Does Dismissal of a Writ Petition for Non-Prosecution on the Revised List Constitute a Decision on Merits or Preserve Right to Refile?

The Uttarakhand High Court reiterates that writ petitions dismissed for non-prosecution do not constitute decisions on merits. The dismissal was procedural, without substantive adjudication, thus preserving the right to refile. This order follows established precedent and has only limited procedural precedential value for future cases.   Summary Category Data Case Name WPMS/3164/2019 of DEEPAK KALRA […]

Can the High Court Direct the Debts Recovery Tribunal to Entertain Interlocutory Applications When Proceedings Are Ongoing? Upholding the Tribunal’s Primary Jurisdiction and Limiting Writ Interference—Binding Authority for Writ Petitions under Article 226 in SARFAESI/DRT Proceedings

Where procedural grievances arise during the pendency of proceedings before a statutory tribunal (here, DRT under SARFAESI Act), the High Court affirms that writ jurisdiction is declined, and parties must await the Tribunal’s orders before seeking judicial review; this reinforces established precedent and will operate as binding authority for future similar writ petitions in the […]

Does a Person Lacking Direct Interest Have Locus Standi to Seek an Inquiry into Alleged Forged Certificates Issued by Revenue Authorities?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ of mandamus where the petitioner, lacking personal or public interest, sought inquiry into an allegedly forged certificate. The Court reaffirmed that locus standi is indispensable for such petitions, following established precedent. The decision is binding on subordinate courts, clarifying procedural safeguards in challenges to […]

Does the Grant of Bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act Require Consideration of the Nature of Injuries and Duration of Custody When the Injuries Are Simple and Charge Sheet Is Filed?

The court clarified that bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act may be granted when the injuries to the complainant are simple in nature and the accused have been in custody for a substantial period, particularly where the charge sheet has already been filed and no serious antecedents are present. The ruling upholds existing […]

When and How Should Sentences for Attempted Dacoity (Sections 399/402 IPC) Be Reduced to Period Already Undergone? High Court Upholds Conviction but Modifies Sentence Based on Delay and Reformative Grounds

The Court clarified that while sustaining the conviction for attempted dacoity and related offences, sentencing can be modified to the period already undergone when the accused have faced prolonged trials causing significant hardship. This judgment adheres to settled precedent on sentencing discretion, emphasizing proportionality, reformation, and right to speedy trial, and serves as a binding […]

Recent Judgment Clarifies the Application of Bail Principles in Abetment of Suicide Cases Under Section 306 IPC—New Precedent for Bail Discretion Under BNSS, 2023

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana reaffirmed that to attract Section 306 IPC (abetment of suicide), there must be clear instigation with sufficient proximity and intensity, as enunciated by the Supreme Court. Mere allegations, without concrete evidence of instigation, may not justify continued detention. This judgment upholds established Supreme Court precedent and sets binding […]

Can Litigants Claim Refund of Court Fee When Disputes Are Settled Privately and Complied with Before the Court? Judgment Affirms and Applies Supreme Court’s Liberal Interpretation of Section 89 CPC and Section 69-A of the Court Fees Act—Binding Precedent for Refund of Court Fee in Cases of Private Settlement

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana confirms that parties who settle privately (outside the court process but before the court) are entitled to a refund of court fees, referencing the Supreme Court’s purposive interpretation in M.C. Subramaniam (2021). This ruling reaffirms that the benefit under Section 69-A of the Court Fees Act extends beyond […]

Upholds Existing Precedent; Confirming Courts’ Power to Dismiss Non-Prosecuted Appeals as Binding Authority—No New Law Created

The High Court affirms the principle that lack of appearance by the appellant, even at the preliminary hearing stage before issuance of notice of motion, is sufficient ground for dismissal of a Regular Second Appeal for non-prosecution. This judgment follows existing practice and can be cited as binding precedent for courts dealing with similarly abandoned […]

Can a Second Appeal Be Dismissed for Non-Prosecution If the Appellants Fail to Appear or Comply with Court Directions?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court reaffirms that appellate courts may dismiss second appeals for non-prosecution where appellants repeatedly fail to appear or comply with earlier orders, including deposit of costs. This judgment upholds existing procedural precedent and serves as binding authority for trial and appellate courts in the region regarding dismissal of appeals for […]

When Does a Transfer Order Become Unchallengeable on “Couple Case” Grounds Upon Change in Marital Status?

The court clarified that a transfer order previously stayed on the “couple case” ground becomes unchallengeable if the couple status ceases (here, due to spouse’s service termination), disposing of the petition as infructuous. This upholds the requirement for a subsisting couple status to sustain such challenges. Judgment provides affirmance (not new law), binding on Punjab […]

When Can Anticipatory Bail Be Granted Under the New BNSS, 2023? Clarification and Binding Authority from the Punjab & Haryana High Court

The High Court clarifies that anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023 is to be granted where the accused has joined and cooperated in investigation and custodial interrogation is not required, thus maintaining the fundamental approach followed under Section 438 CrPC. This judgment upholds existing precedent, interprets new procedural law (BNSS), and is binding on […]

Is Civil Court Jurisdiction Barred by Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003? – Reaffirmation of Existing Precedent by Punjab & Haryana High Court

Court reaffirmed that the civil courts have no jurisdiction in matters where Section 145 bars such jurisdiction, following its own Division Bench precedent. This judgment upholds prior interpretation, offering binding authority for electricity sector disputes on jurisdictional exclusions.   Summary Category Data Case Name RSA/2767/2022 of UTTARI HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM PUNDRI AND ANOTHER Vs […]