This week’s roundup traverses through various High Courts to cover important legal developnments such as, timely Release of Undertrials, BJP MLA Nirmala Sapre’s Disqualification case, Patanjali Chyawanprash, Indore Truck Crash Case, Unauthorized entry on Railway Tracks, Freedom Fighter Pension, Name Change for Transgender Persons, SIR in Kerala, Parachute Coconut Oil, and much more.
BAIL
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | Compromise cannot wipe out criminal liability in cheating affecting public trust: Anticipatory bail denied
A petition was filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail in case where he was accused of cheating and conspiracy involving deliberate deception and monetary fraud of Rs 4,50,000. Despite the petitioner-accused settling the matter with the complainant by returning the money, a Single Judge Bench of Sumeet Goel, J., held that the alleged compromise could not wipe out the criminal liability in offences of cheating which affected public trust and were not merely private in nature. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition and stated that the accused did not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail as the alleged act, by its nature, constituted offence against the State as well as public at large. [Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab, 2025 SCC OnLine P&H 13597, decided on 30-10-2025]
Read more HERE
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | ‘Undertrial/Convict cannot remain confined due to administrative laxity’; Directions to ensure timely release of undertrials and convicts on bail
In a bail application filed by an accused in an FIR filed against him under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (“BNS”), 2023, by a father who claimed that he allegedly enticed his daughter to leave her home, the Single Judge Bench of Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J., allowed the application. Furthermore, the Court provided a set of directions to ensure the timely release of undertrials and convicts on bail after it is granted. In a bail application filed by an accused in an FIR filed against him under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (“BNS”), 2023, by a father who claimed that he allegedly enticed his daughter to leave her home, the Single Judge Bench of Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J., allowed the application. Furthermore, the Court provided a set of directions to ensure the timely release of undertrials and convicts on bail after it is granted. [Sohrab v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine All 7186, decided on 04-11-2025]
Read more HERE
CIVIL LAW
KERALA HIGH COURT | S. 60(1)(g) exemption inapplicable where father’s retirement benefits are to be attached for child’s maintenance
In the present petition, the point for consideration was whether retirement benefits such as pension and gratuity were liable to attachment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (‘CPC’) in a claim for maintenance and educational expenses made by a minor daughter against her father. The Family Court had dismissed the petition for attachment before judgment citing the exemption under Section 60(1)(g) CPC. The Division Bench of Devan Ramachandran and M.B. Snehalatha*, JJ., set aside that order, holding that the exemption under Section 60(1)(g) CPC cannot be invoked to defeat a statutory and moral obligation to maintain one’s minor child. [Rifa Fathima v. Salim, OP (FC) No. 503 of 2025, decided on 07-11-2025]
Read more HERE
JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT | ‘Rejection of Plaint requires attentive application of mind, not routine action’: Trial Court order for Non-Disclosure of Cause of Action, upheld
In an appeal filed by the appellant (originally ‘plaintiff’), he had challenged the Trial Court’s order rejecting the plaint at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (‘CPC’), when he had instituted a suit for declaration concerning a residential property. A Single Judge Bench of Rahul Bharti, J., upheld the Trial Court’s decision, concluding that the plaint failed to establish the plaintiff’s right to sue for the reliefs claimed as it did not mention the facts giving rise to the cause of action and as to how the plaintiff was to be reckoned as a claimant. [Sunil Singh v. Krishan Lal Gupta, RFA No. 20 of 2021, decided on 08-11-2025]
Read more HERE
CRUELTY
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Mere statements by parents about daughter’s emotional distress not sufficient to establish cruelty under Section 498A IPC
In an appeal wherein the appellant-husband challenged his conviction and sentence under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, on the ground that the evidence on record did not establish cruelty or abetment to suicide beyond reasonable doubt, a Single Judge Bench of M. M. Sathaye, J., quashed the judgment of conviction passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, and held that the necessary ingredient of cruelty likely to drive a woman to suicide or harassment to coerce unlawful demands was not clearly spelt out, much less proved. The Court noted that no instance of instigation was attributable to the husband and that there was also no proximate link between the event of suicide and the alleged demand for money. [Ramprakash v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 4226, decided on 04-11-2025]
Read more HERE
CRIMINAL LAW
KERALA HIGH COURT | Complainants or legal heirs must be informed when accused dropped from FIR during investigation
A Single Judge Bench of Jobin Sebastian, J. has directed the State Police Chief to issue instructions to Investigating Authorities to give notices to de facto complainants or their legal heirs whenever an accused in the FIR is removed from the list of accused during the course of an investigation. The ruling came while dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellant against judgment dated 29-09-2025 wherein a writ petition filed to seek further investigation in a case under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 326 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), was dismissed. [Shareena v. State of Kerala, WA No. 2557 of 2025, decided on 06-11-2025]
Read more HERE
CUSTOMS
DELHI HIGH COURT | Delayed Show Cause notice by Customs — Is the Owner of goods still liable for redemption fine, penalty or interest?
While hearing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, wherein the petitioner was seeking release of his gold kadaa and chain detained by the customs department, the Division Bench of Pratibha M. Singh* and Madhu Jain, JJ, held that since the customs department had failed to issue the show cause notice within the statutory time limit, the petitioner was not liable to pay any redemption fine, penalty or interest. Thus, the Court directed unconditional release of the petitioner’s goods. [Sunil Kumar Gupta v. Commissioner of Customs, W.P. (C) No. 16869 of 2025, decided on 7-11-2025]
Read more HERE
CYBER CRIME
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | 19-year-old cybercrime accused restrained from using Telegram and WhatsApp during trial
In a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (‘BNSS’) by a 19-year-old, accused of being involved in a cybercrime, a Single Judge Bench of Sameer Jain, J., considered his age and allowed him to be released on bail. However, it restrained him from using any social media application, apps like telegram and WhatsApp during the continuation of the present matter and trial. [Manraj v. State of Rajasthan, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 5300, decided on 17-10-2025]
Read more HERE
DEBT, FINANCIAL AND MONETARY LAWS
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Section 14 SARFAESI Act | Magistrate cannot direct secured creditor to bear police assistance expense in getting secured assets’ possession
In a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (‘CJM’) which contained a direction for him to approach for police assistance in getting the possession of secured asset after depositing the expenses of such assistance, a Single Judge Bench of Ashutosh Kumar, J., held that there is no provision under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’) which asks the secured creditors to deposit any expenses of assistance to the police authorities in taking possession of the secured asset. Accordingly, the Court set aside the said direction and directed the police authorities to comply with the said order at the earliest. [Tyger Home Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14449 of 2018, decided on 30-10-2025]
Read more HERE
DEFAMATION
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT | Plea to quash defamation case against man accused of creating estranged sister-in-law’s fake social media accounts, dismissed
In a petition filed by the petitioner, accused of defamation, identify theft, cheating by personation and publication of sexually explicit material, under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 (‘CrPC’) to quash proceedings against him, a Single Judge Bench of M.I. Arun, J., dismissed the same and held that if allegations of creation of sister-in-law’s fake social media accounts stood proved against the petitioner, then they would be considered defamatory in character. [Pramod Shivashankar v. Vaishnavi, Crl. Petition No. 8217 of 2023, decided on 30-10-2025]
Read more HERE
DISABLED PERSONS
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT | “Issues of Grave Public Importance”: Suo motu cognizance of dysfunctional lifts forcing disabled employees to climb stairs in govt building
In a suo motu writ petition registered regarding the lack of lifts in the new composite Government building, the Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha, CJ., and Bibhu Datta Guru, J., directed the Secretary, Public Works Department (“PWD Secretary”), Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, to file an affidavit on the matter within three days. [In the Matter of Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation v. State of Chhattisgarh, WPPIL No. 99 of 2025, decided on 10-11-2025]
Read more HERE
DIVORCE
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | “Unjust benefit given to husband”: Family Court deprecated for granting divorce without framing issues and recording evidence
In an appeal filed against the order passed by the Family Court whereby the suit was dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (“CPC”) holding that divorce between the parties had already taken place as the divorce notice annexed to the plaint had been received by the wife, the Division Bench of Vivek Rusia* and Binod Kumar Dwivedi, JJ., allowed the appeal, holding that the Family Court gave unjust benefit to the husband by granting divorce without framing issues and recording evidence and treating the notice of divorce as served. [Y v. Z, 2025 SCC OnLine MP 8064, decided on 14-10-2025]
Read more HERE
EDUCATION LAW
MADRAS HIGH COURT | NEET admission plea rejected; Ordered FIR over tampered scorecard citing moral turpitude
In the present petition, a NEET (UG) 2025 candidate sought a direction to the Selection Committee, Directorate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy, to call him for counselling and allot a seat for BSMS/BAMS/BUMS/BHMS courses under the Tamil Nadu Government quota, claiming that his original score of 478 was later reduced to 132 without notice and seeking admission based on the higher score. A Single Judge Bench of N. Anand Venkatesh, J., while dismissing the petition, held that such conduct could not be treated lightly, since the act of the petitioner and all those involved with him suffered from moral turpitude. Apart from the disqualification from taking the NEET examination, the Court emphasised that a police investigation must be conducted to identify the individual(s) responsible for tampering with the scorecard submitted by the petitioner during the admission process. [D. Mohammed Nadeem v. National Testing Agency (NTA), 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 9769, decided on 28-10-2025]
Read more HERE
ELECTION LAW
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Notices issued to Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, BJP MLA Nirmala Sapre in disqualification case filed by Congress MLA Umang Singhar
In a writ petition filed by Congress MLA Umang Singhar against BJP MLA Nirmala Sapre seeking her disqualification from the Legislative Assembly, the Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva, CJ., and Vinay Saraf, J., issued notices to the Speaker of Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly (“the Speaker”) and Nirmala Sapre. [Umang Singhar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, WP No. 36057 of 2025, decided on 07-11-2025]
Read more HERE
KERLA HIGH COURT | State’s plea to defer SIR refused to be entertained leaving it open to approach Supreme Court
While hearing the issue whether the High Court could entertain a writ petition seeking deferment of the Special Intensive Revision (‘SIR’) of electoral rolls in the State when the validity of the SIR is being considered by the Supreme Court, a Single Judge Bench of V.G. Arun, J., while dismissing the writ petition, held that it would be inappropriate to entertain the petition in light of the Supreme Court’s interim order, dated 11-11-2025, which requested the High Courts to defer any writ proceedings related to the validity of the SIR. [State of Kerala v. Election Commission of India, WP(C) NO. 42591 OF 2025, decided on 14-11-2025]
Read more HERE
ENVIRONMENT LAW
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | “Photos show trees not transplanted, rather cut completely”: State directed to file photos with GPS location of 253 allegedly transplanted trees out of 488 illegally cut trees
In a suo motu writ petition registered regarding the reported illegal chopping of 488 trees near Bhopal, the Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva, CJ., and Vinay Saraf, J., directed the State to file photographs along with the GPS locations of each of the 253 allegedly transplanted trees. [In reference (Suo Moto) v. State of Madhya Pradesh, WP No. 42565 of 2025, decided on 04-11-2025]
Read more HERE
FAMILY AND PERSONAL LAWS
KERALA HIGH COURT | First wife not a silent spectator; Must be heard before registration of Muslim man’s second marriage
In a significant ruling concerning the registration of marriages under Muslim Personal Law, a Single Judge Bench of P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J., held that an opportunity of being heard must be given to the first wife before the registration of Muslim man’s second marriage, and if the first wife objects, the Registrar must not register the second marriage and refer the parties to a competent Court. [Mohd. Shareef C. v. State of Kerala, 2025 SCC OnLine Ker 11796, decided on 30-10-2025]
Read more HERE
HEALTH AND MEDICAL LAW
KERALA HIGH COURT | Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists without medical qualification barred from using ‘Dr.’
A Singh Judge Bench of V.G. Arun, J., barred physiotherapists and occupational therapists, who do not possess a formal medical qualification, from using ‘Dr.’ as a prefix to their names. In the present writ petition, the Indian Association of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (‘IAPMR’), prayed for an interim order directing National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (‘NCAHP’) and State Allied and Health Care Council (‘SAHCC’) to ensure that Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapy Professionals do not use the prefix ‘Dr’ in their names. The Court, while admitting the petition, found that IAPMR had made out a prima facie case, and directed the competent authorities to ensure that the prefix ‘Dr.’ mentioned is not used by Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists without required medical qualification. [Indian Association of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation v. Union of India, WP(C) No. 41064 of 2025 (G), decided on 04-11-2025]
Read more HERE
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT | DACP benefits extend to all similarly situated medical cadre officers, not just litigants
In a petition filed by some members of the Medical Cadre, seeking directions to revise and refix their benefits under the Dynamic Assured Career Progression Scheme (‘DACP scheme’) in line with the 5th and 6th Pay Revisions, along with release of arrears and consequential entitlements, after the State shifted the cut-off date and withdrew earlier benefits, a Single Judge Bench of Ananda Sen, J., held that all similarly situated persons falling within the same class must be given the same benefits, irrespective of whether they filed litigation or not. The Court emphasised that the date which was fixed earlier was the only crucial date for the purpose of grant of DACP benefits, and there cannot be any other second date. [Ram Prasad Singh v. State of Jharkhand, 2025 SCC OnLine Jhar 3587, decided on 06-11-2025]
Read more HERE
HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT | Authorities must act immediately in Protection pleas; delay attracts liability
In the present case, a young married couple filed a petition with the relevant authorities, requesting protection from the girl’s father and brother after apprehending threat to their lives,however, no action was taken. A Single Judge Bench of Parmod Goyal, J., held that in case protection is not awarded immediately on receipt of application made by citizen especially in case of marriage then the authorities shall be made liable for their inaction for not giving timely protection and seeking one or other report if any untoward incident takes place. Further, the Court stated that in protection related cases, authorities should act quickly, and matter should not be allowed to be tangled in bureaucratic administration. [Mandeeep Kaur v. State of Punjab, CRWP No. 11443 of 2025, decided on 24-10-2025]
Read more HERE
MADRAS HIGH COURT | “Faith cannot be fenced by caste or confined by prejudice”: Temple car ordered to enter Dalit colony
In a petition filed by a Scheduled Caste resident of Puthagaram village, seeking directions to allow his community to worship at the Muthukolakkiamman Temple and to ensure that the temple chariot, during its trial and main runs, passes through the Dalit Colony, a Single Judge Bench of P.B. Balaji, J., while allowing the petition emphasised that no one can dictate terms as to who is entitled to stand before the deity and worship and who cannot. The petitioner had alleged historical exclusion by caste Hindus and failure of authorities to uphold constitutional protections despite repeated complaints and peace committee interventions. The Court observed that faith cannot be fenced by caste or creed, and divinity cannot be confined by human prejudice, since God does not reside in certain streets alone, and no street is unworthy of the chariot or the god it carries. God never discriminates, and therefore, discrimination cannot be wrapped in the sanctity of tradition. [Selvaraj v. Collector, 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 9757, decided on 07-11-2025]
Read more HERE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Injunction in trade mark dispute between SNN and UP-based popcorn maize seller, set aside
In the present appeal, the appellant, SNT and Co., challenged the order of the District Judge, Nagpur, restraining it from using the trade mark “SNT” for “popcorn maize” and related products, based on allegations by the respondent, Shah Nanji Nagis Exports (P) Ltd., of deceptive similarity with its registered mark “SNN”. A Single Judge Bench of Rohit W. Joshi, J., while setting aside the District Court’s order held that the matter needs to be remanded to the Trial Court for deciding the application for grant of temporary injunction afresh. The Court emphasised that while deciding as to whether two trade dresses/packets are deceptively similar or not, a Court must look at the packet/trade dress as a whole and should not give undue importance to certain distinguishing factors in the two trade dresses/packets. [SNT & Co. v. Shah Nanji Nagis Exports (P) Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 4202, 03-11-2025]
Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Patanjali restrained from calling other chyawaprash brands as ‘dhoka’; Interim relief granted to Dabur
In an application filed by Dabur under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, seeking a permanent and mandatory injunction against Patanjali for denigration, disparagement and defamation through their advertisement for chyawanprash, the Single Judge Bench of Tejas Karia, J, held that calling other chyawanprash as ‘dhoka’ or deceit constituted disparagement of chyawanprash as a class and was not permissible. Thus, the Court restrained Patanjali from broadcasting the advertisement disparaging the class of chyawanprash and also directed the defendants to block the same from all internet and social media websites. [Dabur India Ltd. v. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., C.S. (COMM) No. 1182 of 2025, decided on 6-11-2025]
Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Order transferring domain names containing ‘BIMA SUGAM’ mark stayed in favour of Bima Sugam
In an application challenging the order dated 29-5-2025 (‘impugned order’), wherein the domain names, www.bimasugam.com and www.bimasugam.in registered with the appellant had been transferred to the respondent, the Division Bench of C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, JJ, stayed the impugned order. The Court held that the transfer of domain names would effectively allow the respondent to exploit the domain names registered in favour of the appellant at the interim stage while the suit is still pending disposal. [A Range Gowda v. Bima Sugam India Federation, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 8196, decided on 30-10-2025]
Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Ad-interim injunction granted in favour of ITC restraining defendants from using well-known mark ‘BUKHARA’
In an application filed by ITC Ltd. under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, seeking an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the ‘BUKHARA’ trade mark, the Single Judge Bench of Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J, granted an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from misusing the ‘BUKHARA’ trade mark. [ITC Ltd. v. Bukhara Inn, C.S.(COMM) No. 1187 of 2025, decided on 7-11-2025]
Read more HERE
MADRAS HIGH COURT | Everest Coconut oil’s label and packaging ‘entirely distinct’ from Parachute: Marico’s Copyright claimrejected
While hearing a petition seeking suspension and removal of the respondent’s copyright registration, filed by Marico Ltd., manufacturer of well-known products including PARACHUTE, a Single Judge Bench of N. Senthilkumar, J., held that the petitioner’s claim of similarity between the respondent’s product and its own was wholly untenable. The Court held that the respondent’s trade dress was ‘clearly distinguishable’ from the petitioner’s and that the petitioner did not produce supporting materials to establish infringement. [Marico Ltd. v. Prahalad Rai Kedia, (T)OP(CR) No. 1 of 2024, decided on 11-11-2025]
Read more HERE
LABOUR LAW
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | Read why human trafficking and bonded labour charges were quashed against MLA Zahid Beg’s wife in minor house help death case
In a set of two applications filed by Zahid Beg, an MLA of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly, and his wife, Seema Beg seeking quashing of the cognizance order and the charge-sheet filed against them regarding human trafficking and bonded labour of minor girls, a Single Judge Bench of Sameer Jain, J., held that charge sheets filed, and proceedings pending were bad, and both were liable to be quashed and no prima facie case was made against them. Accordingly, the Court quashed the same and listed the matter for further hearing. [Seema Beg v. State of UP, Application u/s 528 BNSS No. 35862 of 2025, decided on 07-10-2025]
Read more HERE
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT | Workman appearing through advocate constitutes deemed consent for employer’s legal representation
In the petition filed by Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd., challenging the impugned order that upheld the workman’s application under Section 36(3) and (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (‘the Act’) and barred the Management’s advocate from appearing in the reference proceedings, a Single Judge Bench of Deepak Roshan, J., held that when a workman appears through advocate, it is treated as deemed consent for employer’s legal representation. Reiterating the well settled law, the Court observed that consent may be either express or implied, and leave can be granted directly by the Labour Court or inferred when the Court permits an advocate to appear and entertains applications filed by such advocate. [Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Jay Prakash Singh, W.P. (L) No. 2457 of 2025, decided on 04-11-2024]
Read more HERE
MAINTENANCE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Wife entitled to dignified living: Raised maintenance to Rs 3.5 lakh after finding husband suppressed financial strength
In the interim application filed by a woman seeking enhancement of maintenance from Rs 50,000 to Rs 5 lakhs per month, citing her living expenses and responsibility for the daughter’s upbringing, alleging that the husband was a chronic defaulter and that the amount awarded was unreasonably low compared to the family’s substantial business interests, the Division Bench of Justice B. P. Colabawalla and Somasekhar Sundaresan*, JJ., held that the wife is entitled to lead a life of dignity and provide her daughter a life of dignity. Accordingly, the Court directed aggregate monthly maintenance of Rs 3,50,000, noting that the husband did not come with clean hands, having suppressed financial strength and made misstatements about being a person of poor means. [Purvi Mukesh Gada v. Mukesh Popatlal Gada, Interim Application No. 16733 of 2023, decided on 10-11-2025]
Read more HERE
NARCOTICS, INTOXICANTS AND LIQUOR
TELANGANA HIGH COURT | ‘Endangers public health, strikes at root of societal imbalance’: Opinion on the spread of Narcotic Substances
In a petition seeking the writ of Habeas Corpus for declaring that the order dated 10-3-2025 and consequential orders (‘impugned orders’) detaining the detenu were illegal and ought to be set aside, the Division Bench of Moushumi Bhattacharya, Gadi Praveen Kumar*, JJ, held that any narcotic activity endangering public health and safety, strikes at the very root of societal stability. Accordingly, the Court declined to interfere with the impugned orders and dismissed the petition. [Roshni Devi v. State of Telangana, 2025 SCC OnLine TS 1469, decided on 28-10-2025]
Read more HERE
POCSO
MADRAS HIGH COURT | “Expected protector became source of suffering”: Life sentence of father for sexual harassment of minor daughters, upheld
In a case where a father was accused of sexual harassment of his minor daughters, the Division Bench of N. Sathish Kumar and M. Jothiraman*, JJ., upheld the life imprisonment imposed by the Trial Court and observed that, “A father’s paramount duty is to ensure the safety, emotional wellbeing, and moral upbringing of his children, and when such responsibility is let down, it strikes at the foundation of the family and society. The Court therefore found no mitigating factor warranting interference with the sentence imposed by the Trial Court and upheld the life imprisonment imposed.” The accused had challenged his conviction and life sentence under Sections 4 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’) on the ground that the case was falsely framed owing to a ten‑month delay in lodging the complaint, further asserting that the victims never disclosed the incidents to either neighbours or their mother. The Court, however, found no mitigating factor and dismissed the appeal. [X v. State of Madras, Crl.A.No.646 of 2019, decided on 11-11-2025]
Read more HERE
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT | S.359 BNSS not a bar on High Court’s inherent power under S. 528 to quash FIRs
In the present petition, the petitioner sought quashment of an FIR and the resultant charge-sheet pending before the Special Mobile Magistrate, Electricity, Jammu (‘Special Judge’), on the ground of an amicable settlement of his matrimonial dispute with Respondent 2 (‘complainant’). A Single Judge Bench of Mohd. Yousuf Wani, J., while allowing the petition, quashed the charge-sheet and held that in view of the mutual settlement, continuation of the proceedings would be a futile exercise. The Court clarified that Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) is not a bar on the inherent power conferred on the High Courts under Section 528 BNSS to quash FIRs or other proceedings. [Sidharth Mahajan v. State (UT of J&K), 2025 SCC OnLine J&K 1069, decided on 31-10-2025]
Read more HERE
CHHATTISHARH HIGH COURT | No more long adjournments: Trial Courts directed to avoid unnecessary adjournments, fix short and continuous dates
In a bail application filed by an accused in relation to an FIR filed against him under Section 20-B(II)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”), the Single Judge Bench of Ramesh Sinha, CJ., rejected the application, holding that the accused had failed to provide a sufficient reason for possessing the contraband and the three prosecution witnesses turning hostile amounted to tampering with the evidence. However, the Court also directed the Trial Court to pre-pone the next date and possibly conclude the trial within 4 months. [Hariom Pal v. State of Chhattisgarh, MCRC No. 8711 of 2025, decided on 03-11-2025]
Read more HERE
PRESS AND MEDIA LAWS
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | “The film is an inspiration and fiction”: Relief denied to Shah Bano’s daughter against release of ‘Haq’ Movie
In a writ petition filed by the daughter of late Shah Bano Begum seeking stay on releasing, screening, promoting or publishing the film “Haq” or any derivative thereof and directing the Central Board of Film Certification (‘CBFC’) to withhold or revoke certification of the film pending verification of consent from legal heirs of Late Shah Bano Begum, the Single Judge Bench of Pranay Verma, J., dismissed the petition, holding that the daughter had failed to make out any case for interference because there was no violation of any fundamental rights and alternative remedy existed. [Siddiqua Begum Khan v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine MP 8047, decided on 04-11-2025]
Read more HERE
ROADS AND RAILWAYS
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | ‘100 lives lost in 2 weeks’: Suo moto cognizance taken of recurring road accident deaths, seeks Centre and State response
In a suo moto Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) regarding recurring loss of human lives on the roads of Rajasthan, the Division Bench of Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Anuroop Singhi, JJ., observed that such incidents were avoidable with due diligence and proper institutional response and regulation and hence, sought response from Centre and State on improvement of road and public safety matters. [Suo moto v. Road & Public Safety, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 5613, decided on 4-11-2025]
Read more HERE
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT | Indore Truck Crash Case| “Sufficient action not taken”: Police Commissioner directed to appear on next date
In a suo motu writ petition registered regarding the Indore Truck Crash Case wherein a rashly driven truck entered a residential area thereby causing several accidents, injuries to 35 people and loss of three lives, the Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva, CJ., and Vinay Saraf, J., held that despite the order passed by the Court, sufficient action was not taken by the authorities to prevent recurrence of similar incidents. Accordingly, the Court directed the Commissioner of Police (‘the Commissioner’) to appear before the Court through VC on the next date and consider the suggestions given by the Amicus Curiae and submit his response. [In Reference (Suo Motu PIL) v. State Of Madhya Pradesh, W.P. No. 37620 of 2025, decided on 10-11-2025]
Read more HERE
DELHI HIGH COURT | Unauthorized entry no defence when Railway Tracks are easily accessible: Relief granted to kin of 3-year-old, two women run over by train
In a set of three appeals filed against a judgment passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal (“RCT”), whereby claimants were denied compensation for death of three persons when a train ran over them, the Single Judge Bench of Himanshu Joshi J., allowed the appeals, holding that unauthorized entry on railway tracks did not automatically absolve the Railway of liability. Since, the Railway had failed to prove that they took each and every preventive measure to restrict the persons from crossing the railway lines, the failure to take such preventive measures amounted to negligence or breach of statutory duty. [Ramaavatar v. Union of India, Misc. Appeal No. 657 of 2017, decided on 10-11-2025]
Read more HERE
SERVICE LAW
MADRAS HIGH COURT | Divorced daughters eligible for Freedom Fighter Pension like unmarried daughters
In an appeal filed by the petitioner, the daughter of a freedom fighter, challenging the Central Government’s refusal to grant Central Samman Pension under the Swatantarta Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (‘Pension Scheme’) based on the Revised Policy Guidelines of 2014 (‘2014 guidelines’) issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs excluding divorced daughters, which she contested as an unfair and irrational distinction given her impoverished condition and dependence on her parents, a Single Judge Bench of V. Lakshminarayanan, J., while allowing the petition held that petitioner was entitled to freedom fighter pension from the date of her application. The Court emphasised that the petitioner’s father and mother were freedom fighters and it was not in dispute that the petitioner was in impoverished circumstances. [Thillai Lokanathan v. Union of India, WP No. 29353 of 2025, decided on 22-10-2025]
Read more HERE
BOMBAY HIGH COURT | Can an heir be appointed to a Lower Post than the Deceased? Inside ruling on Compassionate Appointment
In a petition filed by the petitioner, challenge was raised to the rejection of approval to his compassionate appointment as a Peon in a fully aided Secondary School, where he was appointed on compassionate grounds following the death of his father, a permanent and approved Junior Clerk. However, the Education Officer declined approval on the ground that he was appointed to a lower post than that held by his deceased father. The Division Bench of Ravindra V. Ghuge* and Ashwin D. Bhobe, JJ., while allowing the petition, held that the reasons assigned by the Education Officer in the order were unsustainable. The Court emphasised that there can be no embargo on grant of approval to a compassionate appointee who is appointed on a post for which he has necessary qualifications. [Sandip Keda Garud v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 257 of 2025, decided on 06-11-2025]
Read more HERE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | State’s rejection of ex-gratia pension despite administrative lapses arbitrary: Release of Rs 2 Lakh to constable’s widow, ordered
In a writ petition filed by the petitioner, widowed wife of a constable, under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging rejection of her ex-gratia pension claim on grounds of delay in processing the application, a Single Judge Bench of Farjand Ali, J., held that the delay in processing the application was entirely departmental and that the petitioner could not be penalised for circumstances beyond her control. The Court stated that rejection of the petitioner’s claim on the said ground was arbitrary and unsustainable in law and hence, ordered the release of ex gratia, i.e., Rs 2,00,000, payable to her. [Shanti Devi v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5551 of 2020 decided on 6-11-2025]
Read more HERE
TRANSGENDER PERSONS
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | “Authority committed legal error”: State directed to change transgender person’s name in educational documents in 8 weeks
In a writ petition filed by a transgender person challenging the rejection of their name change application in their educational documents, the Single Judge Bench of Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J., allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned order could not be sustained in the eyes of the law. Accordingly, the Court directed the respondent authorities to make the required change in the educational documents and issue fresh educational marksheets/ certificates within eight weeks from the date of the order. [Sharad Roshan Singh v. State of U.P., Writ C No. 35406 of 2025, decided on 06-11-2025]
Read more HERE
KERALA HIGH COURT | ‘Inclusion of transgender cadets in NCC matter of policy’; Enrollment denied to transgender student
While deciding whether the rejection of a transgender student’s application for enrollment in the National Cadet Corps (‘NCC’) was unconstitutional, a Single Judge Bench of N. Nagaresh, J., dismissed the petition and held that the inclusion of transgender students in NCC is a matter of policy and the existing statutory framework under the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948 (‘NCC Act’), does not contemplate a separate division for them. [Janvin Cleetus v. Union of India, WP(C) No. 33642 of 2024, decided on 13-11-2025]
Read more HERE