When is an Appeal Dismissed as Infructuous and What is Its Precedential Value? Upholding Existing Practice, Not Deciding on Substantive Legal Questions. Binding for Procedure, Not for Substantive Law

An appellate court reiterated that appeals rendered infructuous by changed circumstances or parties’ admissions should be dismissed accordingly. This order affirms settled procedure on handling infructuous appeals, without altering substantive law or existing precedents. The judgment is of practical, procedural value for pending and future appellate matters but does not create new binding legal principles […]

When Can Adverse APARs Be Set Aside Due to Personal Bias and Procedural Irregularities? – Reaffirmation of Strict Compliance with Standing Orders and Natural Justice Principles in Judicial Review of Confidential Reports

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh confirms that Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs) vitiated by personal bias, violation of minimum supervision requirements, lack of reasoned orders, and delayed or mechanical disposal of representations are liable to be quashed. The judgment strictly enforces departmental guidelines and Supreme Court precedent, providing binding authority for […]

When Should High Courts Transfer Criminal Investigations to the CBI Due to Prolonged and Ineffective State Investigations?

The High Court has affirmed that extraordinary delays and lack of progress by State agencies, especially in sensitive cases like long-term missing persons, can justify transfer of investigation to the CBI under Article 226 to protect fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21. The decision follows Supreme Court precedent, reiterates that such transfers remain exceptional, […]

What Is the Effect of Dismissal for Non-Prosecution on Criminal Appeals? Does Such Dismissal Bar Fresh Proceedings or Amount to a Merits Decision? (Precedent Upheld, Binding Authority)

The Punjab & Haryana High Court reaffirmed that dismissal of a criminal appeal for non-prosecution, where the applicant repeatedly seeks adjournments and fails to argue the matter for years, does not result in a merits-based adjudication. Such orders are precedent in highlighting consequences of prolonged inactivity by parties in appellate criminal proceedings. This judgment upholds […]

Does Withdrawal of an Administrative Order Render a Writ Petition Infructuous and Subject to Disposal? (No New Substantive Precedent Created; Follows Established Practice)

When the authority withdraws the impugned order during writ proceedings, the High Court may dispose of the petition as nothing survives for adjudication. The present judgment reaffirms established precedent and has routine procedural value for future cases involving similar facts in administrative law within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Sikkim.   Summary Category […]

Can GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns Be Set Aside by High Courts Allowing a Last Opportunity for Compliance Under Article 226?

Calcutta High Court reaffirms that even after cancellation of registration for non-filing of GST returns, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 can be invoked to grant a final opportunity to file returns and regularise defaults, provided the petitioner complies with strict conditions. This aligns with prior Division Bench precedent, and functions as binding authority for subordinate […]

When Does a Writ Petition Become Infructuous Due to Administrative Relief: Reaffirming Precedent in Service Law Seniority Disputes

A writ petition seeking correction of a seniority list becomes infructuous if, during its pendency, the administrative action already accords the sought relief—here, inclusion in the seniority list. The judgment upholds existing law and reiterates the approach to such circumstances, serving as precedent for state service seniority matters where relief is granted by the government […]

Does Non-Compliance With Mandatory Provisions of SARFAESI Act and Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 Invalidate Auction Sale of Secured Assets? — High Court Reaffirms Settled Legal Standards

The High Court clarifies and reaffirms that non-compliance with mandatory requirements of Section 13(3A) & 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and Rules 8 & 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, including failure to consider borrower’s representations and improper service of possession notice, render the sale proceedings illegal and liable to be set aside. […]

When Does the Plea of Insanity (Section 84 IPC) Shield an Accused from Murder Conviction? Clarification on the Burden of Proof and Judicial Duties—Gauhati High Court Reaffirms Legal Standards Post Supreme Court Precedents

The Gauhati High Court clarifies that the burden to prove unsoundness of mind at the time of the offence (for protection under Section 84 IPC) firmly rests on the accused and must be established by preponderance of probability. The Court affirms previous Supreme Court and High Court rulings, explaining when judicial intervention by way of […]

When Does Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC Apply to Convert Murder (Section 302) to Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder (Section 304 Part I)?

The Gauhati High Court, in a case involving homicide where conviction rested primarily on a child witness, converted the conviction from murder (Section 302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part I IPC) by invoking Exception 1 to Section 300, after finding sufficient evidence of grave and sudden provocation. The judgment […]

Can In-Service Medical Candidates Be Exempted From the ‘Local Candidate’ Requirement Under the Andhra Pradesh Presidential Order When Seeking Reservation in State Quota PG Medical Seats? – High Court Reaffirms Precedent and Non-Segregability

The Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that the ‘local candidate’ reservation under the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission) Order, 1974, applies equally to both in-service and non-service candidates in PG Medical admissions; the State cannot create an exception for in-service medical candidates based on recruitment definitions. The Court upholds the existing legal position […]

Is a Separate 30-Day Notice Under Rule 8(6) and Rule 9(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2022 Mandatory Before Auction of Secured Assets? Clarification/Restatement of Supreme Court Precedent on Notice Periods in SARFAESI Auctions—Binding Authority for DRT and Subordinate Courts

The Andhra Pradesh High Court reaffirms, following Supreme Court law, that a 30-day gap between Rule 8(6) and Rule 9(1) notices is not mandatory, and non-compliance does not vitiate SARFAESI auction proceedings. This decision sets aside contrary DRT stays and directs adherence to Supreme Court interpretation, serving as binding precedent for subordinate courts and tribunals […]