Latest Chhattisgarh Hc updates from LegalRepublic.in.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur held that no constitutional infirmity arises from the Chhattisgarh Jail Non-Gazetted Services Rules, 2022 merely because they do not provide a promotional channel for Drivers.
The Chhattisgarh High Court set aside a life-sentence conviction, holding that a telephonic conversation relayed by the deceased's wife cannot substitute direct evidence of the accused being last seen with the victim.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that a domestic Tullu Pump electrocution falls outside the 2018 compensation circular, but directed power officials to communicate orders to applicants.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh quashed revenue orders directing petitioners to produce Rin Pustika, holding the Tehsildar had no authority to compel document production at a private respondent's instance.
The Chhattisgarh High Court enhanced compensation from ₹14.08 lakh to ₹51.24 lakh after finding the Claims Tribunal had no basis to discard the deceased's duly filed income tax returns.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that invoking Article 311(2)(b) to bypass a departmental enquiry requires written reasons, not bare satisfaction, before dismissal.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh affirmed a Family Court direction to return stridhan or pay Rs. 2 lakh, holding that in-laws typically retain marriage receipts and a husband must specifically deny stridhan allegations.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that receipt of premium does not automatically trigger insurance cover; the contract begins only from the date the policy is issued.
Chhattisgarh High Court partly allowed a writ petition challenging HPCL's withdrawal of a petrol pump dealership letter of intent, directing Rs. 1 lakh compensation for hardship caused by delayed site verification.
The High Court affirmed cancellation of IDSMT scheme plot allotments made in breach of lease terms, but quashed criminal proceedings against municipal officials for a collective council decision.
The Bilaspur bench found authorities misread Section 165(7) and wrongly imposed a 5-acre minimum on a Scheduled Tribe member's voluntary sale application under Section 165(6).
The High Court found that issuing a document-verification notice on the very date fixed for verification violated the State's own circular requiring 20 days' advance notice by Registered Post.
The Bilaspur court found no coercive direction on the face of the impugned order and no material showing actual injury to any student's fundamental rights.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh set aside a 2008 Sessions Court conviction under Section 376(1) IPC, finding the prosecutrix's testimony unsupported by her parents, medical evidence, or forensic results.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that official inspection reports carry a presumption of correctness and absence of independent witnesses is not fatal to prosecution under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh set aside a trial court's acquittal in an electricity theft case, ruling that official panchnamas carry a presumption of correctness that the accused failed to rebut.
Dismissing a Navodaya Vidyalaya teacher's plea, the Chhattisgarh High Court held that voluntarily declining promotion four times bars a claim to time-bound financial upgradation.
Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi holds that a teacher's son cannot be denied compassionate appointment for missing a TET deadline the pandemic itself postponed.
Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha dismisses the State's revision, holding that confiscation of a Scorpio vehicle under Section 47-A required proof that seized bottles actually contained liquor exceeding five bulk litres.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that the State Backward Class Commission acted beyond its jurisdiction when it directed recovery of Rs. 1,26,500 from a dealer in a commercial dispute.
Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha granted bail to two Punjab residents arrested for illicit liquor transport and ordered the DGP to reconsider action against an ASI who falsely attributed 19 criminal cases to one applicant.
The Division Bench found that tariff and true-up proceedings fastening a Rs 153.55 crore refund liability on Jindal Steel were conducted without affording the company any opportunity of hearing.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that rejecting a compassionate appointment claim solely because the deceased employee's mother held a low-paid post, without examining actual family hardship, was arbitrary.
A Division Bench led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha held that dismissal founded on a valid conviction is not automatically undone by subsequent acquittal, rejecting a claim for full back wages under Fundamental Rule 54.
