Advocate | Legal Blogger | Judicial Insights & Updates

  Judicial Discretion in Granting Mandatory Injunctions: A Supreme Court Analysis of Section 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 By: Advocate Abhishek Jat The application and interpretation of Section 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, governing the grant of mandatory injunctions, has been a recurring subject of judicial scrutiny. In a recent and pivotal judgment, the Supreme Court of India, in Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority & Ors. v. Nirmala Devi & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 7707 of 2025 arising out of SLP (C) No. 15148 of 2017), provided a comprehensive elucidation of the judicial parameters and statutory prerequisites for compelling affirmative acts by a party. Authored by Justice J.B. Pardiwala, this ruling meticulously delineates the boundaries of judicial discretion and the conditions precedent for such an extraordinary equitable remedy. Statutory Foundation: Section 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 39 of the Specific Relief Act empowers...

🚨 RJS 2025 Admit Cards ARE OUT! Your Path to Becoming a Civil Judge Starts Now! 🧑‍⚖️ Posted on: July 10, 2025 By: Advocate Abhishek Jat | The Legal Bandhu The moment you've been waiting for is here! The Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, has officially released the Admit Cards for the Rajasthan Judicial Services (RJS) 2025 Preliminary Examination. This is a monumental step for every aspiring Civil Judge who applied for this prestigious recruitment drive. If you're among the provisionally eligible candidates, it's time to gear up! Here’s your complete guide to downloading your admit card and what you need to know for the upcoming exam. Key Details at a Glance 🗓️ Official Notification No.: RHC/Exam Cell/RJS/CJC/2025/2591 Date of Issue: July 09, 2025 Exam Date: Sunday, July 27, 2025 Exam Time: 10:00 AM to 12:00 Noon How to Download Your RJS 2025 Admit Card 💻 Your admit card is your golden ticket to the examination hall, and it's available exclusively online. No physica...

Pre-Arrest Medical Examination and the 24-Hour Rule: Judicial Clarification by the Bombay High Court By Abhishek Jat, Advocate The Bombay High Court, in the case of Hanumant Jagganath Nazirkar v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No. 54 of 2025), delivered a landmark judgment clarifying the legal position regarding the computation of the 24-hour period within which an arrested person must be produced before a magistrate. The Division Bench, comprising Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain held that the time spent in pre-arrest medical examination cannot be excluded from this statutory timeline, and any detention exceeding 24 hours without judicial authorization is illegal. Factual Background The petitioner, Hanumant Jagganath Nazirkar, a 58-year-old retired individual, was implicated in a case involving allegations of cheating, forgery, and dishonest misappropriation of a substantial sum. After the rejection of his anticipatory bail by both the High Court and subsequently the ...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Reclassifies Murder Conviction as Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder By Abhishek Jat, Advocate Citation: X v State of Madhya Pradesh , Madhya Pradesh High Court, Judgment dated 1 July 2025 Coram: Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Prem Narayan Singh Case Background The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently adjudicated upon an appeal concerning the conviction of an individual for the death of his wife following a domestic altercation. The appellant, convicted by the trial court under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, challenged the verdict, asserting the absence of intent to kill. Factual Matrix The incident originated from a domestic dispute over a monetary demand. The appellant, in a heated exchange with his wife, physically assaulted her and subsequently inflicted a fatal head injury using a brick. Witness testimonies indicated that the altercation was spontaneous, escalating rapidly wit...

Cheque Bounce and Section 138 NI Act: Detailed Legal Analysis with Recent Case Law By Abhishek Jat, Advocate, Gwalior High Court What is Cheque Bounce? A cheque bounce, or dishonour of cheque, happens when a cheque presented to the bank is returned unpaid. The most common reason is insufficient funds in the account, but other grounds include mismatched signatures, overwriting, stale or post-dated cheques, or stop-payment instructions. Cheque bounce disrupts financial reliability and can have serious legal consequences for the drawer, especially under Indian law. Legal Framework: Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, criminalizes the act of issuing a cheque that is dishonoured for insufficient funds or if it exceeds the arrangement with the bank. The law aims to ensure the credibility of cheque transactions and penalize those who issue cheques without maintaining adequate funds. The penalty can include imprisonment up to two ...

Supreme Court Invalidates Preventive Detention of Law Student Under NSA By Abhishek Jat, Advocate The appellant, a law student, was subjected to preventive detention under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (NSA) by the District Magistrate, Betul, Madhya Pradesh, through an order dated 11 July 2024. This order was subsequently extended four times, with the final extension valid until 12 July 2025. The detention was premised on the appellant’s alleged involvement in nine criminal matters, including the current case. Out of the previous eight cases, the appellant had been acquitted in five, convicted with only a fine in one, and was on bail in two pending matters. In the present case (Crime No. 236 of 2024), bail was granted on 28 January 2025, but the appellant remained incarcerated solely due to the preventive detention order. Legal Issues and Arguments Scope of Section 3(2) of NSA: Section 3(2) empowers the government to detain individuals to prevent acts prejudicial to t...

  Judicial Recognition of Transwomen in Matrimonial Offences: A Landmark Interpretation of Section 498-A IPC By Advocate Abhishek Jat In a groundbreaking judgment that furthers the jurisprudential recognition of transgender rights in India, the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in Viswanathan Krishna Murthy & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Petition Nos. 6783, 7064, and 6830 of 2022), delivered on 16 June 2025 by Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, addressed the novel issue of whether a transwoman, who is in a heterosexual marriage, can seek protection under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The Court not only affirmed the transwoman’s right to file a complaint under matrimonial offence provisions but also quashed the proceedings against the accused due to absence of specific allegations, thereby harmonizing gender justice with safeguards against misuse of criminal law. Backgro...