The Calcutta High Court held that a mere smell of alcohol noted in a post-mortem report cannot be a ground to deny compensation to the legal heirs of a deceased accident victim.

The Court ruled that intoxication under the Motor Vehicles Act must be proved through scientific evidence, like a blood alcohol test.

In the absence of such proof, heirs cannot be deprived of compensation.

The Court upheld the award of ₹11.41 lakh granted to the deceased motorcyclist’s family.

[The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sabita Das & Ors.]

The Calcutta High Court upheld the life imprisonment of a man convicted of repeatedly sexually assaulting a minor aged between 12 and 14 years.

The Court held that a child cannot consent to sexual relations, even in a claimed love relationship, and that the victim’s affection cannot dilute statutory protection under the POCSO Act.

It relied on the victim’s consistent testimony, medical evidence, and a DNA report indicating the accused could not be excluded as the child’s biological father.

The Court also observed that the delay in lodging the FIR was justified as the minor stayed silent due to emotional dependence.

[Santosh Srivastava @ Manu Srivastava v. State of West Bengal & Anr.]

The Calcutta High Court held that a writ petition cannot be used to stop personal insolvency proceedings under Section 95 of the IBC, since the Code provides a complete statutory mechanism with appellate remedies.

The Court said that issues relating to default, recall notices and RBI norms must be decided by the NCLT, where both the Section 7 case against the borrower and Section 95 proceedings against the guarantors are pending.

It noted that Piramal Finance and the security trustee are private entities not amenable to writ jurisdiction and that the petitioners have an alternative remedy before NCLT.

[Sanjay Jhunjhunwala v. Piramal Finance]

The Calcutta High Court set aside an ex parte arbitral award in a ₹7.27-crore loan dispute after finding that SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. had unilaterally appointed the sole arbitrator.

The Court held that such an appointment violates natural justice and breaches Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, making the award a nullity.

It rejected objections on limitation, holding that delivery of the signed award was not proved, and clarified that Calcutta retained supervisory jurisdiction as the seat of arbitration.

The Court held such unilateral appointments are legally invalid and cannot be cured by participation.

[Y S Transport Company & Anr. v. SERI Equipment Finance Ltd.] 

The Central Government informed the Supreme Court that it will bring back Sunali Khatun, a pregnant woman deported to Bangladesh, along with her 8-year-old son Sabir, purely on humanitarian grounds.

The assurance came during the Union’s appeal against a Calcutta High Court order on repatriation.

The Court noted that Sunali will be returned to Delhi and may be shifted to Birbhum, where her father resides. It also directed West Bengal to provide medical care for her pregnancy and ensure the welfare of the child.

The matter will be heard next on December 12.

[Union of India v. Bhodu Sekh & Ors.; Union of India v. Amir Khan & Ors.]

The Calcutta High Court has held the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and State authorities responsible for the deaths of four labourers and injuries to others during a 2021 sewer-desilting operation in South Kolkata. 

The Bench criticised systemic failures and negligence, noting breaches of the Manual Scavengers Act, 2013, lack of supervision, and absence of safety mechanisms. 

Calling manual scavenging a “blot on the nation’s conscience,” the Court directed payment of ₹30 lakh compensation to each deceased worker’s family (adjusted from earlier amounts) and ₹5 lakh to each injured worker. 

It also ordered an independent investigation, constitution of committees under the 2013 Act, and strict compliance with statutory obligations.

[Association for Protection of Democratic Rights & Anr v. State of West Bengal & Ors.]

The Calcutta High Court held that a Section 8 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not maintainable without a written arbitration agreement as required under Section 7.

The Court noted that no written contract existed between Flint Group India Pvt. Ltd. and the defendant containing an arbitration clause, thereby barring reference of the suit to arbitration.

Reliance on a 2019 distributorship agreement executed with Flint Netherlands was rejected as the plaintiff disclosed no material connecting the dispute to that agreement. The Court also declined to apply the “group of companies” doctrine and dismissed the application with costs of ₹10,000.

[Flint Group India Pvt. Ltd. v Sujay Lodha]

The Calcutta High Court’s Full Bench has held that juveniles (children in conflict with law) can apply for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC.

The Court found no conflict between the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 438 CrPC, noting the JJ Act applies after a child is apprehended, while anticipatory bail protects liberty before any arrest

It emphasised that a child’s liberty is as protected under Article 21 as that of any adult, and depriving access to pre-arrest bail would undermine fundamental rights.

[Suhana Khatun & Ors v State of West Bengal]

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that inventions requiring the destruction of human embryos are not patentable under Section 3(b) of the Patents Act, which prohibits patents contrary to public order and morality.

The Court upheld the Patent Office's rejection of a patent application on the grounds that the invention involved the destruction of human embryos and was therefore unethical and contrary to public order and morality.

The court emphasised that ethical considerations override commercial interests in such biotechnological research, aligning Indian patent law with international ethical standards on embryo protection.

The Calcutta High Court ruled that the right to file a written statement is a statutory right grounded in natural justice and cannot be denied merely due to procedural lapses if filed within the 120 days prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure.

The Court held that denial within this timeframe would defeat a defendant’s valuable right to defend the case. The ruling came in a commercial dispute involving the Central Bank of India, where the defendants filed their written statement on the last permissible day.

The Court condoned the delay, imposed ₹50,000 as costs payable to the State Legal Services Authority, and allowed the filing.

[Central Bank of India & Ors v. Jay Kumar Goyal & Ors]

The Calcutta High Court held that an employee’s past misconduct can be taken into account when determining the quantum of punishment in disciplinary proceedings.

The Division Bench was hearing the case of a CISF constable who had denied three charges of alleged misconduct and was subsequently facing discharge from service.

The Court clarified that while the charges against an employee must be clear and specific, referencing prior misconduct does not make the proceedings invalid. It relied on State of Mysore v. K. Manche Gowda, affirming that an employee’s past conduct may guide the determination of appropriate punishment.

[Yeshveer v Union of India & Ors.]

The Calcutta High Court has granted bail to former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee, accused in a multi-crore teacher recruitment scam. 

Justice Suvra Ghosh observed that Chatterjee had been in custody for over a year, had already secured bail in the related ED case, and had not been interrogated after 15 October 2024.

The Court also observed that co-accused Manik Bhattacharya is already on bail. The case involves allegations of appointing ineligible candidates through corruption.

Chatterjee’s bail comes with strict conditions to ensure compliance.

[Partha Chatterjee v Central Bureau of Investigation]

The Calcutta High Court has issued Mandatory Child Access and Custody Guidelines to standardise custody and visitation practices across family courts in West Bengal and the Andaman & Nicobar Islands.

The guidelines, developed following a PIL filed by Dr. Ratul Roy and the Ayushman Initiative for Child Rights, focus on the best interests of the child, ensuring regular contact with both parents.

Key provisions include structured parenting plans, compensatory access for denied visitation, penalties for breaches, and clarity on parental responsibilities regarding relocation, communication, and medical updates.

The guidelines are now officially available on the Calcutta High Court website.

The Calcutta High Court held that a plea alleging misuse of a digital signature amounts to an allegation of fraud but does not deny the existence of an arbitration agreement.

The plaintiff claimed their digital signature was misused to execute a loan agreement without consent, arguing that the arbitration clause was therefore inapplicable.

The Court clarified that such a plea does not invalidate the arbitration clause under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

It emphasised that questions of fraud or misuse of digital signatures are to be examined by the arbitral tribunal, not the court. Accordingly, the court directed that the matter be referred to arbitration, upholding the agreement’s enforceability.