10222 High Courts judgments explained in plain English: what was decided, the law applied and why it matters. Page 20 of 426.
Jharkhand HC quashed the order requiring an Rs 8 lakh security for releasing a seized Maruti Baleno, directing that only a reasonable indemnity bond be furnished. The decision enforces proportionality under Section 528 BNSS, shielding vehicle owners from arbitrary financial demands.
The Rajasthan High Court ordered the state to pay Rs 25 lakh to Lila’s family and directed immediate FIR registration, emphasizing the state’s Article 21 duty to protect life in detention. It also issued sweeping prison-reform directives, signalling stricter accountability for custodial deaths.
The Jharkhand High Court ruled that a contract’s venue clause does not determine the seat of arbitration, confirming the tribunal’s fixation of Delhi as the seat. Having waited over two-years without raising a Section 4 objection, the petitioner was deemed to have waived the right to contest the seat.
The Uttarakhand High Court held that a husband who voluntarily assumed family responsibility must pay maintenance to a step-son, even without a biological relationship. It also increased monthly maintenance to ₹8,000 for the wife and ₹6,000 for the minor daughter. The ruling extends Section 125 CrPC protection to non-biological dependents.
A three-year lapse and the use of detention to sidestep a Supreme Court bail order breach Article 21, prompting the High Court to set aside the preventive detention. The decision bars authorities from relying on stale evidence to prolong detention, safeguarding accused persons under the PITNDPS Act.
Delhi High Court ruled that a series of 89-day peon contracts cannot be shielded by the Section 2(oo)(bb) exemption of the Industrial Disputes Act. The court set aside the Labour Court's reinstatement award and ordered a lump-sum payment of Rs 3 lakhs per workman, with interest, affecting similarly engaged fixed-term workers.
The Delhi High Court quashed the ex-parte interim injunction against Nugenesys after finding the plaintiff deliberately concealed a cease-and-desist notice, breaching the duty of candour in the Statement of Truth. The decision warns trademark litigants that material suppression will invalidate injunctive relief under the Commercial Courts Act.
The Gauhati High Court ruled that DigiLocker documents satisfy the evidentiary standards of the IT Act 2000, making them as valid as paper originals. Consequently, the show-cause notices issued to transport firms over allegedly forged truck papers were struck down, safeguarding entities that rely on electronic records.
The Himachal High Court ruled that a written statement cannot be amended after the trial starts unless the party shows prior due-diligence, upholding the trial court’s refusal. The decision limits the court’s supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, warning litigants that pleadings must be finalised before trial.
The Gujarat High Court set aside a 2019 Section 148 notice, ruling that without new, concrete material a tax authority cannot reopen an assessment merely on a revised opinion. This reinforces that any reassessment must be backed by fresh evidence, protecting taxpayers from arbitrary reopening.
The Delhi High Court set aside the Section 148 order that forced the accused to deposit 20 % of the compensation amount during the pendency of his appeal. It waived the deposit requirement and instructed the appellate court to dispose of the appeal within six weeks, easing the petitioner’s financial hardship.
The Delhi High Court ruled that the 2026 amendment to Section 96 of the IBC operates retrospectively, extinguishing the interim-moratorium bar for personal guarantors. Consequently, suits against guarantors can proceed despite a pending moratorium. This decision broadens creditors' enforcement options in ongoing insolvency proceedings.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a conviction recorded after the alleged offence cannot be counted as a prior conviction under Section 31 of the NDPS Act, so enhanced punishment cannot be imposed. Only convictions existing before the offence date qualify, impacting NDPS prosecutions with multiple cases.
The Calcutta High Court affirmed that a passenger who boards a train in good faith qualifies as a bona-fide passenger, making a death an untoward incident under Section 123(c) and warranting Rs 8 lakh plus interest as compensation to the victim’s family. This clarifies the evidentiary burden for claimants in railway accident cases.
A corporate defendant successfully invoked the Section 35 bona-fide use defence to retain a family name in its trademark, prompting the Bombay High Court to modify the earlier interim injunction. The ruling clarifies that companies may lawfully use surnames when use is genuine, affecting future trademark litigants.
A later government resolution cannot cut short the retirement age already granted to an associate professor, preserving the employee’s accrued service right. The Bombay High Court held that the retirement age fixed at 62 under the earlier rule remains enforceable despite a 2025 order seeking retirement at 60. This safeguards all government employees whose service terms were fixed before any subsequent amendment.
An ICC email declaring a complaint lacks a sexual element is deemed a ‘recommendation’ under Section 13(2) of the POSH Act, permitting a Section 18 appeal. The Bombay HC set aside the Industrial Court’s order, remanding the case for fresh consideration and confirming the right to appeal.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside the Haryana PSC’s post-shortlisting interview cut-off, finding that mid-process changes to recruitment criteria breach constitutional equality and reservation guarantees. It ordered a fresh evaluation of candidates strictly per the original advertisement’s minimum qualifying marks, protecting all aspirants affected by the arbitrary change.
Punjab & Haryana HC ruled that under Sec 483 BNS, bail is the default and pre-trial detention cannot serve as a substitute for sentencing, even in serious offences. The decision protects accused from unnecessary incarceration while trial is pending, reinforcing the right to liberty.
The Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court affirmed that an insurer's liability under a comprehensive motor insurance policy is limited to Rs 1 lakh per passenger, even when higher compensation is awarded. It raised the total compensation to Rs 37.62 lakh, emphasizing that policy terms prevail over IRDA circulars. This ruling impacts insurers and claimants in motor accident claims across the state.
Delhi High Court dismisses appeal, upholding arbitral award and confirming narrow scope of judicial review under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act.
Without the requisite stamp duty, an arbitral award cannot be treated as a valid instrument for execution. The Delhi High Court also stayed any enforcement while a Section 34 challenge remains pending, leaving the award ineffective until the petition is finally decided. This restricts award holders and creditors from pursuing recovery until both stamp duty is paid and the petition is resolved.
The Delhi High Court set aside a life-sentence for sexual assault, ruling that a child victim’s inconsistent testimony cannot alone satisfy the evidentiary burden under the IPC and POCSO Act without supporting forensic evidence. The decision underscores that corroboration is mandatory for convictions based solely on child witness statements.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court annulled the conviction of a public servant under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act because the prosecution lacked a valid sanction, rendering the proceedings non-est. The ruling reinforces that any PC-Act charge against a public servant must be preceded by a proper sanction, or the case is liable to be dismissed. This decision benefits officials facing similar charges where sanction was not duly obtained.