Topic
Allahabad High Court dismisses habeas corpus petition as non-maintainable once trial commences, relying on precedent in Neeraj v. State of U.P.
Bombay High Court rules that plaintiffs can amend pleadings to enhance compensation claims under Order VI Rule 17 CPC before trial begins, overriding objections under Order II Rule 2 CPC. The decision underscores procedural flexibility in property damage disputes where fresh evidence justifies higher claims.
Bombay High Court rules that once trial proceedings have formally commenced, prolonged incarceration alone-even for five years-does not entitle an accused to bail if prior judicial orders have denied relief. The ruling underscores judicial finality over delay-based bail pleas, limiting the scope of speedy trial protections post-trial initiation.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that amendments to pleadings after trial commencement under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC demand strict proof of 'due diligence'-mere disclosure during cross-examination is insufficient. The decision reinforces judicial scrutiny on late amendments, impacting civil litigants seeking mid-trial modifications.
The Madras High Court ruled that plaint amendments under CPC Order VI Rule 17 are permissible before trial commencement, even if supporting documents are delayed. The court emphasized that allowing such amendments prevents multiplicity of suits and ensures complete adjudication of disputes, particularly in property and asset disputes. This decision reinforces judicial discretion in balancing procedural fairness with substantive justice.