451. Closing of evidence -- Dismissal of application to lead and conclude evidence – Challenge to -- No cogent reason given by the petitioner to explain as to why in a period of 3½ years, petitioner has been unable to conclude his evidence – Very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording 26-27 opportunities to the petitioner -- However, the same cannot be misused to endlessly drag the matter to the unfair advantage or disadvantage of either party -- No ground to interfere in the impugned order – Revision dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 31.07.2025

452. Amendment in prayer of suit – Petitioner/ Plaintiff dispossessed during the pendency of suit -- Petitioner earlier sought relief of injunction, but now, by way of the proposed amendment, he is seeking restoration of possession in his favour, on the basis of tenancy -- Such a relief sought by the petitioner would require detailed pleadings and independent evidence – Held, proposed amendment would fundamentally change the character and nature of the case -- Civil Judge has rightly declined the application for amendment of the civil suit. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 28.07.2025 Decided on: 31.07.2025

453. Criminal breach of trust – Quashing of FIR -- It is not a case where the accused were entrusted with the subject property -- The subject property belongs to them and they had rights over it as owners with title -- Thus, the very foundation for invoking Section 406 of the IPC falls to the ground – FIR quashed. (SC) Decided on: 31.07.2025

454. Acquisition of land – Title dispute – Restitution of compensation -- Jurisdiction of civil Court -- Once the ownership and wrongful enrichment were proved, the Trial Court was well within its jurisdiction to grant full and effective relief, including restitution -- Denial of consequential reliefs despite a declaration of ownership has resulted in manifest injustice. (P&H HC) Decided on: 31.07.2025

455. Public nuisance – Dharna – Quashing of FIR -- Even if the case of the respondent-State is accepted at its face value, it cannot be concluded that the appellants, while conducting the rally and dharna, engaged in any form of obstruction of the road in a manner that led to the offences alleged -- Appellants were exercising their right to freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peacefully – No purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution -- It would have been appropriate for the High Court to have exercised the power available under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the court’s process – Appeal allowed, FIR and the proceedings quashed. (SC) Decided on: 31.07.2025

456. Mutation -- Already sold property – Appropriate remedy -- Revenue authorities refused to record name of the appellants after noticing the fact that the original person, through whom appellants-vendor claim right, had already sold his share and was not left with any land which could be transferred – Issues sought to be raised by the appellants cannot be examined in summary proceedings of mutation -- Remedy of the appellants would be to seek appropriate declaration from the competent Civil Court. (P&H HC) Decided on: 30.07.2025

457. Sanad takseem issued – Jurisdiction of Collector thereafter -- Naksha 'Bey' challenged by the petitioners by filing an appeal before learned Collector, however; during the pendency of appeal, partition proceedings concluded with the drawing of sanad takseem – Thereafter, learned Collector had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. (P&H HC) Decided on: 29.07.2025

458. Karewa marriage – Void marriage -- At the time of alleged Karewa Mariage between S and SR, wife of SR namely L was still alive -- It is settled law that second marriage, during subsistence of first marriage, is null and void. (P&H HC) Decided on: 28.07.2025

459. Eviction petition under Rent Act -- Religious Institution – Bar of jurisdiction -- Eviction petition instituted under the Rent Act would not be barred in view of the provisions of Section 12 of the 1998 Act. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 30.04.2025 Decided on: 28.07.2025

460. Registration of FIR -- Application under Section 156(3) CrPC – Procedure of -- Magistrate ought not to ordinarily entertain an application under Section 156(3) CrPC directly unless the informant has availed and exhausted his remedies provided under Section 154(3) CrPC, but as the Magistrate is otherwise competent under Section 156(3) CrPC to direct the registration of an FIR if the allegations in the application/complaint discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the order so passed by the Magistrate would not be without jurisdiction and would not stand vitiated. (SC) Decided on: 25.07.2025

461. Excise matter – Protracted trial – Sentenced to already undergone -- FIR of 15.08.2001 and petitioner was put to trial in 2001, convicted and sentenced on 12.03.2005 -- His appeal was dismissed on 19.12.2007 -- Ever since then, his revision petition pending – Held, petitioner has faced the agony of trial and pendency of his appeal/ revision etc. for the last almost 24 years -- He has already undergone sentence of three months and five days -- No history of the petitioner being a previous offender -- No useful purpose would be served by sending him to custody at this stage -- Order of sentence is modified to that already undergone by the petitioner (P&H HC) Decided on: 25.07.2025

462. Public premises – Land owned by Government of India, however, placed under the management of Jalandhar Cantonment Board -- Entries made in the GLR maintained under the Cantonment Land Administration Rules is conclusive evidence of title – Land on which shop has been raised and falls within the cantonment area i.e. Survey No. 283/2512, is a 'public premises' within the meaning of Section 2 (g) of 1971 Act. (P&H HC) Decided on: 24.07.2025

463. Offence under SC/ ST Act -- Quashing of criminal proceedings by High Court – Challenge to -- Dispute occurred between two Scheduled Caste groups, and the same was not driven by caste-based malice -- There was no substantive evidence on record to reflect involvement in the matter beyond the complainant’s time-barred assertions -- Delay itself casts doubt on the credibility of the allegations made against them – No evidence on record which would indicate mala fide intention on the part of Respondent No. 2 or any connivance -- Bald allegations against the Appellant would not in itself be sustainable -- High Court’s order does not call for any interference – Appeal dismissed. (SC) Decided on: 23.07.2025

464. NDPS – Regular bail – Recovery of 254 grams heroin from main accused -- Petitioner was arrested on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused -- When police arrested him, another alleged recovery of 50 grams of heroin was also effected -- Petitioner is behind bars since 13.10.2023, however, out of total 11 prosecution witnesses -- Petitioner has suffered incarceration of 01 year, 09 months & 09 days -- Petitioner is involved in one another case although he is on bail in that case – Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 23.07.2025

465. Suspension of Sarpanch – Threat of self-immolation by Sarpanch -- Resorting to self-harm as a means of protest is neither a recognised form of legal redress nor can it be countenanced in a constitutional democracy -- Prima facie, this amounts to mis-conduct in the discharge of her duties and her continuance in the office is un-desirable in the public interest in terms of Section 51(3)(e) of the 1994 Act -- In terms of Section 51(1)(b) of the 1994 Act, the Deputy Commissioner was justified in ordering suspension of petitioner from the post of Sarpanch – Suspension order upheld. (P&H HC) Decided on: 22.07.2025

466. Employment Assistance Scheme to the dependents of Government Servants (H.P.) -- Death of Home Guard – Compassionate appointment – Right of -- When the job performed by Home Guards has been assessed to be purely of temporary nature, it will not be prudent to hold their dependents entitled to benefit under Compassionate Appointment Scheme -- Dependents of a Home Guard cannot raise claim for permanent job, when the Home Guard himself renders only a voluntary and temporary job -- Dependents of Home Guard cannot claim right to any Government service having larger scope than the nature of job held by the Home Guard – Petition dismissed. (H.P. HC) Reserved on: 09.7.2025 Decided on: 21.07.2025

467. Proof of Will -- Legal Principles -- A Will has to be proved like any other document subject to the requirements of Section 63 of the Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Act, 1872, that is examination of at least of one of the attesting witnesses -- However, unlike other documents, when a Will is propounded, its maker is no longer in the land of living -- This casts a solemn duty on the Court to ascertain whether the Will propounded had been duly proved -- Onus lies on the propounder not only to prove due execution but dispel from the mind of the court, all suspicious circumstances which cast doubt on the free disposing mind of the testator -- Only when the propounder dispels the suspicious circumstances and satisfies the conscience of the court that the testator had duly executed the Will out of his free volition without coercion or undue influence, would the Will be accepted as genuine. (SC) Decided on: 17.07.2025

468. Power of Registrar – Correct or cancel entry in the Register -- No allegation that the initial entry made in the birth records, recording the petitioner as the father of the child, was fraudulently or improperly made -- Marriage between the petitioner and the 7th respondent was in subsistence when the child was born -- Recital in Ext.P3 agreement, wherein it is stated that the 8th respondent is the biological father of the child -- This recital is seriously disputed by the petitioner, who states that the said recital is a unilateral statement of the 7th respondent -- Above fact is a seriously disputed question, which is beyond the adjudicatory powers of a Registrar in summary proceedings under Section 15, read with Rule 11. (Kerala HC) Decided on: 17.07.2025

469. Non-implementation of Sanad Takseem/ Instrument of partition for 3 years – Second application of partition – Maintainability – Earlier sanad takseem is dated 08.04.1992 -- Partition is to be executed within a period of three years – Second partition application filled on the basis of jamabandi for the year 2015-16, wherein the entire land under partition has been shown under joint ownership -- Held, once the sanad takseem dated 08.04.1992 was never implemented/ executed at the spot nor the said sanad takseem was reflected/ implemented in the revenue records and the status of the partition continued to be recorded joint in the revenue records, it has to be taken that the parties by their conduct chose not to implement the partition in terms of sanad takseem and chose to keep their holdings joint – Fresh partition proceedings concluded with the drawing of sanad takseem dated 19.03.2023 -- No fault – Writ petition dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 17.07.2025

470. Murder – Death sentence converted to life sentence till last breath -- Appellant-convict had barbarically murdered his family members – Probation report concludes that: Appellant-convict has the ability to adapt, engage in constructive activities, pursue an education despite past difficulty, continued worry about his daughter’s future, shows a notable capacity for reform and personal growth – Appellant-convict’s continued incarceration has had a negative impact on daughter, who is really struggling to cope with life – Interactions with her, threw light on a gentle, loving side of the Appellant-convict – Possibility of reformation; as a criteria, apply to the instant case – It can be said that there is mixed opinion on whether he shall or shall not be able to reform his way, the Court will err on the side of caution just as when there are two possible interpretations of a given set of facts or circumstances, the one that favours the accused is to be adopted – Death penalty may not be appropriate – Appellant should spend his days in jail attempting to repent for the crimes committed by him – Appeals are partly allowed to the extent that he is released from death row – Instead, he shall await his last breath in prison, without remission. (SC) Decided on: 16.07.2025

471. Summoning of additional accused -- High Court proceeded to conduct a mini trial -- It erred in giving a categorical finding on the merits -- High Court erred in observing that witnesses have stated nothing about the motive of the crime; that the depositions are silent on the aspect of common intention; absence of the manner or sequence of occurrence of the incident; or that it cannot be inferred who is the aggressor -- All these questions, amongst others, are relevant or not is a matter to be considered at the stage of final adjudication -- It is a settled law that the power under Section 319 CrPC must be exercised sparingly -- However, where the evidence reveals the complicity of the prospective accused, it becomes obligatory for the authority to exercise the power provided under the said Section -- Summoning order passed by the Trial Court restored. (SC) Decided on: 16.07.2025

472. Divorce – Irretrievable breakdown of marriage -- Cruelty – Acquittal in criminal case -- Long separation -- Parties separated just one year after their marriage and have remained apart ever since for more than 16 years -- Additionally, in the criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, the appellant and his family members have been acquitted, which demonstrates that the allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment against the appellant were false -- Welfare and dignity of both the spouses must be prioritized -- Court finds it a fit case to exercise its power under Article 142 of the Constitution and granted the relief of divorce to the parties on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage -- Appellant is working as a clerk in a private firm and the respondent is a homemaker who is independently taking care of their minor son aged 16 years -- Appellant ordered to pay composite monthly maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- to the respondent and their child. (SC) Decided on: 15.07.2025

473. DNA Evidence – Procedure to be followed – Directions issued, in all cases where DNA Evidence is involved: 1. The collection of DNA samples once made after due care and compliance of all necessary procedure including swift and appropriate packaging including a) FIR number and date; b) Section and the statute involved therein; c) details of I.O., Police station; and d) requisite serial number shall be duly documented. The document recording the collection shall have the signatures and designations of the medical professional present, the investigating officer and independent witnesses. Here only we may clarify that the absence of independent witnesses shall not be taken to be compromising to the collection of such evidence, but the efforts made to join such witnesses and the eventual inability to do so shall be duly put down in record. 2. The Investigating Officer shall be responsible for the transportation of the DNA evidence to the concerned police station or the hospital concerned, as the case may be. He shall also be responsible for ensuring that the samples so taken reach the concerned forensic science laboratory with dispatch and in any case not later than 48-hours from the time of collection. Should any extraneous circumstance present itself and the 48-hours timeline cannot be complied with, the reason for the delay shall be duly recorded in the case diary. Throughout, the requisite efforts be made to preserve the samples as per the requirement corresponding to the nature of the sample taken. 3. In the time that the DNA samples are stored pending trial appeal etc., no package shall be opened, altered or resealed without express authorisation of the Trial Court acting upon a statement of a duly qualified and experienced medical professional to the effect that the same shall not have a negative impact on the sanctity of the evidence and with the Court being assured that such a step is necessary for proper and just outcome of the Investigation/Trial. 4. Right from the point of collection to the logical end, i.e., conviction or acquittal of the accused, a Chain of Custody Register shall be maintained wherein each and every movement of the evidence shall be recorded with counter sign at each end thereof stating also the reason therefor. This Chain of Custody Register shall necessarily be appended as part of the Trial Court record. Failure to maintain the same shall render the I.O. responsible for explaining such lapse. The Directors General of Police of all the States shall prepare sample forms of the Chain of Custody Register and all other documentation directed above and ensure its dispatch to all districts with necessary instruction as may be required -- States requested to examine the necessity of conducting training of the Investigating Officers to ensure full compliance. (SC) Decided on: 15.07.2025

474. Solatium and interest -- District Revenue Officer-cum-Competent Authority vide its supplementary award, awarded the benefit of solatium as well as statutory interest payable under Sections 23 & 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in favour of similarly situated land-owners – Representation of the petitioner for similar relief denied – Held, respondent No.1 cannot be permitted to act in a discriminatory manner – Order set aside, respondent No.1 to pass a supplementary award in favour of petitioner with respect to solatium as well as statutory interest. (P&H HC) Decided on: 15.07.2025

475. Right of person with disabilities in prison -- Directions issued in the larger public interest to uphold the dignity, and healthcare rights of prisoners with disabilities in all custodial settings -- The obligations herein are rooted in India’s constitutional guarantees, statutory mandates, and international human rights commitments – Direction issued for immediate and time-bound compliance: 1) All prison authorities shall promptly identify prisoners with disabilities at the time of admission. Each prisoner shall be given an opportunity to declare any disability and provide information about their specific needs. 1.1) All rules, regulations, and essential information about prison life shall be provided to such prisoners in accessible and understandable formats (e.g., Braille, large print, sign language, or simplified language). 2) All prison premises shall be equipped with wheelchair-friendly spaces, accessible toilets, ramps, and sensory-safe environments to ensure universal accessibility. 3) All prisons shall designate and maintain dedicated spaces for physiotherapy, psychotherapy and other necessary therapeutic services. 4) A State-level access audit of all prisons in Tamil Nadu shall be completed within six months by an expert committee comprising officials from the Social Welfare Department, the Department for the Welfare of Differently Abled Persons, and certified access auditors. 4.1) Periodic audits shall thereafter be conducted and updated regularly in accordance with the Harmonized Guidelines and Standards for Universal Accessibility in India (2021). 5) The prison authorities shall ensure complete compliance with Sections 40 and 45 of the RPwD Act, 2016, Rule 15 of the 2017 Rules and the Harmonized Guidelines, 2021 in all prison infrastructure and services. 6) The State shall provide healthcare for prisoners with disabilities equivalent to that available in the community, including access to physiotherapy, speech therapy, psychiatric services, and assistive devices (such as wheelchairs, hearing aids, and crutches). 7) All prison medical officers shall be adequately trained and sensitized to address disabling conditions, ensuring provision of appropriate accommodations and treatment without discrimination or bias. Furthermore, regular awareness and sensitization programmes shall be conducted in all prisons. 8) Every prisoner with a disability shall be provided a nutritious and medically appropriate diet, tailored to their specific health and dietary needs. 9) Lifesaving treatments, including regular and need-based physiotherapy and psychotherapy must be made available on-site or through linkage with government health facilities. 10) All prison staff shall undergo comprehensive training on the rights of persons with disabilities. This training shall include: - awareness of equality and non-discrimination principles - proper handling of disability-related challenges - use of appropriate language and behaviour, as per the UN Handbook on Prisoners with Special Needs. 11) The State Prison Manual shall be reviewed and appropriately amended within six months to ensure conformity with the RPwD Act, 2016 and the UNCRPD. 11.1) A specific section must be incorporated to prohibit discrimination against prisoners with disabilities and promote equal treatment and reasonable accommodation. 11.2) The revised Manual shall be prominently displayed in every prison establishment. 12) The State shall undertake periodic consultations with civil society organisations working in the disability sector to develop inclusive policies and identify accommodations based on real needs. 13) The State shall constitute a monitoring committee to conduct periodic inspections and submit compliance reports every three months. 14)The State shall maintain and update disaggregated data on the disability status of prisoners, including records on accessibility, reasonable accommodations, and medical requirements. 14.1) This is to ensure compliance with Article 31 of the UNCRPD and the RPwD Act, 2016. 14.2) The data shall be made available in the public domain, subject to privacy safeguards. 15) The Director General of Prisons shall file a comprehensive compliance report before the State Human Rights Commission within three months from the date of this judgment, detailing all steps taken in furtherance of these directions. (SC) Decided on: 15.07.2025

476. Rape case -- Compromise quashing of FIR – Permissibility of -- Offence u/s 376 IPC is undoubtedly of a grave and heinous nature -- Ordinarily, quashing of proceedings involving such offences on the ground of settlement between the parties is discouraged and should not be permitted lightly -- However, the power of the Court u/s 482 CrPC to secure the ends of justice is not constrained by a rigid formula and must be exercised with reference to the facts of each case. (SC) Decided on: 14.07.2025

477. Return of plaint – Rejection of plaint -- If the Civil Court is of the view that the dispute being commercial in nature has to go before the Commercial Court then the plaint has to be returned under Order VII Rule 10 CPC -- Entire plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. (SC) Decided on: 14.07.2025

478. Cheque bounce complaint – Non-impleadment of Partnership firm as accused – Maintainability of Complaint against Partner – Vicarious liability/ Joint and several – Since the liability is joint and several, even in the absence of a partnership firm being proceeded against by the complainant by issuance of legal notice as mandated u/s 138 of the Act or being made an accused specifically in a complaint filed under Section 200 of CrPC, (equivalent to Section 223 of the BNSS), such a complaint is maintainable. (SC) Decided on: 14.07.2025

479. Complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. without approaching police – Description of complainant -- Legality of -- A complainant has the option either to approach the Police agency with an application for registration of FIR u/s 154 Cr.P.C or he/she has option to approach the Magistrate with a complaint u/s 200 of the Cr.P.C. -- Discretion entirely lies with the complainant -- No bar to approach the Magistrate with a criminal complaint instead of approaching the Police even in cases where cognizable offences are disclosed from the contents of the criminal complaint. (J&K&L HC) Decided on: 11.07.2025

480. Acquittal in cheque bounce complaint – Leave to appeal – Right of appeal -- Scope and ambit of proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C./413 BNSS are inherently broader and more accommodating when juxtaposed with the comparatively narrower confines of Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., 1973/ 419(4) of BNSS, 2023 – Matter relegated to Session Judge : -- The appeal, along with accompanying application(s) remitted to the learned Sessions Judge with a direction to treat the same as having been filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., 1973/ Section 413 of BNSS, 2023. The said learned Sessions Judge may entrust the appeal to himself or assign it to another Court of competent jurisdiction for its disposal, as per law. -- The Registry directed to send, expeditiously, the complete records of the present appeal (including the paper-book) to the said learned Sessions Judge. (P&H HC) Decided on: 10.07.2025

481. Levirate marriage -- Maintenance to wife -- Marriage, being validated by custom, cohabitation, social acceptance, and the birth of children, must be treated as valid in law for the purposes of Section 125 Cr.P.C -- Disregarding such a union would not only be legally unsound but would also send a regressive message to society, undermining the dignity of women and the security of children born from such relationships -- Petitioner, having lived as wife, borne children, and been deserted without support, falls within the protective umbrella of Section 125 CrPC -- Existence of children born out of the union further strengthens the presumption of valid marriage, or at minimum, a relationship akin to marriage, entitling the petitioner to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C -- Technical plea of invalidity of marriage, in this case, cannot be a valid ground to deny her maintenance. (Patna HC) Decided on: 10.07.2025

482. Suspension of Sarpanch – Proposal of Acting Sarpanch passed in favour of petitioner -- No-confidence motion – Requirements of – BDPO directed the petitioner to handover the charge to some other Panch -- Petitioner cannot be held to be a duly elected Sarpanch as envisaged u/s 6 of the 1994 Act read with Rule 4 of 1995 Rules; therefore the provisions contained under Section 10 of the 1994 Act which provides for ‘No Confidence Motion’ against a duly elected Sarpanch, is not attracted -- Contention of the petitioner that he cannot be removed from post of Acting Sarpanch without following process/procedure as envisaged under Section 10 of 1994 Act rejected – Writ petition dismissed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 09.07.2025

483. Acquittal in cheque bounce complaint – Leave to appeal – Delay/ Limitation -- Appeal before Session’s Court -- Application u/s 378(4) Cr.P.C. disposed of by directing the learned Sessions Judge to treat the present leave to appeal as an appeal filed u/s 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust the same to any appropriate Court to try the same -- The concerned Court shall decide the appeal on merits as per law, as expeditiously as possible -- Concerned Appellate Court need not to adhere to the delay aspect, if any, involved in the case, for the purpose of considering the issue raised in the appeal and its disposal on merit. (P&H HC) Decided on: 09.07.2025

484. Jump of bail – Surety for Rs. 1 lakh – Liability of -- Delay of 511 days in appeal condoned -- Appellant/ surety had no knowledge that the convict would not surrender on time and there are no allegations of collusion between the appellant and the accused with regard to the accused not surrendering before learned trial Court -- Penalty reduced to Rs.20,000/- from Rs.1,00,000/-. (P&H HC) Decided on: 08.07.2025

485. NDPS – Regular bail – Conviction in one NDPS case already there – Effect of – Speedy trial – Right of -- Recovery of 87 kgs 800 grams of ganja -- Although the petitioner have been convicted in one case under the NDPS Act, however, that conviction would not come in the way of extending the concession of bail to the petitioner in the instant FIR since it is clearly discernible that the petitioner's right to a fair and speedy trial has been compromised on account of the repeated non-appearance of the prosecution witnesses -- No possibility of the trial concluding in the near future with 16 prosecution witnesses remaining to the examined – Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 08.07.2025

486. Murder – Regular bail – Speedy trial – Right of -- Petitioner is behind the bars from the last 03 years, 11 months and 02 days -- Investigation is complete -- Charges were framed and trial of the case has not made much progress – Right to speedy trial is enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India -- Speedy trial would cover investigation, enquiry, trial, appeal, revision and retrial etc. i.e. everything starting with the accusation against the accused and expiring with the final verdict of the last Court -- If a person is deprived of his liberty under a procedure which is not reasonable, fair, or just, such deprivation would be violative of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India – Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 08.07.2025

487. Onerous condition for bail – Deposit of original title deed -- Surety be close relative – Legality of -- Condition requiring one of the sureties to be a close relative cannot be sustained as there cannot be any geographical discrimination in the matter of bail -- When the sureties are directed to produce the original document, after ascertaining the solvency of the surety, the original document should be returned, if necessary, by substituting it with a certified copy – Condition requiring one among the sureties to be a close relative deleted, Court below directed to return the original document produced by the surety on production of a certified copy. (Kerala HC) Decided on: 07.07.2025

488. Regular Second Appeal -- Amicable settlement – Refund of Court fee – Right of -- Appeal dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the compromise made part of the decree-sheet -- Compromise effected before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre -- Parties held entitled to refund of the court fee. (P&H HC) Decided on: 07.07.2025

489. Murder – Regular bail -- FIR was lodged on 04.01.2023 – Deceased was alive till 22.02.2023 – No effort was made to get the other assailants identified – NS/ Eyewitness in his statement made on 16.01.2023 nominated two others to be the conspirators, he did not name the petitioner to be amongst assailants -- It is only on 25.03.2023 i.e. after the death of injured, the petitioner was arrested on the identification of NS/ eye witness -- Charges framed by the trial Court on 11.10.2024 -- Matter adjourned several times for recording prosecution evidence -- However, the most material witness are not appearing despite repeated summons and bailable warrants -- Petitioner is in custody for the last 2 years 3 months and 3 days and he is not involved in any other criminal case -- Prosecution may take long time to conclude its evidence – Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 03.07.2025 Decided on: 04.07.2025

490. Permanent injunction – Trespasser’ right – Claim as lessee -- For leasing out a Government land, the officials are required to adhere to the relevant statutory provisions -- Appellant failed to plead and prove as to when the lease was created in his favour and what were the terms -- It is not appropriate for the courts to protect possession of the trespassers while granting injunction against a true owner -- Property belongs to the Government -- Mere production of certain receipts evidencing the payment of certain amount without referring to the particular land would not come to the rescue of the appellant – Permanent injunction declined by Ld. Appellate Court, upheld. (P&H HC) Decided on: 03.07.2025

491. Maintenance to wife – Domestic Incident Report (DIR) – Requirements of -- Financial liabilities of husband – Effect of -- Trial Court taking into consideration gross salary as Rs.43,874/- of petitioner/ husband granted Rs.12,000/- per month as interim relief/ maintenance. (J&K&L HC) Reserved on: 09.05.2025 Decided on: 03.07.2025

492. Sexual intercourse through deceitful means with promise to marry -- Regular bail -- De facto complainant is a married lady -- Prima facie, it is doubtful whether the offence u/s can be attracted -- If both of the parties are aware about a subsistent marriage it cannot be alleged that the sexual intercourse between them was with a promise to marry – Bail allowed. (Kerala HC) Decided on: 02.07.2025

493. Expiry of trade-mark -- Removal of trademark from register – Notice for – Mandate of – Authorities were supposed to issue a notice in the Form O-3/ RG-3 informing the registered proprietor of the date of expiry -- Aforesaid exercise has not been undertaken by the respondents – Since the respondents have failed to comply with the aforesaid mandatory provision, their action of removal of registered trademark of the petitioner from the record is not sustainable in the eyes of law and such action quashed and set aside. (Raj. HC) Decided on: 01.07.2025

494. Bail order – Delay of 28 full days in release of prisoner – Effect of -- Reasons given by the State is the non-mentioning of sub-section (1) of Section 5 – Correction made in the release order by the First Additional Sessions Judge, yesterday – Held, on this trivial non-issue, the applicant/ petitioner has lost his liberty for at least 28 full days -- Liberty is a very valuable and precious right guaranteed to the persons by the Constitution -- It cannot be bartered away on the altar of technicalities -- Ad hoc monetary compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) awarded to the applicant to be paid by State – Enquiry marked. (SC) Decided on: 25.06.2025

495. Res-judicata – Two suits – Comon judgment -- One appeal – Effect of -- Trial Court dismissed Civil Suit No. 44 of 2004 and decreed Civil Suit No. 95 of 2006 based on common evidence lead by parties after clubbing of the suits -- There is not even a whisper about findings rendered by the Trial Court in Civil Suit No. 95 of 2006 in the grounds of First Appeal preferred against Civil Suit No. 44 of 2004 – Held, Ld. Additional District Judge was justified in dismissing the appeal preferred only against the judgment and decree passed in Civil Suit No. 44 of 2004 without assailing the same in Civil Suit No. 95 of 2006 -- Appeal preferred before District Judge as well as present appeal is barred by principle of resjudicata. (H.P. HC) Decided on: 25.06.2025

496. Additional Public Prosecutor -- Contractual appointment -- Regularisation of -- Petitioner has not been able to establish any right either statutory or constitutional so as to deserve the relief of regularisation -- Appointment of Additional Public Prosecutors is a structured procedure as provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the relevant Rules prevalent in the particular State -- Thus, a claim for regularisation of a person working on the said post on contractual basis cannot be entertained as such relief would be contrary to law -- High Court committed no error in rejecting the Writ Petition -- Special leave petition dismissed. (SC) Decided on: 24.06.2025

497. NDPS – Commercial quantity -- Recovery of 32 kgs of Ganja -- Regular bail -- Definition of Ganja under NDPS Act takes in its ambit only the flowering or fruiting tops of cannabis plant and excludes the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops -- Thus, the definition of ‘Ganja’ is restricted and it does not include the seeds and leaves of Ganja plant -- Police while weighing the contraband did not segregate flowering tops from other material -- Petitioners ordered to be released on bail. (A.P. HC) Decided on: 23.06.2025

498. Murder – Acquittal -- Circumstantial evidence – Motive -- Recovery of weapon -- A blood-stained weapon even bearing the same blood group as that of the victim would not be sufficient to prove the charge of murder – Regarding motive, the evidence are very vague and vacillating -- Law is well settled that in an appeal against acquittal, interference can only be made if the only possible view based on the evidence points to the guilt of the accused and rules out his innocence -- Prosecution failed to lead clinching evidence to bring home the charges -- Impugned judgment of acquittal does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference – Appeal dismissed. (SC) Decided on: 19.06.2025

499. POCSO – Allegation of sexual assault against Doctor – Quashing of Criminal proceedings -- Victim complained about chest pain and abdominal pain -- Medical examination of the victim was conducted by the petitioner in the presence of the mother of the victim on the first occasion, and in the presence of the elder sister of the victim on the second occasion -- It is too hard to believe that the petitioner would have resorted to sexual advances upon the victim in the close presence of the victim’s mother and elder sister -- Neither the statement given by the victim to the Police, nor her statements to the learned Magistrate u/s 164 Cr.PC, contained any indication that the alleged act committed by the petitioner was with sexual intent – Chances of that adolescent girl getting misunderstood about the act of the petitioner, cannot be ignored -- Section 41 of the POCSO Act assumes much relevancy -- Provisions of Sections 3 to 13 shall not apply in case of medical examination or medical treatment of a child when such medical examination or medical treatment is undertaken with the consent of his parents or guardian – Criminal proceedings quashed. (Kerala HC) Decided on: 17.06.2025

500. WhatsApp messages – Privileged communication -- Learned Family Court permitted the respondent/ plaintiff/ husband to mark the exhibits on the WhatsApp chats produced by him in his evidence -- Being aggrieved by this order of the Family Court, the instant petition by wife -- Held that: (a) the evidence is admissible so long as it is relevant, irrespective of the fact how it is collected. The possible misuse of this rule of evidence, particularly in the context of the right to privacy, can be addressed by prudent exercise of judicial discretion by the Family Court, not at the time of receiving evidence but at the time of using evidence at the stage of adjudication; (b) merely admitting evidence on record is not proof of a fact-in-issue or a relevant fact. Admitting evidence is not even reliance by the court on such evidence. Admitting evidence is mere inclusion of evidence in record, to be assessed on a comprehensive set of factors, parameters and aspects, in the discretion of the court; (c) the test of ‘relevance’ ensures that the right of a party to bring evidence to court, and thereby to a fair trial, is not defeated. What weight is to be given to evidence so brought-in, and whether or not the court ultimately relies upon such evidence for proof of a fact-in-issue or a relevant fact, is always in the discretion of the court. (d) merely because a court allows evidence to be admitted, does not mean that the person who has illegally collected such evidence is absolved of liability that may arise, whether in civil or criminal law or both; (e) such evidence must be received and treated with caution and circumspection and to rule-out the possibility of any kind of tampering, the standard of proof applied by a court for the authenticity and accuracy of a such evidence should be more stringent as compared to other evidence. (M.P. HC) Decided on: 16.06.2025