Gauhati High Court
Oral Evidence Can't Prove Citizenship Without Documentary Linkage: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Challenge To Foreigners' Tribunal Opinion
The Gauhati High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Foreigners' Tribunal opinion, holding that the petitioner had “miserably failed” to prove that he is a citizen of India and born out of bona fide citizens, and finding no perversity or error on the face of the record in the Tribunal's decision declaring him a foreigner A division bench comprising Justice Kalyan Rai Surana...
Marriage Can't Be Dissolved By Way Of Affidavit Made Before Notary: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has held that a marriage cannot be dissolved by way of an affidavit made before a Notary, and that in the absence of any material showing invocation of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, a claim of divorce based merely on a notarised affidavit cannot be accepted. Setting aside the Family Court's maintenance order, the Court found that the Respondent's...
Bar On Bail Under Section 37 NDPS Act Lifted Where Co-Accused Acquitted On Same Evidence: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court granted bail to an NDPS accused after holding that, once the co-accused in the same case (tried separately) had been acquitted and such findings had not been disturbed in appeal, the Court was bound to proceed on the basis that those findings were valid for the purpose of bail, thereby satisfying the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.Justice Sanjeev...
Writ Court Under Article 226 Examines Decision-Making Process, Not Merits: Gauhati High Court Refuses To Interfere With PDS Licence Cancellation
The Gauhati High Court declined to interfere with the cancellation of a fair price shop (PDS) licence, holding that its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is confined to examining the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision, and finding that no case for interference was made out.Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi, presiding over the case, said, “The certiorari jurisdiction to...
No Requirement To Issue Pre-Cognizance Notice U/S 223 BNSS To Accused In Cheque Bounce Complaint: Gauhati High Court
Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Sanjabij Tari vs. Kishore S. Borcar 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 952, the Gauhati High Court has held that a Magistrate is not required to issue notice to the accused at the pre-cognizance stage in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act. The Court clarified that issuing such notice by invoking the first proviso to Section 223(1) of...
Tender | Common Site Photograph By Bidders Not Proof Of Cartelisation; Integrity Commitment Must Be Breached: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court while refusing to interfere with the award of a Public Works Department contract for construction of a Circuit House at Udalguri, held that an allegation of cartelisation raised by an unsuccessful bidder based solely on a common photograph enclosed with site-visit certificates of two competing bidders cannot be accepted in the absence of any concrete material showing...
PC Act Proceedings Can't Continue On Hearsay Evidence With No Nexus To Official Duty: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has held that proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 cannot be sustained against an accused Home Guard where the materials on record are only hearsay and do not disclose any nexus with the discharge of official duties. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, presiding over the case, held, “As regards the petitioner No.2, I find sufficient force in the...
Gauhati High Court Weekly Round-Up : January 12 - January 18, 2026
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Gau) 4-9 ]X v/s Y 2026 LiveLaw (Gau) 4Seema Chakraborty & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Gau) 5The State of Assam & Others vs. Ikbal Hussain Laskar 2026 LiveLaw (Gau) 6HIMASHMI SAIKIA & Ors. v/s THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Gau) 7The State of Assam & Ors. v. Dipak Gogoi 2026 LiveLaw (Gau) 8Mahindra and...
Lok Adalat Settlement Must Be With Parties' Free Consent, Counsel Cannot Compromise Case Without Written Authority: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court, while considering the validity of a settlement recorded in a National Lok Adalat, held that settlement under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 must be arrived at by the parties themselves with free consent, and that in the absence of written authority authorising counsel to sign a compromise, such settlement cannot be treated as valid.Justice Sanjay Kumar...
Compassionate Appointment Can't Be Denied Because Deceased Had Less Than 3 Yrs Of Service Left: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has held that a policy condition restricting compassionate appointment on the basis of the remaining length of service of a deceased government employee is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Arun Dev Choudhury observed, “We find that the classification made on the basis of...
Reservation Norms Can't Be Introduced Midway To Scrap Completed Selection Process: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has quashed the cancellation of recruitment process for the post of Rehabilitation Workers under the National Health Mission (NHM), Assam, which was halted after the State Government flagged non-compliance with reservation norms. The recruitment, which had progressed up to the publication of an approved select list, was cancelled on the grounds that reservations had...
Contract Employee Subjected To Disciplinary Rules Can't Be Terminated Without Departmental Enquiry: Gauhati HC
A Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court comprising Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Arun Dev Choudhury held that if a contractual employee's appointment expressly incorporates statutory disciplinary rules, then the termination on grounds of misconduct is punitive and invalid without following the prescribed enquiry procedure under such rules. Background Facts The...