Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 6 R. 17 — Amendment of plaint — Continuous cause of action: Matters to be considered for allowing of amendment of plaint for incorporating amendment and prayer by way of amendment in original plaint, explained, [State of W.B. v. Pam Developments (P) Ltd., (2025) 3 SCC 356]
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 41 — Arrest of accused: Fir not reliable, as FIR lodged against unknown persons and claim made by the witness that he spotted the accused persons at a public place prior to their arrest not believable in absence of any corroboratory evidence, [Wahid v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2025) 3 SCC 341]
Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (60 of 1958) — S. 48(1) proviso — Refund of stamp duty: Law clarified on limitation for claiming of refund of stamp duty under Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, [Harshit Harish Jain v. State of Maharashtra, (2025) 3 SCC 365]
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 — Ss. 8 and 18 r/w Ss. 17, 2(h), 2(m) and 2(g): Matter relating to non-requirement of registration/filing of memorandum stipulated under S. 8, as a precondition for referring dispute to arbitration under S. 18, consideration of the same, as discretionary/non-mandatory, referred to larger Bench, [NBCC (India) Ltd. v. State of W.B., (2025) 3 SCC 440]
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 302 — Motive — Issue of non-payment of wages: The issue of non-payment of wages is hardly material and is so trivial a matter so as to compel anyone to take an extreme step of committing a crime of such a grave nature, [Hansraj v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2025) 3 SCC 350]
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 304-B: Suicidal death, by itself, would not absolve the accused under S. 304-B, because S. 304-B presupposes several factors for its applicability, [State of Uttarakhand v. Sanjay Ram Tamta, (2025) 3 SCC 433]
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 306 r/w S. 107 — Abetment of suicide — Use of words “go and die” — Implication thereof — Quashing of proceedings: Proceedings quashed in absence of requisite ingredients and when accused merely told deceased, “because of you our boy died, why you do not die”, [Ayyub v. State of U.P., (2025) 3 SCC 334]
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 504 — Intentional insult — Determining factors: Mere abuse, discourtesy, rudeness or insolence, held, may not amount to an intentional insult within the meaning of S. 504 if it does not have the necessary element of being likely to incite the person insulted to commit a breach of the peace or an offence. Each case of abusive language, held, shall have to be decided in the light of the facts and circumstances of that case, [B.V. Ram Kumar v. State of Telangana, (2025) 3 SCC 475]
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 201 — Recovery at instance of accused — Effect of: Glaring inconsistencies with respect to recoveries made at instance of accused, murder accused acquitted by giving benefit of doubt, [Raja Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2025) 3 SCC 314]
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 34 — Related eyewitness: Law clarified on credibility and reliability of evidence of related eyewitness, [Goverdhan v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2025) 3 SCC 378]
Service Law — Pay — Parity in pay/Pay scale — Posts of part-time Swachchkar: Denial of benefit of Clause 6 of Circular dt. 10-5-1984 conferring benefit of revised pay scale to employees completing three years of service after initial recruitment by Selection Committee and appointed by Collector as temporary employees on fixed wages to appellants who were appointed as temporary employees against vacant and sanctioned posts, unjust, unfair and arbitrary, [Rakesh Kumar Charmakar v. State of M.P., (2025) 3 SCC 326]
