Digi - Legal Insights

Impugned order declaring Petitioner liable for reassessment concerning a property purchase of Rs. 83,87,386 was deemed outside jurisdiction and set aside.

State Election Commission (SEC) failed to engage in required consultation with Government regarding delimitation of Wards, leading to publication of an arbitrary notification dated 09.09.2026.

Victims testimony is credible and should be accepted, as circumstances raised do not justify dismissing her evidence hence, Trial Courts judgment is set aside and Respondent is convicted under several sections of Indian Penal Code and sentenced of ten years in rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,00,000.

Complainant has not given any material to demonstrate actual payment of ₹ 17, 50, 000/- made to accused in any manner, even purpose of such payment is not specified hence, right of accused to cross-examination complainant and his witnesses cannot be curtailed.

Under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, prosecution is not permissible without an active predicate offence, which is rendered non-existent following a discharge or quashing of FIR, thereby restricting Enforcement Directorates jurisdiction.

Applicant, a foreign national with valid passport until 15.10.2028, is a first-time offender without prior criminal records, except for current conviction hence, impugned orders and judgment is suspended and Applicant, is directed to be released on bail, subject to specific conditions.

Petitioner was not obligated to refund any excess payments, which dates back to 2005 and 2015 and requiring such a refund would cause undue hardship.

Petitioner wrongfully withdrew compensation without disclosing tenants rights hence, order requiring petitioner to refund amount did not modify original Award and found no grounds to interfere with order in its Writ jurisdiction.

Petitioner is permitted to seek second expert opinion from independent agency, such as Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) on specific queries, which can be formulated by petitioner with help of expert of his choice.

Decision to suspend Managing Director was made by a panel of Administrators, not the Board of Co-operative Societies, as it was based solely on directions from the Registrar of Co-operative Societies hence, it needs to be set aside.

Order taking cognizance and order issuing process, both are without application of mind, deserve to be set aside and initiation and continuation of impugned proceedings in absence of ingredients of offence amounts to an abuse of process of law.

Mandatory injunction issued by court was appropriately based on evidence, requiring defendants to remove their new construction while preserving overall property rights.

Complaint lacks specific details regarding petitioners role in companys operations, failing to meet requirements of Section 141 of Act for his prosecution under Section 138 hence, liable to be quashed.

Prospective promotion Order dated 28 February 2025 cannot be treated as finally determining the Petitioners' entitlement to corrective dates.

Panchayats reason for denial is invalid, as Town Planner has provided technical clearance that remains unchallenged hence, construction license should be issued by Panchayat.

Courts jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution is extraordinary, equitable and discretionary and Courts observations and reports from Executive Engineer and Deputy Superintendent of Land Record clearly indicate an apparent mistake in award.

Petitioner acted bona fide, paying taxes and interest and resolving outstanding amounts prior to filing of Complaint hence, impugned Order and pending criminal case are quashed and set aside.

There was recognition of procedural fairness in visa adjudication process, particularly concerning claims of marriage of convenience hence, impugned decision to cancel or refuse continuation of Petitioners’ visas cannot be sustained.

Absence of forensic links and reliance on hearsay renders Prosecutions case unsustainable, highlighting risks of continuing trial based on such weak evidence, which infringes upon Petitioners rights and well-being hence, impugned FIR and charge-sheet registered of alleged offenses quashed.

Continuing his confinement lacked fruitful purpose, given his rehabilitative progress and deemed SSRBs earlier rejection of his release arbitrary and legally unsustainable, thus quashing it hence, it would be appropriate to direct release of Petitioner.