Can a Complainant in a Section 138 NI Act Case File an Appeal Against Acquittal as a “Victim” Under the Proviso to Section 372 CrPC Without Seeking Special Leave? Supreme Court Clarifies Law; High Court Permits Withdrawal of Leave to Appeal

The judgment affirms that a complainant in a cheque dishonour (Section 138 NI Act) case qualifies as a “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC and may appeal an acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without seeking special leave under Section 378(4). This reflects a binding clarification of appellate rights, consolidating Supreme Court precedent for […]

When Can a High Court Interfere with a Labour Court’s Award on Closure and Retrenchment? Limits on Judicial Review under Article 226 Reaffirmed

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed that in industrial disputes involving closure and retrenchment, its power of judicial review under Article 226 is limited: it will not reappreciate factual findings of Labour Courts unless there is patent illegality, violation of natural justice, or jurisdictional error. The judgment upholds existing Supreme Court precedent, providing binding […]

Does an Employer Have a Legal Duty to Absorb Workers from a Closed Unit into Other Functioning Units? Clarification of Section 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act and Scope of High Court Interference under Article 226

The High Court held that closure of an industrial unit per Section 25FFF entitles workers only to compensation, not absorption in other units, and reaffirmed the limited writ jurisdiction of High Courts to interfere with Labour Court awards—providing binding authority within Andhra Pradesh.   Summary Category Data Case Name WP/5020/2016 of G. Ram Babu Vs […]

Is a Motor Accident Tribunal Required to Apply Minimum Wage Matrix or Pension Income for Compensation Assessment When the Deceased Was a Pensioner Above 60 Years?

The Chhattisgarh High Court reaffirmed that for deceased claimants who were pensioners above 60 years, assessment of income for motor accident compensation should be based on actual pension received rather than the minimum wage matrix, and future prospects need not be added. This judgment upholds settled law and serves as binding authority for motor accident […]

When Is Oral Evidence Sufficient to Establish a Subcontractor Relationship in Construction Disputes? Gauhati High Court Reaffirms the Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof in Absence of Written Agreement

The Gauhati High Court held that in civil construction disputes, the plaintiff must strictly prove the existence and terms of a subcontractor relationship; oral evidence unsupported by documentary proof or corroborative evidence is insufficient where fundamental facts remain unproved. The decision upholds and applies well-settled legal principles governing burden of proof and the evaluation of […]

Does Dismissal of a Writ Petition as Infructuous by the Andhra Pradesh High Court Create Precedent or Affect Legal Rights of the Parties?

A writ petition dismissed as infructuous by a High Court does not lay down any new law, reaffirm existing precedent, or serve as binding or persuasive authority; such disposal does not affect substantive legal rights of the parties or set precedent for future cases.   Summary Category Data Case Name WP/7129/2019 of Dariboina Venkata Lakshumma […]

Can Prosecution for “Reserved Forest” and Public Property Offences Continue When Statutory Preconditions Are Absent? High Court Reaffirms Strict Interpretation and Quashes Proceedings

The Chhattisgarh High Court decisively held that prosecution under Section 26(1) of the Chhattisgarh Forest Act, 1972 and Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 cannot continue where statutory preconditions—such as proof of “reserved forest” status or actual damage—are not met. The decision upholds Supreme Court and High Court precedent, […]

Can Higher-Order Training Be Treated as Fulfilling Prescribed Qualifications for Promotion? High Court Clarifies Precedent on Equivalency of Qualifications and the Doctrine of Moulding Relief

The High Court, affirming relevant administrative clarifications and recruitment rules, holds that a higher-level course (MRO) is sufficient in place of the prescribed training (MRT) for promotion if it subsumes the lower course’s syllabus. This judgment upholds existing precedent, clarifies practical application of equivalency in service jurisprudence, endorses departmental interpretation, and illustrates the doctrine of […]

Can a Complainant in a Section 138 NI Act Case Appeal Acquittal as “Victim” Without Seeking Special Leave Under Section 378(4) CrPC? A Reaffirmation of Complainant’s Appellate Rights under Proviso to Section 372 CrPC — Now Binding Authority for Cheque Dishonour Matters

The Court, applying Supreme Court precedent, holds that a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act case is a “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC, entitled to file a direct appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, without needing special leave under Section 378(4); this aligns the victim’s appellate rights with those of […]

Is Delay Fatal to Claims for Compassionate Appointment? High Court Reaffirms Strict Timelines and Purpose

Chhattisgarh High Court upholds that compassionate appointment is solely to provide immediate relief to families of deceased employees, and claims made after considerable delay—where the family has already survived for years—are not maintainable. The Court strictly applies Supreme Court precedents, affirming that delayed claims defeat the object of compassionate appointment and must be rejected. This […]

Can a Higher Qualification Be Treated as Satisfying a Prescribed Lower Qualification for Promotion in Service Law?

The High Court has held that a higher-level training course (MRO) may be considered as fulfilling the requirements of a prescribed lower training course (MRT) for promotion under recruitment rules, especially when officially clarified by the appropriate authority. This judgment affirms existing administrative understanding, provides sector-specific applicability (health services promotions), and will serve as a […]

Can a Complainant Under Section 138 NI Act File an Appeal Against Acquittal as a ‘Victim’ Under Proviso to Section 372 CrPC Without Seeking Special Leave? — Supreme Court Affirms Expanded Appeal Rights for Cheque Dishonour Cases

The High Court of Chhattisgarh confirms that pursuant to the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, a complainant in Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cases qualifies as a ‘victim’ under Section 2(wa) CrPC, enabling direct appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC—no special leave under Section 378(4) […]