Safir v. Sajid

Stamp Act, 1959 (Kerala) – Section 2 (a) – “bond” – For an instrument to partake the character of a bond an obligation must have been created in the instrument itself – A specific acknowledgment in the agreement of an amount that is outstanding to be paid as on the date of execution of the document, the same can only be construed as an agreement and it does not partake the character of a bond as defined in Section 2(a) of the Act.

P.M. Salim v. Vasudevan Namboothiri

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Amendment of Pleadings – Whether a categorical and wilful admission made in the pleadings can be strike down by filing an amendment application ?

Unnikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 (Pocso Act) – The consequence of not proving the age of the victim is that the accused cannot be found guilty of any offence under the Act.

Gimpex Pvt. Ltd. v. Manoj Goel

Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 – Section 139 raises the presumption “unless the contrary is proved”. Once the complainant discharges the burden of proving that the instrument was executed by the accused; the presumption under Section 139 shifts the burden on the accused. The expression “unless the contrary is proved” would demonstrate that it is only for the accused at the trial to adduce evidence of such facts or circumstances on the basis of which the burden would stand discharged. These are matters of evidence and trial. JT 2021 (10) SC 103 : 2021 (12) SCALE 269

Milkhi Ram v. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 25B and 25F – Jurisdiction of Civil Court – Whether the suit before the civil court at the instance of the terminated employee, was maintainable ? Held, the civil court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a suit structured on the provisions of the ID Act. The decree favouring the plaintiff is a legal nullity. AIR 2021 SC 5025 : JT 2021 (10) SC 88 : 2021 (12) SCALE 180

Prashant Singh Rajput v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Anticipatory Bail – Cancellation of – Difference in the approach that the Court must adopt while considering a challenge to an order which has granted bail and an application for cancelling the bail granted – Explained. AIR 2021 SC 5004 : JT 2021 (10) SC 150 : 2021 (12) SCALE 214

Manoj Mishra @ Chhotkau v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Ss. 3 & 4 – Penal Code, 1860 – Ss. 363, 366, 376D & 506 363 – Gang Rape – Prosecutrix made Contradicting Statements – Effect of. AIR 2021 SC 5032 : JT 2021 (10) SC 388 : 2021 (12) SCALE 331