘PIL’) regarding the condition of the Bilaspur District Hospital, the Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha, CJ., and Bibhu Datta Guru, J., took note of various news reports concerning the issues faced by patients in multiple hospitals, especially AIIMS, Raipur, and directed the Secretary of Health Department, Chhattisgarh Government, to file a personal affidavit regarding the news reports. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | Altruism prioritised over formalities in organ donation; Ordered reconsideration of woman’s application for donating kidney to husband’s friend
The present petition was filed by Petitioner 1 who was a kidney patient and needed a kidney transplant. Petitioner 2, his friend’s wife, was willing to donate her kidney to him but the application was rejected by the District Level Authorisation Committee (‘District Committee’) and the State Level Organ Transplantation Authorization Committee (‘Appellate Authority’) because they doubted the element of altruism. A Single Judge Bench of N. Nagaresh, J., , observed that the rejection had been based on untenable grounds, set aside the impugned orders, and directed that the application be reconsidered. Read more HERE
MINES AND MINERALS
MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT | State Government directed to monitor cement company to prevent illegal mining of limestone
A public interest litigation was filed against alleged illegal mining of limestone by the respondent, a cement company, the Division Bench of I.P. Mukerji*CJ. And W. Diengdoh J. disposed of the same and directed the State Government to monitor the respondent to prevent illegal mining of limestone. Read more HERE
PAROLE
KERALA HIGH COURT | ‘Not entitled to Emergency Leave’: Parole denied to Murder Convict for wife’s pregnancy care
In a petition filed by a life convict’s wife seeking emergency leave for him so that he could provide her pregnancy care, a Single Judge Bench of P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J., denied the emergency leave to him and held that extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution could not be exercised to grant parole to those convicted of serious offences. Read more HERE
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | “Glaring instance of shirking responsibility”: State rebuked for lackadaisical attitude in Court proceedings causing delays
In a writ petition filed for the payment of dues to the petitioner by the State i.e., the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Ballia, the Single Judge Bench of Manju Rani Chauhan, J., rebuked the State for its lackadaisical attitude in Court proceedings and causing delay. Read more HERE
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | “Not case of inadvertence but of absolute lack of mind application”: Rs 1 Lakh cost imposed on DM for passing illegal blacklisting orders
In a set of two writ petitions filed by two companies against the orders passed by the District Magistrate (‘DM’) blacklisting them indefinitely, the Division Bench of Manish Kumar and Ranjan Roy, JJ., allowed the petitions, holding that the impugned orders were not per the law settled by the Supreme Court, and imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on the DM to be paid to both the petitioners. Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | Digitalisation of all temple accounts under Travancore Devaswom Board ordered after Rs 40 lakh petrol pump embezzlement
The present Devaswom Board Audit Report (‘Audit Report’) was filed by the Joint Director, Kerala State Audit Department, Travancore Devaswom Board (‘Board’) , on the petrol pump embezzlement of nearly Rs 40 lakh at Swamy Ayyappa Fuels. The Division Bench of Raja Vijayaraghavan V.* and K.V. Jayakumar, JJ., noting that the Board administered approximately 1250 temples, directed it to submit a comprehensive report outlining concrete steps taken to fully computerise the accounts of all the institutions under its administration. Read more HERE
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | ‘Instituting frivolous litigation resulted in gross misuse of judicial process’: 50k cost imposed on litigant
A contempt petition was filled by the petitioner under Article 215 of the Constitution read with Section 10, 12 and 2(c) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 for alleging willful disobedience of judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Rajeeb Kalita v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 81. A Single Judge Bench of Sudeepti Sharma, J., held that the contempt petition would not be maintainable as its subject matter was entirely civil in nature and thus fell outside the purview of contempt jurisdiction. The Court imposed cost of Rs 50,000 for petitioner’s conduct as instituting frivolous litigation had resulted in gross misuse of the judicial process. Read more HERE
RIGHTS OF LGBTQ+
MADRAS HIGH COURT | State urged to act on horizontal reservation for transgender and intersex persons
The present petition was filed by the petitioners who sought effective implementation of measures to protect the rights of transgender and intersex persons including framing polices, sensitisation of teachers and addressing systematic discrimination. A Single Judge Bench of N. Anand Venkatesh, J., while recording the State Government’s issuance of Tamil Nadu State Policy for Transgender Persons 2025 (the ‘Policy’), commended the initiative and held that policies aimed at LGBTQIA+ community must be designed and implemented from their perspective. The Court further directed the State to consider incorporating additional community-based suggestions, address reservation in employment and education, and ensure compliance with Supreme Court rulings on marriage and related rights of transgender persons. Read more HERE
ROADS AND HIGHWAYS
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Indore-Dewas Highway Jam| Expeditious construction of service lanes directed
In a public interest litigation filed by some law students seeking directions regarding the conditions of the roads and highways in the State, the Division Bench of Vivek Rusia* and Binod Kumar Diwedi, JJ., disposed of the petition, directing the expeditious completion of the construction of the service lanes. The Court further directed the National Highway Authority of India (‘NHAI’) to regularly monitor the same and submit a compliance report within 30 day. Read more HERE
SCHOOLS
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT | ‘Serious dereliction of duty’; Authorities, self-help group rebuked for govt. school children being fed dog-licked food
In a suo motu writ petition registered regarding malnutrition of children in Anganwadi centres, the Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha, CJ., and Bibhu Datta Guru, J., took note of a recent instance of government school children being fed food that had been licked by stray dogs. The Court rebuked the authorities concerned and directed the Secretary, School Education Department, Chhattisgarh Government (‘the Secretary’) to file an affidavit answering several issues raised by the Court. Read more HERE
SERVICE LAW
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT | Domicile certificate cancelled without hearing; BSF Constable’s provisional appointment restored
The petitioner challenged the cancellation of his provisional appointment to the post of Constable in the Border Security Force (‘BSF’), which was withdrawn following the cancellation of his domicile certificate by the State Authority. A Single Judge Bench of Aniruddha Roy, J., quashed both the cancellation of the domicile certificate and the appointment offer, holding that the absence of a hearing before cancelling the domicile certificate violated principles of natural justice and equity. The Court ordered the restoration of the petitioner’s appointment offer. Read more HERE
STAMP ACT
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | ‘Reasonable period’ to conclude proceedings under Section 53-A(1) of Maharashtra Stamp Act after its initiation is maximum 2 years
In a writ petition filed against the order passed by Respondent 2-Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Maharashtra (‘Revenue Authority’) for payment of deficit stamp duty based on valuation report, the Single Judge Bench of Jitendra Jain, J., quashed and set aside the said order on grounds of limitation and held that Section 53-A(1) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (‘Stamp Act’) should be read to conclude that it provided a maximum of 6 years for the initiation and the conclusion of the proceedings. Furthermore, the “reasonable period” to conclude such proceedings after its initiation should be maximum of 2 years. Read more HERE
SUCCESSION
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Section 2(2) of Hindu Succession Act must be amended to give Scheduled Tribe daughters succession rights
In a civil writ petition filed by the petitioner against an order of the Board of Revenue holding that the petitioner, as a Scheduled Tribe daughter, did not have succession rights, the Single-Judge Bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., while setting aside the Board’s order, held that the denial of succession rights to a schedule tribe daughter on the basis of her gender is a violation of her fundamental right to equality. The Court emphasized that when daughters belonging to non-Scheduled Tribe communities are entitled to an equal share, there is no justification for denying the same right to a daughter of a Scheduled Tribe community. The Court further noted that the provisions contained under Section 2(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (‘the Act of 1956’) which lays down that the Act of 1956 does not apply to Scheduled Tribes must be amended to safeguard and promote the rights of Female Members of the Scheduled Tribe community. Read more HERE
TENANCY AND LAND LAWS
DELHI HIGH COURT | ‘Admissions can be inferred from vague/evasive denials’; Eviction based on admissions decreed despite denial of landlord-tenant relationship
In a petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, (‘CPC’) impugning the order dated 7-10-2023 passed by the Additional District Judge, East, Karkardooma Court, Delhi (‘Impugned Order’) whereby the application under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC (‘Application’) filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Trial Court. A Single Judge Bench of Tara Vitasta Ganju, J., opined that admissions could be inferred from vague and evasive denials or even from the facts and circumstances of a case. The Court noted that the respondent had admitted to being a tenant and being in occupation of the tenanted premises, however, he had denied the execution of the Lease Deed but admitted that the Second and Third Lease Deeds were executed between him and S.D Malik, mother of the Directors of the petitioner company. The Court held that the Trial Court erred in not exercising jurisdiction under Order XII Rule 6 CPC as the respondent’s admissions entitled the petitioner to possession without trial. The Court thus allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order. Read more HERE