Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Constitution of India

2,140 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,801–2,000.

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANRversusMOHD. PARVEZ ABDUL KAYUUM ETC

2019 INSC 7245 July 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered appeals against the Gujarat High Court's judgment that acquitted several accused of murder and terrorism charges in the killing of former Home Minister Haren Pandya and the attempted murder of Jagdish Tiwari. The CBI had investigated and found both incidents were part of a larger conspiracy

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. & ANR.versusJAGGU & ORS. ETC.

2019 INSC 7275 July 2019Disposed off

The case concerned 2,040 contract labourers employed in SAIL's captive limestone mine who, after a 1993 prohibition on contract labour under the CLRA Act, continued to work and claimed parity of wages with regular SAIL employees under the NJCS memorandum. The respondents sought relief under Section 20(1) of the Minimum

MAHIPAL SINGH RANA, ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2016 INSC 4925 July 2016Disposed off

Advocate Mahipal Singh Rana threatened a civil judge in Etah on two occasions, leading the Allahabad High Court to convict him of criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and impose two months' imprisonment, a fine, and a ban on appearing in Etah courts until he purged the contempt. The High Court also

SUBRAYA M.N.versusVITTALA M.N. & ORS.

2016 INSC 4945 July 2016Case Partly allowed

The suit sought partition of three parcels of land that were part of the joint family of the deceased Narayana. The defendant claimed that the first two parcels had been relinquished by the plaintiffs through a village panchayat resolution and receipts, while the third parcel was his self‑acquired property. The trial c

ANIL KUMAR GUPTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 4975 July 2016Disposed off

The petition arose from a tragic incident on 1 February 2011 when over two lakh candidates gathered for an ITBP recruitment drive in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, and, after the drive was postponed, many climbed onto the roof of the Himgiri Express. The train, travelling at 75 kmph, struck a low foot‑over‑bridge whose clear

S. SUBRAMANIAM BALAJIversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2013 INSC 4445 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant challenged the Tamil Nadu government's distribution of free colour television sets, laptops, mixers, and other welfare items promised in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) election manifesto, alleging that the expenditure was unauthorized, violated Article 14 and amounted to a corrupt practice under Sect

THE STATE OF KARNATAKAversusTHE ASSOCIATED MANAGEMENT OF (GOVT. RECOGNIZED UNAIDED ENGLISH MEDIUM) PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS & ORS.

2013 INSC 4415 July 2013Matter referred to larger bench

The State of Karnataka appealed against the High Court's partial upholding of its 1994 Government Orders mandating mother‑tongue or Kannada as the medium of instruction in primary schools, which had been challenged by unaided English‑medium schools. The Supreme Court examined whether the State could compel the mother t

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusGOPALI & ORS.

2012 INSC 2715 July 2012Dismissed

The case involved a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act after the death of Nanag Ram, a 36‑year‑old machine operator, in a road accident. The claimants sought Rs.24 lakh, while the insurer challenged the award on several grounds. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court should ha

BAROT VIJAYKUMAR BALAKRISHNA & ORS.versusMODH VINAYKUMAR DASRATHLAL & ORS.

2011 INSC 4555 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) recruited Assistant Public Prosecutors under the 2008 Recruitment Rules, which required minimum qualifying marks for both written and viva‑voce tests. The advertisement omitted the viva‑voce cut‑off, and the Commission fixed a 10‑out‑of‑30 minimum mark shortly before the int

RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 4605 July 2011Disposed off

The case concerned three former Short Service Commissioned Officers who had joined the Indian Army after the period of emergency and were later appointed to the Uttar Pradesh Provincial Police Service. They claimed back‑service seniority and other benefits under the Uttar Pradesh Non‑technical (Class‑II) Services (Rese

INDU BHUSHAN DWIVEDIversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR.

2010 INSC 3485 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Indu Bhushan Dwivedi, a Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate, was dismissed from service after a departmental inquiry found two of three charges proved: leaving headquarters without permission and using derogatory language. The High Court’s dismissal recommendation relied on adverse remarks in his Annual Confidential Rep

RASID JAVED & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR. ETC. ETC.

2010 INSC 3525 July 2010Dismissed

The appellants, private bus operators, claimed that a 1999 notification under s.102(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which purported to modify the 1993 scheme and allow them to operate on the Saharanpur‑Delhi inter‑state route, was validly approved by a Hearing Authority and could not be rescinded. The State of Utta

RAJENDRA ANANT VARIKversusGOVIND B. PRABHUGAONKAR

2025 INSC 6335 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajendra Anant Varik, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a dishonoured cheque and was ordered to pay compensation. He appealed, and the First Appellate Court acquitted him, holding that the complainant was an unlicensed money‑lender under the Goa Money‑Lenders Act, whic

DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATILversusTHE CHIEF MINISTER & ORS.

2021 INSC 2845 May 2021Disposed off

The State of Maharashtra enacted the Maharashtra State Reservation (of Seats for Admission in Educational Institutions in the State and for appointments in the public services and posts under the State) for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018, granting 12% and 13% reservation to the Maratha com

SUMER SINGHversusSURAJBHAN SINGH AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 9695 May 2014Case Partly allowed

The case concerns a criminal appeal filed by the injured party, Sumer Singh, under Article 136 of the Constitution seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on Surajbhan Singh and others for grievous hurt (IPC s.326) and related offences arising from a land dispute. The High Court had reduced the sentence to the seve

LARSEN AND TOUBRO LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 3545 May 2011Dismissed

The Union of India issued a Request for Proposal for 20 fast patrol vessels, stipulating that bids must be at a firm and fixed price for the contract duration. Larsen & Toubro (Petitioner No.1) submitted the lowest commercial bid but included a foreign‑exchange rate variation clause without specifying the currency, vio

SHANKARA CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.versusM. PRABHAKAR & ORS.

2011 INSC 3595 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned about 90 acres of land in Andhra Pradesh that had been declared evacuee property under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 by a notification dated 11‑12‑1952 and later acquired by the Central Government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1

BONDU RAMASWAMYversusBANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2010 INSC 2715 May 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the legality of land acquisitions undertaken by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for the Arkavathi layout, focusing on whether the BDA Act required President's assent, was repugnant to the Land Acquisition Act, and complied with constitutional provisions under Parts IX and IX‑A. The

S.K. DASGUPTA & ORS.versusVIJAY SINGH SENGAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 2755 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Vijay Singh Sengar filed a public interest writ petition alleging that power cuts in Madhya Pradesh were endangering patients in government hospitals and disrupting street lighting. The Madhya Pradesh High Court issued interim orders directing the State Electricity Board to provide round‑the‑clock electricity to hospit

SMT. SELVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 5205 May 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered whether the involuntary administration of narcoanalysis, polygraph, and Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) tests for investigative purposes violates fundamental rights. The Court held that compulsory administration of these techniques violates Article 20(3) of the Constitution, whic

DR NARENDRA GUPTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 3225 April 2023Directions issued

Dr. Narendra Gupta filed a public interest litigation alleging that women, especially from marginalized communities, were subjected to unnecessary hysterectomies under government health schemes in several states, violating their right to health under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court examined affidavits

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusDILIP KUMAR MALLICK

2022 INSC 13015 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a CRPF employee, was removed from service for concealing a pending criminal case while filling a verification roll. The disciplinary and appellate authorities upheld the removal, but the High Court Division Bench later directed the employer to impose a lesser punishment, deeming removal too harsh. The S

KALPANA MEHTA AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 3145 April 2017Matter referred to larger bench

The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus challenging the approval and administration of the HPV vaccine, relying heavily on a report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee. The Union of India contended that such a report could not be used as evidence to establish facts, invoking parliamentary privilege and the doctri

JOYI KITTY JOSEPHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 3275 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The wife of a man detained under the COFEPOSA Act challenged his preventive detention, arguing that the detaining authority had not applied its mind and had ignored the stringent bail conditions imposed by the magistrate. The Supreme Court examined the factual matrix, which showed the detainee’s involvement in a large‑

VIJAY BAHADURversusSUNIL KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 3325 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vijay Bahadur contested the election of Gram Pradhan in Chaka village, alleging a discrepancy of 19 votes between the Presiding Officer’s oral statement (1194 votes) and Form 46 (1213 votes) and claiming irregularities such as missing poll‑booth diaries and police interference. He filed an election petiti

UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusBIBHU PRASAD SARANGI AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 1565 March 2021Disposed off

The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) challenged a Central Administrative Tribunal order that directed the reconsideration of the promotion of Bibhu Prasad Sarangi to the Indian Administrative Service, citing a disciplinary penalty imposed on him. The matter was taken to the Orissa High Court under Article 226 of

ANKUSH MARUTI SHINDE AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 3055 March 2019Disposed off

The case involved six accused who were convicted of murder, robbery and rape of a woman in a hut robbery in 2003, based primarily on the identification of two eye‑witnesses (PW1 and PW8) in a test identification parade (TIP) and in court. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved guilt beyond reason

STATE OF KERALA & ORS.versusB. SURENDRA DAS ETC

2014 INSC 9335 March 2014Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined two amendments to Kerala's Abkari Policy that altered Rule 13 of the Foreign Liquor Rules: (i) the removal of "three‑star" hotels from eligibility for FL‑3 liquor licences, and (ii) the introduction of a distance rule (Rule 3E) prohibiting new licences within 3 km in panchayat areas and 1 km

GAJANAN BABULAL BANSODE & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2021 INSC 635 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra Government, without consulting the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC), issued a Government Resolution on 22 April 2019 to appoint an additional 636 candidates as Police Sub‑Inspectors, effectively doubling the vacancies advertised for the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) 201

D. RAGHU AND OTHERSversusR. BASAVESWARUDU AND OTHERS ETC.

2020 INSC 1305 February 2020Disposed off

The appellants, originally recruited as Data Entry Operators (DEOs) Grade B, challenged a notice that limited promotion to the post of Inspector to pre‑restructured categories, arguing that the 2001 cabinet‑approved cadre restructuring merged DEOs into the Senior Tax Assistant (STA) cadre and that their prior service s

THE COMMISSIONER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusS.S. SARVESH

2019 INSC 1475 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Mysore Urban Development Authority (the Authority) appealed a civil suit decree against it, but its first appeal was dismissed in default when its counsel failed to appear. The Authority sought restoration of the appeal under Order 41 Rule 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but the appellate court refused and

RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONSversusRE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS

2017 INSC 9555 February 2016

The Supreme Court entertained Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013 concerning inhuman conditions in 1,382 Indian prisons. Relying on earlier decisions, the Court affirmed that prisoners are persons entitled to fundamental rights, including dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. It examined the persistent proble

M/S. SANGHVI RECONDITIONERS PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 795 February 2010Dismissed

M/s. Sanghvi Reconditioners Pvt. Ltd., a ship‑repair unit, was found to have imported engineering cargo as "ship spares" and then sold the goods to a third party, thereby fraudulently claiming exemption under Notification No.211/83. The Customs Commissioner demanded duty, penalty and interest; the appellant withdrew it

MANISH GOELversusROHINI GOEL

2010 INSC 825 February 2010Dismissed

Manish Goel and Rohini Goel married in July 2008 and separated shortly thereafter. The husband filed an annulment suit under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act in Gurgaon, while the wife filed a domestic‑violence petition in Delhi. They later filed a mutual‑consent divorce petition under Section 13‑8(1) before the De

NAK ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD.versusTARUN KESHRICHAND SHAH AND ORS.

2026 INSC 85 January 2026Dismissed

The suit was filed by the heirs of a property owner to recover service charges from a sub-tenant, respondent No.3, who failed to appear, leading to an ex‑parte decree. The appellant, NAK Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd., later sought to be impleaded, claiming it was the successor of respondent No.3 under the Companies Act

GULFISHA FATIMAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2026 INSC 25 January 2026Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined bail applications of several accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. It balanced the constitutional right to liberty under Article 21 against the statutory bail restriction in Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, considering the length of pre‑trial de

ADANI POWER LTD. & ANRversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2026 INSC 15 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Adani Power Ltd., operating a coal‑based power plant in the Mundra SEZ, challenged the levy of customs duty on electricity exported from its SEZ unit to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) under several notifications issued between 2010 and 2016. The Gujarat High Court, in a 2015 judgment, held that no lawful charging event

M/S. SHEKHAR RESORTS LIMITED (UNIT OF ORIENT TAJ)versusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 155 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

M/S Shekhar Resorts Ltd., a corporate debtor, was under a moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) from September 2018 until July 2020. While the moratorium was in force, the company applied for the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 and was issued Form No.3 requiring a payment of R

STATE OF UP THROUGH SECRETARY (EXCISE) & ORS.versusM/S MCDOWELL AND COMPANY LIMITED

2022 INSC 135 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

A fire on 10 April 2003 destroyed 35,642 cases of Indian Made Foreign Liquor stored in the bonded godown of M/s McDowell & Co. Ltd. The Uttar Pradesh Excise Department levied a demand for excise duty on the destroyed liquor, which the High Court set aside on the ground that the fire was an act of God and no negligence

MUNAGALA YADAMMAversusSTATE OF A.P. & ORS.

2012 INSC 65 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a detention order issued under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 against Munagala Anjaiah, who was alleged to be a bootlegger violating the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995. The appellant's wife challenged the order, and the High Court upheld it, reasoning th

SREE SWAYAM PRAKASH ASHRAMAM AND ANR.versusG. ANANDAVALLY AMMA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 65 January 2010Dismissed

The original plaintiff, allotted an A‑schedule building under a 1948 settlement deed, used a B‑schedule pathway that lay within the Ashramam’s property to access his building. After the defendants attempted to block the pathway, the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of an easement (by grant or necessity) and a per

GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2019 INSC 13144 December 2019Dismissed

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd., owner of a tug, entered into a six‑month time charter agreement with New Mangalore Port Trust. The Karnataka tax authorities directed the company to register under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, claiming the agreement attracted tax under section 5C, which taxes the transfer of t

SURENDRA SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2018 INSC 11484 December 2018Dismissed

The appellants Surendra Singh and Ram Singh were convicted for the murder of shopkeeper Rajendra Kumar based on a series of circumstantial facts, including motive, being the last persons seen with the victim, recovery of stolen items and blood‑stained clothing at their homes, identification of those items, discovery of

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHERversusMANOHARSINHJI PRADYUMANSINHJI JADEJA

2012 INSC 5644 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat and the Mamlatdar sought to enforce the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 against Manoharsinhji Pradyumansinhji Jadeja, whose 587 acres of land were declared surplus. Jadeja contended that the lands were "urban land" under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and therefore o

DR. NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCESversusDR. YERRA TRINADH & OTHERS

2022 INSC 11724 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The University conducted digital evaluation of answer scripts for a postgraduate diploma course, and several students filed writ petitions seeking re‑evaluation of their answer sheets. The High Court, after calling for the answer scripts, ordered a fresh re‑evaluation despite the absence of any provision for such a pro

THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION & ANR. ETC.versusSUNIL KUMAR B. & ORS. ETC.

2021 INSC 4224 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the legality of the Central Government's 2014 amendment (G.S.R. 609(E)) to the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995, which raised the maximum pensionable salary, introduced a joint option for employees earning above Rs.15,000, and required such employees to contribute an additional 1.16% of their

PRITHIPAL SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. ETC.

2011 INSC 7844 November 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by five police officials convicted for the abduction, illegal detention and murder of human‑rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra. The trial court and High Court had found the appellants guilty based on the testimony of several witnesses, including an accomplice, despite the absence

INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

2021 INSC 6004 October 2021Disposed off

Paulmech Infrastructure Private Ltd (appellant) entered into a Letter of Intent (LOI) with Utkal Ashok Hotel Corporation Ltd (UAHCL) for a 40‑year lease of Hotel Nilachal Ashok, requiring payment of Rs 9.34 crore within 30 days, including a non‑refundable upfront sum of Rs 8.82 crore. The appellant failed to pay the fu

R. SRINIVAS KUMARversusR. SHAMETHA

2019 INSC 11284 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The husband and wife were married in 1993 and have been living apart for more than 22 years. The husband filed a petition for divorce under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty, and also sought dissolution on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, but the Family Court and the High Cou

RAJ KUMARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2019 INSC 11324 October 2019Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling milk whose Milk Solid Non‑Fat (MSNF) content was 7.7%, below the statutory standard of 8.5%. He argued that the delay in analysis caused a marginal shortfall, that he was denied the right under Section 13(2) to have a second sam

KSB ALIversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

2017 INSC 9954 October 2017Dismissed

K.S.B. Ali claimed title to 1,635 acres of land in Kokapet village on behalf of 203 alleged heirs of Nawab Nusrat Jung‑I, relying on a 1954 Atiyat Court order approved by the Revenue Minister. The Government issued several orders (2002, 2004, 2005) that were later rescinded, and tenders for the land were issued. Ali fi

M/S KULJA INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusCHIEF GEN. MANAGER W.T. PROJ. BSNL AND ORS.

2013 INSC 6734 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kulja Industries Ltd., supplied telecom equipment to BSNL under two tenders. BSNL later alleged that the appellant, in collusion with BSNL officials, received excess payments of Rs 7.98 crore through duplicate bills and blacklisted the appellant permanently. The appellant challenged the blacklisting, arg

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KVS & ORS.versusJ. HUSSAIN

2013 INSC 6754 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Upper Division Clerk in a Kendriya Vidyalaya, was found to have entered the Principal's office while fully drunk during duty hours, an act admitted by him. A disciplinary authority, after his admission, imposed removal from service under the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules. The High Court late

AJAHAR ALIversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 6764 October 2013Dismissed

In 1995 Ajahar Ali forcibly grabbed the hair of 16‑year‑old Nasima Begum, kissed her and caused a cut on her lip. He was convicted under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months’ simple imprisonment and a fine. The appellant appealed, arguing that the 18‑year delay, his juvenile status at the ti

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MARTYRS MEMORIAL TRUST AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 4494 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Board of Trustees of Martyrs Memorial Trust, a public charitable trust, was allotted government accommodation in Ballia, Uttar Pradesh, which was later cancelled by the District Collector who also acted as the Trust's Secretary. The Trust challenged the cancellation, alleging the Collector acted without a Trust mee

AMANJOT SINGH CHADHAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 11274 September 2025Disposed off

The petitioner sought a writ under Article 32 of the Constitution directing all States and Union Territories to implement Section 6 of the Anand Marriage Act, 1909, which mandates rules for registering Sikh Anand Karaj marriages. The Court noted that while some jurisdictions had notified such rules, many had not, resul

R. POORNIMA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 5344 September 2020Dismissed

The petitioners, directly recruited District Judges in Tamil Nadu (2011), claimed they were senior to promotee judges but were overlooked for elevation to the Madras High Court. They argued that, under Article 217(2) of the Constitution, their prior advocacy experience should be clubbed with their judicial service to s

STATE OF NCT OF DELHIversusSANJAY

2014 INSC 6024 September 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act) bars prosecution under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for theft of sand and gravels from riverbeds. The Court held that offences under Section 21 of the MMDR Act (contravention of mining lease conditions) are distin

STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERSversusTHE TRIBAL MISSION

2012 INSC 3754 September 2012Disposed off

The Tribal Mission established an unaided English‑medium school in Kerala in 2001 and applied for state recognition in 2003. The Government, relying on its 2007 policy and the Kerala Education Rules (KER) 1959, rejected the application, noting that three recognized schools existed nearby and that granting recognition c

BHANEI PRASAD @ RAJUversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2025 INSC 9344 August 2025Dismissed

The father was convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 506 of the IPC for repeatedly committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his ten‑year‑old daughter. The trial court, relying on the victim's testimony, corroboration from her elder sister, and forensic DNA evidence, sentenced him to life imp

AMARENDU JYOTI & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATISGARH & ORS.

2014 INSC 9904 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The husband and wife lived together in Delhi for a month before the wife returned to her parents in Ambikapur. Two years later her father filed an FIR under Section 498A IPC alleging cruelty. The High Court held that the cruelty continued and that the Ambikapur court had jurisdiction. On appeal, the Supreme Court exami

BAKSHI DEV RAJ & ANR.versusSUDHIR KUMAR

2011 INSC 5454 August 2011Dismissed

The appellants Bakshi Dev Raj & Anr. challenged a decree modified by the High Court in a second appeal, alleging that their counsel settled the matter without a written agreement and that the subsequent review petition was barred because their Special Leave Petition (SLP) had been dismissed as withdrawn. The Supreme Co

M/S. V.K. ENTERPRISES AND ANR.versusM/S. SHIVA STEELS

2010 INSC 4784 August 2010Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit under Order 37 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC to recover a cheque amount that was dishonoured. The petitioner applied for leave to defend under Order 37 Rule 3, alleging that the cheque dated 11‑10‑2006 was originally dated 11‑10‑2000 and had been tampered with, and that the cheque was given only

RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusA.K. NAIR & ORS.

2023 INSC 6134 July 2023Disposed off

A.K. Nair, a Reserve Bank of India employee with 50% post‑polio disability, failed to obtain the required 95 marks in the 2003 All India Merit Test for promotion to Assistant Manager by three marks. He sought condonation of the shortfall and reservation in promotion under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The Bo

NIRAVKUMAR DILIPBHAI MAKWANAversusGUJARAT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

2019 INSC 7234 July 2019Dismissed

The appellant, a SEBC candidate, applied for a Forest Service post and was selected after availing age relaxation granted to reserved categories. The Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC) placed him in the reserved category list, but he argued that, per the Supreme Court's decision in Jitendra Kumar Singh, he should

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHIversusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

2019 INSC 1944 July 2018Directions issued

The Supreme Court of India interpreted Article 239AA of the Constitution, which provides special provisions for the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The case arose from a dispute between the Government of NCT of Delhi and the Union of India regarding the powers of the Lieutenant Governor and the elected Council of

CHARANJIT & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2013 INSC 4384 July 2013Dismissed

The case arose from the alleged torture and rape of a woman (PW‑3) by police officials after she was taken for interrogation on 9 February 1989. PW‑3 filed a petition to the Governor, a criminal complaint before a magistrate, and later testified in trial, alleging that she was detained overnight and raped, with her hus

STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.versusASHOK KUMAR DANGI AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 4354 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the recruitment of primary school teachers in Jharkhand, where candidates holding C.P.Ed./Dip.P.Ed. sought appointment as primary teachers and the High Court had directed that 5% of vacancies be filled by physical‑trained candidates based on Bihar's policy. The Court held that

ACADEMY OF NUTRITION IMPROVEMENT AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2011 INSC 4314 July 2011Disposed off

The Academy of Nutrition Improvement and others challenged the constitutionality of Rule 44‑1 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, which prohibited the sale of non‑iodised common salt for human consumption. The petitioners argued that the rule violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and

RAM JETHMALANI AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDLA AND ORS.

2011 INSC 4344 July 2011Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by former Union Law Minister Ram Jethmalani and others alleging that large sums of unaccounted money were being held by Indian individuals and entities in foreign banks, notably involving Hassan Ali Khan and the Tapurias, and that the Union of India had been sluggish

RAMESHWARI DEVI & ORS.versusNIRMALA DEVI & ORS.

2011 INSC 4504 July 2011Disposed off

The case arose from a long-running family dispute over a residential property where the appellants repeatedly filed suits and applications for over four decades, causing extensive delay and waste of judicial resources. The Supreme Court examined whether the trial courts should impose actual, realistic costs on parties

SAHIL ABDULSATTAR MANSURI & ORS.versusSAFIMAHAMAD FAFIRBHAI MANSURI & ORS.

2026 INSC 6264 June 2026

The father of the appellants filed a criminal complaint in 2007 alleging that while on Haj pilgrimage the accused forged his signature and created bogus partition and sale deeds to insert their names into revenue records. Despite multiple orders, the investigation stalled, case papers were lost, and a re‑investigation

HARINAGAR SUGAR MILLS LTD. (BISCUIT DIVISION) & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 8014 June 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Harina​gar Sugar Mills Ltd. (Biscuit Division) (HSML) applied to close its biscuit unit after Britannia Industries terminated a 32‑year job‑work agreement. The State Government, through a Deputy Secretary, sent a letter on 25 September 2019 asking HSML to resubmit its application, claiming the original lacked cogent re

SUJAL VISHWAS ATTAVAR & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2026 INSC 4424 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant company alleged that the appellants forged documents to obtain a property measurement and sought registration of a FIR. After filing complaints with the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, the authority declined coercive action and referred the matter to the police, which returned the case to the lan

KANIMOZHI KARUNANIDHIversusA. SANTHANA KUMAR & ORS

2023 INSC 4994 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition filed under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which alleged that the returned candidate, Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, had suppressed her spouse's PAN and income‑tax details in Form 26. The Court held that the petition contained only vague, bal

YAMAL MANOJBHAIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 4984 May 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The petitioner, an NRI, was arrested at Delhi airport for allegedly smuggling watches through the green channel. He sought a direction for home‑cooked food and, more importantly, the right to settle the customs duty liability under Section 127B of the Customs Act, arguing that Section 123, which bars settlement for cer

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusASHISH AGARWAL

2022 INSC 5104 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The Union of India appealed against the High Courts' orders quashing reassessment notices issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act after 1 April 2021. The Finance Act, 2021 had substituted sections 147‑151, introducing section 148A as a condition precedent for issuing a notice under section 148. The Supreme Court

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERSversusCALCUTTA CLUB LIMITED

2019 INSC 11114 May 2016Matter referred to larger bench

The State of West Bengal appealed against Calcutta Club Limited, which had been held not liable for sales tax on food and drink supplied to its permanent members. The club argued that the doctrine of mutuality made such supplies a non‑sale, while the State contended that the 46th Constitution Amendment (Article 366(29A

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusRAKESH KUMAR KESHARI & ANR.

2011 INSC 3524 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Rakesh Kumar Keshari and another, were appointed as Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal) on contract and sought renewal of their terms after the District Judge and District Magistrate recommended it. The Uttar Pradesh State Government instead advertised the posts, later directed the Distric

SOUMEN PAUL & ORS.versusSHRABANI NAYEK & ORS.

2025 INSC 4514 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the recruitment of assistant teachers in West Bengal primary schools, where the eligibility rule required a Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) as prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). Because the COVID‑19 pandemic delayed the 2020‑22 D.El.Ed. batch, several candidat

KRISHNADATT AWASTHYversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 2524 April 2024Matter referred to larger bench

The case concerned the selection and appointment of ten Shiksha Karmi Grade‑III candidates who were close relatives of members of the selection committee. The Collector cancelled their appointments on the ground of bias under Section 40(c) and Section 100 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, but the appellants were

BHAGWAN DAS GOEL (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LRS. & ORS.versusPYARE KISHAN AGARWAL

2019 INSC 4644 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, invoking Clause 11 of a partnership deed of "Gupta Bus Service" dated 5 July 1960. The appellants objected, arguing that the partnership was unregistered and therefore barred by Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act, 1932,

SURAZ INDIA TRUSTversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2011 INSC 2604 April 2011Matter referred to larger bench

The Suraz India Trust, a Rajasthan public trust, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking review of two Supreme Court judgments that had affirmed the primacy of the collegium in appointing Supreme Court and High Court judges. The trust contended that those judgments effectively amended Article

SYED MAQBOOL ALIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2011 INSC 2634 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State acquired land in 1982 for a road and paid compensation to certain owners, but the appellant claimed that his plots were taken without any legal acquisition. After a complaint to the Lokayukta was dismissed as time‑barred, he filed a writ petition in 2000 seeking acquisition of the disputed land and compensati

CHANDRAN @ MANICHAN @ MANIYANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2011 INSC 2644 April 2011Disposed off

The case involved a massive spurious liquor tragedy in Kerala where 31 people died and many were injured after consuming liquor adulterated with methyl alcohol. The accused, a group of brothers and their associates, were charged under the Abkari Act, particularly Section 57A, for mixing or permitting the mixing of a no

SITA SORENversusUNION OF INDIA

2024 INSC 1614 March 2024Reference answered

The appellant, Sita Soren, a member of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly accepting a bribe to vote for an independent candidate in a Rajya Sabha election, but she ultimately voted for her party's candidate. She sought to quash the charges invoking Artic

ABDUL VAHABversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 2634 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant’s truck carrying 17 cow progeny was seized and the driver and others were arrested under the Madhya Pradesh Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 2004 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. The trial court acquitted all accused, finding no evidence of intent to slaughter, but the District Magistr

VIKAS KISHANRAO GAWALIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2021 INSC 1504 March 2021Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of Section 12(2)(c) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 and two State Election Commission notifications that reserved OBC seats beyond the 50% ceiling in several districts. Relying on the Constitution Bench decision in K. Krishna Murthy, th

INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIAversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA

2020 INSC 2644 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) issued a Statement and a Circular in April 2018 directing banks and other regulated entities to cease dealing with persons or entities dealing in virtual currencies (VCs) and to exit existing relationships within three months. The petitioners – a trade association and several cryptocurre

C. JAYACHANDRANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS. ETC.

2020 INSC 2654 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, C. Jayachandran, applied for a District Judge post under a 2007 advertisement for six Higher Judicial Service vacancies. After the High Court annulled the grant of moderation marks to other candidates, the revised select list placed Jayachandran at rank 3, but his appointment was delayed until 24 Februar

PANCHRAJ TIWARIversusM.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 1644 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Panchraj Tiwari, a graduate junior engineer appointed in 1986 to the Rural Electricity Cooperative Society (RECS) Rewa, was approved for promotion to Assistant Engineer in 1994. The RECS was dissolved and merged with the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB) effective 15 March 2002, and Tiwari was absorbed as

K.K. BASKARANversusSTATE REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2011 INSC 1834 March 2011Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 (as amended in 2003), arguing that it encroached upon Union legislative competence (entries 43‑45 of List I) and violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitutio

ANKHIM HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusZAVERI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.

2026 INSC 1374 February 2026Disposed off

The parties, Ankhim Holdings and Zaveri Construction, formed a partnership to develop an SRA project and later fell into dispute. The Bombay High Court appointed an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve the dispute. While arbitration was pending, the respondent was admitted to corporate

THE SURAT PARSI PANCHAYAT BOARD AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 1544 February 2022Disposed off

The Surat Parsi Panchayat Board filed a petition under Article 226 seeking directions to allow the performance of Dokhmenashini, the traditional Zoroastrian funeral rites, asserting that the Union Government's COVID‑19 dead‑body disposal protocols violated their religious freedom under Article 25. The Gujarat High Cour

VIVEK RAI & ANR.versusHIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND THROUGH REGISTRAR GENERAL & ORS.

2015 INSC 964 February 2015Dismissed

The petitioners, convicted under IPC 498‑A and the Dowry Prohibition Act, had their appeal dismissed and filed a revision petition under CrPC ss. 397 and 401 before the Jharkhand High Court. The High Court refused to register the revision because the petitioners had not surrendered to custody as mandated by Rule 159 of

S. T. SADIQversusSTATE OF KERALA& ORS.

2015 INSC 914 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the constitutional validity of Section 6 of the Kerala Cashew Factories Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1995, which declared that ten cashew factories acquired earlier would stand transferred to the State notwithstanding any court judgment. The petitioners argued that the provision directly nullified

M. MANOHAR REDDY & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 734 February 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, two advocates, sought a writ of quo warranto to quash the appointment of a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on the ground that a criminal case was pending against him and that the consultative process had failed to consider this. The Court examined the distinction between eligibility (objective)

NARINDER KAURversusPUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT & ORS.

2011 INSC 1004 February 2011Disposed off

Narinder Kaur, a Civil Judge, applied within two years of her entry into government service to correct her date of birth from 26‑01‑1971 to 09‑01‑1972, citing the Punjab Financial Volume I (Haryana First Amendment) Rules, 2001 which allow correction upon a special inquiry. The High Court rejected her application, alleg

SARFARAZ ALAMversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 184 January 2024Dismissed

The appellant challenged the validity of a preventive detention order issued under Section 3 of the COFEPOSA Act against the detenue, alleging that the authorities failed to serve the grounds of detention and did not inform him of his right to make a representation as mandated by Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The

ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2024 INSC 264 January 2024Directions issued

The All India Judges Association filed a writ petition challenging the allowances recommended by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC) for judicial officers and retired judges. The Union and several State governments objected, arguing that the recommendations would impose a financial burden, should be gov

SHOBHABAI NARAYAN SHINDEversusTHE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, NASHIK DIVISION, NASHIK & ORS.

2022 INSC 94 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, elected as Sarpanch and member of a village panchayat in Dhule, were alleged to have failed to lodge election expense accounts and were therefore subject to disqualification proceedings under Section 14B(1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959. The Collector, acting as delegate of the State E

SULEKHAN SINGH & CO. & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 34 January 2016Dismissed

The appellants, Sulekhan Singh & Co. and others, were granted mining leases in Uttar Pradesh after the State issued a Government Order (G.O.) on 31 May 2012 requiring all minor‑mineral leases to be awarded by e‑tendering under Chapter IV of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. The High Court quashed the le

YUMMAN ONGBI LEMBI LEIMAversusSTATE OF MANIPUR & ORS.

2012 INSC 24 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's husband, Yumman Somendro, was arrested in January 2011 for murder and, while in police custody, was served with a detention order under the National Security Act (NSA) dated 31 January 2011, which was later confirmed by the Governor for twelve months. The order was based solely on the subjective satisfa

MISSION ACCESSIBILITYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 13763 December 2025Disposed off

Mission Accessibility, a disability‑rights organization, filed a writ petition seeking modification of the scribe‑registration timeline for the Civil Services Examination and the introduction of laptops with screen‑reader software and accessible digital question papers for visually‑impaired candidates. The petition arg

ABHISHEK GUPTAversusDINESH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 14063 December 2025Disposed off

The appellant, Abhishek Gupta, was allotted a fair‑price shop licence after the licence of respondent No.1 was revoked for breach of conditions. The revocation and its affirmation were challenged by respondent No.1 in a writ petition under Art.226, where the appellant was not impleaded. The Single Judge set aside the r

POOJA CERATECH PRIVATE LIMITEDversusOIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

2021 INSC 9253 December 2021Dismissed

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) issued a tender for the sale of gas. Pooja Ceratech Private Limited submitted a price bid but later claimed a mistake and sought to modify the bid. ONGC opened the price bids without the petitioner, disqualified it and invoked the bank guarantees furnished as security deposit, inv

SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 6763 December 2020Dismissed

Skill Lotto Solutions Pvt. Ltd., an authorised agent for Punjab lotteries, filed a writ petition under Art.32 challenging the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) on the grounds that the definition of ‘goods’ in s.2(52) – which includes actionable claims – is unconstitutional and that taxing lottery, bet

ROSHINA TversusABDUL AZEEZ K.T. & ORS.

2018 INSC 11423 December 2018Leave granted

The dispute concerned possession of a flat in Kozhikode between private individuals Roshina T (appellant) and Abdul Azeez K.T. (respondent No.1). While a civil suit for injunction was pending, the respondent filed a writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the appellant to r

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusPALAK MODI AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 5583 December 2012Dismissed

The case concerned two probationary officers of State Bank of India who were terminated after being alleged to have used unfair means in a confirmation test. The bank, relying on a report from the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) and seating‑arrangement evidence, extended their probation and then dismiss

JOHN PANDIANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T. NADU

2010 INSC 8463 December 2010Disposed off

The case concerns the murder of Vivekanandan in Coimbatore, allegedly orchestrated by Venkatraman (A‑1) out of a love rivalry and carried out by hired assassins Kumar (A‑9), Pavunraj (A‑10) and Prince Kumar (A‑11). The trial court convicted all accused under sections 302, 34, 109 and 120B IPC; the High Court affirmed m

IN RE.: CONSTRUCTION OF PARK AT NOIDA NEAR OKHLA BIRD SANCTUARY ANAND ARYA & ANR. T.N. B GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 8443 December 2010Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the construction of a large memorial park in Noida, alleging that the 33.43‑hectare site was forest land and that the project proceeded without the required prior environmental clearance under the 2006 EIA Notification, thereby threatening the nearby Okhla Bird Sanctuary. The Court examined r

POONAM & OTHERSversusHARISH KUMAR AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 7833 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The sisters Poonam, et al., filed a civil suit for declaration of title and injunction against their brother, which was dismissed by the trial court. They appealed the decree but filed the appeal 63 days late, seeking condonation of delay, citing illness of one sister and negligence of counsel. The District Judge and s

PANKAJ BANSALversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 8663 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal, were arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) after being summoned in connection with two Enforcement Case Information Reports (ECIRs). They had earlier obtained anticipatory bail for the firs

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusCALCUTTA CLUB LIMITED

2019 INSC 11113 October 2019Disposed off

The Calcutta Club, a Section 25 company operating as a members' club, was served with a notice for non‑payment of sales tax on food and drinks supplied to its permanent members. The Club argued that, under the doctrine of mutuality, no sale occurred because the supplier and the buyer were the same persons, a view uphel

TELANGANA JUDGES ASSOCIATION & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 9263 October 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

The Telangana Judges Association challenged the draft and modified guidelines for allocating subordinate judicial officers between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, arguing that the guidelines favored Andhra officers and violated their rights. The Supreme Court examined the constitutional scheme, the Andhra Pradesh Reorgan

VIKAS YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 9433 October 2016Disposed off

The appellants Vikas Yadav, Vishal Yadav and Sukhdev Yadav were convicted of murder, kidnapping and related offences (IPC ss.302, 364, 34, 201) and sentenced to life imprisonment with additional fixed‑term sentences. The State appealed for enhancement of the life sentence to death; the High Court instead imposed a fixe

VINOD KAPOORversusSTATE OF GOA & ORS.

2012 INSC 4443 October 2012Dismissed

Vinod Kapoor challenged the construction of a bungalow on C‑land in Goa, alleging violations of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 and the Coastal Regulation Zone notification under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Bombay High Court dismissed his writ petition on the basis of a technical report and late

C.P. FRANCISversusC.P. JOSEPH AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 10713 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the succession to the suit‑schedule property of the deceased parents, C.R. Pius and Philomina Pius, who had executed a joint will bequeathing the property to the appellant C.P. Francis. The respondents, other children of the deceased, challenged the will on the grounds of lack of testamentary capa

ISHWAR (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS & ORS.versusBHIM SINGH & ANR.

2024 INSC 6513 September 2024Dismissed

The respondents filed a suit for specific performance of a 2005 sale agreement, which was eventually decreed by the appellate court directing the appellants to execute the sale deed upon payment of the balance consideration. While the execution application was pending, the appellants sought rescission of the contract u

G H MANJIT SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2019 INSC 9923 September 2019Dismissed

The case arose from a violent incident on 03‑03‑2001 at the Barnala Court Complex where seven accused, including Manjit Singh and Sukhwinder Singh, attacked members of a complainant party, causing grievous injuries and the death of Dalip Singh. The prosecution relied primarily on the testimony of two injured eye‑witnes

RAGHUBIR SINGHversusGENERAL MANAGER, HARYANA ROADWAYS, HISSAR

2014 INSC 5923 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Raghuvir Singh, a conductor with Haryana Roadways, was arrested in 1994 on a criminal charge of ticket‑money misappropriation and was terminated from service without a proper enquiry or show‑cause notice. After being acquitted in 2002, he sought reinstatement; the dispute was referred by the State Government to the Lab

SHAHID BALWAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 5863 September 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether its own orders dated 11 April 2011 and 9 November 2012, issued under Articles 136 and 142 while monitoring the 2G spectrum scam investigation, could be recalled. The petitioners argued that the orders infringed their right to approach the High Courts under Articles 226, 227 and Sectio

UNION OF INDIAversusNAMIT SHARMA

2013 INSC 5873 September 2013Case Allowed

The Supreme Court reviewed its own September 2012 judgment that upheld Sections 12(5), 12(6), 15(5) and 15(6) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, on the ground that the earlier decision contained a manifest error of law. The Court held that the provisions merely require persons of eminence with wide knowledge and ex

DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEEversusLODHI PROPERTY CO. LTD. ETC.

2025 INSC 9233 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) appealed against a Delhi High Court decision that held it could not levy restitutionary or compensatory damages under s.33A of the Water Act and s.31A of the Air Act, on the ground that such powers amounted to penalties. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme, the p

THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORSversusRAJ KUMAR @ BITTU

2021 INSC 3773 August 2021Disposed off

The State of Haryana challenged a High Court order directing the State to draft a fresh remission policy under Article 161 and to apply the 2008 policy for premature release of Raj Kumar, who had served 12 years and 25 days of a life sentence. The Supreme Court examined the interplay between the constitutional power of

PARHLAD AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 5403 August 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Parhlad, and his uncle were convicted for kidnapping and raping a girl who was about 14 years old. The trial court, and subsequently the High Court, relied on the victim's testimony, her father's statements, and a school leaving certificate to establish that she was below sixteen, rejecting the ossificat

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIAversusUNION OF INDIA

2012 INSC 3143 August 2012Dismissed

The Bar Council of India challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 22‑A to 22‑E of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (as inserted by the 2002 Amendment), arguing that they were arbitrary, violated Articles 14 and 21, denied a right of appeal and encroached on the jurisdiction of special statutes. The Su

DR. MEHMOOD NAYYAR AZAMversusSTATE OF CHATTISGARH AND ORS.

2012 INSC 3193 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Mehmoood Nayar Azam, an Ayurvedic doctor and social activist, was arrested and taken into police custody where he was forced to hold a placard with self‑condemning words and photographed; the photograph was later circulated, causing humiliation and mental trauma. The High Court found that he had been subjected to c

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusSANTOSH KUMAR MISHRA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 4743 August 2010Disposed off

The case concerned the selection and appointment of pharmacy diploma holders as pharmacists in Uttar Pradesh. The 1980 Rules required that vacancies be filled by appointing candidates who obtained their diplomas earlier, irrespective of merit, while the 2002 and 2003 Rules introduced a merit‑based selection. The State

JAVED GULAM NABI SHAIKHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 6453 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh was arrested in February 2020 with a large consignment of counterfeit currency and charged under Sections 489B, 489C, 120B read with 34 of the IPC and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The investigation was taken over by the NIA and, after four years of custody, the trial court had

AMIT KUMAR ROYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 7203 July 2019Disposed off

Amit Kumar Roy, an Air Force airman, applied for a bank probationary officer post without completing the mandatory seven years of service or obtaining prior permission under Air Force Order (AFO) 14/2008. He obtained a provisional No Objection Certificate (NOC) and discharge from the Armed Forces Tribunal, joined the b

RANJAN SINHA & ANR.versusAJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA & ORS.

2017 INSC 5753 July 2017Disposed off

The case concerned the applicability of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 to the newly created State of Jharkhand after the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000. The petitioners challenged a Jharkhand Government notification that sought fresh registration of pharmacists under Section 31 of the Act, arguing that the First Register prepa

K. S. VARGHESE & ORS.versusST. PETERS & PAULS SYRIAN ORTH. & ORS.

2017 INSC 5803 July 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals concerning the administration of Parish Churches within the Malankara Church, which has been divided between the Patriarch faction and the Catholicos faction. The core dispute was whether the 1934 Constitution of the Malankara Church or individual Udampady agreements (such as those f

MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIC VISHWAVIDYALAYAversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2013 INSC 4283 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya, a university created under the 1995 Act to impart Vedic and other education, challenged the Amendment Act 5 of 2000 which altered Section 4(1) to restrict instruction to Vedic learning only, deleted the phrase “dissemination of knowledge”, and added a proviso requiring St

P. SUDHAKAR RAO & ORS.versusU. GOVINDA RAO & ORS.

2013 INSC 4203 July 2013Disposed off

The case concerned whether Supervisors in the Andhra Pradesh Engineering Service could be granted retrospective seniority when they were appointed as Junior Engineers under G.O.Ms No. 54 dated 15‑02‑1983. The Supreme Court held that while statutory rules may have retrospective effect, such retroactivity must satisfy Ar

SHREEJITH L.versusDEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION) KERALA & ORS.

2012 INSC 2653 July 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined several petitions for compassionate appointments of dependents of government employees who died in service, filed under the Kerala Education Rules and a 1999 Government Order. It held that applications must be made within two years of death, or within three years after a minor attains majorit

UNION OF INDIAversusMOHANLAL & ANR.

2012 INSC 2673 July 2012

The Union of India appealed the acquittal of Mohanlal and another by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which had held that the prosecution failed to prove the destruction of 3.36 kg of opium seized under Sections 8/18(b) read with 29 of the NDPS Act. The Supreme Court examined whether the lack of proof of destruction inva

ABHISHEK KUMAR SINGHversusG. PATTANAIK & ORS.

2021 INSC 3053 June 2021Disposed off

The petitioners, former Assistant Engineers of Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam, claimed that the corporation violated court orders by re‑engaging them without continuity of service and back wages, and later by terminating them without a prior hearing. The Supreme Court examined two sets of contempt petitions: one concerning th

DR. RINI JOHAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 4413 June 2016Case Allowed

Dr. Rini Johar, a doctor, and a senior advocate were arrested in November 2012 on a FIR alleging fraud under IPC sections 420 and 34 and the Information Technology Act. The arrest was carried out without complying with Sections 41 and 41‑A of the CrPC, nor the D.K. Basu guidelines, and the petitioners were taken to Bho

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTARANCHALversusMAMTA BISHT AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3363 June 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttaranchal Public Service Commission advertised 35 posts of Civil Judge (Junior Division) with both vertical (SC/ST/OBC) and horizontal (women, physically handicapped) reservations. Ms. Mamta Bisht, a resident woman of Uttaranchal, applied for the horizontal women’s reservation but was not selected. She filed a wr

FULJIT KAURversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2010 INSC 3383 June 2010Dismissed

Fuljit Kaur applied for a residential plot in Punjab Urban Estates and was asked to pay a provisional price. After the tentative price was later determined, the authorities issued a demand for an additional price, which she challenged as arbitrary. The High Court upheld the demand, relying on the Supreme Court’s decisi

BALWANT SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 4823 May 2023Disposed off

Balwant Singh was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in the 1995 bomb blast that killed Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh. A mercy petition on his behalf was filed by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee in 2012, but the petitioner himself never lodged any petition. The petitioner claimed an inordina

INDIAN SCHOOL, JODHPUR & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2021 INSC 2813 May 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined challenges by private unaided schools in Rajasthan to the Rajasthan Schools (Regulation of Fee) Act, 2016 and its 2017 Rules, alleging violations of Articles 19(1)(g) and 13(2) of the Constitution. It also considered the State's order dated 28 October 2020, issued by the Director of Secondary

BHAIKON @ BAKUL BORAHversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 3063 May 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Bhaikon @ Bakul Borah, was convicted of rape (IPC s.376) and murder (IPC s.302) of Rupamoni Dutta based on the testimony of an eye‑witness (PW‑1) corroborated by the victim's father (PW‑2) and the post‑mortem doctor (PW‑9). The trial court sentenced him to death for murder and life imprisonment for rape;

M/S M.R.F. LTD. ETC.versusMANOHAR PARRIKAR AND ORS.

2010 INSC 2623 May 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of two Goa Government notifications (15‑May‑1996 and 1‑Aug‑1996) granting a 25% electricity tariff rebate to industrial consumers. The appellants argued that the notifications were lawful government decisions, while the State contended they were issued by the Power Minister witho

DAMODAR S. PRABHUversusSAYED BABALAL H.

2010 INSC 2603 May 2010Disposed off

The appellant and respondent were parties to commercial transactions in which five cheques issued by the appellant were dishonoured, leading to criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. After protracted litigation up to the Supreme Court, the parties reached a settlement and sought

MUKESH KISHANPURIAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 2663 May 2010Disposed off

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which the Calcutta High Court rejected. He filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court challenging that order. The Court examined the record and found no justification to grant anticipatory bail. However, it clarified

GOA GLASS FIBRE LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF GOA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 2673 May 2010Dismissed

The State of Goa enacted the Goa (Prohibition of Further Payment and Recovery of Rebate Benefits) Act, 2002 to stop further electricity rebate payments under two 1996 notifications and to recover amounts already paid, alleging the notifications were unauthorized. Industrial units (Goa Glass Fibre Ltd. and others) chall

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusBAISHAKHI BHATTACHARYYA (CHATTERJEE) AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 4373 April 2025Disposed off

The West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) conducted a 2016 recruitment for assistant teachers and non‑teaching staff that was later found to involve massive irregularities, including rank‑jumping, out‑of‑panel appointments, manipulation of OMR scores, destruction of original answer sheets and illegal subcontrac

SIDDHARTH DALMIA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 3513 March 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, invoking Article 32, sought a court order to stop private hospitals from forcing patients to purchase medicines and consumables exclusively from the hospitals' own pharmacies at inflated prices, alleging exploitation and violation of the right to life under Article 21. They highlighted personal experie

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusDEBABRATA TIWARI & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2023 INSC 2023 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, heirs of municipal employees who died in service, sought compassionate appointments under a scheme intended to provide immediate financial relief to dependents. Their applications were filed in 2005‑2006, but the authorities took years to act, and the petitioners approached the High Court only in 2015.

THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRSversusDR. MAHINDRA BHASKAR LIMAYE & ORS.

2023 INSC 2093 March 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a challenge by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs against the High Court’s order striking down Rule 3(2)(b), Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 6(9) of the Consumer Protection (Qualification for appointment, method of recruitment, procedure of appointment, term of office, resignation and removal of President a

GAMBHIRDAN K GADHVIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS

2022 INSC 2593 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner challenged the appointment of respondent No.4 as Vice‑Chancellor of Sardar Patel University, alleging that the appointment violated the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2010/2018 which require ten years of professorial experience and a search committee constituted as per those regulations.

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTARANCHALversusJAGDISH CHANDRA SINGH BORA & ANR. ETC.

2014 INSC 1603 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the recruitment of Junior Engineers in Uttaranchal, where the 2001 emergency recruitment rules did not grant any preference to trained apprentices, but the 2003 amendment rules introduced a 10‑mark bonus for apprentices. The Court held that the 2003 rules could not be given retrospective effe

CENTRE FOR PIL & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2011 INSC 1753 March 2011Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the legality of Shri P.J. Thomas's appointment as Central Vigilance Commissioner under Section 4(1) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003, which was based on a recommendation by the High Powered Committee (HPC). The Court found that the HPC failed to consider material indicating pendi

P. SURESHversusD.KALAIVANI & ORS

2026 INSC 1213 February 2026Case Allowed

The appellant, P. Suresh, filed a suit for permanent injunction over disputed land before the District Munsif Court, Tambaram. The defendants contested the title and alleged the plaintiff's documents were forged, seeking to have the plaint struck off. The High Court of Madras, invoking its supervisory jurisdiction unde

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusTARSEM SINGH & ORS.

2025 INSC 1463 February 2025Dismissed

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) filed a miscellaneous application seeking clarification on whether the Supreme Court's 2019 judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, which mandated payment of solatium and interest to landowners whose land was acquired under the NHAI Act, should operate only prospectiv

ANUSHKA RENGUNTHWAR & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 993 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, who are Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) card‑holders, had been allowed since 2005 to appear for the All India Pre‑Medical Test (NEET) and compete for medical seats on parity with Non‑Resident Indians (NRIs) and Indian citizens. In March 2021 the Union of India issued a notification under Section 7B(1)

MGR INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2017 INSC 1053 February 2017Dismissed

The MGR Industries Association, whose members operate in an area declared as an industrial development area under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Area Development Act, 1976, challenged a tax demand by the Zila Panchayat under the Uttar Pradesh Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961, claiming exemption under

SUBHAS DATTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2015 INSC 863 February 2015Disposed off

The petitioner filed a public‑interest writ under Article 32 seeking directions for adequate security and investigation of thefts of historic artefacts from several Indian museums, including the Viswabharati University museum, Asiatic Society, Nandan Art Gallery and Victoria Memorial. The Union of India and various mus

ARUP BHUYANversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2011 INSC 983 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Arup Bhuyan was convicted under Section 3(5) of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) for alleged membership in the banned outfit ULFA, based solely on a confession he allegedly gave to the Superintendent of Police. The Supreme Court examined whether such a confession, inadmissible under Secti

KAUSHAL KISHORversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2023 INSC 43 January 2023Reference answered

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 113 of 2016 and Special Leave Petition (Diary) No. 34629 of 2017 were referred to a Constitution Bench to answer five questions concerning the scope of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and the enforceability of fundamental rights against non-State actors. The petitions arose from st

KANPUR JAL SANSTHAN & ANOTHERversusM/S. BAPU CONSTRUCTION

2014 INSC 9003 January 2014Disposed off

Kanpur Jal Sansthan appealed against a High Court order that, after rejecting its Section 34 objection to an arbitral award, directed it to deposit the entire award amount while allowing the claimant to withdraw half without security. The Supreme Court held that once a Section 34 objection is rejected, the award become

MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSAJU P. PAUL AND ANOTHER

2013 INSC 33 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The claimant, Saju P. Paul, a heavy‑vehicle driver employed by another company, was travelling as a "spare driver" in the cabin of a goods vehicle that met with an accident in 1993. The vehicle owner had taken a motor‑vehicle insurance policy covering only the driver and cleaner, not a spare driver. The Motor Accident

DARSHAN LAL NAGPAL (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusGOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 13 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi government sought to acquire 80 bighas 15 biswas of land, including 21 bighas 3 biswas belonging to the appellants, for a 400/220 KV electric sub‑station. It invoked Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, dispensing with the hearing provisions of Section 5A(2) on the ground of urgency lin

ROUSANARA BEGUMversusS.K. SALAHUDDIN @ SK SALAUDDIN & ANR.

2025 INSC 13752 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Rousanara Begum married S.K. Salahuddin in 2005 and divorced him in 2011. At the time of marriage her father gave Rs 7 lakh and 30 bhori of gold, which the appellant sought to recover under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. Lower courts awarded partial amounts, but the Calcutta

STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERSversusLINDE INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 12402 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jharkhand challenged the tax treatment of oxygen gas sold by Linde India Ltd to Tata Steel, contending that it is not a "raw material" for steel production under Section 13(1)(b) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and therefore should attract the normal 3% sales tax rather than the concessional 2% rate. The Hi

UNION OF INDIAversusV. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 8862 December 2015Reference answered

The case arose from the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, for which several accused were convicted and sentenced to death, later commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court. The State of Tamil Nadu proposed to remit the life sentences of the convicts, prompting the Union of India to file a wri

ASHISH CHADHAversusSMT. ASHA KUMARI & ANR.

2011 INSC 8322 December 2011Disposed off

A complaint alleged that a former MLA and her husband conspired to illegally obtain government land using forged documents. The Special Judge framed charges, which the High Court set aside, quashed the charges against all accused, and transferred the case to another court, claiming the accused were denied a fair trial

SIDDHARAM SATLINGAPPA MHETREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 8432 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Congress party member, was accused of instigating party workers to fire on BJP supporters, resulting in a murder eight days later. He applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which the High Court rejected. The Supreme Court, relying on the Constitution Bench decision in Sibbia's cas

PREM SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 9832 September 2019Disposed off

Prem Singh, a welder, worked for about 37 years in a work‑charged establishment of the Uttar Pradesh government and was later regularised before superannuation. He claimed that the period spent in the work‑charged establishment should be counted as qualifying service for pension under the Uttar Pradesh Retirement Benef

HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 8462 September 2016Dismissed

Hindustan Lever Ltd., a tea manufacturer, claimed exemption from entry tax on packing materials used for tea under a 1993 notification and a reduced rate under a 1998 notification. The issue was whether packing material could be classified as "raw materials, component parts or inputs" within Entry 80 of Schedule I of t

MOHD. ARIF @ASHFAQversusHE REGISTRAR, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 5902 September 2014Disposed off

The petitioners, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, challenged the constitutionality of Order XL Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, which mandates that review petitions be disposed of by circulation without oral argument. The Supreme Court examined whether Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA& ORSversusTRIVENI SHARAN MISHRA

2014 INSC 5822 September 2014Dismissed

The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) advertised a peon post with a maximum qualification of Class IX, excluding candidates with higher education. Triveni Sharan Mishra, a graduate pursuing an M.A., applied claiming only higher secondary qualification and was appointed. After two years, LIC discovered his highe

NOOR SABAversusANOOP MISHRA & ANR.

2013 INSC 5822 September 2013Dismissed

The petitioner, a widow, sought a revised family pension after the Supreme Court directed its determination in 2008. She later filed contempt petitions alleging non‑compliance with that direction and with a subsequent order dated 1 September 2010 directing the Accountant General of Uttar Pradesh to calculate and report

AP. DAIRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FEDERATIONversusB. NARASIMHA REDDY & ORS.

2011 INSC 6352 September 2011Dismissed

The Andhra Pradesh government enacted the Mutually Aided Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2006, which retrospectively excluded dairy‑milk co‑operative societies from the 1995 Act and deemed them to be registered under the 1964 Act, thereby increasing state control. Eight district milk unions challenged the amend

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusSHAUNAK H.SATYA & ORS.

2011 INSC 6402 September 2011Case Partly allowed

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) conducted examinations for chartered accountants and was asked by Shaunak H. Satya, a failed candidate, to disclose the instructions, model answers and related materials given to examiners and moderators under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI). The issues we

CITY MONTESSORI SCHOOLversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2024 INSC 5702 August 2024Dismissed

The dispute concerned a garden lease of a Nazul plot in Lucknow that vested in the State of Uttar Pradesh. City Montessori School (CMS) had the highest bid in a 1995 auction, but the State cancelled its bid and later converted the leasehold to freehold in favour of the alleged lessee for a nominal sum. CMS challenged t

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusM/S AMBUJA CEMENT LTD.

2024 INSC 5722 August 2024

The State of Gujarat appealed against the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal and the High Court, which had allowed M/s Ambuja Cement Ltd. to exclude Value Added Tax (VAT) and the value of purchases on which no tax credit was claimed from its taxable turnover of purchases under Section 11(3)(b) of the Gujarat Value Added

VANSHIKA YADAVversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 5682 August 2024Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined petitions seeking the cancellation of the 2024 NEET (UG) exam on the ground that the question paper had been leaked in Hazaribagh and Patna and that the exam’s integrity was compromised. The Court evaluated evidence from the National Testing Agency (NTA), the Central Bureau of Investigation (

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search