The Chhattisgarh High Court held that non-payment of overtime allowance constituted a continuing wrong and could not be barred by delay or laches.

Nineteen railway employees of the South East Central Railway, Bilaspur Zone, performed overtime between 2007 and 2010 and claimed unpaid allowances after their retirement.

The Tribunal directed the Railways to pay ₹40,22,837/-, but the Railways challenged the order, citing delay.

The Court ruled that each denial created a fresh cause of action, and withholding overtime regularly amounted to a recurring breach of duty, and subsequently dismissed the Union of India’s writ petitions, upholding the Tribunal’s order

[Union of India & Ors vs Raghunath]

The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld a 2019 Raipur Family Court ruling granting divorce to a husband whose wife called him “paaltu chuha” (pet rat) for following his parents and demanded he live separately from them.

A Bench of Justices Rajani Dubey and Amitendra Kishore Prasad held that such behaviour amounted to mental cruelty, noting that the husband’s evidence was unchallenged and supported by records.

The Court also observed that the wife had deserted the matrimonial home since 2010, justifying divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion.

The husband was directed to pay ₹5 lakh as alimony, along with monthly maintenance for his wife and son.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that compensation awarded for the acquisition of land from NHAI is not taxable under Section 96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The Court held that once the amount of compensation is determined under the provisions of the aforementioned Act, exemptions from income tax, stamp duty and fees would be applicable.

The petitioner, whose agricultural land had been acquired by NHAI, moved to the High Court after the Income Tax Officer rejected his application, contending that the Act of 1956 fell under the list of enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule and therefore, the same would be excluded from the purview of the RFCTLARR Act.

[Sanjay Kumar Baid v. Income Tax Officer]

The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed a challenge by educational institutions and ruled that schools and colleges fall under the purview of the Employees’ State Insurance (ESI) Act, requiring them to provide health insurance and social security benefits to their employees.

The court emphasised that the Act applies to all establishments employing 10 or more people, including the education sector, ensuring worker welfare.

The court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Christian Medical College Hospital Employees' Union vs Christian Medical College Vellore Association, which held that labour laws are enforceable against minority institutions.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to quash an FIR against two ElasticRun employees accused of delivering a knife ordered via Flipkart, which was later used in a murder and robbery.

The Court noted that police had earlier warned e-commerce platforms against delivering prohibited items, yet the knife was dispatched through the logistics firm. Rejecting claims of safe-harbour protection under the IT Act, the Bench held that such immunity does not extend to physical delivery of dangerous goods.

The police had specifically booked Dinesh Kumar Sahu (Senior Area Manager) and Harishankar Sahu (Delivery Service Agent) under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The investigation has been allowed to continue.

The Chhattisgarh High Court, taking suo motu cognisance of rising stabbing incidents and unregulated knife sales, was informed that police seized 211 knives from 193 people this year.

Acting on court directions, e-commerce platforms like Amazon, Flipkart, Snapdeal, and Shopclues shared customer details, leading to seizures under the Arms Act. 

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru noted the alarming data of a total of 677 cases registered but acknowledged state efforts, ultimately urging stricter vigilance.

The matter will be heard next on September 22.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has initiated a suo motu PIL over the death of a railway contract worker who was electrocuted on duty and allegedly denied timely medical assistance by authorities.

Notices were issued to the railway administration and state government, seeking details on safety protocols, emergency medical response, and accountability.

The Court further sought clarification as to who was responsible for such an act of negligence where a person comes into contact with a live wire, causing severe injuries, and if the fault was on the part of the contractor, then what action has been taken by the Railways against the same.

The Chhattisgarh High Court took suo motu cognisance of a shocking incident at Pakela Residential Potacabin School, where phenyl was allegedly mixed by a teacher in vegetables cooked for 426 students. 

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru termed the act a “criminal act” that endangered lives and said it could have shattered public trust in residential schools.

The Court directed the Chief Secretary to file an affidavit and mandated statewide food safety measures, including kitchen hygiene, CCTV surveillance, routine tasting, staff accountability, and medical preparedness.

The matter is listed for September 17, 2025.

[Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation v. The Chief Secretary]

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that taunting a husband for unemployment and making unreasonable demands during financial hardship amounts to mental cruelty.

The Court granted divorce to the husband, overturning a family court’s dismissal of his petition under the Hindu Marriage Act.

It found the wife’s disrespect, verbal abuse during the COVID-19 pandemic, influence over their daughter against the husband, and desertion of the family to be mental harassment and desertion.

The wife’s absence and failure to rebut evidence strengthened the husband’s case. The court ruled that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and granted a divorce in the husband’s favour.

[Anil Kumar Sonmani v Smt. Shradha Tiwari]

The Chhattisgarh High Court has directed the state government to pay ₹25,000 in compensation to each student who was served a midday meal that a dog had allegedly licked.

The incident, which occurred in a government school, exposed severe lapses in food safety and hygiene protocols. The court condemned the negligence, emphasising the state’s constitutional duty to ensure children’s well-being.

Additionally, the bench mandated immediate corrective measures, including proper storage and monitoring of meals. The case will be heard next on September 17. 

The Chhattisgarh High Court has taken suo motu cognisance of reports highlighting the unregulated sale of knives in Bilaspur, noting their link to a surge in stabbing incidents.

A bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru observed that despite police action under the Arms Act, sharp weapons remain easily available in paan shops, general stores, and even online, worsening public safety risks.

Citing 120 stabbing cases in seven months, including seven deaths, the Court stressed the need for stricter regulation and enforcement.

It directed the Home Department’s Principal Secretary to file an affidavit detailing the steps taken.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that the State and National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) have not done enough to prevent accidents caused by stray cattle.

Highlighting incidents like the deaths of 16 cattle on NH-45 and seven in another accident, the Court directed the NHAI Project Director to file a personal affidavit detailing preventive measures. It also ordered awareness campaigns, stricter law enforcement, and removal of encroachments at Pendridih bypass to reduce traffic hazards.

The District Magistrate of Bilaspur must ensure compliance. The matter is listed for further hearing on August 19, 2025.

[Sanjay Rajak v State of Chhattisgarh]

The Chhattisgarh High Court has strongly criticised a government school and a self-help group in Balodabazar after reports claimed that students were served food licked by a dog.

Taking suo motu cognizance, the court noted that 83 students had to be administered anti-rabies doses. 

The bench, led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, called it gross negligence and slammed the authorities for endangering lives. 

It directed the School Education Department to file an affidavit on the medical treatment given, actions taken against responsible parties and steps to prevent such incidents.  The matter is now listed for August 19.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that merely shouting "I love you" at a minor girl does not amount to sexual harassment under the POCSO Act unless it is accompanied by sexual intent.

The case involved a 15-year-old girl who alleged harassment by a boy. The trial court acquitted him, and the High Court upheld the decision.

Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal noted that a single expression of love, without evidence of sexual desire or abusive language, doesn’t attract Section 7 of the POCSO Act or other IPC provisions. The state’s appeal challenging the acquittal was dismissed. (State of Chhattisgarh v. Rupendra Das Manikpuri)