Judgement's Digest Portal

Sunita Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRR No. 1062 of 2019 04.10.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey IPC – Sec. 306, Sec.107 No nexus and proximity with the conduct and behaviour of the accused with that of  the suicide committed by the deceased – discharge from the offence punishable under  Section 306 of IPC.

Pannalal Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRA No. 292 of 2009 15.05.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor I.P.C-Sec.363, 366, 376/34 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act- Sec. 3(1) &  3(2)(v) The accused allured the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage and committed forcible sexual intercourse – conviction upheld.

Gowkaran Prasad and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Revision No. 372 of 2004 22.10.2018 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor I.P.C-Sec.294, 452,323/34 Incident had took place about 17 years ago – Sentence reduced to the period already undergone.

Manbai Vs State of Chhattisgah CRR No. 186 of 2006 04.12.2018 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor I.P.C-Sec.317, Case of the prosecution has been supported by medical evidence and statement of independent witnesses – conviction under Section 317 of IPC upheld.

Shantilal Gangwal and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRR No. 357 of 2005 19.02.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor M.P. Anusuchit Vastu Vaypari  (Anugyapan tatha Jamakhori Par Nirbandhan) Order, 1991 – Clause 8(1) Essential Commodities Act- Sec. 6 (k) The applicant failed to produce the bill of sugar purchased by him.  Subsequently produced photocopy of the bill was not proved by examining any witness thereof – Order of confiscation of Collector and affirmed by the appellate Court - not interfered with.

Vijendra Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRA No. 497 of 2002 22.10.2018 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Sec.20(b)(i), Sec.50 Cr.P.C.- Sec.313 Malkhana register does not speak about sending of samples to the FSL for chemical examination – The Constable who was entrusted with the samples for chemical examination has not been examined – conviction under Section 20 (b) (I) of the NDPS Act cannot be sustained.

Raju @ Rajnarayan Vs State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Revision No. 424 of 2009 19.11.2018 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Public Gambling Act- Sec.4-A Accused was caught red-handed accepting Satta-patti with an amount of Rs.3500/- - rightly convicted under Section 4-A of the Public Gambling Act.

B.D. Bhoi Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRR No. 514 of 2006 12.12.2018 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act-Sec.3(1) (x) I.P.C.- Sec.294 Cr.P.C.- Sec.193 Special Judge under SC/ST Act, cannot issue warrant of issue without the case being committed to it.

Prakash Chandra Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRR No. 564 of 2005 19.02.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor M.P. Anusuchit Vastu (Anugyapan tatha Jamakhori Par Nirbandhan) Order, 1991 Essential Commodities Act- Sec.3/7 and 6 (a) No procedural irregularity and violation of principles of natural justice found – Order of confiscation affirmed by the appellate Court not interfered with.

Ghanshyam and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRA No. 1093 of 2002 13.11.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor IPC- Sec.147, 148, 294, 307 and 323/34 Cr.P.C. - Sec.313 Incident took place about 17 years ago – sentence of 5 years RI is reduced to six months.

Damyanti Devta Vs Rupanand Devta CRR No. 480 of 2005 05.02.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Cr.P.C. -Sec.125 The source of income of husband should be considered while awarding maintenance to the wife.

Rajesh Vs State of Chhattisgarh CA No. 725 of 2009 14.11.2019 Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Indian Penal Code Sec.306/34, 498-A & 107 Appellant having illicit relation with the wife of his elder brother - Deceased ended his life by hanging due to mental agony – offence under Section 306 IPC not made out – conviction under Section 498-A of IPC upheld.

Ramesh @ Pagal Sen Vs State of Chhattisgarh CA No. 993 of 2002 19.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya IPC- Sec.328 Cr.P.C.-Sec.313, 437-A FSL report not produced – no specific evidence that the accused has administered any poisonous substance to the victim – conviction under Section 328 of IPC cannot be upheld.

Smt. Bela Sahu (Chaudhari) and others Vs Nalla Bothu Prasad and Others MAC No. 650 of 2014 24.04.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.166 Deceased aged about 44 years was a permanent employee of the Bank – 30% future prospects should be counted toward loss of income.

Surjit Singh Vs Dileshwar Prasad Yadav and Others MAC No. 97 of 2015 25.04.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.166 Injured got 40% permanent disability – 20% functional disability should be counted towards loss of income.

Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Vs Smt. Muki Sudi and Others MAC No. 1641 of 2017 and MAC No. 173 of 2018 29.03.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.173 & 166 Occupant of the offending vehicle – covered under the Insurance Policy – Insurance  Company to pay compensation.

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Bilaspur Vs Sagni Bai and Others MAC No. 231 of 2014 16.05.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.166 Acquittal in criminal case is not suffice to hold that the vehicle was not driven rash and negligently by the driver.

Bharat Singh Thakur and Another Vs Santuram Dhiwar and Others MAC No. 1352 of 2014 05.04.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.166 Deceased was working as service engineer earning Rs.14,500/- p.m. - His income cannot be assessed on the notional basis – compensation suitably enhanced.

Sanjay @ Tarkeshwar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh CA No. 543 of 2003 01.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Indian Penal Code Sec.363, 366, 376 & 506(B) Cr.P.C. Sec.437-A Prosecutrix was not below 18 years of age on the date of incident and was consenting party – conviction  cannot be sustained.

Tilak Chand Vs State of Chhattigarh CA No. 1090 of 2001 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya I.P.C-Sec.354, Cr.P.C.- Sec. 437-A, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prev. of Atrocities) Act, 1989- Sec.3(1) (xi) Statement of prosecutrix is corroborated by the contents of FIR – conviction under Section 354 of IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Special Act – upheld.

Bhoolmati Vs Dholuram Bharati and Another MAC No. 334 of 2013 04.04.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.166 Claimant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 50% - compensation enhanced.

Vishnudatt alias Vishnu Vs State of Chhattigarh CRA No. 1001 of 2001 18.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya CR.P.C, 1973. Sec 374(2) I.P.C. Sec 304 (PART-I) While assaulting on the head of the deceased with wooden stick, the appellant was  not having intention to cause such bodily injury resulting into his death – convicted  under Section 325 instead of Section 304 Part-I of the IPC.

Nikhil Pandey Vs Ritesh Mehto and Others MAC No. 1175 of 2014 27.03.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Injured was pillion rider – contributory negligence cannot be attributed to him.

IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. Raipur Vs Smt. Anti Bai and Others MAC No. 1186 of 2014 14.05.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.166 Deceased was sitting on the tractor as gratuitous passenger – Insurance Company  has rightly been exonerated from its liability.

National Insurance Company Ltd. Raipur Vs Pyarelal and Others MAC No. 1045 of 2014 14.03.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.173 Deceased was sitting on the mud-guard of the tractor – not proved – Insurance  Company has rightly not been exonerated from its liability.

Suresh Chand Tripathi and others Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh) CRA No. 2658 of 1997 19.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sec.7 and 13(2) Offence committed prior to the coming in force of the Act, 1988 – charges were  framed and the accused was tried and convicted under the Act of 1988 – the entire  trial stands vitiated.

Ashok Bafana and another Vs Jai Bhagwan Sharma and Others MAC No. 662 of 2013 15.05.2019 Hob’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.163A Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 Compensation towards the head of future prospect can be granted while passing award  under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Smt. Sonam @ Joyti Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No. 1062, 962, 980, 1137 and 1045 of 2018 25.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-Sec.3 (1)( xii)  I.P.C.- Sec.109, 506, 365, 343 & 366 Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012- Sec.4 Attendance of the prosecutrix in the attendance register of hostel was for the whole month – Statement that she remained outside with the accused is not believable – Prosecutrix has also not made complaint about sexual intercourse to anyone – Conviction cannot be upheld.

Devendra Prasad Thakur and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No. 154 of 2011 18.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel I.P.C. Sec 307/34 CR.P.C, 1973. Sec 313 11 days' delay in lodging FIR – prosecution witnesses stated that injury was due to  fall of injured – accused acquitted.

Saroj Ekka Vs State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No. 695 of 2014 03.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel IPC- Sec.304, 325 Cr.P.C.- Sec.313 The only injury was found over the head of the deceased and he died after six  months of the incident – conviction under Section 304 Part-I of the IPC altered to  Section 325 of the IPC.

Smt. Purnima Dewangan Vs Rajendra Kumar Dewangan TPC No. 77 of 2018 13.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta C.P.C.- Sec.24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sec. 13, Cr.P.C.- Sec.125 Non-applicant abused and threatened the applicant wife to give statement in his favour otherwise face dire consequence - Sufficient to transfer the case.

Smt. Aanchal alias Kuljeet Kaur  Ajmani Vs Amit Ajmani TPC No. 54 of 2019 13.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta C.P.C.- Sec.24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sec.12 &13, Cr.P.C.- Sec.125 Family Court is not far away from the city of the resident of the applicant – conveyance easily available – no ground made out – transfer petition is rejected.

Ashok Agrawal and Another Vs Quality Foundry Industries, Raipur CRMP No. 1423 of 2019 27.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Cr.P.C. Sec 482  Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881- Sec.138 NI Act- Sec.141 Companies Act, 1956 Sec.610, Sec.163 Summons issued under Section 204 Cr.P.C. - No specific averments against the  petitioner showing his responsibility for conduct of business of the Company –  Further proceedings of complaint case is stayed till further orders.

Amit Kumar Agrawal Vs Smt. Garima Agrawal TPC No. 47 of 2019 07.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Civil procedure- Sec.24 , Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sec. 13 Cr.P.C.- Sec.125 The petition transferred at the instance of husband – he has to bear the travelling  expenses of the non-applicant/wife.

Smt. Preeti Chandra Vs Pradeep Kumar Chandra TPC No. 44 of 2019 07.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Civil procedure- Sec.24 Conduct of applicant was not proper and was objectionable during the proceedings  in the Family Court – The Family Court is not far away from the city of the residence  of the applicant – Conveyance is easily available  - transfer petition is rejected.

Manoj Nirmalkar Vs Smt. Bhagwati Bhawani and Others CRR No. 368 of 2019 11.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Cr.P.C.- Sec.125 Woman entering into live-in-relationship, is not entitled for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.

Chandra Shekhar Kaushik and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRR No. 1293 of 2019 18.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant CR.P.C, 1973. Sec 161, I.P.C. Sec 306/34 Accused discharged for the commission of offence under Section 306/34 of IPC –  Trial Court is directed to consider the evidence as to whether prima facie case is  made out under Section 498-A of the IPC.

Steel Authority of India Limited Vs Lalit Agrawal and others WPCR No. 484 of 2019 22.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Constitution of India, Article 226/227 Teade Marks Act, 1999 – Sec.103, 108 Indian Penal Code- Sec.420, 485 Cr.P.C.- Sec.397 Prevention of Corruption Act- Sec.5(2) If the offence under the Special Act is not identical to the IPC, charge under both  the Acts has to be framed.

B. L. Agrawal Vs State Bureau of Investigation of Economic Offences WPC No. 8 of 2018 21.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Constitution of India, Article 226 Prevention of Corruption Act – Sec.13(1) E/ Rule 32 Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 Sec.3 Exoneration of the accused in the departmental proceedings by the order of the  State  Government cannot be made a ground to close the investigation against him.

Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Raipur Vs Niki Tiwari and Others MAC No. 223 of 2014 26.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.173, 166, 149(2)(a)(ii) Offending vehicle insured with the Insurance Company – Driving licence has been found fake – Tribunal directing “Pay and Recover” against the Insurance Company – Not interfered with.

Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Vs Rakesh Kumar Anant and Others MAC No. 521 of 2013 17.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.173 Driving licence was renewed after the date of incident.  Insurance Company is directed to pay compensation first and thereafter recover it from the owner and driver.

Himanchal Prasad Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPS No. 672 of 2011 08.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Green Card holder is entitled for 2 years age relaxation for the post of Siksha Karmi Grade-III.

Fekuram Tandon Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 3833 of 2019 05.11.2019 Hob’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Constitution of India, Article 226 Request for correction of date of birth in Matriculation Certificate by a Public Servant   - 20 years of delay – cannot be entertained.

Smt. Janki Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 3703 of 2019 17.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Constitution of India, Article 226 Show cause notice calling an explanation from an employee is not assessable under  writ jurisdiction.

Gorelal Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. And Another WPS No. 236 of 2011 27.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Constitution of India, Article 226 Finding arrived at in Departmental Enquiry can only be interfered with for non- compliance of principles of natural justice and competency of authority passing the  impugned order.

Mehatru Baddhai @ Mehatru Ram Baddhai Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPS No. 4365 of 2014 20.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Civil Services Conduct Rules, 1965 – Rule 221) & (2) Punishment of removal from service – the delinquent constable entered into a  marriage with another woman having first wife being alive – not interfered.

Rajnarayan and Others Vs Smt. Paras Bai Baid and Others SA No. 233 of 2011 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Chhattisgarh Accomodation Control Act ,1961-Sec.12(1)(a), (c), (e), (h) C.P.C,1908 – Sec.100 Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sec.109 By virtue of transfer of lease property, the transferee ipso facto acquires “all the rights” of the transferer/lessor.

Suresh Kumar and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others SA No. 79 of 2009 20.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal M.P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950- Sec.54, sec.54 (i) & 54(ii) M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1954- Section 47 Specific Relief Act – Sec.34 Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sec.41 Suit land was not purchased even from the ostensible owner, purchaser can not be termed to be a bonafide purchaser.

Smt. Nanbai Rathore Vs Smt. Meena Bai (Dead) Through Lrs. Ganesh Kunwar and Another SA No. 373 of 2018 14.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal C.G. Civil Services (Pension Rules) Rule – 47(1),(2),(6),(7)(a)(i), (8) & (14)(b)(i) C.G. Civil Services (Conduct Rules) 1965-Rule.22, 22(1) Second wife of deceased Employee of Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited (CSPGCL) is not entitled for family pension. 

Kawardha Rajpariwar Sarvajanik Mandir Nyaas and Another Vs Mahant Rambali Das and Another SA No. 87 of 2006 14.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal C.G. Public Trust Act, 1951-Sec.3, 6, 7 & 32 C.P.C. u/s. 100, Order-6 Rule-17, Order-41 Rule-27, Validation Act,1964-Sec.4, Order directing any property to be registered as Public Trust cannot be challenged by way of suit in any Court of law.

Abhishek Tiwari Vs Union of India and Others WP(Cr) No. 1030 of 2019 06.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal I.P.C.- Sec. 294, 323, 451 &  506 with 34 Passport Act, 1967- Sec.6(2)(f) Constitution of India -Art. 21 Renewal of Passport can be done during the pendency of Criminal Case, if the Passport holder obtains permission from the Criminal Court for travel abroad in line with notification dated 25.08.1993 issued by the Central Government. "

Mohammed Haneef Vs Ramlakhan and Others SA No. 61 of 2007 05.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal C.P.C.- Sec.96 & 100 Indian Limitation  Act, 1963- Article.59 Specific Relief Act,1963-Sec.31 Cancellation of sale deed – period of limitation would start when the facts entitling the plaintiffs to have the instrument cancelled or set aside become known to him as provided under Article 59 of the Limitation Act.

Viken Gupta @ Munna Vs Jaitun Bai and Others SA No. 349 of 2006 21.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal M.P./C.G. Accomodation Control Act, 1961 Sec.12(1)(f) Landlord must be owner of the accommodation which can be said alternative accommodation as required under Section 12 (i)(f) of the Act, 1961 to turn down his prayer for eviction on the ground of bonafide need.

Vishnuprasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Another SA No. 432 of 2004 13.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal M.P. Ceiling on Agriculture  Holdings Act,1960- Sec.11, Sec. 46 Draft statement was not objected within 30 days of its publication – Civil Suit under Section 11(5) of the Act, 1960 would not be maintainable and barred by Section 46 of the Act as well.

Kejuram (Died) Through Lrs and Another Vs Gayna Bai and Others SA No. 65 of 2006 27.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Code of Civil procedure- Order 22 Rule 3 with Sec.151 Decree passed without bringing legal heirs of plaintiff in counter claim, the same  would be ineffective decree – proper procedure is to set aside the ineffective decree  and remand the case to the trial Court.

Keshavram and Others Vs Kubercharan (Dead) Through Lrs. And Others SA No. 307 of 2005 18.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Cr.P.C.- Sec.145 Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956- Sec.8(3) Sale deed executed by natural guardian of minor son is voidable at the instance of  minor – after becoming major, the execution of sale deed has not been challenged  – sale become absolute.

Hazi Abdul Rahim Khan Vs Mohammad Karim and Others SA No. 503 of 2006 20.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Chhattisgarh Accomodation Control Act ,1961-Sec.12(1)(a),Sec.23 C.P.C – Sec.100 A licencee of the original tenant is bound by decree of eviction by virtue of Section  23 of the Act, 1961.

Smt. Sukhman Vs Subaso and Others SA No. 332 of 2007 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Code of Civil procedure- Sec.96 Limitation Act, 1908 -Article 120 Cause of action does not accrue from the date of mutation for claiming partition.

Prabhudayal Kesharwani and Another Vs  Late Dhandai Through Lrs. And Another WP227 No. 736 of 2018 14.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Code of Civil procedure- Order 21 Rule 35 Constitution of India - Article 227 Issue which has already been framed and decided by the trial Court cannot be  permitted to be raised again during the execution proceeding and it is impermissible  in law.

Afajal Ali and another Vs Amruddin Ansari (Dead) Through Lrs and others SA No. 424 of 2005 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sec.6(a) Code of Civil Procedure  Order 9 Rule 2, Rule 3, Rule 4 Mohammadan Law- Sec.54 Registration Act, 1908 Sec.-17(1)(b), 49 A deed purporting to relinquish or assign the chance of a Mohammedan heir  succeeding to an estate is not registrable under Section 17 r/w Section 49 of the  Registration  Act, 1908.

Ashok Kumar Tiwari Vs Mohit Kumar and Others WPC No. 1134 of 2019 15.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri C.G. Bhu Abhilekh Niyamawali- Chapter-3, Sec.2, Rule-34, Chapter -5- rule 4 C.G. Land Revenue Code,1959 sec.129, 121 to 124 Placement of missing traverse station (Chanda) is to be done as per procedure and order enlisted in the Chhattisgarh Bhu Abhilekh Niyamawali.

Kumar Saurav Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 2403, 4950, 5407, 5935, 2428, 2570, 2646 and 2755 of 2019 15.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Constitution of India – Art.226 Out of 100 questions as much as 41 questions/answers have wrongly been framed - re-examination ordered - carelessness will always have a price.

Shai Transporters Registered Office At-8-B, Industrial Estate, Bhilai Vs Bhilai Steel Plant, Durg ARBAP No. 10 of 2019 04.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sec.11(6) Contempt of Court Act-Sec.2 Disparaging statement made in the application to withdraw consent from the on  going  arbitral proceedings is amount to interference with the administration of justice – suo- motu contempt registered.

Vishal Deshlahre and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 3499 of 2019 30.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Chhattisgarh Muncipalities Act, 1961- Sec 29 Formation of the ward under Section 29 of the Act, 1961 is based on the population  not on the number of voters.

Laxman Singh and Others Vs Gajanand and Another SA No. 481 of 2003 11.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava C.P.C.- Sec. 145/146  Limitation  Act, 1963- Art.64, Sec.14 Period of pendency of proceedings before Revenue Courts including under Section 145/146 of Cr.P.C. cannot be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act while counting period of limitation of the suit instituted for declaration of title.

Paluram and Others Vs Bhukha (Dead) Through Lrs. Through Collector Sarguja and Others SA No. 246 of 2002 04.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava C.P.C.- Sec. 145 Registered sale-deed – non-execution asserted – Burden to prove would be on the other party to plead and prove non-execution thereof.

Industrial Development Bank of India Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 2235 of 2008 11.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Constitution of India under  Art-226 Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act , 1960- Sec.64, 78(1) , 78(2) & 94 Revisional jurisdiction under the Act can only be invoked by moving an application within a period of 30 days and not beyond that – extension of period of limitation not available – Registrar cannot invoke revisional jurisdiction suo-motu but on an application made before it.

Smt. Mantora Bai (Died) Through Legal Heir Smt. Chitrarekha Bai Vs Smt. Ganeshiya Bai and Another SA No. 130 of 2003 04.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Sec.68, Indian Succession Act, 1925- Sec.63(C) One of the witnesses stating that ascriber prepared the WILL deed and was read over to the testator and after arrive at her own satisfaction, she affixed thumb impression – WILL  properly proved.

Mayaram and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WP No. 4337 of 2005 11.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Constitution of India under Article- 227 Land Revenue Code- Sec 170-B Dispute under section 170-B of C.G.L.R.C. - Sub-Divisional Officer rejected the  same holding that sale was made upon the permission – in appeal, the Collector  hold that permission granted was not bonafide and affirmed by Board of Revenue -  held – the Collector assumed jurisdiction to review the order for grant of permission-  not permissible – the scope of inquiry under section 170-B of the code is limited to  find out whether the aboriginal tribe was defrauded of his legitimate right.

Shobhnath Vs Manmati and Others SA No. 5 of 2002 04.09.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Sec.68, Indian Succession Act, 1925- Sec.63(C) Execution of WILL cannot be doubted on suspicious circumstances, arising out of  figment of imagination against the evidence available on record.

State of Chhattisgarh Through the Colloctor of Stamps, Ambikapur Vs Sourabh Agrawal WPC No. 6662 of 2007 28.08.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Indian Stamp Act-1899, Sec.47-A(3) M.P./C.G. Preparation and Revision of Market Value Guideline Rules, 2000 Indian Stamp Act (M.P./C.G. Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules 1975 Registration  fees of the gift deed - The Collector of Stamps is not bound by the  market value prescribed in guide-line issued by the Central Valuation Board and has  to hold a proper enquiry after affording due opportunity to the applicant in accordance  with the relevant provisions of law.

Prahalad Singh Gunwan Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPS No. 5350 of 2009 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra C.G. Vidhi avam Vidhayi (Nirwachan) Karya Vibhag ke Dwitiya, Tritiya Shreni (Lipik Vargiya) Nirwachan Sewa Bharti Niyam,1976 Prescribing the minimum bench mark to ascertain the minimum necessary merit and thereafter, making promotion on the basis of seniority- cum-merit amongst the qualified candidates does not offend the principle of seniority- cum-merit "

K.P. Tiwari Vs Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company WPS No. 3158 of 2007 07.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Chhattisgarh Civil Services Leave Rules, 1977 -Section 2(1)(c) & Rule 25 Pension Rule 1976-Rule 42(1)(a) A work charged employee regularised subsequently is not entitled for leave encashment for the period rendered in the work charge establishment. "

In Reference of State of  Chhattisgarh Vs Shankar Haldhar CR.REF No. 2 of 2017 and CRA No. 1963 of 2017 14.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra C.P.C.- Sec. 366, 370 & 392 I.P.C. Sec 302(thrice), 342 & 406 Arms Act-Sec.25 & 27(1) The 3rd Judge to whom criminal appeal is referred upon difference of opinion amongst judges of the Division Bench is entitled to hear and decide the matter afresh, the third judge is not bound to follow one or the other judgement rendered by the judges of the Division Bench. "

Smt. Kanti Mishra and Other Vs Rajendra Shankar Shukla and Others SA No. 782 of 1998 14.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Chhattisgarh Accomodation Control Act ,1961-Sec.12 C.P.C,1908 – Sec.100 Chhattisgarh Abolition of Proprietary Rights(Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands)Acts,1950 Hindu Succession Act,1956 -Sec.15(2)(b) (I) In a suit for eviction, execution of will cannot be challenged as being  impermissible in law; (ii)A Hindu woman once became absolute owner of the property by virtue of Section 14 of the Act, 1956 can execute the WILL in favour of any person as per her own desire."

Noni Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 3163 of 2018 23.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Right to Information Act, 2005 Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959- Sec.248, Sec.246 (I)     Section 246 of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 – every person who lawfully holds any land as a house site in the abadi or who may lawfully acquire such land shall be a bhumiswami in respect of such land. (ii) Illegal demolition of house – compensation of Rs. 5 lacs granted to the  petitioner – State to recover the said amount from erring officer after constituting Departmental enquiry. "

Kamleshwar Prasad Trivedi (Dead) Through Lrs. And Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPS No. 2538 of 2007 17.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra A delinquent employee cannot be subjected to major penalty of removal from  service on the charge of attending duties in a drunken condition when was not sent  for medical examination to prove consumption of alcohol.

Producin Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (T & D) Cooperative Federation Limited Raipur and Others FA No. 361, 299 and 360 of 2019 23.08.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Coperative Society Act,1960- Sec.94 Preliminary issue of jurisdiction depending upon law and facts both should not be  adjudicated without allowing the parties to lead oral as well as documentary  evidence.

State of Chhattisgarh and Another Vs Ayodhya Prasad Dubey FAM No. 102 of 2015 20.08.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Land Acqusition Act 1894-Sec.4(1), Sec.23 & 24 Land acquisition – enhancement of compensation – onus to prove entitlement to  receive higher compensation is upon the claimant – sale deed showing higher rate  of land should have been filed to ascertain market value of the land as on the date  of issuance of notification under the Act, 1894.

M/s Siddhu Construction Company Vs Employees State Insurence Corporation, Raipur M.A. No. 13 of 2019 26.08.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 – Sec.82, Sec.75, Sec.45 Under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948, the appropriate authority can recover dues  both from the principal employer as also the immediate employer.

Manglu Ram and Other Vs Sukhu Ram and Others FA No. 262 of 2016 26.08.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Code of Civil procedure, Order 41 Rules 27 Deed of relinquishment of right in respect of immovable property is not admissible in evidence though it could be relied upon for collateral purposes of severance of title.

Sanjay and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh CRA No. 752 of 2012 23.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Hon’ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya Cr.P.C. Sec 313 I.P.C. Sec 302/34, 323 To attract mischief of Section 34 of IPC, only common intention to commit an  offence and participation in commission of the offence has to be established and  overt-act on part of some of the persons sharing the common intention is not  necessary.

Ku. Nivedita Soni Vs Yogesh Kumar Agrawal and Others WA No. 521 of 2019 with WPC No. 3633 of 2019 18.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act , 2006- Sec.2(1) Constitution of India- Art.226 Right to Information Act, 2005 (I)Installation of petrolium outlet – Locus – Action under challenge not shown to prejudice the rights & interest of the petitioner – Petitioner raised voice after 5 years – Writ not liable to be entertained. (ii)'Rural Retail Outlets' shall not be located on the side of the Highways (National/State).

State of Chhattisgarh and another Vs National Investigation Agency WA No. 511 of 2019 20.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu National Investigation Agency Act, 2008-Sec.6(1), 10, 21 IPC Sec.149, 148, 302, 396, 307 and 120-B (I) Power of State Government to investigate the Scheduled Offences under the  NIA Act is subject to the power of Central Government provided under Section 6  of the NIA Act. (ii)Once investigation of Scheduled Offences is entrusted with the NIA by the Central Government, the State Government becomes functus officio. 

Sri Ravi Agrawal Vs Union of India and Others WPT No. 77 of 2019 20.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017- Sec.3(2)with sec.5, 168, 167, Sec.2(91) with Sec.70 General Clauses Act, 1897-Sec.3(39) Proper Officer” under CGST Act – Notification showing as issued by the 'Board' stands corrected as issued by the 'Government' – Proper – Challenge to Circular & Notification – Repelled.

Manoj Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh WA No. 478 of 2019 11.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code,1959- Sec.104, Sec.24 & 22 Sub-Divisional Officer is competent to transfer Patwari.

Century Textiles and Industries Ltd. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPC No. 2744 of 2017 11.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Registration Act, 1908-Sec.64 to 67 Companies Act,1956 Indian Stamp Act, 1899-Sec. 6A,19A & 48B (I) Collector of Stamps, Raipur directed to deposit deficit stamp duty on the  mortgage deed executed at Mumbai – neither instrument nor its copy was  available to the Collector Stamps, Raipur – Instrument cannot be charged under  Section 19-A of the Act, 1899 and it only comes into play when a copy of  instrument produced before him. (ii)Collector of Stamps cannot direct production of original instrument. (iii)Section 48 (B) of the Act is not discriminatory and violative of articles 14 & 19.

Abhishek Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPPILNo. 111 of 2016 11.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Constitution of India under Article- 14, Art-226, Art-32 High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules,2007- Rule.81 Rule 81 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules, 2007 requiring deposit of an amount of Rs.5000/- towards security is not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

U.K. Shrivastava Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WA No. 224 and 252 of 2019 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Rule 8 under the head rule of professional ethics (I) Government aided private college - Professor superannuated on attaining the  age of 60 years though age of retirement raised to 62 years by the Government  - illegal – entitled for salary for the period denied to serve. (ii)An advocate being member of the Executive Committee or the Committee by whichever name for the time is vested with general management of the affairs of Organisation or Institution is barred from making appearance on behalf or against the same Organisation or Institution."

Vikas Raj Vs High Court of Chhattisgarh and Another WA No. 451 of 2019 05.11.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu (I)  Affected parties are not included in the array of party – challenge to process of selection – not tenable. (ii) English and Hindi skill test – Minimum cut-off marks prescribed – separate     Minimum Marks in respect of English and Hindi skill test was not prescribed – challenge thereof not entertained as process of selection was completed and appointment has been made – direction given - “Separate Minimum cut-off marks shall be stipulated in the next process of selection onwards.”

Chandrakant Giri Goswami Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others WPS No. 2873, 510 and 2887 of 2019 24.10.2019 Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Scheduled II to Rule 6 of the Chhattisgarh Lok Abhiyojan (Rajpatrit) Bharti Evam Padonnati Niyam, 2008 (I)   Fixing upper age limit of 40 years for promotion as ADPPO from A.G.-III having  Law degree with 7 years experience – irrational – lack of nexus to the object sought to be achieved  - Arbitrary and discriminatory and therefore, violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. (ii) Process of acquisition of knowledge – following stranga in Sanskrit relied upon: ^^आचार्यात् पादमादत्ते पादम शिष्यः स्वमेधया  । पादम सब्रह्राचारिभ्यात्ः पादम कालक्रमेण चः ॥^^ “A person acquires one-fourth of the knowledge from the teachers, one-fourth by  himself, one-fourth from the colleagues and remaining one-fourth, by the passage of time.”...

Praveen Kumar Lunia and Anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRR No.922 of 2019 04.10.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Indian Penal Code – Sec. 306, 107, 34 Abatement for suicide – accused sold their land to another person and did not return  advance payment to the deceased – charge under Section 306 of IPC cannot be  framed.

Dr. Pawan Kumar Tiwari Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRR No.1105 of 2018 27.09.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Indian Penal Code – Sec.147, 294, 506 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sec.372, 397, 401 Criminal Revision is not maintainable against the order of acquittal.

Smt. Nanda Khakhariya Vs. Sharad Shukla and Ors. CRR No.937 of 2017 27.09.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Prevention of Corruption Act- Sec.13(1) IPC- Sec.409, 420/120-B The proposed accused are not found to be public servant, complaint was rightly  rejected by the Special Court (P.C. Act). 

Nirakar Ambust Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRR No.1077 of 2019 04.10.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Indian Penal Code – Sec. 304 Cr.P.C.- Sec.227/228 Live naked electricity wire was fixed in the house - deceased died due to  electrocution – charge under Section 304-A of IPC should be framed instead of 304  of IPC.

Rekhalal and Anr. Vs. Dharmendra Kumar and Anr. CRR NO.532 of 2018 27.09.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Code of Criminal Procedure – Sec.145 Dispute under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. - it only be seen that the applicant was forcibly   dispossessed within two months before the date on which information was  received by the Executive Magistrate. 

Smt. Geeta Kunjam Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRR No.955 of 2019 04.10.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012- Sec.8, 10, 16, 17, 19(1) If a person responsible did not report the matter to the higher official as required  under Section 19 of the POCSO Act, he would be liable to be prosecuted under  Section 21 of the Act.

Bhagawat Vs. Bhagat Singh and Anr. CRR No.184 of 2005 20.09.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sec. 145 For grant of protection under Section 145 Cr.P.C., the applicant must show his forcible dispossession within two months next before the date on which the  information was received by the concerned Executive Magistrate.

Dinesh Kumar Vs. Champeshwar Sahu and Anr. CRR No.464 of 2015 20.09.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sec.313, 397 Negotiable Instrument Act Sec.138 Trial as well as appellate Court have arrived at concurrent factual finding that the  cheque was signed  by the accused - such factual finding cannot be interfered with  in Criminal Revision under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C.

Ayen Khan @ Rasool khan Vs. Smt. Jahirun Bee CRR No.724 of 2018 20.09.2019 Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sec.125, Divorced Muslim lady is entitled to get maintenance under Section 125 of the  Cr.P.C. 

Harnam Singh Ore and  Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) CRA No.1942 of 1998 29.08.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sec.374 M.P. Vinirdishta Bhrasta Acharan Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1982 – Sec.33, 34 Indian Penal Code- Sec.409 Prosecution failed to prove criminal breach of trust beyond reasonable doubt,  appellant acquitted.

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. VS. Birendra Kumar Sahu and Others MAC No.342 of 2013 10.04.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 Indian Penal Code- Sec.304A Deceased was minor and engaged as conductor of the vehicle – such defence has  not been raised in written statement – cannot be accepted – Insurance Company  is liable to satisfy the award.

Sahadevram Varma and Anr. Vs. Akram And Others MAC No.910 of 2015 15.05.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 Driving licence seized by the police – not produced before the Tribunal - driving  Licence was fake” neither pleaded nor proved by the Insurance Company – Tribunal  committed error by exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability. 

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Suryawati Devi and Others MAC No.1010 of 2013 02.05.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.173, 166 Passengers travelling in the goods carrying vehicle - “Pay and recover” can be  ordered against Insurance Company. 

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Poonam Kujur and Ors. MAC No.860 of 2014 02.05.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166, 2(21) Holder of LMV driving licence is competent to drive transport vehicle. 

Tekmati and anothers Vs. Makeshar Ram and others MAC NO.970 of 2014 07.03.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 Age of the deceased was 30 years at the time of accident, multiplier 17 would  be  applicable instead of 12.

Hinsaram Sahu Vs. Abdul Samad and Others MAC No.582 of 2013 16.05.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.173, 166 Accident occurred on 17-05-2011 – monthly income not proved – would be  considered as Rs.4000/- p.m. as per minimum wages applicable at the relevant  time. 

Shri Ram General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Tilakdas and Ors. MAC No.1465 of 2016 03.05.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 Driver having licence to drive the transport vehicle and on the date of accident was  driving heavy goods vehicle – Insurance Company exonerated from its liability to  pay compensation. 

Prateek Kumar Jain Vs. Shri Jagannath Kureti and others MAC No.1385 of 2014 08.04.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166, 149(2)(a)(ii) Driving Licence was fake” neither pleaded nor proved by the Insurance Company –  Tribunal committed error by exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability. 

Vivekanand Rai Vs. Bijendranath Rai and others MAC No.910 of 2018 09.04.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 – Sec.30, 4A Interest on compensation should be granted from the date of accident. 

Bilal Khan Vs. Avinash Kumar and Ors. MAC No.825 of 2017 18.03.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.173, 2/181 Indian Penal Code – Sec.279, 337, 338" Fake driving licence – Insurance Company has rightly been exonerated from its  liability to pay compensation to the claimants. 

Devsingh Rathiya Vs. Mahesh Ram and Anr. MAC No.152 of 2014 05.04.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.173 Tractor was being driven in-violation of policy conditions – Insurance Company was  not liable to indemnify the owner.

Smt. Sanjula Yadav and Ors. Vs. Vikas Kumar and Anr. MAC No.90 of 2018 19.03.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 In head-on-collision, both riders of the motorcycles would be negligent. 

Mohan Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRA No.245 of 2002 05.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act- Sec.20(B) (i), 50 The testimony of the police officer is found to be reliable and trustworthy, the Court  can definitely act upon the same. 

Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kunwar Singh Dhruw and Ors. MAC No. 303 of 2013 26.04.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 – Sec.4A Insurance Company is not liable to pay the penalty being failing to  disburse the  amount of compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

Trilochan Yadav and Anr. Vs. Gopichan Yadav and Ors. MAC No. 540 of 2016 02.05.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 Age of the deceased was 22 years at the time of accident, multiplier of 18  would be applicable.

Smt. Prem Kumari and Ors. Vs. Mathura Das and Ors. MAC No.320 of 2015 15.03.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 Award enhanced with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till the  realisation. "

Divisional Manager The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Larang Paikra and Ors. MAC No. 1671 of 2016 11.03.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 -Sec.166 While assessing income of the deceased employee, tribal allowance, HRA and  medical allowance are not deductible. "

Dinesh Nishad Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRA No.363 of 2019 27.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012- Rule 7, Sec.6 IPC – Sec.363, 366A, 376(1) Cr.P.C. Sec.357 Prosecutrix was consenting party – she was below 18 years of age, not proved –  appellant acquitted.

Mahesh Kumar Gond and Anr Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRA No.1337 of 2014 30.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Indian Penal Code – Sec. 498, 34, 304B Cr.P.C.- Sec.161, 313 Money was demanded for construction of a house - does not fall under the  definition of dowry – appellants are acquitted from the charges for the offence under  Sections 498-A and 304-B of IPC. "

Sanjay Ram Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRA No.1555 of 2015 30.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012- Sec.4 IPC – Sec.376 Statement of mother and father regarding the age of prosecutrix can be believed  even without  ossification test.

Yugal Kishore Sahu and Anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh  and others CRMP No.1841 of 2018 25.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure – Sec.482, 320(8) Indian Penal Code – Sec.498A, 323/34, 324/34 In exceptional circumstances, non compoundable cases can be quashed under  Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in view of compromise entered into between the parties.

Tamaskant Chatterjee Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRMP No.1682 of 2019 26.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure – Sec.482, 437(6), 167(2) If the alleged offences are grievous in nature, accused cannot be enlarged on bail  under Section 437(6) Oof Cr.P.C. 

Sukhram Sahu and Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRMP. No.1997 of 2019 25.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sec. 482 Indian Penal Code – Sec.498-A, 34 Charge sheet filed under Section 498-A of IPC can be quashed on the ground of  compromise between the parties. "

Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma Vs. Smt. Shakuntala Singh Vishwakarma CRMP No.1188 of 2019 26.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sec. 482 Negotial Instrument Act, 1881 – Sec.138, 139 The cheque was issued for a debt or existing liability is not required to be  specifically pleaded in the complaint.

Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma Vs. Ku. Kamna Vishwakarma CRMP No.1189 of 2019 26.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sec. 482 Negotial Instrument Act, 1881 – Sec.138, 139 The jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly.

Vinod Kumar Nagesh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh CRMP No.294 of 2019 16.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sec.482, 320(8) Indian Penal Code Sec. 419, 420, 170 Parties entered into compromise before the High Court - Criminal proceedings for  the offence under Section 420 of IPC can be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 

Padamlochan Yadav @ Bablu Vs. A.K. Dhritlahre CRMP No.820 of 2014 25.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sec. 482 Indian Penal Code, Sec.435, 451, 504, and 506-B If the complaint discloses prima-facie offence committed by the accused, the same  cannot be quashed in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of  Criminal Procedure. 

Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma Vs Smt. Shakuntala Singh Vishwakarma CRMP No.1180 of 2019 26.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sec. 482 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Sec. 138, 139 It is not necessary for the complainant to specifically plead that cheque was issued  for any debt  or existing liability to constitute offence under Section 138 of  Negotiable Instruments Act.

Jayendra Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. WP(Cr.) No. 375 of 2019 21.10.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XVIII Rule 4; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 – Sec.476 (1), 125, 195, 195 (3), 340; 340 (1), 397 Constitution Of India - Article 226 Indian Penal Code 1860 – Sec.193, 199, 200 Perjury – False statement before the Court – Unless and until Court forms an  opinion and record a finding to that effect, proceedig under Section 340 read with  195 of Cr.P.C should not be initiated. Citation : MANU/CG/0732/2019

Rajesh Kumar Agrawal Vs. Sanjay Agrawal and another Civil Revision No. 20 of 2018 23.10.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order VII Rule 11, 11(b), Sec.115,  151 Indian Succession Act, 1925 – Sec. 372 Limitation Act, 1963 – Article 58 Under Article 58 of the Limitation Act, the suit has to be inistituted within three  years from the date of accrual of first cause of action. Citation : MANU/CG/0753/2019

Gopi Lal Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh WPC No. 3723 of 2019 18.10.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Gram Panchayat ke Sarpanch Thatha Up-Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat Tatha Zila Panchayat ke President Thatha Vide-President Ke Virudh Avishwas Prastav) Niyam, 1994 – Rule 3 Constitution Of India - Article 227 No confidence motion – Passed with majority of 10:1 – Challenged on the ground   of non-compliance of 7 days notice as provided under Rule 3 of the Rules, 1994 –  Non-compliance thereof – Not fatal -, if no prejudice is shown. Citation : MANU/CG/0746/2019

S.R. Panchkhanday Vs. State of Chhattisgarh WPS No.7852 of 2019 25.09.2019 Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Mid-session transfer of a Government Employee is detrimental to the educational  career of his children.