(1) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 308(1), 308(5), 61(2)—Anticipatory Bail—Direction to undergo mediation—Petitioner, an aged person, sought anticipatory bail in connection with offences alleging forgery and cheating. High Court granted anticipatory bail but directed the petitioner to participate in mediation before the District Mediation Centre. Supreme Court held that once the High Court was satisfied that a case for grant of anticipatory bail was made out, it ought not to have imposed a direction compelling the accused to undergo mediation. Direction requiring appearance before Mediation Centre set aside, while order granting anticipatory bail otherwise left undisturbed. Petition disposed of. [Paras 6 to 9] Result: Bail maintained. ...
(2) SUPREME COURT
Bail
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 117(2), 118(1), 118(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 54—Gujarat Police Act, 1951—Section 135—Regular Bail—Grievous hurt—Custody of five months—Petitioner challenged High Court’s order denying regular bail in case alleging offences including causing grievous hurt. Supreme Court, considering nature of allegations, role attributed to petitioner and fact that he had been in custody for over five months, held that discretion for grant of bail deserved to be exercised in his favour. Petitioner directed to be released on bail subject to such terms and conditions as Trial Court may deem fit to impose. Special Leave Petition disposed of. [Paras 3 and 4] Result: Bail granted. ...
(3) SUPREME COURT
Bail
Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 498-A and 304-B—Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961—Sections 3 and 4—Regular Bail—Prolonged custody—Parity with co-accused—Petitioner sought bail after rejection by High Court in dowry death case; in custody since 27.05.2024. Supreme Court, considering length of custody (about one year and eight months), likelihood of delay in conclusion of trial and fact that co-accused had been granted bail, held that case for grant of bail was made out. Without expressing opinion on merits, petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds and subject to conditions to be imposed by trial Court—Violation of conditions to entail appropriate action. [Paras 2 to 4] Result: Bail allowed. ...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Bail
Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 406, 420 and 201—Regular Bail—Civil Dispute—Custody period—Charges yet to be framed—High Court rejected second bail application in case arising out of alleged breach of trust and cheating between business partners. Appellant contended dispute was essentially civil in nature; he had been in custody since 20.08.2025 and charges were yet to be framed. Supreme Court, considering nature of allegations, stage of proceedings and period of incarceration, held that case for grant of bail was made out. Impugned order set aside. Appellant directed to be released on bail subject to conditions to secure his presence and with direction not to misuse liberty; breach to entail cancellation. [Paras 5 to 9] Result: Bail granted. ...
(5) SUPREME COURT
Suspension of sentence
Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 412—Suspension of Sentence—Bail pending Appeal—High Court rejected application for suspension of sentence in appeal against conviction under Section 412 IPC (seven years’ rigorous imprisonment). Supreme Court observed that the appellant had already undergone about two years and two months of incarceration without remission and the criminal appeal of 2024 was still pending and likely to take time for disposal. Considering the period of custody and pendency of appeal, sentence suspended and bail granted subject to conditions to ensure presence before courts. Appellant directed to cooperate in hearing and not misuse liberty; breach to entail cancellation. Criminal appeal allowed. [Paras 5 to 10] ...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Anticipatory Bail—Conditional Deposit—Impermissibility of Monetary Condition—Trial Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner subject to deposit of ₹25,00,000/-, which was reduced by High Court to ₹10,00,000/-. Supreme Court, relying on its earlier decision in Gajanan Dattatray Gore v. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1571, reiterated that no High Court or Trial Court shall grant regular or anticipatory bail on condition of deposit of a particular amount or on undertaking to deposit money. Bail must be decided strictly on merits in accordance with law and not be made conditional upon monetary deposit. Monetary conditions directing deposit of substantial sums are impermissible. Order of deposit set aside and anticipatory bail affirmed without any condition ...
(7) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 482—Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023—Sections 132, 221, 351(1) read with Section 3(5)—Anticipatory Bail—High Court Rejection—Interim Protection by Supreme Court—Cooperation with Investigation—Principle of Parity—Held, where appellant was protected by interim order and cooperated with investigation, denial of anticipatory bail not justified—Supreme Court set aside High Court orders and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions—Bail directed on furnishing cash security of ₹25,000/- with two sureties—Appellant to cooperate, not misuse liberty or tamper with evidence; breach to entail cancellation—Co-accused granted similar relief on principle of parity. ...
(8) SUPREME COURT
Service Law
Service Law—Contempt Proceedings—Non-compliance of Promotion Order—Pendency of Special Appeal—Absence of Stay—Held, in absence of any interim stay granted by the Division Bench against the Single Judge’s order directing promotion, the respondent is entitled to proceed with contempt—Repeated adjournments sought by petitioner in special appeal cannot stall implementation of the order—Supreme Court found no infirmity in Single Judge’s direction to file compliance affidavit and ensure presence upon failure—However, one final opportunity granted to petitioner to pursue pending special appeal for interim relief before Division Bench—Contempt listing deferred for limited period with liberty to respondent to proceed if no stay is granted. [Paras 8 to 13] ...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Anticipatory bail
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 438—Anticipatory Bail—Absconding Accused—Grant improper—Accused absconding for nearly six years since date of incident involving offences under Sections 302, 307 IPC and Arms Act—Failure to cooperate with investigation and announcement of reward for arrest—High Court erred in granting anticipatory bail—Absconding accused ordinarily not entitled to pre-arrest bail unless exceptional case made out—Impugned order set aside—Accused directed to surrender. [Paras 40 to 47, 52] B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 438—Parity—Acquittal of Co-Accused—Irrelevance—Acquittal of co-accused does not ipso facto entitle absconding accused to anticipatory bail—Findings recorded in trial of co-accused ir...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Education Law
A. Kerala Education Rules—Chapter XXXII Rule 6.2(24)(iii)—Higher Secondary School Teachers (HSST)—SET Qualification in Concerned Subject Mandatory—Requirement of State Eligibility Test (SET) qualification “in the concerned subject” is mandatory for appointment as HSST—Statutory provision to be interpreted purposively to ensure subject competence and academic excellence at Higher Secondary level—SET in any subject unrelated to the post does not meet statutory eligibility—Object of Rule is to maintain teaching standards in the specific subject taught. [Paras 14 to 22] B. Kerala Education Rules—Chapter XXXII Rule 10(4)—Exemption from SET—Ten Years Approved Service—Exemption from SET available only to teachers having ten years of approved teaching service at...
(1) JHARKHAND
Circumstantial evidence, Murder
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 374(2)—Appeal Against Conviction—Reappreciation of Evidence—In an appeal against conviction under Section 374(2) CrPC, the appellate court is duty-bound to re-examine whether the prosecution has established guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly where conviction under Sections 302/34 IPC is challenged on grounds of absence of credible evidence and lack of proof of common intention (Para 9). Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302/34—Circumstantial Evidence—Common Intention—Where the prosecution case rests substantially on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and unbroken—Hostility of seizure list witnesses and failure to convincingly prove recovery of alleged incriminating articles, such as blood-stained clothes, creat...
(2) KARNATAKA
Recall of witness
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 311 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 348—Recall of Witness—Scope—Court empowered to summon, recall or re-examine any witness at any stage of trial—Provision to be interpreted purposively to advance cause of justice and discovery of truth—Essentiality of evidence to just decision is determinative test—Rejection of application solely on ground that it was second in line held improper—One opportunity ought to have been granted. [Paras 5 to 7] B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Further Cross-examination of Defence Witness—In prosecution under Section 138 NI Act, recall of DW.1 for further cross-examination permissible where it aids fair adjudication—Though power under Section 311 CrPC...
(3) KERALA
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 482—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Quashing of Proceedings—Drawer and Account Holder Distinction—Petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment of prosecution under Section 138 NI Act—Allegation that cheque was drawn on account maintained by proprietary concern through its proprietor (first accused), but cheque was signed by second accused as authorised signatory of proprietor—Complaint itself disclosed that signatory was not the account holder and account holder had not signed the cheque—Under Section 138 NI Act, criminal liability arises only against “drawer” who maintains the account and draws the cheque—In case of individual/proprietorship concern, neither non-signatory account holder nor signatory who is n...
(4) GUJARAT
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 378—Appeal Against Acquittal—Scope of Interference—In an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 CrPC, the High Court may review and reappreciate the entire evidence; however, it must bear in mind the double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused—Interference is unwarranted where the trial court’s view is a possible and reasonable conclusion based on the evidence on record (A). Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 498A, 114—Murder and Cruelty—Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt—Though medical evidence established homicidal death by burns, the prosecution failed to prove the identity and role of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to absence of reliable direct or corroborative evidence and material weaknesses in the case (C). Evide...
(5) JHARKHAND
Murder
Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 304 Part I, 34—Murder vs. Culpable Homicide—Application of Section 300 Exception 4 In a case arising out of a sudden quarrel between brothers over house construction, resulting in death, the conviction under Section 302 IPC was modified to Section 304 Part I IPC (Paras 30–62) The Court held that the incident occurred without premeditation, in the heat of passion during a sudden fight, and without the accused taking undue advantage or acting in a cruel or unusual manner, thereby attracting Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC (Paras 38–40, 45). Testimony of the sole eyewitness (wife of the deceased) revealed that the appellants were initially unarmed and procured weapons only after a scuffle; they did not flee the scene—circumstances inconsistent with a pre-planned murde...
(6) CALCUTTA
Writ jurisdiction
Railways Act, 1989—Sections 66 & 73—False Declaration—Requirement of Mens Rea—For imposition of penalty under Sections 66 and 73 of the Railways Act, 1989, deliberate intention to defraud or cause wrongful loss must be established—Mere operational discrepancies, clerical errors, or procedural variations do not amount to “false declaration” in the absence of concealment, misrepresentation, or demonstrable freight loss (Paras 47, 49, 51, 55). Contract Act, 1872—Section 74—Forfeiture and Penalty—Forfeiture of earnest money or security deposit requires proof of breach and must represent a reasonable pre-estimate of loss—Confiscatory or deterrent charges imposed without proof of actual loss are punitive and legally unsustainable (Paras 15, 45, 52). Administrative Law&m...
(7) MEGHALAYA
Service Law
All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Regulations — Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) — Ph.D. Requirement — Prospective Application—The requirement of possessing a Ph.D. degree for promotion to higher grade pay under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) is prospective in operation and applies only to faculty who entered service after the cut-off date specified in the Regulations; it cannot be imposed retrospectively upon existing incumbents (Paras 12, 13)—For determining eligibility under CAS, the relevant consideration is the date of entry into service, not the date on which promotion becomes due (Para 12). A clarificatory notification issued by AICTE cannot operate as an amendment to existing Regulations so as to curtail accrued service benefits (Para 14). Distinction between technical and non-t...
(8) JAMMU & KASHMIR
Government Liability—Hiring of Hotel Premises for Protected Persons—Accommodation and Catering Charges—Where hotel premises are requisitioned or hired by Government authorities for accommodating protected political persons, and security arrangements restrict independent commercial use of the premises, the Government is legally bound to honour claims for accommodation and catering charges incurred in such engagement (A, E)—The State cannot subsequently dispute the necessity of accommodation once the premises were placed under official control. Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order VIII Rules 3 & 5—Admission by Non-Denial—Failure to specifically deny material averments in pleadings amounts to deemed admission, strengthening the claimant’s case (B). Natural Justice and Administrative Fairn...
(9) GAUHATI
Land acquisition
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013—Section 26(2) and First Schedule—Multiplication Factor—Determination of Compensation—Section 26(2) read with the First Schedule mandates application of a multiplication factor ranging from 1.00 to 2.00, as notified by the Appropriate Government, for determination of market value of land in rural areas, ensuring fair and equitable compensation (Paras 14, 19). The applicable multiplication factor is the one in force on the date of the preliminary notification initiating acquisition proceedings; a subsequent notification cannot retrospectively alter compensation rights (Paras 15, 20). Land Acquisition—Legality of Administrative Action—Verbal Orders—State action must be traceable to statuto...
(10) CHHATTISGARH
Criminal proceedings, Cheating
Penal Code, 1860—Section 420—Cheating—Civil Dispute vs. Criminal Offence—For an offence under Section 420 IPC, dishonest intention and fraudulent inducement must exist at the inception of the transaction—Mere non-payment arising from a commercial dealing does not constitute cheating in the absence of evidence showing such initial dishonest intent (Paras 4, 5, 9)—A dispute relating to purchase and sale of goods between traders, falling within Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, is essentially a commercial dispute and ordinarily warrants adjudication before a Civil/Commercial Court (Para 4). Criminal Procedure—Inherent Powers—Quashing—Abuse of Process—Under Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 BNSS, 2023), the High Court may quash proceedings where continuation...
