The High Court of Delhi held that if the parties to a matrimonial dispute under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC have fully and voluntarily settled their disputes, with the complainant affirming receipt of full settlement and expressing no desire to continue prosecution, it is in the interest of justice to quash the criminal proceedings. This decision continues […]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reaffirmed that the requirements of Section 82(2) CrPC must be mandatorily and cumulatively fulfilled before declaring a person a proclaimed offender, clarifying that absence must not automatically be treated as “wilful” or “deliberate” if justified. The judgment follows and applies existing precedent and serves as binding authority within […]
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld that “war injury” under Category E(i) includes diseases contracted during operational area postings which lead to invalidation from service, and that differentiation between disease and injury for denial of war injury pension is impermissible. This judgment affirms existing interpretation and strengthens benefit protection for armed forces personnel […]
The High Court restates that terms of recruitment advertisements, such as mandatory signature requirements on each page of application forms, are sacrosanct and strictly enforceable; courts cannot relax them based on sympathy or individual hardship. This approach directly affirms established Supreme Court precedent and applies to all judicial and public service recruitment processes. Summary […]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court clarified that minimum wages for skilled workers must guide the income assessment for deceased agricultural landowners, with a 10% increase for future prospects as per Supreme Court precedent. The ruling modifies standard compensation calculations, reaffirming Supreme Court law and serving as binding authority for tribunals within its jurisdiction. […]
The High Court reaffirmed that termination of workmen in violation of Sections 25-F and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, entitles aggrieved employees to reinstatement with continuity of service and partial back wages. By following prior Division Bench authority, the Court dismissed the State’s writ petition, confirming the judgment’s binding impact within the jurisdiction. […]
Quashing of FIRs and criminal proceedings under non-compoundable matrimonial offences (including Section 498-A IPC) is permissible in exercise of inherent powers, when parties reach a genuine settlement with no element of coercion. The High Court reaffirmed and applied Supreme Court and Full Bench precedent, clarifying that such orders may be passed to secure the ends […]
A contempt petition becomes infructuous and is disposed of when both parties agree that the original order has been fully complied with. This clarification upholds established precedent and confirms that such orders hold limited binding authority, primarily illustrating procedural closure within contempt jurisdiction in the High Courts. Summary Category Data Case Name COCP/3898/2025 of […]
Clarification on the Court’s Approach Under Section 528, BNSS – Existing Principles Reaffirmed Binding Authority for Subordinate Courts on Procedural Handling of Non-Appearance Cases Summary Category Data Case Name CRM-M/23844/2025 of JASWINDER SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR CNR PHHC010688922025 Date of Registration 01-05-2025 Decision Date 02-09-2025 Disposal Nature DISPOSED OF Judgment Author […]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reaffirmed that individuals engaged as Motivators/Master Motivators on a purely voluntary, incentive-based basis, with no employer-employee relationship, are not entitled to regularization of their services. The Division Bench upheld the Single Judge’s dismissal, confirming the continued validity of precedent regarding regularization in such factual circumstances. This judgment is […]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court reaffirms, in line with recent Division Bench authority, that Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 expressly excludes civil court jurisdiction in matters covered by the Act. This decision follows existing precedent, providing binding authority on jurisdictional bar in electricity sector disputes for all subordinate courts within the High […]
The High Court affirms that, in light of the Division Bench decision in “Mahesh Kumar v. Sub Divisional Officer and Another,” Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 bars civil court jurisdiction where applicable; this ruling upholds and applies existing precedent and is binding on subordinate courts within its territorial jurisdiction. Summary Category Data […]