Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

ARAVIND KUMAR

9 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

GOVERNMENT OF GOA THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARYversusMARIA JULIETA D’SOUZA (D) & ORS.

2024 INSC 8831 January 2024Dismissed

The Government of Goa filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction against Maria Julieta D’Souza, which the trial court dismissed for lack of a clear title document and alleged limitation. The High Court reversed the decision, holding that the plaintiff's predecessor’s title was established through deeds and co

SMT. BHAGWATI DEVIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2025 INSC 105129 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bhagwati Devi, a mother‑in‑law, was convicted under Section 498‑A IPC for allegedly subjecting her daughter‑in‑law to dowry‑related cruelty that led to the latter's suicide by hanging. The trial court and the Uttarakhand High Court upheld the conviction based primarily on the testimony of the deceased's

OMDEO BALIRAM MUSALE & ORS.versusPRAKASH RAMCHANDRA MAMIDWAR & ORS.

2024 INSC 9324 January 2024Dismissed

The petitioners filed a suit for declaration in 1982 alleging that their father had illegally sold family property in 1980. The suit was dismissed for default because the petitioners failed to pay the process fee for serving notice, and subsequent applications for restoration of the suit and the revision petition were

M/S SHAH NANJI NAGSI EXPORTS PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2025 INSC 103219 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s Shah Nanji Nagsi Exports Pvt. Ltd., exported corn starch and filed 54 shipping bills between July and October 2017 under the Foreign Trade Policy. Due to a clerical omission by its customs broker, the declaration of intent to claim the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) was entered as “No”

M/S ANVITA AUTO TECH WORKS PVT. LTD.versusM/S AROUSH MOTORS & ANR.

2025 INSC 12028 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a commercial dispute where the plaintiff, Aroush Motors, sued Anvita Auto Tech Works for recovery of monies after terminating a dealership agreement. The defendant failed to file its written statement within the statutory 120‑day period and sought multiple extensions, eventually filing the statement

RAJNI AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 12018 October 2025

The deceased, Sanjesh Kumar Yagnik, purchased a second‑class ticket for travel from Indore to Ujjain on 19 May 2017 but was allegedly pushed out of the moving train due to overcrowding, sustaining fatal head injuries. His widow and minor son filed a claim petition before the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking compensation

NARESH CHANDRA AGRAWALversusE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 948 February 2024Dismissed

The Bank of Rajasthan complained that the audit firm Ramesh C. Agrawal & Co. failed to flag suspicious transactions, leading the Director (Discipline) to give a prima facie opinion that the appellant was not guilty of professional misconduct. The Board of Discipline disagreed and, relying on Rule 9(3)(b) of the 2007 Ru

GURWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 927 February 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Gurwinder Singh, was arrested along with co‑accused for alleged involvement in a terrorist module of the banned organization ‘Sikhs for Justice’, including raising funds, conspiracy and attempts to procure weapons. The investigation, taken over by the NIA, resulted in charges under the UAPA, IPC and Arms

NADEEM AHAMEDversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2025 INSC 9935 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Nadee m Ahamed was seized with approximately 125 g of heroin while a co‑accused was found with about 130 g, leading the trial court to treat the combined 255 g as a commercial quantity and convict both under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds that the

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

SHANKARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 3662 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Shankar and Vishal, were named in an FIR for the murder of Vijay Singh based solely on the mother’s (PW‑1) suspicion arising from a long‑standing family enmity. PW‑1 later clarified in her Section 161 statement and during trial that the names were included falsely and that she was not an eyewitness. No

RAMESH CHAND (D) THR. LRS.versusSURESH CHAND AND ANR.

2025 INSC 10591 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff claimed title to a Delhi property on the basis of an agreement to sell, a general power of attorney, a receipt of consideration, an affidavit and a registered will executed by his father, Kundan Lal. The trial court and High Court had upheld his claim, but the Supreme Court examined whether these document

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