251. Committal of case to Session Court – Application by prosecution seeking FSL report before Sessions Court -- Sessions court fell in grave error in observing that the application ought to have been filed before the learned Magistrate at the time of the committal of the trial -- To deny the application without seeking the report would result in a miscarriage of justice -- Application allowed. (Rajasthan HC) Decided on: 10.07.2024

252. Murder – Regular bail – Extrajudicial confession -- Only one eye-witness to depose against the petitioner, but he has turned hostile and has not supported the story -- In the charge-sheet, two other witnesses projected by prosecution to depose against the petitioner in respect of alleged extra judicial confession – Incident took place on 19.07.2023, however, the statements of these two witnesses got recorded by Police on 30.08.2023 -- Inordinate delay casts a serious doubt over the credibility of the investigation – In any wildest imagination, an accused shall not make confession before a person having connection with the opposite party -- High probability that the trial may take long time to conclude – Bail allowed. (Rajasthan HC) Decided on: 10.07.2024

253. Additional issues – Suit for possession by way of partition – During the proceedings, defendant moved an application for framing of an additional issue for raising the objection of partial partition – In the written statement preliminary objection No.4 has been taken stating therein that the partition is partial as plaintiff has not mentioned Khasra in which the plaintiff had raised construction of the residential house – Only because the word “partial” has been clerically mentioned as “parcel”, the trial Court has observed that no such objection was raised – Direction given to the trial Court to frame additional issue regarding the partial partition. (P&H HC) Decided on: 09.07.2024

254. DNA test of defendant – Permissibility of -- Plaintiff has to stand on her own legs by producing cogent evidence to prove her assertions -- Defendant of the case, cannot be compelled by plaintiff to undergo the DNA test. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 04.07.2024 Decided on: 09.07.2024

255. Army Welfare Education Society / Private Educational Institution – Service dispute – Maintainability of writ – -- Whether the appellant Army Welfare Education Society is a “State” within Article 12 of the Constitution of India so as to make a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution maintainable against it? -- Whether a service dispute in the private realm involving a private educational institution and its employees can be adjudicated upon in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution? Held, High Court committed an egregious error in entertaining the writ petition holding that the appellant society is a “State” within Article 12 of the Constitution -- School run by the Appellant Society imparts education -- Relationship is that of an employee and a private employer arising out of a private contract -- If there is a breach of a covenant of a private contract, the same does not touch any public law element -- The school cannot be said to be discharging any public duty in connection with the employment of the respondents. (SC) Decided on: 09.07.2024

256. Parole -- Son going abroad – A happy occasion like this, son secured an admission in a prestigious University in Australia, who is going to depart from the country for a period of two years -- If for the purpose of celebration of marriage parole can be granted, Court failed to understand why merely because the rule do not contemplate such a contingency, the benefit of this rule shall not be extended to the petitioner – 10 days parole granted. (Bombay HC) Decided on: 09.07.2024

257. Medical reimbursement -- Unapproved hospital -- Partial reimbursement at PGI rates – Son of the petitioner is handicapped, also a mentally challenged person suffering from severe abdominal pain/ emergency condition, shifted to the unapproved hospital and on the date of admission, he was operated upon and was discharged on the next day – Held, it would be inhuman to say employee should keep on searching the list of approved hospitals and should first go to an approved hospital or a government hospital by ignoring the developing pain and at the risk of life -- It would be not only perverse but it will also be violative of Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India – Writ petition allowed -- Respondents directed to pay full medical reimbursement. (P&H HC) Decided on: 08.07.2024

258. Murder – Acquittal -- Test identification parade (TIP) – TIP not done during investigation -- All the prosecution witnesses who identified the accused in the Court were not known to the appellant -- They had not seen the appellant prior to the said incident -- TIP had become necessary particularly when both the accused, who are alleged to have committed this murder were arrested within two days -- Inspite of being questioned as to what the reasons were for not holding TIP in this case, no satisfactory reply was given by him -- Identification of the accused before the court ought to have been corroborated by the previous TIP which has not been done -- Appellant could not have been convicted on the basis of a very doubtful evidence as to the appellant’s identity -- Appeal allowed. (SC) Decided on: 08.07.2024

259. Res-judicata between co-defendants -- Principle of res judicata is applicable not only between the plaintiff and the defendants but also between the co-defendants -- In applying the principle of res judicata between the co-defendants, primarily three conditions are necessary to be fulfilled, namely, (i) there must be a conflict of interest between the co-defendants; (ii) there is necessity to decide the said conflict in order to give relief to plaintiff; and (iii) there is final decision adjudicating the said conflict -- Once all these conditions are satisfied, the principle of res judicata can be applied inter se the co-defendants. (SC) Decided on: 08.07.2024

260. Excise matter – Confiscation proceedings before Collector – Power of Judicial Magistrate -- If a vehicle is seized under the provisions of the Excise Act and confiscation proceedings in respect thereof are going on before the Collector, a Judicial Magistrate has got no jurisdiction to release the aforesaid vehicle. (Allahabad HC) Decided on: 05.07.2024

261. Customary law – In order to establish a valid custom, the following ingredients need to be established:-- (a) continuity (b) certainty (c) long usage (d) reasonability -- Trite it is that the custom when pleaded needs to be strictly proved – Custom usually arise from the practices prompted by the society. (P&H HC) Reserved on : 16.04.2024 Pronounced on : 04.07.2024

262. Issues not pressed in Trial court – Power of Appellate court – Before the First Appellate Court, no arguments have been raised qua the issue Nos.2 to 4 -- However, the First Appellate Court reversed the issues while deciding the appeal -- Having chosen to not press the issue Nos.2 to 4 before the Trial Court and in the absence of any challenge having been laid to the issues before the before the First Appellate Court, it is incomprehensible as to how the First Appellate Court reversed the findings -- Appeal allowed, judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court set aside and that of the Trial Court restored. (P&H HC) Decided on: 04.07.2024

263. Surplus land – Permissible area – Non-utilisation of – Effect of – Land declared as surplus not utilized till date as per Section 14 (1) of the Haryana Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972 -- Since the holding of the plaintiff, her father and other co-sharers is still joint and the permissible area & surplus area of the plaintiff has not been separated and distinctively identified till date, so the defendant-State cannot utilize the area declared as surplus in any manner whatsoever. -- Land declared as surplus of the plaintiff had not been allotted to any eligible tenants and thus, the proceedings have not been completed till date nor the possession has been taken from the plaintiff till date. -- Direction given to the defendants/ State to first complete proceedings under 1953 Act regarding the declaration of the land as surplus and it is only thereafter that land of the plaintiff is to be declared as surplus or permissible as per 1972 Act by giving her the benefit of the fact that she has become an independent unit being a married lady and cannot be included as a unit of family of her father/ landowner -- Till all these proceedings are completed, decree of injunction passed, restraining the defendant/ respondent State from dispossessing the plaintiff from any part of the suit land held by her, as was transferred to her by her father, except in due course of law. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 27.05.2024 Decided on: 03.07.2024

264. Eviction of tenant -- Bonafide need – Death of landlord – Long pendency of proceedings – Effect of -- Petition was filed by the landlord in 1980 – No merit in argument that now the requirement of the original petitioner i.e. the landlord must have ceased to exist as the said landlord has died – There is no doubt that the landlord is dead and a period of about 44 years has elapsed from the time of filing of the petition but at the same time the children of the landlord have acquired his rights and they have also been brought on record in the form of his LR, therefore the genuine requirement of the landlord to move out in 1980 still cannot be ignored. (P&H HC) Reserved on : 28.05.2024 Date of Decision : 03.07.2024

265. Temporary injunction – Joint owner -- Property is situated in an area which is being used for running a small scale industry -- No dispute that previously the defendants were utilising the area by constructing a shed with iron sheets -- Defendants have installed their machinery to carry out work of laundry and steam press -- Even if the defendants are permitted to put new iron or cemented sheets over the pillars, there will be no permanent change in the nature of the property -- Defendants stated that if suit is decreed and suit property falls in the share of the plaintiffs, they will not claim any compensation for the construction. -- Decision of the suit is likely to take a long time and if the parties are not permitted to use the property, it will lead to wastage of resources. -- If the plaintiffs succeed they will get the property with construction. -- Parties are yet to lead evidence. Held, Courts below have erred in obstructing the defendants from completing the renovation/ re-construction of the shed by granting injunction. (P&H HC) Decided on: 03.07.2024

266. Appointment of Lambardar – Age of candidate -- Respondent No.4 (24 years old) had an edge over the petitioner (39 years old) inasmuch as that he is younger in age than the petitioner -- Age of a candidate is a relevant factor. (P&H HC) Decided on: 03.07.2024

267. Cheque bounce complaint -- Appeal against conviction – Suspension of sentence – Condition to deposit 20% of compensation amount -- Appellate Court was required to consider whether the case falls under exception or not – Impugned order set aside, Ld. Appellate Court directed to pass the order afresh, after granting opportunity to the parties with regard to, whether the petitioner is able to make out a ground that his case falls under exceptional category which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount or whether the petitioner is liable to pay less amount of compensation. (P&H HC) Decided on: 03.07.2024

268. Civil suit for possession of agricultural land -- Ejectment of tenant -- Denying title of landlord – Effect of – Jurisdiction of civil Court -- If defendants denied the title of the plaintiffs in the written statement by taking a specific plea to the effect, that will be sufficient to hold that they had denounced the title of the plaintiff -- Civil Court will have the jurisdiction to entertain the suit for possession. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 03.05.2024 Decided on: 02.07.2024

269. Arbitration award – Challenge to – Applicability of Section 5 of Limitation Act -- Section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application to challenging an arbitral award u/s 34 of the Act – It can be made within three months and the period can only be extended for a further period of thirty days -- The use of the words “but not thereafter” in the proviso to Section 34 makes it clear that extension cannot be beyond thirty days. (HP HC) Decided on: 01.07.2024

270. Agreement to sell -- Transfer by way of affidavit with possession – Nature of -- Affidavit does not amount to plaintiff having relinquished his title -- Such document was required to be mandatorily registered u/s 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 -- However, such affidavit can be treated as agreement to sell with delivery of possession – Section 53-A of the Act, protects the possession of the proposed purchaser -- The ingredients of Section 53-A of the Act stands fulfilled because the total payment has been made and continuation of the defendant’s possession over the suit property is acknowledged -- Plaintiff infact relinquished his share -- Though, technically a relinquishment or a registered sale deed should have been executed in favour of the defendant, however, Section 53-A of the Act, which is based upon the rule of estoppel comes to the appellant’s rescue – Plaintiff held not entitled to the decree of possession of the suit property. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 23.04.2024 Decided on: 01.07.2024

271. Interim regular bail -- Bhog ceremony of father -- Petitioner is involved in two NDPS cases including the present one -- Superintendent, Central Jail, directed to make all necessary arrangements for taking the petitioner, in custody, to attend the Bhog ceremony with police escort. (P&H HC) Decided on: 28.06.2024

272. NDPS case – Suspension of sentence – Appeal against conviction – Sample of contraband – Non-compliance of procedure -- Appellant sentenced to undergo 15 years’ R.I. with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default stipulation of six months’ R.I. -- Appellant has already undergone almost three years and is in custody since the date of judgment and order i.e. 30.08.2022 continuously -- Court prima facie satisfied that provisions of Section 52A (2) of the Act were not complied with -- Bail allowed. (UK HC) Reserved on: 25.06.2024 Decided on: 27.06.2024

273. NDPS Case – Regular bail – Commercial quantity – Bail in such cases may not be granted, unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail -- But, denial of bail does not give unfettered liberty to the prosecution to keep a person in custody without conducting a trial -- Applicant is in custody for more than a year -- In between, for more than six months, no progress was made in the case, the trial has yet not concluded -- Bail allowed. (UK HC) Decided on: 26.06.2024

274. NDPS Case -- Regular bail -- Recovery of 400 grams smack – Recovery Memo not signed by Gazetted officer – Provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act not complied with – Applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail – Bail application allowed. (UK HC) Decided on: 26.06.2024

275. Gang rape – POCSO case -- Regular bail -- In the FIR, the applicants are named, and according to the victim, she was taken from her house -- In her statement u/s 164 of the Code, the victim tells that she was forcibly taken from a public road, when the applicants introduced themselves to her -- In her medical examination, she did not name the applicants and told that unknown persons took her -- Prior to the medical examination of the victim, the FIR had already been lodged – If the victim did not know the name of the applicants when she was medically examine, how could she name the applicants in the FIR -- Bail allowed. (UK HC) Decided on: 26.06.2024

276. Agreement to sell by brother/ attorney after death of Owner -- Plaintiffs asserted in the plaint, specifically that brother/ attorney of owner received payments from various vendees -- While filing the written statement there is no specific denial to the assertion -- In the absence of specific denial, the pleadings are deemed to have been admitted -- Moreover, two daughters of Owner while appearing in evidence, have not disputed the payment – Attorney died, children of attorney have not stepped into the witness box -- It will not be appropriate to hold that the plaintiffs have failed to prove the payment of the entire sale consideration. -- Colony has already been carved out on the disputed property. -- If specific performance of the agreement to sell is granted chances are that the plaintiffs would complete the colony by providing all the requisite facilities to the residents/ plot buyers. -- Heirs of owner/ principal are settled in England and for the last 25 years, they have never bothered to take care of their property after their father passed away in the year 1991, hence, no equity lies in their favour. -- From the testimony of both the daughters of owner, it is evident that they always treated agreement to sell to be the complete sale of the suit property. Plaintiffs are not guilty of committing any default which may disentitle them the relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell as they being third parties unaware of the death of principal were bonafide purchasers -- Relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell granted. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 03.05.2024 Decided on: 24.06.2024

277. Conviction in cheque bounce complaint – Compromise thereafter – Quashing of conviction/ sentence – Trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of eight months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2,25,000/- to the complainant – Appellate court affirmed the same -- Matter ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence quashed and set aside -- Petitioner-accused acquitted subject to deposit of 10% of the Cheque amount with the HPSLSA. (HP HC) Decided on: 20.06.2024

278. Dying declaration – Circumstances related to death -- Victim did not give any history of the consumption of the poison and the Medical Officer could not find any symptom of the poisoning -- Therefore, he did not treat the victim for poisoning -- Statement made by the victim nowhere states that the accused had forced her to consume the poison -- She stated that one black pill was taken from the bag of accused, which was consumed -- She fell asleep thereafter -- She has not specifically stated whether the victim had herself taken the medicine or it was administered to her -- There is no proof that the pill consumed by the victim was aluminium phosphide -- Statement made by the victim cannot constitute the circumstances relating to her death and the same cannot be admitted as a dying declaration. (HP HC) Reserved on: 20.05.2024 Decided on: 19.06.2024

279. POCSO – Rape – Compromise quashing of FIR -- Since the parties have married each other, the petition is allowed -- FIR and consequential proceedings arising therefrom ordered to be quashed. (HP HC) Reserved on: 11.06.2024 Decided on: 18.06.2024

280. Lapse of time for arbitration award – Extension of time -- Section 3G of the National Highways Act is pending adjudication before the learned Arbitrator -- Period of 12 months in terms of Section 29A(1) of the Arbitration Act, 1996 stands elapsed -- Period specified u/s 29A(3) of the Act is also over, hence, the ld. Arbitrator has closed the proceedings in view of termination of his mandate – Time extended for six months for passing the award by taking recourse of Section 29A(4). (HP HC) Decided on: 18.06.2024

281. Rejection of plaint – Deficiency in court fee – Civil Suit fixed for arguments -- Learned Trial Court, taking into consideration a period of about seven years at the stage when the matter was fixed for arguments, justifiably held that the question raised can be examined during the course of appreciation of evidence on the basis of material on record, dismissed the application – Order dismissing the application, upheld. (HP HC) Decided on: 18.06.2024

282. Appeal -- Writ by Adjudicating Authority/ Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner – Maintainability of -- Held, Adjudicating Authority, though an Officer of the Government cannot prefer any appeal – To challenge orders passed under Section 7-I of the Act, 1952 by the Tribunal, the Writ petition filed by the Adjudicating Authority/ Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner is not maintainable. (HP HC) Reserved on:13.06.2024 Decided on: 18.06.2024

283. POCSO – Gang rape -- Acquittal of accused – Disciplinary action against Investigation Agency -- Investigation in the case was conducted in a casual and perfunctory manner -- Prosecution has withheld the CCTV footage, SFSL reports with respect to the medical examinations of the victim as well as the accused persons and also with respect to the articles which were seized from the vehicles allegedly involved in the commission of the crime in order to connect the accused persons with the commission of the offence -- Director General of Police directed to take appropriate disciplinary and departmental inquiry against the erring police officials for having conducted a shoddy investigation, that eventually led to the acquittal of the appellants herein. (HP HC) Reserved on:12.06.2024 Decided on: 18.06.2024

284. EPF -- Quantum of damages – Power of -- Contention that under 2nd Proviso to Section 14-B of the Act, only the Board of Trustees was empowered to reduce the quantum of damages and that the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-I, Chandigarh, had no such power – Court disagreed with said plea – Held, as an Appellate Authority, the said Tribunal acting u/s 7-I of the Act, can exercise all the powers of the Primary Authority/ Adjudicating Authority. (HP HC) Reserved on:12.06.2024 Decided on: 18.06.2024

285. Complaint against doctor – Death by rash and negligent act of doctor -- Cognizance by Magistrate – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Opinion of another doctor – Requirement of -- A private complaint may not be entertained unless the complainant has produced prima facie evidence in the form of credible opinion given by another doctor to support the charge of rashness or negligence on the part of the accused doctor -- To allow the proceeding to continue, will amount to an abuse of the process of law -- Entire criminal proceeding u/s 304-A of IPC quashed. (Jharkhand HC) Decided on: 18.06.2024

286. Circumstantial evidence -- If the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established and that those circumstances must be conclusive in nature unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused -- Moreover all the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a complete chain and there should be no gap left in the chain of evidence -- Further, the proved circumstances must be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence. (HP HC) Reserved on: 14.06.2024 Decided on: 18.06.2024

287. Conviction in cheque bounce complaint – Compromise – Acquittal -- Entire amount of compensation agreed to be paid to the respondent-complainant and respondent has no objection in compounding the offence -- No impediment in accepting the prayer for compounding of offence while exercising power u/s 147 of the Act even after recording of conviction by the courts below – Matter compounded, impugned judgments of conviction and sentence quashed and set aside. Damodar S. Prabhu’s case (2010) 5 SCC 663 = (2010) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15231 relied. (HP HC) Decided on: 15.06.2024

288. Anticipatory bail -- Attempt to murder – Summoning u/s 319 Cr.P.C. -- Petitioners were found innocent during investigation -- Petition allowed, petitioners directed to appear before the trial Court on or before the date already fixed thereat -- On their such appearance, they shall be admitted to bail by the Court concerned on usual terms and conditions -- In the meantime, in case, petitioners are sought to be arrested, they shall be admitted to interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. (P&H HC) Decided on: 14.06.2024

289. Snatching case – Compromise quashing of FIR -- Offences, for which the petitioner/accused has been charged, are not of grave in nature – FIR and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom quashed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 14.06.2024

290. POCSO -- Rape with minor – Compromise quashing of FIR -- Complainant and the victim (19 year old) on oath stated that the FIR sought to be quashed, is the result of misunderstanding same the was lodged in a hot haste, without realizing the consequences of the same -- Both victim and the petitioner were in touch with each other, but there is no allegation of sexual assault, if any -- At the time of alleged offence, the victim was 17 and ½ years old – Victim in her statement recorded u/s 161 CrPC specifically denied factum with regard to her abduction and kidnapping by petitioner, coupled with the fact that she does not want to pursue the criminal proceedings – Since the matter stands compromised and they are no more interested in pursuing the criminal proceedings against each other, no fruitful purpose would be served in case criminal proceedings are allowed to continue – FIR as well as consequent proceedings ordered to be quashed and set-aside. (HP HC) Decided on: 14.06.2024

291. NDPS Case – Jump of bail – Proclaimed offender -- Due to communication gap with his counsel, the petitioner could not appear in Court on 6.10.2023 and his bailable warrants were issued for 13.12.2023 -- On 13.12.2023 he was out of station due to some household work -- Resultantly, his bail and surety bonds were cancelled and warrants of arrest were issued and thereafter, proclamation was issued and he was declared proclaimed offender – Petitioner undertakes that he is ready and willing to surrender before the trial Court – Order declaring proclaimed offender set aside subject to surrendering of the petitioner within 7 days with cost of Rs.10,000/- (P&H HC) Decided on: 13.06.2024

292. Anticipatory bail – SC/ST Case – Cheating -- It has not been specifically stated IN FIR that the appellants had any knowledge that the complainant belonged to a Scheduled Caste and even no specific words have been attributed by the appellants – Prima facie, the ingredients of Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act are not made out and thus, the appeal is allowed and in the event of arrest, the appellants shall be released on bail subject to furnishing personal bonds and surety to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. (P&H HC) Decided on: 13.06.2024

293. Murder -- Anticipatory bail – Summoning u/s 319 Cr.P.C. -- Complainant as party -- No force in contention of State so as to implead the complainant as a party -- Petitioner not named in the FIR to be amongst the assailants and he has been named for the first time in supplementary statement of the complainant – On surrender by petitioner, the Trial court directed to release him on bail. (P&H HC) Decided on: 12.06.2024

294. NDPS Case -- Interim bail – Birth of daughter – Recovery of 530 grams of Heroin – Without adverting to the merits of the case and considering the fact that a baby girl is born to the petitioner who has been in custody for more than 5 months deserved to be released on interim regular bail to enable him to share his love and affection to the newly born baby -- Petitioner ordered to be released on interim regular bail for a period of two weeks. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.06.2024

295. Attempt to murder – Compromise compounding/ quashing after conviction – 7 years’ rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- by Trial court, appeal pending since 2015 -- Compounding application moved by the appellant as well as by the informant -- Respondent No.2/informant contended that he does not want to press the criminal proceedings further against the applicant/accused as the grievances of the informant have settled outside the Court -- Compounding application allowed -- Impugned judgment and order by which the appellant/accused was convicted set aside -- Appellant/accused acquitted of the charges of Section 307 of I.P.C. on the basis of the compromise. (UK HC) Decided on: 11.06.2024

296. NDPS Case – Commercial quantity -- Regular bail -- According to the FIR, narcotic substance in commercial quantity was recovered from the possession of the co-accused on 28.04.2023 -- It is he who revealed that he had purchased narcotic substance from the applicant – Contention that applicant at the relevant time was in jail – Bail allowed. (UK HC) Decided on: 11.06.2024

297. POCSO – Rape -- Child in conflict with law – Bail under juvenile law – Even if a CIL is transferred for trial as an adult under Section 18(3) of the Act, his bail application shall be entertained under Section 12 of the Act -- Bail to a CIL may be denied if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to any moral, physical or psychological danger, or his release would defeat the ends of justice. (UK HC) Decided on: 11.06.2024

298. NDPS Case – Regular bail – Commercial quantity – Petitioner involved on disclosure statement of co-accused -- No recovery from petitioner, admissibility of the disclosure statement suffered by the co-accused would be debatable – No other case, petitioner in custody since 06.05.2024 -- Quantity of Tramadol recovered from the co-accused is a commercial quantity but this alone would not be sufficient to deny the concession of regular bail to the petitioner – Bail allowed. (P&H HC) Decided on: 11.06.2024

299. Will – Suspicious circumstances -- Testator of the Will died issueless on 23.07.1977 and his wife had predeceased him -- Will did not see the light of the day till the filing of the suit for almost 8 years -- No explanation is forthcoming for the plaintiff-respondent to have kept quiet for so long and not getting the mutation entered in his favour on the basis of the Will – Ld. Appellate Court held that the Will in favour of the plaintiff-respondent was duly proved – Held, Judgement and decree passed by the First Appellate Court cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 18.05.2024 Decided on: 07.06.2024

300. Co-parcenery property – No son – Right to alienate -- Suit for declaration challenging the consent decree dated 22.07.1981 -- In the absence of any fraud having being played, the power to alienate the suit property despite being ancestral property could not be challenged as the property in his hand would be treated as separate property in the absence of a son. (P&H HC) Reserved on: 22.05.2024 Decided on: 07.06.2024