Topic
The Gauhati High Court held that under BNSS 43(5), arrest is effective detention, not formal custody, for the sunset rule. Applying this, it denied bail in an NDPS case with 434.38 g heroin, clarifying arrest timing for bail in drug prosecutions.
The Gauhati High Court permitted a medical termination at 27 weeks for a minor sexual assault survivor, holding that the child's best-interest supersedes the 24-week ceiling in the MTP Act. This sets a precedent that statutory gestational limits can be set aside when a minor's health and rights are at stake, affecting future POCSO and MTP cases involving minors.
The Gauhati HC ordered regularisation of Assam Rifles-occupied land and payment of rent arrears and compensation. The ruling benefits the petitioners and landowners, stating that military land occupations must be regularised and compensated.
The Gauhati High Court ruled that a temporary constable who suffers a training-related injury is a member of the CRPF for purposes of rehabilitation and disability pension, overturning his termination. This clarifies that temporary service employees are entitled to pension benefits when permanently incapacitated.
The Gauhati High Court quashed the April 2025 order cancelling the regularisation of 45 Block Education Officers, holding that appointments must adhere to the statutory recruitment rules and earlier judicial directions. The decision reinstates the officers’ regular status and bars arbitrary revocation.
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 Gauhati High Court affirmed that an individual labelled a foreigner must demonstrate Indian citizenship, and that irregularities in service of notice do not invalidate a Foreigners Tribunal’s ex-parte finding. This places the evidential burden on the accused and upholds procedural validity for similar citizenship disputes.
United India Insurance was ordered to pay the entire Rs 67.12 lakh compensation with interest after the Gauhati High Court ruled that contributory negligence must be proved by evidence and cannot be inferred. The judgment underscores that insurers cannot rely on a presumption of driver fault in motor accident claims. Claimants and insurers alike must base any reduction in award on concrete proof of negligence.
The Gauhati High Court dismissed appeals by five accused convicted of murder and rioting in a land dispute over a community hall, upholding life imprisonment. The Court rejected claims of private defence, prioritizing ocular evidence over technical flaws and affirming the trial court's findings.
Gauhati High Court rules that provisional attachment orders under PMLA Section 5 must explicitly disclose the 'reason to believe' to comply with natural justice. The court also clarifies that properties representing proceeds of crime can be attached even if acquired before the scheduled offence, reinforcing ED's attachment powers.
Gauhati High Court reinforces the exhaustion doctrine by dismissing a writ petition challenging a demolition order for unauthorised construction, directing petitioners to first pursue the statutory appeal under the GMDA Act. The ruling underscores that Article 226 cannot be invoked bypassing available statutory remedies, impacting property owners and developers in urban development disputes.
Gauhati High Court rules that the 30-day timeline under Section 21A of the Registration Act for issuing land sale NOCs is mandatory, rejecting administrative delays as justification. The decision reinforces statutory compliance, ensuring timely processing of land sale permissions for property owners and buyers.
Gauhati High Court sets aside its order for violating natural justice by not impleading Reliance Jio Infratel, a necessary party, in a writ petition affecting its rights. The ruling reinforces that any order impacting a non-party’s legal interests must ensure their participation to uphold procedural fairness.
Gauhati High Court rules that a child victim's testimony under Section 4 of the POCSO Act requires no corroboration if it is cogent, even when the accused claims intoxication or minor inconsistencies exist. The judgment reinforces the primacy of victim testimony in penetrative sexual assault cases, impacting criminal appeals under the POCSO framework.
Gauhati High Court rules that voluntary intoxication cannot absolve an accused under Section 376(3) IPC and POCSO Act, upholding a 20-year sentence for raping a minor. The court also directed victim compensation within three months, reinforcing the irrelevance of intoxication as a defence in sexual offences against children.