The Rajasthan High Court held that a person who was not a party to a partition suit and claims property independently is not barred by Order XXIII Rule 3-A or Section 96(3) CPC from challenging the resulting compromise decree, by separate suit, appeal with leave or an application. But a woman's disputed claim to be the deceased owner's widow could not be decided on a Section 151 application (paras 18, 20-25).
The Bombay High Court dismissed petitions by three MMS students of the Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies whose admissions under the CIWGC supernumerary quota were cancelled in their final semester. It held that the cumulative circumstances showed, on a preponderance of probabilities, that they knowingly relied on materially inflated academic credentials, and that reaching the final semester or a placement cannot turn such an admission into a lawful one (paras 64, 75, 83).
A Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside a single judge's direction to regularise drivers, conductors and others recruited by a private outsourcing agency and deployed with the PEPSU Road Transport Corporation (paras 2, 62). Without a master-servant relationship proved by appointment, working for the PRTC did not make them its employees (paras 20-21, 29).
A Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur upheld the conviction of Ram Narayan @ Bhanu Dhimar for the rape and murder of a girl aged two years and five months in Shahdol district, but commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment for at least 25 years without remission (paras 94, 97, 99). It also set aside the criminal-intimidation convictions of two co-accused, his wife and Rajkumar Dhimar (para 101).
The Madras High Court quashed the case against fourteen men accused of gathering at Gudalur and raising slogans in support of the Palestinian people, holding that an assembly is unlawful only when its common object falls within the statutory categories, such as using criminal force or committing an offence (paras 7-8). The charge sheet showed no criminal force and no ingredients of wrongful restraint under Section 126(2) BNS (para 8).
The Bombay High Court dismissed an MBBS student's plea for another attempt at the First Year Anatomy examination, holding that the proviso to Regulation 21 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 allows four attempts at the first year as a whole, irrespective of the subjects taken in each attempt (paras 24-26). Her first examination, in which she could not take Anatomy, counted as an attempt, and the Rajkumarsingh ruling was distinguished (paras 26, 29).
The Bombay High Court found that an affidavit of the Municipal Commissioner of Greater Mumbai did not comply with its order of 10 August 2026, which sought details of municipal lands that could be used to house the Corporation's sanitary workers under a 2008 State policy (paras 2, 5-7). Noting that the policy had not been implemented for about 18 years, it adjourned the matters to 9 September 2026 for a fresh affidavit (paras 5, 9).
The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Section 85(1) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act against two men accused of shouting loudly at each other on a public street under the influence of alcohol, finding no allegation of any element of obscenity, depravity or moral offensiveness and no cognizable offence (paras 3-6). For the nuisance their shouting caused, it ordered them to pay Rs. 10,000 costs to a charity (para 9).
The Bombay High Court refused to disturb the custody of a girl who has lived with a neighbour and his wife since she was about two months old, holding that her welfare, not her biological parents' legal right, is decisive (paras 34, 62). It upheld the District Judge's refusal of interim custody, asked for the main custody case to be decided preferably within six months and gave the parents access twice a week (para 67).
The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused regular bail to Sandeep Gupta, accused by the Enforcement Directorate of laundering about ₹236 crore diverted from Richa Industries Limited through shell entities (paras 1-2, 8). It held that where material prima facie shows a specific, active role, especially through misuse of corporate or fiduciary structures, bail must be approached with greater circumspection (paras 6.1-7).
A Division Bench of the Madras High Court at Madurai declined to direct that Other Backward Classes be counted in the Census, holding that whether to include the OBC category or any other caste is a policy decision, and also a matter for individuals, who may choose not to state their caste (para 3). It disposed of two writ petitions without setting aside the 2020 notification limiting caste enumeration to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (para 4).
A Division Bench of the Madras High Court upheld a divorce granted to a husband on the ground of cruelty, holding that a wife's frequent stays at her maternal home without valid reason, and her pressure on her husband, an only son, to set up a separate residence away from his parents, amounted to cruelty (paras 9-10). It dismissed her appeal against the Cuddalore Family Court's decree of 08.07.2026 (para 11).