{"id":351246,"date":"2025-06-22T12:00:34","date_gmt":"2025-06-22T06:30:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=351246"},"modified":"2025-06-22T09:00:56","modified_gmt":"2025-06-22T03:30:56","slug":"high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/","title":{"rendered":"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi’s Acid Attack; TikTok’s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar’s National Anthem Case: Patanjali’s Misleading Ads; and more"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This week\u2019s roundup travels across all the High Courts to provide you with cases about Karnataka MLA G. Janardhan Reddy\u2019s bail in illegal mining case, Yamaha\u2019s trade mark, Mamta Banerjee\u2019s Coal Controversy, Split verdict in 2004 HCS Recruitment Scam, and much more.<\/p>\n

ABETMENT TO SUICIDE<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | [S.306 IPC] \u2018Act of instigation must be such, where deceased has no choice, but to commit suicide\u2019; FIR quashed<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere* and Dr. Neela Gokhale, JJ., heard a writ petition preferred under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> and under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> that sought the quashing of the FIR for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 306<\/a>, 506(2)<\/a> and 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019). The petitioner was accused of instigating the suicide of the deceased for harassment over a loan given by him to the deceased. The Court held that it was not possible from any angle to conclude that the petitioner instigated the deceased to commit suicide by demanding the payment of the amount borrowed by him or that the petitioner used abusive language or intimidated him. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BAIL<\/p>\n

TELANGANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Karnataka MLA G. Janardhan Reddy\u2019s conviction stayed and bail granted in illegal mining case<\/p>\n

Two interlocutory applications were filed by the petitioner, Gali Janardhan Reddy, for the suspension of his conviction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (\u2018BNSS\u2019) and the sentence under Section 430(1) BNSS, made by the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad (\u2018Special Court\u2019) vide judgment dated 6-5-2025 in relation with illegal mining. K. Lakshman, J.<\/span>, after referring to the contentions of the petitioner regarding his disqualification from the membership, held that if the suspension was not granted, he would lose the chance to contest the by-election of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly and thereby would fail to represent the people of his constituency. The Court, thus, stayed his conviction and granted him bail. [Gali Janardhan Reddy v. State of Telangana, 2025 SCC OnLine TS 301<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Bail granted to Government Model College Guest Faculty accused of circulating alleged WhatsApp posts to hurt religious sentiments of other community<\/p>\n

In an application filed by applicant, Guest Faculty at Government Model College, Dindori, under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking regular bail in connection with FIR for circulation of certain posts and a video titled \u2018Naya Ravan\u2019 in a WhatsApp group, allegedly to hurt religious sentiments, a single-judge bench of Avanindra Kumar Singh, J., granted bail. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BANK SCAM<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Two persons allegedly involved in Rs 1626 crore bank fraud case permitted to travel abroad<\/p>\n

In an application filed by the Petitioners 1 and 2 under Section 151<\/a> of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908<\/a>, seeking suspension of Look Out Circular (\u2018LOC\u2019) issued by Respondents, and for permitting Petitioners, allegedly involved in bank fraud case, to travel abroad, Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, J.*<\/span>, stated that it found no reason to decline the request of Petitioners for travelling abroad. Hence, permitted petitioners to travel after fulfilling the conditions, similar to as imposed by the Trial Court in the previous orders. [Vineet Gupta v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4436<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CITIZENS, MIGRANTS AND ALIENS<\/p>\n

MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018Foreign national can\u2019t be indefinitely restricted in India by LOC without being named as accused\u2019; Completion of probe directed against Seychelles citizen within one year<\/p>\n

In a writ petition directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (\u2018CBI\u2019) to withdraw the Look Out Circular (\u2018LOC\u2019) issued to the Assistant Foreigners Regional Registration Officer, Bureau of Immigration, against the petitioner in connection with a case pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the Single Judge Bench of D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J. observed that a foreign national cannot be compelled to remain in India indefinitely in connection with a criminal case, particularly when he has not even been named as an accused. Accordingly, the Court directed the investigating agencies to complete the probe against the petitioner, a citizen of Seychelles, within one year. It further ordered that, if no case is established against him upon conclusion of the investigation, the Lookout Circular issued against him shall be revoked. [Karthik Parthiban v. State, 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 2665<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908<\/p>\n

ORISSA HIGH COURT<\/span> | [Order 39 Rule 7 CPC] Why Pleader Commissioner\u2019s Report cannot be taken as evidence in civil suit<\/p>\n

In the present case, the petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 20-2-2024 of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nimapara, whereby a Pleader Commissioner was appointed in terms of Order 39 Rule 7<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (\u2018CPC\u2019). A Single Judge Bench of R.K. Pattanaik, J.<\/span>, opined that the report submitted by a Pleader Commissioner, appointed under Order 39 Rule 7 CPC for property inspection, could be used to determine interim applications, like those for injunctions but it could not be taken as evidence in deciding the merits of a civil suit. The said report was only meant to assist the court in limited matters such as inspection, preservation, or detention of the property. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

COOPERATIVEE SOCIETIES<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Removal of bouncers hired to prevent housing society members from feeding stray dogs, ordered<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of G.S. Kulkarni and Arif S. Doctor, JJ., heard a contempt petition by a resident of a cooperative society who alleged that the respondents had breached earlier orders of this Court wherein they were directed to not employ bouncers in order to stop the petitioner or any other member of the society from feeding the stray dogs. The Court disposed of the said petition when the respondents agreed to discontinue the duties of the two bouncers and to not remove the water bowls kept for the dogs. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Accused\u2019s plea of transfer to \u2018open prison\u2019 in Preeti Rathi Acid Attack case, rejected<\/p>\n

A writ petition was filed before the Division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi*<\/span> and Sanjay A. Deshmukh, JJ., to send the petitioner, Ankur Narayan Panwar, to open prison. The petitioner, while being searched after returning from furlough leave, was found possessing a mobile battery in his bag. He initially stated that his family, unaware of the prison rules, might have packed it along with the other items but at a later stage, blamed the duty staff, and alleged that he was not shown the battery when he asked for it. The Court, in Preeti Rathi Acid Attack case, after referring to the Notifications, Open Prison Rules, 1971 and the Prison Discipline contained in the manual, dismissed the petition and held that the transfer to an open prison could not be claimed as a matter of right, especially when there was a discipline issue on the part of the petitioner. [Ankur Narayan Panwar v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2324<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Enquiry directed into 2012\u2019s New Year eve party with liquor at children\u2019s shelter home<\/p>\n

In a public interest litigation by a social worker, Sangeeta Sandeep Punekar (the \u2018petitioner\u2019) in relation to a liquor party on a New Year eve, arranged at a children shelter home wherein half-naked girls were dancing in front of mentally deficient children, the Division Bench of Alok Aradhe*<\/span>, C.J. and Sandeep V. Marne, J., directed Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Mumbai, to initiate an enquiry regarding the alleged party. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRIMINAL TRIAL<\/p>\n

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT<\/span> | When alleged kidnapping of a pet cat \u2018Daisy\u2019 compelled admonishing symptomatic misuse of criminal process<\/p>\n

In a matter revolving around alleged kidnapping of a pet cat named Daisy which subsequently led to filing of chargesheet against the petitioner accusing him of serious offences including insulting the modesty of a woman, the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., while considering the issue, took to task the jurisdictional police for entertaining the complaint of a missing cat ostensibly for extraneous reasons. The Court said that the Police ought not to have entertained the complaint which did not indicate any cognizable offence at the outset. In fact, the complaint did not even indicate a non-cognizable offence. Mincing no words, the Court said that the instant case revealed the symptomatic misuse of criminal process where hurt feelings or robust grievances masquerade as legal wrongs. [Taha Husain v. State of Karnataka, 2025 SCC OnLine Kar 654<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | WhatsApp chats can be admitted without consent as evidence in matrimonial disputes<\/p>\n

In an appeal against the Family Court\u2019s order permitting the husband, to mark WhatsApp chats procured without wife\u2019s consent through an application installed on her phone, as exhibits in the matrimonial proceedings instituted by him under Section 13<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a>, a single-judge bench of Ashish Shroti, J., upheld the Family Court\u2019s order to admit the WhatsApp chats as evidence and emphasised that in matrimonial disputes, the relevance of evidence prevails over the means of its procurement. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Detailed directions issued for Investigating Authorities & Judicial Officers on Gang Violence and Organised Crime<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by a man, who was being harassed by a gangster, seeking protection of his and his family\u2019s life and liberty, the Single Judge Bench of Harpreet Singh Brar, J., allowed the petition, directing that the department concerned to take swift action towards providing protection to the petitioner and his family. The Court also provided detailed directions for the establishment of a criminal justice and legal response mechanism to counter gang violence and organised crime. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRUELTY<\/p>\n

MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018Unsubstantiated sexual allegations against husband and father-in-law amounts to cruelty\u2019: Woman\u2019s Restitution of Conjugal Rights plea set aside, divorce granted<\/p>\n

In a civil appeal filed under Section 19<\/a> of the Family Courts Act, 1984<\/a>, read with Section 28<\/a> of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a>, seeking to set aside the order and decree passed by the Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, the Division Bench of J. Nisha Banu and R. Sakthivel*<\/span>, JJ. set aside the orders of the Family Court. The petition filed by the husband seeking dissolution of marriage was allowed, while the petition filed by the wife for restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed. Consequently, the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DOWRY DEATH<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Life sentence of husband upheld for wife\u2019s death by setting her on fire; Cruel conduct highlighted<\/p>\n

The appellant, who was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5000, for setting his wife on fire, filed an appeal for reduction of the punishment imposed on him under Section 302<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019). The Division Bench of Sarang V. Kotwal*<\/span> and Shyam C. Chandak, JJ., refused to reduce his conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The Court held that his actions were exceptionally cruel and took undue advantage of his wife and children\u2019s vulnerability. It was held that such cruelty disqualifies him from seeking relief under Exception 4 of the Section 300 IPC. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018Mere possibility of contrary view doesn\u2019t justify reversal of acquittal\u2019; Acquittal in Dowry Death case, upheld<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed by State of Rajasthan challenging the Additional Sessions Judge\u2019s judgment of acquittal under Sections 302<\/a> and 304-B<\/a> of the Penal code, 1860<\/a> (IPC) pertaining to murder and dowry death, but convicted the accused under Section 498-A IPC for cruelty, a Division Bench of Sunil Beniwal and Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati,* JJ., upheld the acquittal of the accused under Sections 302 and 304-B IPC as prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The Court reiterated that in appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must respect plausible views taken by the trial court unless they are perverse or manifestly illegal. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u201cIt\u2019s wife\u2019s tendency to implicate husband and his family members to settle personal scores\u201d: Dowry Harassment FIR against In-Laws, quashed<\/p>\n

An application under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (\u2018CrPC\u2019) was filed by Applicant 1 seeking quashment of an FIR lodged against him and his family members alleging mental and physical cruelty along with dowry related accusations invoking Sections 498-A<\/a>, 323<\/a>, 504<\/a> and 506<\/a> read with Section 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019) and Section 4<\/a> of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961<\/a>. A Division Bench of Anil S. Kilor and Pravin S. Patil*, JJ., observed that the allegations made against the applicant\u2019s family member were general in nature, lacking any specific details to disclose claims of harassment and the only specific accusations pertained to the husband. The Court thus partly allowed the criminal application by quashing and setting aside the case pending against Applicants 2 to 8 and rejecting the application in respect to Applicant 1. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

EDUCATION LAW<\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | Interim directions issued to provide Interpreter to 100% hearing-impaired student for academic and exam assistance<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by 100% hearing-impaired student, seeking various reliefs concerning her education and examination support in a University under the State of Rajasthan, particularly, the non-availability of an interpreter and denial of home-based instruction, despite her disability, a single-judge bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., issued interim directions to the respondent-University. [Manisha Mina v. State of Rajasthan, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 2692<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Procedural delay by NCTE can\u2019t prejudice institution\u2019s academic year; Recognition of Majilis College\u2019s ITE Programme for 2025\u201426, directed<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by Majilis Arts and Science College, challenging National Council for Teacher Education\u2019s (NCTE) delay in granting recognition for its Integrated Teacher Education Programme (ITE Programme) course, the Bench of D. K. Singh, J. set aside an order dated 01-05-2025 that had wrongly mentioned 2026\u201427. The Court directed that the college\u2019s recognition be treated for 2025-26, as the college had complied with all requirements on time, while NCTE failed to follow prescribed timelines. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

ELECTION LAW<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Mere presence of dead persons\u2019 names in the voting list does not mean votes are cast in their names<\/p>\n

In the present election petition, the victory of Shobha Dinesh Bacchav (\u2018respondent 3\u2019) in the General Elections to the 18th Lok Sabha and the voting to the Dhule Parliamentary Constituency was challenged by Subhash Ramrao Bhamre (\u2018election petitioner\u2019) on the ground of illegal casting of votes. A Single Judge Bench of Arun R. Pedneker<\/span>, J., dismissed the election petition stating that the allegations were not supported with any material evidence and therefore the Court could not conclude that just because the voter list contained the names of dead people, the votes were actually cast in their name. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

ENVIRONMENT LAW<\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u201cIf guilty, basis must be disclosed; if not, litigation is futile\u201d; NGT directed to decide culpability before fastening liability in fire incident<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the National Green Tribunal\u2019s order (NGT) dated 29-05-2025, vide which NGT observed to consider the petitioner\u2019s plea for deletion of his name from the array of respondents at the final hearing and fastened liability upon him to pay interim compensation to the victims of the fire incident that occurred at the premises of Rajesh Fireworks, a Division Bench of Vivek Agarwal*<\/span> and Avanindra Kumar Singh, JJ., set aside the NGT\u2019s order and directed the NGT to hear and decide the plea regarding the petitioner\u2019s culpability and involvement in liability in fire incident on its own merits. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Constitution of Ashtamudi Local Wetland Authority for protection and conservation of Ashtamudi Wetland, directed<\/p>\n

In a Public Interest Litigation (\u2018PIL\u2019) concerning the Ashtamudi wetland, which was notified as a Ramsar site in the year 2002, the Petitioner highlighted the depletion and deterioration of the wetland caused by various factors such as pollution from drainage discharge, encroachments, and other anthropogenic activities the division bench of Nitin Jamdar*<\/span>, CJ and Basant Balaji, J. directed the constitution of the Ashtamudi Local Wetland Authority\/Sub-Committee for the protection and conservation of the Ashtamudi wetland to work under the supervision of the State Wetland Authority. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | Plea challenging demolition drive on encroachments in Ummed Sagar Dam catchment area, dismissed<\/p>\n

In a civil writ petition where 124 individuals residing at Khasra No. 5, Gali No. 8, Sundar Balaji Colony, Chopasni, under the jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur, approached the Court challenging the demolition drive against them for allegedly encroaching in the catchment area of the Ummed Sagar Dam, a single-judge bench of Sunil Beniwal, J., dismissed the petition and held that there exists no illegality in the action initiated by the authorities to remove the encroachments from government land, especially land forming part of a vital water body. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

HEALTH AND MEDICAL LAW<\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Suo motu cognizance taken and status report sought on shortage of Hospital Attendants, Nursing Staff at PGIMER, Chandigarh<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of Anil Kshetarpal and Aman Chaudhary, JJ., took suo-motu cognizance of a news report mentioning the severe shortage of hospital attendants and nursing staff in Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (\u2018PGIMER\u2019), Chandigarh. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | No well-known mark status to \u2018TikTok\u2019<\/p>\n

The petitioner challenged the order dated 31-10-2023 passed by Respondent 1-Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks, whereby an application for inclusion of the registered trade mark \u2018TikTok\u2019 in the list of well-known marks, was refused. Manish Pitale, J., affirmed the decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks to refuse inclusion of \u2018TikTok\u2019, a registered trade mark in the list of \u201cwell-known\u201d under Rule 124 of the Trade Mark Rules, 2017 (\u20182017 Rules\u2019) as there was nationwide ban imposed on the petitioner\u2019s application \u2018TikTok\u2019 by the Government of India pertaining to sovereignty and integrity of India, Defence of India, Security of State and Public Order. [Tiktok Ltd. v. Registrar of Trade Marks Mumbai, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2323<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019, quashed<\/p>\n

In the present petition, Manish Pitale, J.<\/span>, dealt with the issue of refusal to register the trade mark \u2018WR\u2019 to the petitioner, Yamaha Hatsudoki Kabushiki Kaisha (\u2018Yamaha\u2019) by the Registrar\/Examiner of Trade Marks (the \u2018respondent\u2019). The Registrar cited similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019 and stated that there would be a likelihood of confusion in the minds of public between the trade mark of Yamaha, of which the registration was sought, and similar trade marks already on the register. The Court quashed the cryptic order by the Registrar and directed him to advertise the application before acceptance as per Section 20(1)<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019). Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Interim relief granted to \u2018SOCIAL\u2019 restaurant against \u2018SOCIAL TRIBE\u2019 in trade mark dispute<\/p>\n

The present interim application was filed by the applicant \u2018SOCIAL\u2019 seeking remedy for trade mark infringement and passing off. The defendant \u2018SOCIAL TRIBE\u2019 was using the mark in a manner which was deceptively similar to the one registered by the applicant. A Single Judge Bench of Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J., after comparing both the marks, held that adding the suffix \u2018TRIBE\u2019 to the word \u2018SOCIAL\u2019 did not change the fact that the defendant attempted to infringe the registered trade mark of the applicant. The Court granted injunctive relief to the applicant by restraining and prohibiting the defendant from infringing upon the applicant\u2019s registered trade mark. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Interim injunction granted to VOLVO in a trade mark infringement case<\/p>\n

In a suit filed by the plaintiffs for the grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing upon the plaintiffs\u2019 trade mark, A Single Judge Bench of Amit Bansal, J*<\/span>, granted ex-parte ad interim injunction while observing that the defendants wilfully misused the plaintiffs\u2019 trade mark to encash on the plaintiffs\u2019 well-established goodwill and name. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

JUDICIARY<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018The Court cannot assume the role of an examiner, doing so would breach judicial propriety\u2019; Re-evaluation ordered in Judicial Services Exam<\/p>\n

In a writ petition seeking correction of the totaling of the Civil Law-I examination (\u2018Civil Law paper\u2019); correct evaluation of an answer in the English subject examination ( \u2018English paper\u2019) attempted by the petitioner in the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Examination 2016, a Division Bench of Sheel Nagu, CJ., and Sumeet Goel, J., allowed the writ petition and ordered re-evaluation of an answer by an examiner different from the one who previously examined for free and fair assessment.[ Rustam Garg v. Punjab & Haryana High Court, 2025 SCC OnLine P&H 2759<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, OTHER UNIONS AND CHILDREN<\/p>\n

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT<\/span> | [Constructive Desertion] Divorce granted to husband due to his foundational deceit and concealment of prior marriages, set aside<\/p>\n

In an appeal filed by the appellant (wife) challenging the judgment and decree dated 21-11-2019 and 18-12-2019, issued by the Additional District Judge in a matrimonial suit wherein the marriage was dissolved between the parties by divorce, the Division Bench of Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar, JJ. set aside the decree of divorce and held that divorce decree cannot be granted to a party (petitioner) who perpetrated foundational cruelty (e.g., deliberate marital deception) of greater magnitude than any alleged misconduct by the other spouse, even if the marriage is irretrievably broken down, as it would constitute a miscarriage of justice and violate the principle of \u201cclean hands\u201d. [Kamalika Majumdar Nee Das v. Subhapriya Majumdar, 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 4835<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Couples may be divorced as husband and wife, but never as parents, their responsibilities continue for life<\/p>\n

In a contempt case filed by a father under the impression that the mother is not allowing the child to interact with him, in spite of the directions in the judgment earlier delivered. the division bench of Devan Ramachandran* and M.B. Snehalatha, JJ. issued the following directions: (a) The contempt case was closed. (b) The father was granted full liberty to participate in the child\u2019s therapy sessions and to monitor her educational progress and personal life. However, the Court made it clear that this must be done without causing the child any distress, and with the understanding that the father\u2019s obligation was to provide her with the utmost care and protection, free from any threat or intimidation. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERLA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Registrar cannot cancel marriage certificate unless registration is proven fraudulent or improper<\/p>\n

In a matter concerning the cancellation of marriage registration as the marriage was not somenised under any personal or special law, the Single Judge Bench of CS Dias, J. held that a Registrar of Marriages cannot cancel a marriage certificate unless it is proved that the registration was either fraudulent or improperly made. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GUAHATI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Relief granted to woman driven out of matrimonial home due to lighter complexion of child<\/p>\n

In an application seeking quashing of the impugned order whereby the Sessions Court denied maintenance to the petitioner-wife for the child, the Single Judge Bench of Parthivjyoti Saikia, J., allowed the application, holding that the wife was driven out of the matrimonial house due to the child\u2019s complexion not matching the parents and thus, the wife had shown sufficient reason for living separately. [Mustt. Lozzatan Begum v. Shahidul Islam, 2025 SCC OnLine Gau 2898<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018Court flooded with litigation due to ignorance of SOPs\u2019; Circulation of SOPs directed regarding run-away couples seeking protection<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by a run-away couple seeking protection of their lives and personal liberty from their families and relatives, a Single Judge Bench of Rohit Kapoor, J., disposed of the petition with a direction to the 2nd Respondent to forward the petitioners\u2019 police representation to the authority concerned and ensure that the same was decided per the SOPs. [Kamalpreet Kaur v. State of Punjab, 2025 SCC OnLine P&H 2777<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

ORISSA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Divorce upheld on husband being called \u2018nikhatu, kempa\u2019 by wife for his physical infirmity<\/p>\n

A Division Bench comprising of B.P. Routray*<\/span> and Chittaranjan Dash, JJ., dealt with a matrimonial application wherein the appellant-wife was accused of using derogatory remarks towards her husband-the respondent ridiculing him over his disability. The Court upheld the Family Court\u2019s decision granting divorce which stated derogatory terms like \u201cNikhatu\u201d and \u201cKempa\u201d constituted mental cruelty, which was a valid ground for divorce. [X v. Y, 2025 SCC OnLine Ori 2325<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE<\/p>\n

PATNA HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018Was only present during operation as team member\u2019; 22-year-old medical negligence case against a female gynecologist, quashed<\/p>\n

In a Petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (\u2018CrPC\u2019) for quashing the Trial Court\u2019s order dismissing the application of discharge filed by a female gynecologist under Section 227 of the CrPC, the Single Judge Bench of Chandra Shekhar Jha, J*., relying upon the Supreme Court\u2019s decisions in Devendra Nath Padhi and Bhajan Lal, to secure the ends of justice quashed the 22 year medical negligence case against her. The Court considered that the present accused, the wife of the operating Doctor was only present in the operation theatre as part of the team. [Mamta Sinha (Dr.) v. State of Bihar, 2025 SCC OnLine Pat 2170<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Reopening of Cosmetiq Hospital allowed after closure over alleged medical negligence in Liposuction Case<\/p>\n

In a plea filed by a doctor, the proprietor and plastic surgeon at Cosmetiq Hospital, claiming that the closure of the hospital had made it impossible to continue post-surgical treatment for patients, a Single Judge Bench of V.G. Arun, J. permitted the reopening of Cosmetiq Hospital in Kazhakkuttam. The hospital had been shut down following a tragic incident in which a woman allegedly lost her fingers and toes after undergoing a cosmetic procedure at the facility. [Bibilash B.S. (Dr.) v. State of Kerala, 2025 SCC OnLine Ker 3677<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Cheque Dishonour due to Frozen Account not Offence Under NI Act; \u201cAccount maintained\u201d under Section 138 NI Act, interpreted<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash summons dated 18-09-2024 and the consequential proceedings arising out of complaint initiated under Section 138<\/a> of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881<\/a>, Ravinder Dudeja, J., quashed the summoning order as the reason for dishonor as \u201cinsufficient funds\u201d was that the petitioners\u2019 account was frozen by the CGST Department, and thus, it could not be said to be \u201cmaintained\u201d by them at the relevant time. [Best Buildwell (P) Ltd. v. R.D. Sales, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4267<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PRISONERS<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | State directed to reconsider premature release of a prisoner incarcerated for more than 21 years; Reconstitution of Sentence Review Board suggested<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the petitioner seeking premature release from prison, as he had suffered incarceration for more than 21 years with remission after his conviction, Girish Kathpalia, J., stated that the composition of Sentence Review Board (\u2018SRB\u2019) needs be re-examined by the authorities concerned so as to make the exercise of sentence review meaningful and commensurate to the laudable philosophy of reformation of criminal. The Court further directed the State to consider afresh the petitioner\u2019s case for premature release as per the policy framed by the Delhi Government in 2004 (\u20182004 policy\u2019) and the parameters laid down and discussed in the present case. The Court further suggested that the competent authority should deliberate upon the composition of Sentence Review Board and reconstitute the same and should also further finetune the 2004 policy on the lines discussed in the present case. [Vikram Yadav v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4501<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

QUASHMENT OF PROCEEDINGS\/FIR<\/p>\n

UTTARANCHAL HIGH COURT<\/span> | Criminal proceedings quashed against Patanjali Ayurved for alleged misleading advertisements<\/p>\n

In an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (\u2018BNSS\u2019), filed by Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. (\u2018Patanjali\u2019) against criminal proceedings under Sections 3, 4 and 7 of the Drugs and Magical Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (\u20181954 Act\u2019) and the summoning order therein vis-a-vis matter of misleading advertisements, a Single Judge Bench of Vivek Bharti Sharma, J., observing that there were no specific allegations to show that the advertisements were misleading and non-application of judicial mind in taking cognizance of the criminal case, quashed the criminal proceedings and set aside the summoning order. [Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. v. State of Uttarakhand, 2025 SCC OnLine Utt 1713<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u201cMere knowledge of offender\u2019s whereabouts not harbouring\u201d: FIR quashed against father & brother of absconder<\/p>\n

In a petition filed seeking quashing of an FIR filed under Sections 212<\/a> and 216<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019) against the father and brother of the absconder, the Single Judge Bench of Manisha Batra, J., allowed the petition, holding that the allegations were vague and the evidence was insufficient to infer that the accused person harboured the absconder. The Court also reiterated that simple denial of the whereabouts of an offender by his family members does not amount to harbouring such family members. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PATNA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Case against Bihar CM Nitish Kumar over alleged disrespect to National Anthem during \u2018Sepak Takraw\u2019 World Cup inauguration, quashed<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (\u2018BNSS\u2019) filed by Nitish Kumar, Chief Minister, Bihar, to quash the complaint case for insulting the National Anthem while inaugurating the World Cup event of \u2018Sepak takraw\u2019, the Single Judge Bench of Chandra Shekhar Jha, J., held that the allegations were completely baseless and frivolous and filed to gain cheap popularity in politics by tarnishing the image of Nitish Kumar. Hence, the Court quashed the complaint case and the notice issued thereunder. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ECL order on Mamata Banerjee\u2019s coal controversy set aside; ECL directed to pay \u20b925 lakh compensation<\/p>\n

An appeal was filed by Mamata Banerjee and her son seeking enforcement of the entitlements due to her late husband Badal Banerjee under the Land Loser Scheme of Eastern Coalfields Limited (ECL), following the acquisition of his land for mining purposes and ECL\u2019s subsequent denial of coal allotment. A Division Bench of Tapabrata Chakraborty and Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, JJ., set aside the order of the Single Judge and held that Mr. Banerjee was indeed a beneficiary under the Land Loser Scheme, as evidenced by uncontroverted admissions and official documents of ECL, and directed the company to compensate the appellants with a sum of \u20b925 lakhs in lieu of the undelivered coal. [Mamata Banerjee v. Eastern Coalfields Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 4421<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RENT CONTROL AND EVICTION<\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | Rent Appellate Tribunal can\u2019t keep judgment reserved indefinitely after conclusion of arguments<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the delay by the Rent Appellate Tribunal in pronouncing the reserved judgment which violates the petitioner\u2019s right to speedy trial under Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, a single-judge bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., acknowledged the inordinate delay and directed the Rent Appellate Tribunal to pronounce the judgment expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The Court held that the judgment can\u2019t be kept reserved indefinitely after conclusion of arguments. [Ramswaroop v. Moolchand Saini, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 2691<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RIGHT TO INFORMATION<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Maharashtra State Information Commission shall decide second appeals\/complaints under RTI Act as expeditiously as possible<\/p>\n

The petitioners prayed before this Court to issue a writ\/order\/direction in the nature of mandamus, to direct the respondent, to inform the petitioners about the detailed roadmap charted by it, whereby the second appeals and complaints filed before it were disposed of within 45 days from the date of filing thereof. The Division Bench of Alok Aradhe*, C.J., and Sandeep V. Marne, J., after taking note that the Right to Information Act, 2005<\/a> (\u2018the 2005 Act\u2019) did not contain any time limit for deciding second appeals, stated that Respondent 1 should make an endeavour to decide the second appeals\/complaints under the RTI Act as expeditiously as possible. [Shailesh Gandhi v. Maharashtra State Information Commission, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2325<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

SCS, STS, OBCS AND MINORITIES<\/p>\n

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018State of West Bengal acting in hot haste, reintroducing struck-down reservations; OBC reclassification, stayed<\/p>\n

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed seeking to restrain the State of West Bengal and its instrumentalities from implementing a fresh benchmark survey and issuing notifications for classification and reservation of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in alleged violation of the Calcutta High Court\u2019s earlier judgment dated 22-05-2024, which had struck down the identification of 77 OBC classes and held that only the State Legislature, not the Executive, could exercise such powers under the 2012 Act. A Division Bench of Rajasekhar Mantha and Tapabrata Chakraborty, JJ., directed that multiple executive notifications relating to sub-categorisation of OBCs and enhanced reservation be stayed till the end of July 2025 or until further orders. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

SERVICE LAW<\/p>\n

GAUHATI HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018In merit-cum-seniority there is greater emphasis on merit\u2019; Promotional exercise of New India Assurance Ltd. held valid<\/p>\n

In a civil writ petition challenging the notice dated 16-01-2024 of the Promotion Exercise 2024-25 to the cadre of Scale VII issued by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (\u2018NIAC\u2019) on the ground of it being illegal and violative of the Promotion Policy 2006, the Single Judge Bench of Kardak Ete, J*.<\/span>, finding no procedural infirmity or illegality in the promotion exercise dismissed the petition holding that the principle of \u2018merit-cum-seniority\u2019 lays greater emphasis on merit and ability and seniority plays a less significant role and is to be given weight only when merit and ability are approximately equal. [Lathrang Born Buam v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine Gau 2945<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Prolonged unauthorised absence from work constitutes voluntary abandonment of service and not termination<\/p>\n

A Single Judge Bench of Anil L. Pansare, J., quashed and set aside Industrial Court orders that had directed reinstatement and back wages for several employees who had stayed away from duty without authorisation. The Court held that prolonged unauthorised absence from work, despite multiple opportunities to resume duty, amounted to voluntary abandonment of service and did not constitute termination\/retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947<\/a> (the Act). Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Zilla Parishad ordered to release Rs 18,33,300 gratuity to its retired employee alleged to have used filthy language towards senior officers<\/p>\n

The Petitioner-Zilla Parishad, Amravati challenged the judgment and order dated 3-12-2022 passed by the Controlling Authority under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019), directing the petitioner to pay the respondent gratuity of Rs 18,33,300 along with interest @10%p.a. A Single Judge Bench of M.S. Jawalkar, J.<\/span>, stated that gratuity could not be withheld under Section 4(6) of the Act as no ingredient of Section 4(6)(a) were present and further opined that as per Section 4(6)(b), the gratuity might be fully or partially forfeited when the employee\u2019s service was terminated for his riotous or disorderly conduct or any other act of violence on his part or if the services of the employee had been terminated for any act which constituted an offence involving moral turpitude. The Court stated that since the respondent\u2019s services were not terminated he was entitled for gratuity. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | MP Govt directed to release retiral dues of late IAS officer who was repeatedly victimised even after death<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by the aggrieved brother of a late IAS officer challenging the judgment dated 30-4-2024, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi (\u2018the Tribunal\u2019), Navin Chawla, J*<\/span>, while upholding the order of the Tribunal directed the State of Madhya Pradesh (\u2018the petitioner\u2019) to release the retiral dues withheld by them observing that the late IAS officer was the victim of arbitrary and vexatious actions of the petitioner. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | 2004 HCS Recruitment Scam | Split verdict and referred to Larger Bench<\/p>\n

In a significant decision regarding the contentious 2004 Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) recruitment, a Division Bench comprising Sanjeev Prakash Sharma*<\/span> and Meenakshi I. Mehta*<\/span>, JJ. delivered a split verdict regarding allegations of irregularities in the selection process and discriminatory denial of appointment and referred the matter to a larger bench. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT<\/span> | JPSC directed to pay Rs 1 lakh to a Schedule Tribe candidate who was denied employment over a fee glitch<\/p>\n

In a Letters Patent Appeal (\u2018LPA\u2019) filed by Jharkhand Public Service Commission (\u2018JPSC\u2019) against the order of a single judge holding the respondent, a Scheduled Tribe (\u2018ST\u2019) candidate, entitled to an appointment as Assistant Professor in the Nagpuri language, the Division Bench of M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.*<\/span>, and Rajesh Shankar, J., noting the backwardness and myriad issues faced by the community and that it would be a travesty of justice to not appoint a deserving candidate like the respondent due to a fee glitch which was only discovered later, dismissed the LPA and directed the JPSC to pay the respondent Rs 1 lakh as costs. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Interference refused with 2008 Civil Services appointment after 2016 legislative reforms allowed reservation for mental disability<\/p>\n

The Division Bench of M.S. Sonak*<\/span> and Jitendra Jain, JJ., heard a writ petition filed by Vishwas Haridas Jadhavar (\u2018petitioner\u2019) with a plea that he be appointed to the Civil Services based on his performance in the 2008 UPSC Civil Services examination. He suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder (\u2018OCD\u2019) which was not recognised as a disability for the purpose of reservation under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995<\/a> (\u20181995 Act\u2019) but was later given recognition under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016<\/a> (\u20182016 Act\u2019). The Court held that since the matter was already decided by Delhi High Court, this matter was barred by res judicata and reasoned that a change in the legislative framework under the 2016 Act would not revive any selection process which was already concluded. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GAUHATI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Contractual music teacher directed to approach Governor for exercise of discretionary powers for pension relief<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by an ad-hoc music teacher against the rejection of her regularisation request or alternatively, seeking grant of voluntary\/compulsory retirement along with payment of her pension and pensionary benefits, the Single Judge Bench of Robin Phukan, J., allowed the petition, holding that though the petitioner\u2019s prayer for regularization of her service or voluntary retirement and pensionary benefits could not be granted under the existing law, her case could be considered by the Governor under Rules 31 and 235 of the Assam Service (Pension) Rules, 1969 (\u2018the Rules\u2019). Accordingly, the petitioner was granted liberty to approach the Director of Secondary Education, Assam (\u2018DSE\u2019) to file a representation addressing the Governor. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MADRAS HIGH COURT<\/span> | Matrimonial disputes constitute \u2018misconduct\u2019 under TN Government Servants\u2019 Conduct Rules; Govt. departments can initiate disciplinary proceedings<\/p>\n

In a writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 01-02-2018, wherein the Court opined that the criminal case registered in a matrimonial dispute may not be an impediment for continuance of the government contractual employment, the division bench of S.M. Subramaniam and Dr. A.D.Maria Clete, JJ. clarified that, under the Tamil Nadu Government Servants\u2019 Conduct Rules, 1973, matrimonial disputes constitute misconduct, thereby authorizing government departments to initiate disciplinary proceedings in such circumstances. In the present appeal, it was observed that the respondent\u2019s contract had expired in 2017. Consequently, the Court found that the impugned order was inconsistent with these legal principles and the Conduct Rules and hence allowed the appeal. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

TAX<\/p>\n

SIKKIM HIGH COURT<\/span> | Refund of Rs 4.37 crore ordered; unutilized input tax credit to SICPA India (P) on its business closure<\/p>\n

A tax related writ petition was brought before this Court under Articles 226<\/a> and 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, wherein the petitioner claimed a refund of Rs 4.37 crore in unutilised Input Tax Credit (\u2018ITC\u2019) after closure of their business under Section 49(6)<\/a> of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017<\/a> (\u2018CGST Act\u2019). A Single Judge Bench of Meenakshi Madan Bai, J.<\/span>, opined that while Section 54(3) laid down specific circumstances for refund of ITC, it did not contain an express bar in Section 49(6) read with Section 54 and 54(3) CGST Act on granting refund upon business closure. The Court thus ordered that the petitioners were entitled to the refund of unutilized ITC claimed by them. [SICPA India (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine Sikk 61<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

TELANGANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Explained | \u201cOpen terrace\u201d, \u201copen portico\u201d excluded to calculate built-up area for deductions under S. 80-IB of IT Act<\/p>\n

In a batch of appeals filed by Appellant 1, Modi Builders and Realtors (P) Ltd. (\u2018the assessee\u2019), under Section 260-A<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019), the Division Bench of P. Sam Koshy*<\/span> and Narsing Rao Nandikonda, JJ., dealt with the question of law whether terrace or balcony in the form of open to sky or portico without walls would be added while computing the built up area for determining the eligibility for deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Act. The Court held that both \u201copen terrace\u201d and \u201copen portico\u201d have nowhere been mentioned to be a part of the built-up area as defined in Section 80-IB(14)(a). Thus, an open terrace could never be a balcony or a projection and similarly an open portico would never be included within the inner measurement of a residential unit. [Modi Builders & Realtors (P) Ltd. v. CIT, 2025 SCC OnLine TS 283<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT<\/span> | \u2018Notice under Section 61 JGST Act cannot be issued for mere sale of goods at concessional rates\u2019; GST-ASMT 10 notices quashed<\/p>\n

In a series of writ petitions filed against the GST-ASMT-10 notices issued under Section 61 of Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (\u2018JGST Act\u2019) to the petitioners for selling their goods at prices lower than the prevalent market prices, the Division Bench of M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J. and Deepak Roshan, J*.<\/span>, quashed the notices holding that no action under JGST Act can be taken merely because of difference in transaction value at which the petitioners have sold the goods with that of prevalent market value of goods. [Sri. Ram Stone Works v. State of Jharkhand, 2025 SCC OnLine Jhar 2169<\/a>] Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":351247,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[46069,45673],"tags":[83759,83942,83457,83838,83603,83936,83937,83946,83945,83944,49806,83497,83941,83940,83943,83947,83938,83828,57344,83939],"class_list":["post-351246","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-high-court-round-up","category-columns-for-roundup","tag-ashtamudi-wetland","tag-constructive-desertion","tag-cosmetiq-hospital","tag-gang-violence","tag-honda","tag-karnataka-mla-g-janardhan-reddy","tag-majilis-colleges-ite-programme-for-202526","tag-mamata-banerjees-coal-controversy","tag-nitish-kumars-national-anthem-case","tag-patanjalis-misleading-advertisements","tag-pgimer","tag-preeti-rathi-acid-attack-case","tag-punjab-civil-services-judicial-branch-examination-2016","tag-social-restraurants-trademark","tag-sops-for-run-away-couples","tag-split-verdict-in-2004-hcs-recruitment-scam","tag-tiktoks-trademark","tag-ummed-sagar-dam","tag-volvo","tag-yamahas-trade-mark"],"yoast_head":"\nHigh Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025: Stories on Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads; and more\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025: Stories on Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-22T06:30:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi’s Acid Attack; TikTok’s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar’s National Anthem Case: Patanjali’s Misleading Ads; and more\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/\",\"name\":\"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-22T06:30:34+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025: Stories on Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"High Court Weekly Roundup June 2025\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi’s Acid Attack; TikTok’s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar’s National Anthem Case: Patanjali’s Misleading Ads; and more\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025 | SCC Times","description":"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025: Stories on Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads; and more","og_description":"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025: Stories on Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-06-22T06:30:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi’s Acid Attack; TikTok’s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar’s National Anthem Case: Patanjali’s Misleading Ads; and more","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/","name":"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp","datePublished":"2025-06-22T06:30:34+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"High Court Weekly Roundup for June 2025: Stories on Preethi Rathi\u2019s Acid Attack; TikTok\u2019s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar\u2019s National Anthem Case: Patanjali\u2019s Misleading Ads","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"High Court Weekly Roundup June 2025"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/22\/high-court-weekly-roundup-june-2025-3\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"HIGH COURT JUNE 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Preethi Rathi’s Acid Attack; TikTok’s Trade mark; Nitish Kumar’s National Anthem Case: Patanjali’s Misleading Ads; and more"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-22T085423.238.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":275380,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/11\/mining-tycoon-g-janardhan-reddy-to-remain-out-of-bellary-ananthapuram-cuddapah-after-nov-7-till-conclusion-of-trial-trial-to-be-concluded-within-6-months-without-fail-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":351246,"position":0},"title":"Mining Tycoon G. Janardhan Reddy to remain out of Karnataka’s Bellary, 2 AP Districts after Nov 7 till conclusion of trial; Trial to be concluded within 6 months ‘without fail’: SC\u00a0","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and Krishna Murari has allowed mining baron G. Janardhan Reddy to stay at Bellary upto 06.11.2022 to be with his daughter who has delivered a baby. He has, however, been directed to move out of Bellary and remain out of Bellary in Karnataka\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Mining-Tycoon-G.-Janardhan-Reddy-to-remain-out-of-Bellary-Ananthapuram-Cuddapah-after-Nov-7-till-conclusion-of-trial-Trial-to-be-concluded-within-6-months-without-fail-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Mining-Tycoon-G.-Janardhan-Reddy-to-remain-out-of-Bellary-Ananthapuram-Cuddapah-after-Nov-7-till-conclusion-of-trial-Trial-to-be-concluded-within-6-months-without-fail-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Mining-Tycoon-G.-Janardhan-Reddy-to-remain-out-of-Bellary-Ananthapuram-Cuddapah-after-Nov-7-till-conclusion-of-trial-Trial-to-be-concluded-within-6-months-without-fail-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Mining-Tycoon-G.-Janardhan-Reddy-to-remain-out-of-Bellary-Ananthapuram-Cuddapah-after-Nov-7-till-conclusion-of-trial-Trial-to-be-concluded-within-6-months-without-fail-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Mining-Tycoon-G.-Janardhan-Reddy-to-remain-out-of-Bellary-Ananthapuram-Cuddapah-after-Nov-7-till-conclusion-of-trial-Trial-to-be-concluded-within-6-months-without-fail-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":350557,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/13\/tel-hc-stays-conviction-g-janardhan-reddy-illegal-mining-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":351246,"position":1},"title":"Read why Telangana HC stayed Karnataka MLA G. Janardhan Reddy\u2019s conviction and granted bail in illegal mining case","author":"Editor","date":"June 13, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"This Court has the power to suspend the sentence and conviction and grant bail to the petitioner after recording reasons and this Court, being the appellate court, has to consider irreversible consequences.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Janardhan Reddy","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Janardhan-Reddy.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Janardhan-Reddy.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Janardhan-Reddy.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Janardhan-Reddy.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":146391,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/08\/01\/supreme-court-allows-petition-challenging-nitish-kumars-legislative-council-membership\/","url_meta":{"origin":351246,"position":2},"title":"Supreme Court agrees to hear the petition challenging Nitish Kumar’s Legislative Council membership","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"August 1, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar, JJ allowed the petition seeking cancellation of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's membership of the state Legislative Council for allegedly concealing a pending criminal case against him. Stating that it will consider the matter, the bench\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":351025,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/19\/patna-high-court-quashed-national-anthem-insult-allegations-against-nitish-kumar\/","url_meta":{"origin":351246,"position":3},"title":"Patna High Court quashes case against Bihar CM Nitish Kumar over alleged disrespect to National Anthem during \u2018Sepak Takraw\u2019 World Cup inauguration","author":"Editor","date":"June 19, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court held that smiling and merely folding hands in Pranaam Mudra in standing position could not be construed by any prudent imagination to be an insult to the National Anthem.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Patna High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":352720,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/08\/legal-roundup-intellectual-property-right-roundup-june-2025-copyright-infringement-trade-mark-infringement-scc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351246,"position":4},"title":"INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the latest Intellectual Property Rights rulings from June 2025.","author":"Editor","date":"July 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Covering all the important intellectual property rights cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, latest legal updates in intellectual property rights and links to other roundups.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property Rights Roundup June 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":355782,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/06\/intellectual-property-rights-july-2025-roundup-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":351246,"position":5},"title":"IPR July 2025: A quick recap of the Months\u2019 top Intellectual Property Rights cases","author":"Sonali Ahuja","date":"August 6, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Covering all the important IPR cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, links to other roundups, latest legal updates in criminal law and a few top stories of the month.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property Rights July 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351246","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=351246"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351246\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/351247"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=351246"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=351246"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=351246"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}