Thursday, 13 August 2026

The dispute. Senior executives of M/s Oriental Aromatics Limited were named in an FIR alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust after a camphor distributorship agreement with M/s D.K. Enterprises broke down. The Jharkhand High Court declined to quash the FIR in February 2025, and the executives challenged that refusal before the Supreme Court.

The reasoning. For cheating under Section 318(4) BNS, dishonest intention must exist at the very inception of the transaction and cannot be inferred solely from a subsequent breach.

In case of cheating, the intention of the accused at the time of inducement should be looked into which may be judged by a subsequent conduct, but for this, the subsequent conduct is not the sole test.

For your practice. A complaint under the BNS cheating provisions must plead specific facts showing fraudulent intent at the time of the agreement.

The order. The Supreme Court allowed both appeals, set aside the High Court's order of 19 February 2025, and quashed FIR No. 323 of 2024 registered at Kotwali P.S. All proceedings arising from the FIR stand quashed.

Section 318(4), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Case

PARAG KISHORE SATOSKAR vs STATE OF JHARKHAND

Citation

Supreme Court of India · Crl.A. No.-003803-003803 - 2026 · 2026 INSC 846 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Sanjay Karol, Augustine George Masih

The dispute. Sravanthi Infratech won an Rs. 827-crore EPC contract to build a gas-based power station for Srinivasa Reddy Velagala. After the appellant paid only Rs. 50.15 crores of the advance and work stalled, the respondent issued demand notices and in 2018 filed a Section 9 insolvency petition claiming Rs.. The NCLT admitted the Section 9 application in December 2019 and the NCLAT upheld it in February 2021; the corporate debtor appealed to the Supreme Court.

The reasoning. Milestone payments for goods and services under an EPC contract fall within the definition of operational debt in Section 5(21) of the IBC.

It held that the EPC contract subsisted, the milestone payments qualified as operational debt, there was no pre-existing dispute, and the Section 9 application was time-barred.

For your practice. EPC contractors pursuing insolvency must file Section 9 applications within three years of each milestone's default date.

The order. The Supreme Court set aside the NCLAT judgment of 1 February 2021 and the NCLT order of 13 December 2019. The respondent was directed to pursue its claim through the arbitration mechanism in the EPC contract.

Section 5(21), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Case

SRINIVASA REDDY VELAGALA vs SRAVANTHI INFRATECH PVT. LTD.

Citation

Supreme Court of India · C.A. No.-000876 - 2021 · 2026 INSC 835 · 12.08.2026

Bench

J.B. Pardiwala, K. Vinod Chandran

The dispute. A family dispute over a testator's estate turned on a series of share and LLP capital transfers made by the original plaintiff, Mrs. Sita Chaudhary, to her granddaughter and son-in-law between 2018 and 2019, funded by interest-free loans of approximately Rs. 50 crores. The Delhi High Court Division Bench set aside the Single Judge's interim injunction in March 2026.

The reasoning. An appellate court may interfere with a discretionary interlocutory injunction only when the lower court acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or perversely, or ignored settled principle.

For your practice. When opposing a grant of interim injunction on appeal, counsel must show that the trial court's discretion was exercised arbitrarily.

The order. The Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench's order of 20 March 2026 and restored the interim injunction of 29 July 2022. The Single Judge is directed to dispose of CS(OS) No. 589 of 2021 within eight months. No costs were awarded.

Order XLIII Rule 1(r), Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Case

SHRUTI MANAV SHARMA vs SUNANINA SINGH

Citation

Supreme Court of India · C.A. No.-010601-010606 - 2026 · 2026 INSC 843 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Alok Aradhe

The dispute. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited challenged High Court awards in two electrocution cases: one where a widow filed a writ after her husband died contacting a live KPTC wire, another where a man was injured touching a 66 kV line while retrieving a cricket ball. High Court Single Judges and Division Benches upheld both writ petitions and applied the Motor Vehicles Act multiplier to fix compensation.

The reasoning. The court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is unavailable where disputed questions of fact require determination, and parties must seek civil remedies instead.

It is the settled legal position that where disputed questions of facts are involved a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not a proper remedy.

For your practice. File a civil suit, not a writ, whenever an electrocution claim turns on contested facts.

The order. Both appeals were allowed. The Supreme Court quashed the High Court awards of Rs.25,52,500 and Rs.44,32,050, confirmed interim compensation of Rs.5,00,000 to the respondents.

Section 57, Electricity Act, 2003

Case

KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED vs REKHA

Citation

Supreme Court of India · C.A. No.-010659-010659 - 2026 · 2026 INSC 847 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Sanjay Karol, Augustine George Masih

The dispute. The widow and sons of a deceased Western Coalfields employee sought compassionate appointment for the elder son under Clause 9.3.4 of the National Coal Wage Agreement, which caps eligibility at 35 years. The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) dismissed the writ petition in November 2025, upholding the rejection, and the family appealed to the Supreme Court.

The reasoning. Where a welfare scheme fixes an age ceiling but names no cut-off moment, the ceiling must be measured at the date the employer's own process begins, not at the later date of formal consideration.

The process for compassionate appointment had already commenced on 04.01.2021 when appellant No.2 was admittedly within the prescribed age limit.

For your practice. When filing compassionate appointment claims, anchor the age assessment to the earliest verifiable step in the employer's process and document that date precisely.

The order. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court order of 26 November 2025, directed the respondent to reconsider the claim treating the son as age-eligible within eight weeks of the judgment.

Clause 9.3.4, National Coal Wage Agreement, 2020

Case

RASPELLI BHAGYA KISTAIYA vs GENERAL MANAGER, WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED

Citation

Supreme Court of India · C.A. No.-010589-010589 - 2026 · 2026 INSC 841 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Aravind Kumar, Vipul M. Pancholi

The dispute. Benimadhab Construction, an MSME borrower, held a cash-credit facility of Rs.150 lakhs with a bank that periodically renewed the limit. The borrowers filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court challenging both the NPA declaration and the Section 13(2) notice as premature.

The reasoning. The RBI Master Circular of 2 April 2024 requires a continuous overdue period of 90 days before an account can be classified as NPA or treated as out of order.

Neither any amount was overdue more than 90 days, neither the account of the petitioners can be treated as 'NPA' or 'out of order'.

For your practice. Before invoking SARFAESI, practitioners must verify that the bank holds dated evidence of a continuous 90-day overdue balance.

The order. The court quashed the NPA declaration dated 28 January 2025 and the Section 13(2) notice dated 19 June 2025.

Section 13(2), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

Case

Benimadhab Construction Private Limited & ors. Vs. Reserve Bank of India & ors.

Citation

Calcutta High Court · WPA/23190/2025 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Krishna Rao

The dispute. Adarsh Parasramka and Seema Trading Company supplied industrial oil to a buyer under a commercial contract from mid-2021 and stopped receiving payment from February 2022. The petitioners filed a criminal revision before the Calcutta High Court seeking to quash the FIR and all proceedings in GR (NS) Case No.218/24.

The reasoning. Criminal breach of trust under Section 316 BNS requires entrustment followed by misappropriation, while cheating under Section 318 requires fraudulent intent at the inception of the transaction.

The two offences cannot coexist simultaneously on the same set of facts. They are antithetical to each other. The two provisions of the IPC (now BNS, 2023) are not twins that they cannot survive without each other.

For your practice. Before advising a commercial client to file a criminal complaint over a payment default, confirm that the facts support a distinct fraudulent intention at the outset.

The order. The Court allowed CRR 5075 of 2024, quashing the FIR (Bowbazar P.S. Case No.57/24 dated 12 April 2024) and all proceedings in GR (NS) Case No.218/24. All interim orders were vacated and the trial court was directed to comply.

Section 316, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Case

Adarsh Parasramka & ors. v. State of West Bengal & ors.

Citation

Calcutta High Court · CRR/5075/2024 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Shampa Dutt

The dispute. Netram Kumar, a drawing teacher at a government school in Delhi, was accused of repeated sexual misconduct against a minor student aged about 12 within school premises between February 2015 and July 2016. Kumar appealed under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita challenging the conviction on grounds that the child's testimony was inconsistent.

The reasoning. A child's testimony that is consistent on material particulars inspires confidence and sustains conviction even without medical or documentary corroboration.

It is now well-settled principle of law that conviction can be sustained on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if it inspires confidence.

For your practice. In POCSO trials, defence counsel must target material contradictions in the child's account rather than peripheral inconsistencies of date or location.

The order. The appeal was dismissed. The conviction under Sections 354, 354A IPC and Section 10 POCSO was affirmed along with the five-year sentence, a fine of Rs.2,000 with one month simple imprisonment in default.

Section 29, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

Case

NETRAM KUMAR vs THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation

Delhi High Court · CRL.A.-573/2026 · 2026:DHC:6553 · 12.08.2026

Bench

Madhu Jain

The dispute. A Class IX student at Don Bosco Academy, Patna, a private unaided ICSE-affiliated school, was expelled on 17 October 2025 without a show-cause notice or any hearing, days before the Final Term Examination scheduled for February 2026. The student's father filed a writ petition under Article 226 before the Patna High Court.

The reasoning. A private unaided school discharging the public function of imparting education - a right guaranteed under Article 21A - is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 regardless of its private character.

For your practice. Before advising a private school client to expel a student, counsel must confirm the misconduct falls within an explicitly enumerated ground and that a show-cause notice.

The order. The expulsion order dated 17 October 2025 was quashed and set aside. The school was directed to permit the student to resume classes and sit for the Final Term Examination.

Article 226, Constitution of India, 1950

Case

Satyam vs The State of Bihar

Citation

Patna High Court · CWJC-2449/2026 · 11.08.2026

Bench

Harish Kumar

The dispute. Newkem Products Corporation and its managing partner own a 13,337-sq-metre factory at Bhandup (West), Mumbai, in continuous private possession since 1957. The factory owners filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging both notices as exceeding the statutory jurisdiction conferred by Sections.

The reasoning. Sections 297 and 299 authorise the municipal commissioner to prescribe a regular line and take possession only in relation to an existing public street.

The Respondents cannot take possession of the Petitioners' private land between points C and D by invoking Sections 297 and 299 of the Act in the facts of the present case.

For your practice. Verify that land targeted under Sections 297 or 299 is an existing public street before any acquisition step; inclusion in a development plan does not convert private land.

The order. The Bombay High Court quashed the notices dated 5 July 2024 and 1 April 2025 insofar as they demanded possession of the petitioners' land between points C and D. Interim Applications No.2562 of 2026 and No.6738 of 2025 were disposed of.

Section 297, Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888

Case

GIRISH MORESHWAR GAWAND & ors. vs NEWKEM PRODUCTS CORPORATION & ors.

Citation

Bombay High Court · IA/6738/2025 · 11.08.2026

Bench

Gautam A. Ankhad

The dispute. Priya Srivastava served CRIS for approximately 28 years before applying for voluntary retirement in February 2024. A single judge allowed Srivastava's writ petition and directed CRIS to process her claims; CRIS challenged that order in the present intra-court appeal.

The reasoning. The court held the 2010 amendment ultra vires because it was approved only by the Managing Director and not by the Governing Council as Rule 12 of the bye-laws required.

the inclusion of "resignation" in Rule 8.4 is otiose because the benefit is already anchored to the completion of 25 years of service, irrespective of the manner of termination.

For your practice. Any amendment to a statutory body's internal rules must trace its authority to the correct approving body.

The order. The intra-court appeal was dismissed. Srivastava and her spouse are entitled to post-retirement medical benefits under the Medical Attendance Rules, 2009, with no order as to costs.

Medical Attendance Rules, 2009 (as amended), 2009

Case

THE REGISTRAR, CENTRE FOR RAILWAY INFORMATION SYSTEMS & ors. vs PRIYA SRIVASTAVA & ors.

Citation

Delhi High Court · LPA-575/2026 · 2026:DHC:6557-DB · 12.08.2026

Bench

Tejas Karia

The dispute. M/s J.P. Logistics, registered for clearing-and-forwarding services, also provided goods transport to Mother Dairy and Vadilal under reverse-charge arrangements, issuing bills rather than documents titled consignment notes. The Commissioner (Appeals) partially allowed the first demand and upheld the second; J.P. Logistics appealed both to CESTAT Allahabad.

The reasoning. Bills with essential transport particulars qualify as consignment notes under Section 65(50b); the document's label is immaterial. Form-26AS cannot found a Service Tax demand, and a notice covering facts already known to the Department is barred by limitation.

For your practice. Transport bills must capture all statutory particulars - consignor, consignee, vehicle number, load description, and freight - so they survive reclassification challenges.

The order. CESTAT set aside the service tax demands of Rs 17,60,474 and Rs 98,72,561, vacated penalties under Sections 73(1), 77(1)(a), 77(1)(c) and 70 of the Finance Act 1994, and quashed both show-cause notices.

Section 65(50b), Finance Act, 1994

Case

J P Logistics vs Ce & ors.

Citation

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal · Service Tax Appeal No.70251 of 2022 & Service Tax Appeal No.70831 of 2025 · 12.08.2026

Bench

P.K. Choudhary

The dispute. HCL Infosystems, an OEM computer manufacturer, paid royalties to Microsoft from 2005 to May 2008 under a licence to pre-install Windows on machines it sold, affixing a Certificate of Authenticity on each chassis. An Order-in-Original of October 2018 confirmed the demand with interest and penalties; HCL appealed to CESTAT Allahabad, which heard the matter in August 2026.

The reasoning. Section 65(55a) of the Finance Act 1994 expressly excludes copyright from the definition of intellectual property right; a licence to use pre-installed copyrighted software confers no patent, trademark, or analogous right.

For your practice. Software licence agreements should state clearly that the grant is non-exclusive use of copyrighted code and transfers no enumerated IPR.

The order. CESTAT set aside the demand of Rs 16,67,01,000 together with interest and all penalties under Sections 73, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act 1994.

Section 65(55a), Finance Act, 1994

Case

Hcl Infosystems Limited vs Ce & ors.

Citation

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal · Service Tax Appeal No.70131 of 2019 · 12.08.2026

Bench

P. K. Choudhary