Reaffirmation of Supreme Court precedents: acquittal where demand, acceptance and recovery are not proved; binding authority for subordinate courts in
Affirming Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804), High Court of Chhattisgarh Reserves Liberty to File Appeal under Proviso to Section 372
High Court affirms Supreme Court’s Celestium Financial ruling that Section 138 NI Act complainants qualify as “victims” under BNSS and
High Court Affirms Supreme Court’s “Sterling Witness” Standard, Quashes Conviction Due to Contradictions and Lack of Corroboration Summary Category
Administrative clarification required to correct numbering under Article 229 and remove unsustainable seniority clause; persuasive authority for service rule amendments
The Gauhati High Court in Review.Pet./2/2024 held that civil courts are not barred by Sections 96 and 97 of the
Upholding Precedent on Section 28 SR Act and Binding on Subordinate Courts in Civil Property Disputes Summary Category Data
Summary Category Data Case Name ACQA No. 160 of 2020 of PRAGATI MAHILA SAHAKARI BANK MARYADIT Vs A. CHANNEYA
Court Reaffirms Existing Precedents on Hostile Witnesses, FIR Delays and Forensic Evidence, Providing Binding Authority for Criminal Trials in Rape
High Court of Chhattisgarh sets aside conviction, holding that contradictory age evidence and admission of consensual elopement negate elements of
High Court Affirms Supreme Court’s Celestium Financial Ruling, Clarifies Timeline and Limitation for Appeals Against Acquittals in Cheque-Bounce Cases
High Court Affirms Supreme Court’s Celestium Ruling, Grants 45-Day Window to File Appeal Against Acquittal under Section 372 CrPC