In a recent case of Mukhtar Zaidi Vs The State of Uttar Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No. 2134 of 2024 arising from SLP (CRL) No. 9122 of 2021, a two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court comprising of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma passed a Judgment dated 18-04-2024 and observed that (a) in the event the Ld. Magistrate’s Court disagrees with the conclusions arrived at by the investigating officer in his police report and (b) decides to treat the protest petition filed by the complainant in protest of such I.O.’s conclusions, as a private complaint under Section 200 of the ..read more

A two Judge Bench of Supreme Court comprising of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice K.V. Viswanathan passed a judgement in The State of Arunachal Pradesh v. Kamal Agarwal & Ors. SLP(Crl.) Nos.8663-8665 of 2023 and Chandra Mohan Badaya v. The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors.  SLP(Crl.) No. 7301 OF 2022 wherein the Apex Court held that High Courts must contemplate the true nature of the case and then exercise their jurisdiction. Facts A FIR bearing no.227 of 2017 was lodged by Mr. Anil Agarwal on behalf of Mr. Okep Tayeng who was the proprietor of M/s Shiv Bhandar and subsequently a F ..read more

A single Judge Bench of Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna passed an Order in Gaurav Bhatia v. Naveen Kumar and Ors. CS(OS) 274/2024 dated 16.04.2024, wherein the Hon’ble Court passed an interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff to stop propagation of false news and posts made against the Plaintiff by the Defendants on their platforms. Facts Plaintiff is a Senior Advocate who has previously served as Honorary Secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and has also served as National Spokesperson for the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) wherein he was responsib ..read more

A two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah passed a Judgment dated 15-04-2024 in the matter of M/s Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sanjay Gopinath, Interlocutory Application (I.A.) Nos. 81886/2024 & 84009/2024 in Civil Appeal No. 2764-2771/2022 and observed that despite a Court Order specifically directing that no coercive steps should be taken against the directors of the Appellant-Company, the Hon’ble National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) went ahead and issued Non-Bailable Warrants against them. Hence, as NC ..read more

INTRODUCTION A two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Aravind Kumar passed an Order dated 18.04.2024 in Civil Appeal Nos. 5027 Of 2024 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 30152 Of 2018 in Mrinmoy Maity Vs. Chhanda Koley And Others and held that the principle “delay defeats equity” i.e., delay or laches should be considered by the High Court when exercising discretionary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. FACTS i) An advertisement was issued on 09.09.2012, inviting Applications for LPG distributorship in Jamalpur, District ..read more

INTRODUCTION A two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed an Order in Arun Shankar Vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 1186 Of 2022 and held that the Prosecution had failed to establish the recovery of the weapon at the Appellant’s instance, thereby, leaving the chain of circumstances incomplete and therefore set aside the conviction of the Appellant. FACTS i) The Appellant, Arun Shankar and the Deceased, Sushildhar Dubey, were related and lived in the village of Amgoan, Madhya Pradesh (M.P.). They often went toget ..read more

A single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Acting Chief Justice of Delhi High Court Shri. Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora passed a judgment dated 02.04.2024 in the matter of Mahender Singh vs. the State & Ors., Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) 253/2024 and observed that the present Letters Patent Appeal filed against the judgment of the Single Judge of the High Court in the first Appeal is not maintainable on the ground that it would essentially be a Second Appeal, which is explicitly prohibited by Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, as amended by Act 22 of 2002 ..read more

INTRODUCTION A two- Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prasanna B. Varale passed an Order dated 08.04.2024 in Civil Appeal No. Of 2024 (Arising Out Of SLP (C) No.14974 Of 2022) in K.B. Lal (Krishna Bahadur Lal) Vs. Gyanendra Pratap & Ors. and held that the Appellant failed to provide proper justification for the delay of 11 years to file the First Application under Order IX, Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Procedure where defendant appears on day of adjourned hearing and assigns good cause for previous non-appearance) along with ..read more

A three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Sandeep Mehta passed a judgement in PHR Invent Educational Society v. UCO Bank and Ors. SLP(C) No. 8867 of 2022 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court quashed and set aside the Order of the Telangana High Court stating that High Courts shall not intercede in all the matters under Article 226 if other efficacious remedy is available to the Party. Facts Dr. M.V. Ramana Rao (Borrower) secured a loan from the UCO Bank (Respondent Bank) by mortgaging four properties in Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh ..read more

Recently, a two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court comprising of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra passed a Judgment dated 10-04-2024 in the matter of Manisha Mahendra Gala & Ors. Vs Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 9642 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 9643 of 2010 and observed that the Appellants failed to establish that their predecessors-in-interest have used the disputed road peacefully, without any interruption from the Respondents, for more than 20 years and hence, the Appellants are not entitled to easementary rights thereof. Facts i) I ..read more