Tuesday, 1 September 2026

The dispute. Anand Kumar and co-accused faced prosecution for cheating and forgery involving a disputed power of attorney over fifty-four acres. The High Court dismissed the quashing petition holding that an informant's consent was necessary, which the accused challenged before the Supreme Court.

The reasoning. The Court held that inherent quashing powers remain distinct from compounding and require only the actual victim's compromise.

Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence.

For your practice. Defence counsel pursuing Section 482 quashment must secure compromise affidavits from actual victims rather than informants, distinguishing abuse of process from statutory.

The order. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court order and quashed all criminal proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 459 of 2018 against all accused persons. The related criminal revision was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Case

ANAND KUMAR @ SANJJAY LALWANI vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation

Supreme Court of India · Crl.A. No.-004110-004110 - 2026 · 2026 INSC 928 · 31.08.2026

Bench

K.v. Viswanathan, Arun Palli

The dispute. The District Magistrate of Raigarh reopened a previously closed externment proceeding and banished Vijay Kumar Rajpoot for one year without notice. The appellant was detained in judicial custody in unrelated criminal cases when the ex parte exile order was passed against him. The High Court dismissed his writ petition directing him to pursue a statutory appeal, prompting this challenge before the Supreme Court.

The reasoning. The Court held that statutory notice and hearing under Section 8 are mandatory safeguards, rendering ex parte externment orders void ab initio.

The duty to give the hearing sounds in a statute which affects the fundamental right of a citizen, the failure to comply with such a duty is fatal.

For your practice. Writ petitions lie directly against void externment orders without exhausting statutory appeals whenever authorities breach mandatory hearing safeguards.

The order. The Supreme Court quashed the externment order dated 6 October 2025 as void and set aside the High Court's appellate direction.

Section 8, Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990

Case

VIJAY KUMAR RAJPOOT ALIAS VIJJU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Citation

Supreme Court of India · Crl.A. No.-004083-004083 - 2026 · 2026 INSC 926 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Dipankar Datta

The dispute. The police arrested former Odisha legislator Bikram Panda for suspected involvement in the fatal daylight shooting of an advocate. After the magistrate and the sessions judge rejected bail, the accused petitioned the High Court to challenge the legality of his arrest.

The reasoning. Article 22(1) and the procedural code mandatorily require serving specific written grounds to enable an effective defence.

For your practice. Defence counsel should scrutinise arrest memos at the initial remand hearing, as omitting contemporaneous written grounds vitiates custody and provides an immediate basis for bail.

The order. The High Court allowed the bail application and ordered the petitioner's immediate release upon furnishing a bond under Section 91 of the BNSS.

Section 47, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Case

Bikram Panda @ Bikram Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha

Citation

Orissa High Court · BLAPL/13860/2025 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

The dispute. A fifteen-year-old sexual assault survivor was found to be twenty-seven weeks pregnant following registration of a POCSO case. Represented by her mother, the minor sought judicial permission for termination to safeguard her physical and psychological health. The minor filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking termination of pregnancy beyond the statutory twenty-four week ceiling.

The reasoning. Applying the best-interest doctrine, the court held that a minor's constitutional dignity under Article 21 overrides statutory gestational limits.

For your practice. Counsel representing pregnant minors can bypass statutory gestational limits by securing medical board clearance and invoking constitutional best-interest rights.

The order. The court permitted medical termination of the 27-week pregnancy subject to a parental undertaking. All authorities were directed to maintain strict confidentiality regarding the minor's identity and records.

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 2003

Case

Ms X v. State of Arunachal Pradesh

Citation

Gauhati High Court · WP(C)/407/2026 · 2026:GAU-AP:864 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Sanjay Kumar Medhi

The dispute. Retired education officer Nand Kishor Singh claimed twenty and thirty percent additional pension increments upon entering his eightieth and eighty-fifth years. A Single Judge allowed the retiree's writ petition advancing entitlement dates, prompting the State to file a Letters Patent Appeal.

The reasoning. The Court held that age-related pension rules must receive their plain grammatical meaning denoting completed years rather than entering an age.

The expression ‘80 … 85 …’ in its ordinary grammatical sense means a person who has attained or completed the age of 80 years and is 80 years or more.

For your practice. Pension claims must be computed strictly from completed age milestones rather than the start of birthday years when challenging state disbursement schedules before writ courts.

The order. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Single Judge's judgment, and dismissed the writ petition. Authorities were directed to disburse twenty percent additional pension from 1 January 2017 and thirty percent from 1 January 2022.

Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021

Case

The State of Bihar vs Nand Kishor Singh

Citation

Patna High Court · LPA-249/2024 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Bibek Chaudhuri, Rana Vikram Singh

The dispute. A foreign decree holder sought execution of an arbitral award exceeding five thousand crore rupees against pharmaceutical conglomerate promoters. The judgment debtors systematically dissipated unencumbered healthcare shares despite giving repeated status quo assurances to courts. The decree holder initiated execution and contempt proceedings before the High Court seeking asset attachment and forensic tracing.

The reasoning. The court held that solemn undertakings given to courts override statutory share transfer freedoms and bind promoters across their corporate structures.

The five assurances and the injunction orders of the Supreme Court constitute an unfractured thread forming part of Daiichi‘s efforts to enforce the Foreign Award.

For your practice. Commercial litigators enforcing arbitral awards can secure forensic audits and contempt sanctions against promoters using corporate veils to evade decrees.

The order. The court sentenced two contemnors to six months' imprisonment with Rs 5,000 fine each, payable within four weeks. It ordered a forensic audit of 17 banks and transferred Rs 17.93 crore to the executing court.

Section 64, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Case

DAIICHI SANKYO COMPANY, LIMITED vs MALVINDER MOHAN SINGH & ors.

Citation

Delhi High Court · O.M.P.(EFA)(COMM.)-6/2016 · 2026:DHC:7301 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Subramonium Prasad

The dispute. Former college staff who retired between 2001 and 2011 faced recovery notices after an audit uncovered errors in provident fund accounts. The management then withheld and adjusted their enhanced gratuity payouts to recoup the alleged excess interest credits. Aggrieved by the deductions, the retired employees filed a writ petition challenging the recovery notices and gratuity adjustments.

The reasoning. Applying the Rafiq Masih doctrine, the court barred recovering erroneous credits from blameless retirees after substantial delay. It affirmed that Section 13 of the Payment of Gratuity Act shields terminal gratuity from unilateral set-offs.

The recovery sought from the Petitioners, whether by direct demand or by adjustment against gratuity, cannot be sustained.

For your practice. Counsel defending retirees can invoke statutory gratuity immunity and equitable estoppel to defeat delayed post-retirement recovery attempts.

The order. The recovery notices were quashed. The college was directed to provide account statements within four weeks and refund all adjusted sums with 6% annual interest within eight weeks.

Section 13, Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972

Case

SC SHARMA & ors. vs SHIVAJI COLLEGE AND ANR.

Citation

Delhi High Court · W.P.(C)-558/2019 · 2026:DHC:7333 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Sanjeev Narula

The dispute. The managing director of a construction firm issued a security cheque for forty lakh rupees to a stone supplier following commercial transactions. After the magistrate took cognizance and ordered twenty per cent interim compensation, the director petitioned the High Court under Section 482 to quash.

The reasoning. The High Court held that prosecuting the company is an indispensable condition precedent for fastening vicarious liability onto its directors.

Applying the doctrine of strict construction, we are of the considered opinion that commission of offence by the company is an express condition precedent to attract the vicarious liability of others.

For your practice. Complainants' counsel drafting cheque dishonour notices and complaints must invariably array the corporate account holder as primary accused to prevent threshold.

The order. The High Court allowed both petitions, quashing the cognizance order dated 16 August 2022 and setting aside the interim compensation directive requiring twenty per cent payment.

Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Case

NAVEEN KUMAR @ NAWEEN KUMAR vs THE STATE OF BIHAR

Citation

Patna High Court · Cr.Misc.-63509/2024 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Soni Shrivastava

The dispute. A corporate complainant initiated five cheque dishonour complaints against two business partners over unpaid financial dues. After the magistrate dismissed the withdrawn complaints, the accused petitioned the High Court to quash the surviving proclamation order and consequential FIR.

The reasoning. Continuing prosecution for proclamation default after the principal cheque complaints are settled and withdrawn constitutes an abuse of judicial process.

For your practice. When settling negotiable instrument disputes, counsel should ensure the agreement requires formal withdrawal of complaints to secure the immediate quashing of ancillary.

The order. The High Court quashed the order dated 22 May 2025 declaring the petitioners proclaimed persons. The court also quashed FIR No. 157 dated 06 May 2026 under Section 209 BNS, together with all consequential proceedings.

Section 290, Bihar National Security Act, 2023

Case

NILESH SHANTILAL PATEL & ors. vs STATE OF HARYANA & ors.

Citation

Punjab and Haryana High Court · CRM-M/38448/2026 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Manisha Batra

The dispute. A property owner instituted civil suits seeking possession and rent arrears against tenants occupying two separate floors. The district court decreed possession on admissions under Order XII Rule 6, which the occupants challenged in regular first appeals before the High Court.

The reasoning. An unregistered agreement to sell cannot confer possessory protection under Section 53A because statutory registration is strictly mandatory.

For your practice. Property litigators must ensure agreements to sell are registered before claiming part performance.

The order. The High Court set aside the possession decrees dated 09.10.2024 and 15.10.2024 and remanded both suits for trial on merits. The court directed the parties to appear before the District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, on 17 September 2026.

Section 53A, Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Case

RAHUL CHAUDHARY vs RAJ RANI UPPAL

Citation

Delhi High Court · RFA-104/2025 · 2026:DHC:7292 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Neena Bansal Krishna

The dispute. Poonawalla Fincorp held a comprehensive money insurance policy issued by Oriental Insurance Company covering cash in transit and safes. After armed robbers looted Rs 48.26 lakh from its branch, the insurer repudiated the indemnity claim citing absent security guards and CCTV cameras. After the NCDRC remitted the matter on merits, the SCDRC heard the insured's complaint challenging the insurer's arbitrary repudiation order.

The reasoning. The SCDRC held that insurance contracts must be strictly construed on their express terms without implying unwritten warranties.

For your practice. Counsel advising insurers must verify that operational security safeguards are explicitly incorporated into policy conditions before invoking exclusion clauses to resist robbery.

The order. The SCDRC directed the insurers to pay Rs 44,53,950 with 9% simple interest per annum from 17 July 2017 within forty-five days, alongside Rs 1,00,000 as litigation costs. Any police recovery proven to have been restored may be deducted.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Case

POONAWALLA FINCORP LIMITED vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & ors.

Citation

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · SC/19/CC/814/2018 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Rajes Guha Ray, Santanu Saha

The dispute. A retired Additional Commissioner of Income Tax faced major penalty proceedings for alleged administrative delays in approving reassessment proposals. The department initiated the enquiry on Central Vigilance Commission advice and withheld his accrued retirement benefits. The officer moved the Central Administrative Tribunal to quash the charge memorandum and secure the release of his retiral dues.

The reasoning. Following B.V. Gopinath, the tribunal ruled that the Disciplinary Authority must personally approve the charge sheet. It held that external vigilance advice cannot substitute for the mandatory, non-delegable exercise of statutory discretion.

For your practice. Disciplinary actions against civil servants are vulnerable to quashing unless records prove the competent authority personally approved the charge sheet.

The order. The tribunal quashed the charge memorandum and ordered the release of all retiral dues within sixty days. Delayed payment beyond sixty days will incur interest at 8% per annum until payment.

Rule 14, Classification, Control & Appeal (CCS) Rules, 1965

Case

Shri Abhijit Datta vs Central Board Of Direct Taxes

Citation

Central Administrative Tribunal · O.A.No. 260/00266 of 2025 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, Pramod Kumar Das

The dispute. An informant alleged that certifying authorities and a biometric firm colluded by mandating advanced cryptographic tokens for digital signatures. The complaint asserted that the rigid transition timeline created an artificial entry barrier, granting one supplier an absolute monopoly. The informant approached the Competition Commission seeking an investigation and interim stay of the mandatory migration cut-off date.

The reasoning. The Commission held that upgrading technical standards is a statutory regulatory function outside antitrust review absent collusive agreements.

For your practice. Antitrust claims against regulatory standards must show concrete collusive agreements rather than inferring violations from resulting market concentration.

The order. The Commission closed the information under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, finding no prima facie violation. The interim relief application under Section 33 was accordingly dismissed.

Section 26(2), Competition Act, 2002

Case

Advocate Ramkishan Saraswat vs The Secretary

Citation

Competition Commission of India · Case No. 26 of 2026 · 31.08.2026

Bench

Ravneet Kaur, Sweta Kakkad, Deepak Anurag