Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI

301 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 1–200.

PADI KAUSHIK REDDY ETC.versusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS ETC.

2025 INSC 91231 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Three BRS MLAs who were elected to the Telangana Legislative Assembly joined the INC, prompting two other BRS MLAs to file disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule. The Speaker delayed issuing notices for over seven months, leading the petitioners to approach the High Court, which only directed the Speaker t

KISHORE CHHABRAversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2025 INSC 41931 March 2025Disposed off

The appellant, Kishore Chhabra, owned land in Sultanpur, Sonipat, which was included in a 1992 notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for development. He challenged the acquisition, arguing that his land should be released because a factory had been operating there since 1970 and that other simi

KARUPPUDAYARversusSTATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LALGUDI TRICHY & ORS.

2025 INSC 13231 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Karuppudayar was charged under Sections 294(b) and 353 IPC read with Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC‑ST Act for allegedly insulting a revenue inspector in his office. The High Court dismissed the appellant's petitions under Section 482 CrPC seeking quash of the proceedings, holding that the trial w

IN RE: T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 7831 January 2024Directions issued

The petition sought the institutionalisation and reconstitution of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which had functioned as an ad‑hoc body since its Supreme Court‑ordered creation in 2002. The Court examined the need for a permanent statutory authority to monitor compliance with its environmental orders and consi

K. VADIVELversusK. SHANTHI & ORS.

2024 INSC 74630 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant K. Vadivel was convicted of murder based on a charge‑sheet filed in 2013. After the trial concluded in 2019, the victim's wife filed a Section 311 application seeking additional witnesses, which was dismissed by the trial court and upheld by the High Court. She later filed a Section 173(8) application in

HDFC BANK LTD. & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 105630 September 2022Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions filed by several banks challenging the Reserve Bank of India's directions to disclose confidential information under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The banks argued that the directions conflicted with Section 8 of the RTI Act, the RBI Act and the Banking Regul

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (R AND B) AND OTHERSversusGOKUL CHANDRA KANUNGO (DEAD) THR. HIS LRS.

2022 INSC 104330 September 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellants, contractors, obtained an arbitral award that granted them a sum of money plus interest at 18% per annum for the pre‑reference, pendente lite and post‑award periods. The arbitrator did not provide any reasons for fixing the rate of interest. The respondents had remained silent for long periods (1977‑1989

M/S JM LABORATORIES AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 12730 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, M/s JM Laboratories and its partners, were summoned by a Judicial Magistrate in Kurnool to appear in a case filed under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act alleging manufacture of sub‑standard drugs. They filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the criminal proceedings, which the High Co

URMILA DEVI & ORS.versusBRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 10730 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The claimants filed a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act after the husband/father suffered a road accident, and the Motor Vehicle Accidental Claim Tribunal ordered the National Insurance Company to pay Rs.2,47,500. The insurer appealed to the Patna High Court, challenging its liability to pay, and the claimants filed a

CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR, U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. & OTHERSversusRAM GOPAL

2020 INSC 10930 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. (UPPCL) cancelled the results of a 1978 recruitment for Class IV posts after discovering irregularities, terminating all appointees including Ram Gopal and Shyam Behari Lal. Shyam Behari Lal obtained relief from the Allahabad High Court on equitable grounds, which was later set

STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.versusM/S. JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. & ORS.

2020 INSC 10830 January 2020Disposed off

The State of Odisha entered into a dispute with M/s Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) over the transport of iron ore that JSPL had purchased, processed and stored within the leasehold area of the mining company, Sarda Mines Pvt Ltd (SMPL). After the environmental clearance for SMPL expired, the State refused a transit

CHOWGULE AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITEDversusGOA FOUNDATION & ORS.

2020 INSC 11030 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether mining leaseholders in Goa, whose second renewal leases were set aside, could transport iron ore that had been mined before the cut‑off date of 15 March 2018. The Court held that paragraph 154.6 of the Goa Foundation‑II judgment only prohibited mining after that date and did not bar t

TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITEDversusM/S RAIN CALCINING LIMITED & OTHERS

2019 INSC 130029 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined three sets of appeals filed by Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. (APTRANSCO) against orders of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) fixing wheeling charges, grid support charges, and the continuation of incentives for non‑conventional energy. The Court he

SHIVSHANKARA & ANRversusH.P. VEDAVYASA CHAR

2023 INSC 31829 March 2023Dismissed

The appeal concerned a suit for injunction and possession of a house, filed by the plaintiff under a claim of prior possession. During the suit one defendant died, and the remaining defendants, who were also his legal representatives, continued to defend the suit. The appellants argued that the suit should abate for no

AJITSINH CHEHUJI RATHODversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2024 INSC 6329 January 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Ajitsinh Chehuji Rathod, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a cheque that was dishonoured for insufficient funds. He claimed that the signature on the cheque was forged and sought a handwriting expert's comparison during trial, which the trial court rejected and

JAIVEER SINGH AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 102428 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether an 18‑month Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) delivered by the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) through open and distance learning (ODL) could be treated as equivalent to the 2‑year D.El.Ed. required by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) for appointment as A

RAM KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2022 INSC 103428 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Kumar, was allotted a Fair Price Shop licence during the pendency of an appeal by the earlier licence holder, Kiran Devi (respondent No.9), whose licence had been cancelled by the Deputy Collector. Kiran Devi challenged the cancellation in the High Court, which set aside the cancellation, holding tha

PREM PRAKASHversusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 63728 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Prem Prakash was in judicial custody for a separate ECIR (No. 4 of 2022) when the Enforcement Directorate recorded statements from him under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for a new ECIR (No. 5 of 2023). The High Court had denied his bail, relying on those statements, but the

MANOHAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS

2025 INSC 90028 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a group of farmers, had their land acquired in the 1990s under the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 for the Jintur Industrial Area and were awarded Rs 10,800 per acre by the Land Acquisition Officer. They filed a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhancemen

GOSTHO BEHARI DASversusDIPAK KUMAR SANYAL & ORS.

2023 INSC 65328 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a registered medical practitioner, was found to have willfully defied demolition orders concerning an unauthorised building extension and was subsequently held in contempt of court, leading the High Court to suspend his licence to practise medicine. The appellant challenged the suspension, arguing that t

SHIV KUMAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2022 INSC 76528 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a public servant, was convicted under Section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with Section 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly manipulating measurement books and causing excess payment in school construction works. The prosecution alleged that he reduced

PRAKASH AGGARWALversusGANESH BENZOPLAST LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 46428 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd. (complainant) entered into Inter‑Corporate Deposit agreements with Morgan Securities & Credits Ltd., pledging shares as security. When the value of the pledged shares fell, the lender invoked the pledge and sold the shares to itself and its group companies in 2001. The complainant waited until 20

DIGAMBARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 44528 April 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant Digambar, brother of the deceased Pooja, and his accomplice Mohan were convicted of murdering Pooja and her lover Govind, who were found dead after being taken on a motorcycle. The trial and high courts sentenced Digambar to death and Mohan to life imprisonment, deeming the case "rarest of rare". On appea

IN RE : T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 44228 April 2023Rejected

The Court was asked to clarify whether mining could be carried out beyond one kilometre from the boundary of a National Park or Wildlife Sanctuary when the proposed site lies within an Eco‑Sensitive Zone (ESZ). The petitioner argued that his mining lease, granted in 2005, was situated 2.26 km from the Radhanagari Wildl

ABHISHEK SINGHversusHUHTAMAKI PPL LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 30828 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Operational Creditor (OC) filed a petition under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) against Manpasand Beverages Ltd., which was admitted by the NCLT and a CIRP was initiated. Within two days, the OC and the corporate debtor (CD) settled the dispute and the OC received full payment before a Commit

PULEN PHUKAN & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2023 INSC 30528 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the murder of Pradip Phukan, alleged to have been committed by a group of thirteen persons who entered his house and assaulted him with sharp weapons, resulting in his death. The trial court convicted eleven accused under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 326, 447 and 34 of the IPC, sentencing them to life

INDRAJIT DASversusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA

2023 INSC 17528 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Indrajit Das was convicted for murder under Sections 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC based largely on circumstantial evidence and extra‑judicial confessions. The prosecution alleged that the victim Kaushik Sarkar went missing after riding with the appellant and a juvenile, and that the accused assaulted and di

CHANDRABHAN SUDAM SANAPversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 11628 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap, was convicted of rape and murder of a 23‑year‑old woman and sentenced to death, based largely on circumstantial evidence, CCTV footage, witness testimonies, an alleged extra‑judicial confession and recovered items. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution's evidence sat

PRAVEEN KUMAR C.PversusKERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

2022 INSC 11228 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

In a miscellaneous application (No. 1769 of 2021) filed in Civil Appeal No. 4846 of 2021, the petitioner sought correction of a typographical error in the cause title of the judgment dated 17‑08‑2021. The judgment incorrectly read the respondent's name as "Kerala Public Service Commission Commission & Ors." The Supreme

PHULEL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARAYANA

2023 INSC 86327 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the death of Kiran Kaur, who suffered severe burns and later died, with the prosecution alleging that her husband Phulel Singh set her ablaze over dowry demands. The trial court convicted Singh under Section 304‑B IPC based primarily on the victim's dying declaration recorded by an Executive Magistra

MORESHAR S/O YADAORAO MAHAJANversusVYANKATESH SITARAM BHEDI (D) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 102727 September 2022Dismissed

The plaintiff, a doctor, rented part of the defendant's house and later entered into an agreement to purchase that portion for Rs 50,000, paying Rs 24,000 and Rs 6,000 and taking possession. The plaintiff sued for specific performance, admitting in the plaint that the suit property was jointly owned by the defendant, h

KALVAKUNTLA KAVITHAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 63227 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Kalvakuntla Kavitha, a former Member of Parliament and Legislative Council, was charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in CBI and Enforcement Directorate investigations relating to a Delhi excise policy conspiracy. She applied for bail, invoking the special treatment granted to women under the provi

PRAHLADversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 75327 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Ramesh, who had political enmity with three accused (Mohan, Prahlad and Jagdish), was shot and died in June 1991. The trial court acquitted all three, finding the prosecution evidence insufficient. The High Court reversed the acquittal of Mohan and Prahlad, relying on the sole testimony of an eye‑witness (PW

M/S JSW STEEL LIMITEDversusPRATISHTHA THAKUR HARITWAL & ORS.

2025 INSC 40127 March 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a contempt petition filed by JSW Steel Ltd., which had become the successful resolution applicant for the insolvent Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. After the National Company Law Tribunal approved the resolution plan, the State of Chhattisgarh issued demand notices for sales tax, VAT and entry

R. SHASHIREKHAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 40227 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, R. Shashirekha, filed a complaint alleging that her husband had been cheated, blackmailed and forced to commit suicide by his business partners (respondents 2 and 3) and a manager (respondent 4). The FIR was registered under Sections 306, 420, 506 and 34 of the IPC, but the respondents obtained a quash o

ASLAM ALIAS IMRANversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 40327 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Aslam alias Imran, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly stabbing his brother's brother, Zahid Khan, with a butcher knife, leading to the victim's death. The prosecution's case rested on the testimonies of several eyewitnesses, notably the victim's brother (PW-1), who was an interested witnes

K. SAMBA MOORTHYversusSANJIV CHADHA & ORS.

2025 INSC 11027 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a former Bank of Baroda manager, was placed in abeyance for promotion from Scale‑II to Scale‑III due to pending disciplinary proceedings, which later resulted in a minor penalty of pay reduction. The High Court set aside the disciplinary proceedings, declaring the appellant entitled to all consequential

CONSTABLE 907 SURENDRA SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2025 INSC 11427 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from an incident on 15 November 2004 where a Head Constable Jagdish Singh fired at a car suspected of smuggling liquor, killing the passenger. The trial court acquitted three constables – Surendra Singh, Surat Singh and Ashad Singh – on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove they shared a common

KALI CHARAN AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 89826 November 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined land acquisition proceedings undertaken by the Uttar Pradesh government and YEIDA for the integrated development of the Yamuna Expressway and adjoining parcels. The landowners challenged the use of the urgency provisions under Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arguin

MUNUWA @ SATISH ETC.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 87426 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

In 1979, the principal of a college, Iqbal Bahadur Saxena, was allegedly shot by three accused while seated with his physician. The FIR, recorded at the police station, and a later statement made in hospital were treated as two dying declarations. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302, 307 and 34 of

IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 43026 April 2023Disposed off

The Union of India sought modification of the Supreme Court's directions dated 3 June 2022 that mandated a uniform one‑kilometre eco‑sensitive zone (ESZ) around every protected forest and prohibited any new permanent structures within such zones. The Court examined the practical difficulties of a uniform ESZ, the impac

RAM SHARAN CHATURVEDIversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 86625 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a head cashier of a bank branch, was convicted under Sections 201, 380, 435, 457 and 477 read with Section 120B of the IPC for a theft of Rs. six lakh from the bank's safe, based solely on his custody of one set of keys in a dual‑lock system. The trial and High Courts inferred a conspiracy between the ap

RAHUL KUMAR YADAVversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2024 INSC 35925 April 2024

Rahul Kumar Yadav was convicted under Sections 302 and 394 of the IPC and Section 27(2) of the Arms Act, receiving a death sentence which was later commuted to life imprisonment. He claimed that he was a juvenile at the time of the alleged offence (27 July 2011) and filed applications under Section 7‑A of the Juvenile

YOGESH NAVINCHANDRA RAVANIversusNANJIBHAI SAGRAMBHAI CHAUDHARY & ORS.

2023 INSC 42825 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The original plaintiff filed a suit challenging a sale deed; he died during the suit and his legal heirs (LRs) continued the proceedings. The LRs filed a first appeal, which was dismissed, and subsequently a second appeal was filed by Vitthalbhai Maganbhai Parmar (VM) as the holder of a power of attorney (POA) executed

JAYA BHATTACHARYAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2025 INSC 27025 February 2025Disposed off

The appellant, Jaya Bhattacharya, a former L.D. Assistant in West Bengal, was absent from duty for 107 days in 1986 and subsequently from June 1987 to July 2007, claiming she was prevented from performing duties and not paid salary. The authorities treated the long absence as extraordinary leave under Rules 175 and 176

SUNIL @ SONU ETC.versusSTATE NCT OF DELHI

2024 INSC 72724 September 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants Sunil (Accused No.1) and Nitin (Accused No.4) were convicted by the trial court and the Delhi High Court for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, based on a FIR lodged after a violent altercation that resulted in the death of Sachin. The prosecution proved that the injuries causing d

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusCITI BANK, N. A.

2022 INSC 131824 August 2022Dismissed

Citi Bank, an authorized dealer under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA), accepted cash in foreign currency into the NRE account of a non‑resident Indian during October 1992‑January 1993. In 2002 the Enforcement Directorate issued a show‑cause notice alleging violations of several FERA provisions, relying

M/S RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

2025 INSC 90124 July 2025Dismissed

The appellants, M/s Rimjhim Ispat Ltd. and related companies, were investigated for alleged illegal manufacture and removal of excisable goods, leading to departmental adjudication orders imposing large duties and penalties under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Departmental order dated 31‑03‑2011 was set aside by the

M/S BENGANI FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD AND ANOTHERversusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 90224 July 2025Dismissed

M/s Bengani Food Products Pvt Ltd shipped a 24,700‑quintal maize consignment under a Marine Transit Open (Declaration) policy issued by National Insurance Co. The goods were unloaded at Shalimar Railway Yard on 7 February 2007 and left exposed to heavy rain, causing fungal contamination. The insurer repudiated the clai

MAGHAVENDRA PRATAP SINGH @ PANKAJ SINGHversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 41524 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Maghavendra Pratap Singh (Pankaj Singh), was convicted for the murder of businessman Goverdhan Aggarwal and related offences under Sections 302, 201, 120B of the IPC and the Arms Act, based largely on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution’s case lacked any eyewitnesses, direct forensic linkage, or rel

HIRALAL BABULAL SONIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 26624 February 2025Disposed off

The case involved a fraud scheme where fake telegraphic transfers were used to withdraw Rs. 6.7 crore from a bank, the proceeds of which were allegedly used to purchase 205 gold bars that were later seized from accused Nandkumar Babulal Soni. The trial court convicted Soni under Sections 120B and 411 of the IPC, direct

PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHIversusKUNTAL PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI @ KUNTAL VISANJI SHAH

2024 INSC 5524 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and respondent were married in 2004 and lived in Canada until 2011, when health and employment issues forced their return to India. The couple separated in February 2011, and the respondent thereafter refused to resume cohabitation, even after multiple summons and notices, effectively deserting the appell

IN RE: T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 5924 January 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the challenge by the Goa Foundation to the criteria adopted by the State of Goa for identifying private forest land, specifically the canopy density threshold of 0.4 and a minimum area of 5 hectares. The Court traced the historical development of these criteria from the 1991 guidelines, the 1

BAHARUL ISLAM & ORS.versusINDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8124 January 2023

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004, which created a regulatory authority to register diploma holders in medicine and to regulate their practice in rural Assam. The Court held that the Act was beyond the legislative competence of the Assam State Legi

SUHAS CHAKMAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 81323 October 2024Directions issued

The petitioner, a prison inmate, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a permanent mechanism to ensure free and timely legal aid for prisoners and to address overcrowded, unhygienic prison conditions. The Court examined the constitutional mandate under Articles 21 and 39‑A, the Legal Services Authorities Act,

IRFAN @ NAKAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 75823 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Irfan, was convicted and sentenced to death for allegedly setting fire to a room that killed his son and two brothers, based primarily on two dying declarations. The prosecution argued that the appellant had motive and that eye‑witnesses saw him pour inflammable substance and lock the door. The defence c

PETER AUGUSTINEversusK.V. XAVIER AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 77123 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned a 9‑cent parcel of land in Ernakulam, with conflicting sale, conveyance and settlement deeds executed between the parties' fathers in 1955, 1964 and 1994. The respondents filed a suit for declaration of title, which the trial court dismissed; the High Court of Kerala remanded the case back to the

RAJAN CHADHA & ANR.versusSANJAY ARORA

2025 INSC 54623 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, shareholders of RBT Private Ltd., filed a contempt petition alleging that the respondent, a fellow shareholder, willfully violated court and arbitral orders by removing assets and failing to pay loan EMIs. A Single Judge of the Delhi High Court on 5 December 2023 held the respondent guilty of contempt a

PAWAN KUMAR AGRAWAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2025 INSC 54523 April 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellants, selected in the 2003 recruitment for Civil Judge (Junior Division) in Chhattisgarh, were directed by the High Court on 2 May 2012 to be appointed and to have their seniority reckoned from the date of appointment. The State delayed their appointment until 8 July 2013, after which the appellants were plac

RAMYASH @ LAL BAHADURversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC

2025 INSC 54423 April 2025Disposed off

The complainant Ramyash lodged a FIR alleging that the accused Bhupendra Singh, Moti Lal and Prahlad assaulted his family, resulting in the death of his father. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302, 323, 324 (with 34) and other offences, sentencing them to life imprisonment. The Allahabad High Court

HDFC BANK LTD.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2024 INSC 80722 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Income Tax Department ordered HDFC Bank to stop operation of certain lockers and accounts, but later revoked the order only for the accounts, leading bank officials to mistakenly allow a locker to be operated. The department filed a complaint and an FIR was registered against the bank and its officials for multiple

SHIRDI NAGAR PANCHAYATversusKISHOR SHARAD BORAWAKE AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 85122 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by Shirdi Nagar Panchayat against landowners and plot holders who challenged a 2004 government notification converting a green zone into a residential zone, which required the municipal council to receive 10% of the land as open space and another 10% as amenity space free of cha

BALWINDER SINGH (BINDA)versusTHE NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU

2023 INSC 85222 September 2023Disposed off

The case arose from a 2005 drug seizure in Chandigarh where the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) recovered heroin from a car driven by Satnam Singh and later arrested Balwinder Singh based on a confession recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The High Court had upheld both convictions, relying on the confessional st

M/S C.L. GUPTA EXPORT LTD.versusADIL ANSARI & ORS.

2025 INSC 103522 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s C.L. Gupta Export Ltd., was found by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to have violated environmental laws, leading the Tribunal to impose a Rs.50 crore compensation and direct the Enforcement Directorate to pursue action under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The appellant contended th

GIRISH GANDHIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 61722 August 2024Case Allowed

Girish Gandhi, facing 13 FIRs across six states, obtained bail in all cases but could not furnish the multiple sureties required by each bail order. He petitioned the Supreme Court under Article 32 seeking to have the personal bond and a single set of sureties, already furnished in two cases, deemed sufficient for the

IN RE: ZUDPI JUNGLE LANDS versus

2025 INSC 75422 May 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the status of Zudpi Jungle lands in six districts of Maharashtra, which, although recorded as forest lands, have been used for residential, agricultural, and governmental purposes for decades. The State of Maharashtra sought to treat these lands as non‑forest to avoid the restrictions of the

THIRUMOORTHYversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2024 INSC 24722 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 17‑year‑old at the time of the 2016 offence, was identified as a Child in Conflict with Law (CICL) but the charge sheet was filed directly before a Sessions Court without referral to a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB). The trial court convicted him under sections of the IPC and the POCSO Act and sentenced

THAKORE UMEDSING NATHUSINGversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 19822 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were tried for murder, dacoity and robbery after the victim's jeep was allegedly hijacked; the trial court acquitted them of murder and dacoity but convicted them of robbery. The State appealed, and the Gujarat High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting the accused of murder and related offences. The Sup

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. ETC. ETCversusUDAY EDUCATION AND WELFARE TRUST AND ANR. ETC

2022 INSC 113121 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh granted provisional licences to 1,215 wood‑based industries (WBIs) after an e‑lottery, relying on a timber‑availability assessment by the Forest Survey of India (FSI) under the 2016 Wood‑Based Industries Guidelines. The licences were challenged before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which

SURESH LATARUJI RAMTEKEversusSAU. SUMANBAI PANDURANG PETKAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 84621 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Suresh Ramteke sought specific performance of a sale deed against the respondents Sumanbai Petkar, alleging that the respondents failed to execute the deed despite his readiness and payment of consideration. The trial court and the first appellate court upheld the appellant's claim, finding that the respo

RAJESH & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 83921 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the kidnapping and murder of 15‑year‑old Ajit Pal, for which three relatives – Rajesh Yadav, Raja Yadav and Om Prakash Yadav – were convicted and sentenced to death (two of them) and life imprisonment based largely on circumstantial evidence and confessions recorded before they were formally accused.

IN RE: PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL REPORTS OF THE OFFICERS OF THE INDIAN FOREST SERVICE versus

2025 INSC 74821 May 2025

The Supreme Court examined a Government Order dated 29 June 2024 issued by the Madhya Pradesh Government that made District Collectors and Divisional Commissioners – officers of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) – the reporting, reviewing and accepting authorities for Performance Appraisal Reports (PAR) of Indian

SUDAM PRABHAKAR ACHATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 37821 March 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant Sudam Prabhakar Achat was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for the death of his cousin Motiram Deoram Achat, based on testimony of relatives who witnessed a quarrel in which the appellant, armed with a stick, and a co‑accused, armed with the blunt side of an axe, assaulted the deceased

M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES LTD.versusM/S. DIVGI METAL WARES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ANR.

2024 INSC 23721 March 2024Disposed off

The case concerned transfers of workmen between the appellant's two factories in Pune and Sirsi, which were challenged by the trade union on the ground that the standing orders, as amended in 1999, did not permit such transfers. The High Court had held the amendment invalid and declared the transfers illegal, while als

NAGARAJ REDDYversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2023 INSC 26921 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nagaraj Reddy, was convicted of murder and attempt to murder under Sections 302 and 341 IPC based primarily on the testimony of his deceased brother, PW‑1, an interested witness who admitted prior enmity between the parties. The trial court and High Court upheld the conviction despite the lack of any eye

ANMOLversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 25621 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Anmol, a candidate with 58% multiple disabilities, secured a rank of 2462 in the NEET‑UG 2024 PwD category but was denied admission to an MBBS course by the Disability Assessment Board, which relied solely on quantified disability and the "both hands intact" clause in Appendix H‑1 of the 2019 NMC regulations. The High

SUNNY @ SANTOSH DHARMU BHOSALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 87820 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Sunny @ Santosh Dharmu Bhosale, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the death of Gopal Bhosale, who was allegedly assaulted with a bamboo stick after a quarrel over a loan. The prosecution alleged that the appellant abused the householder and his wife, was confronted by the deceased, and subsequently

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusNIRMAL KAUR @ NIMMO AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 112120 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The police seized about 20 kg of poppy husk from the accused Nirmal Kaur and others, and chemical analysis showed the presence of morphine and meconic acid. The trial court convicted them under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for possessing commercial quantity of poppy straw, but

APPAIYAversusANDIMUTHU @ THANGAPANDI & ORS.

2023 INSC 83520 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant purchased a two‑acre property in 1963 from Puliyankaladi, who had earlier acquired it through a registered sale deed (Exhibit A1) dated 27‑08‑1928. The trial court and the first appellate court held that the certified copy of Exhibit A1, a public document, was admissible as secondary evidence to prove the

VIKRAM BAKSHI AND OTHERSversusR.P. KHOSLA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 102020 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose between the Khosla and Bakshi groups over a resort development project, leading to allegations of perjury and a criminal proceeding under Section 340 of the CrPC. The High Court initially dismissed the criminal application but later recalled its own order after a review petition was filed under Order

GAUTAM KUMAR DASversusNCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 61020 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gautam Kumar Das, lost his wife and father to COVID-19 shortly after the birth of his daughter Sugandha and temporarily handed her over to his late wife's sister. After remarrying, he sought to regain custody, filing a petition under the Guardians and Wards Act and later a habeas corpus writ, but the Del

SHABNA ABDULLAversusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 61220 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, sister‑in‑law of Abdul Raoof, challenged his detention under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) and the subsequent confirmation order, alleging that the detaining authority had not supplied WhatsApp chat records that were relied upo

RAMNARESH @ RINKU KUSHWAH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 61120 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, meritorious candidates from reserved categories who studied in government schools, were denied MBBS seats under the Unreserved Government School (UR‑GS) quota for the 2023‑24 academic session because the State of Madhya Pradesh applied a flawed methodology in allocating horizontal and vertical reservati

ANBAZHAGANversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 63220 July 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, an agriculturist, struck the deceased with a hoe during a verbal altercation over a pathway, causing a head injury that led to death. The trial court convicted him of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I and sentenced him to ten years' rigorous imprisonment. The High Court a

ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 73520 May 2025Directions issued

The Supreme Court heard a batch of writ petitions filed by the All India Judges Association seeking clarification on the promotion and recruitment mechanisms in the judicial services, including the quota for Limited Departmental Competitive Examinations (LDCE), qualifying experience requirements, and suitability tests.

UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ANRversusADANI POWER (MUNDRA) LIMITED & ORS.

2023 INSC 40120 April 2023Dismissed

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (collectively, Haryana Utilities) had entered Power Purchase Agreements with Adani Power Mundra Ltd. (APML) for 1,424 MW of power. APML claimed relief under the "Change in Law" clause of the PPAs, alleging a shortfall of domestic coal cau

GMR WARORA ENERGY LIMITEDversusCENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION (CERC) & ORS.

2023 INSC 39820 April 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals arising from Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) between GMR Warora Energy Ltd. (the generator) and various distribution companies, challenging the classification of several post‑cut‑off charges as ‘Change in Law’ events and the computation of carrying cost interest. The Court

A.M. MOHANversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY SHO AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 23320 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, A.M. Mohan, was charged under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC along with co‑accused for alleged cheating. He filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashment of the FIR, arguing that the FIR and charge‑sheet did not disclose the essential ingredient of dishonest inducement req

DESH RAJversusBALKISHAN (D) THROUGH PROPOSED LR MS. ROHINI

2020 INSC 5920 January 2020Disposed off

The appellant and respondent, brothers, entered into an agreement to sell one floor of their ancestral property, which the respondent later sought to enforce through a suit for specific performance. The appellant repeatedly failed to file a written statement within the timelines prescribed by Order VIII Rule 1 of the C

PRAKASH AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 102019 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 306 and 34 IPC for allegedly abetting the suicide of their daughter-in-law, who had committed suicide on 20 March 2015 after a family dispute and a court‑ordered mahalokadalat. The prosecution’s case hinged on the claim that the appellants' words at the mahalokadalat on 17 Feb

DIGAMBAR AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 101919 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed an FIR alleging that her husband and his parents-in-law subjected her to cruelty, forced her to consume poisonous food, and caused a miscarriage, invoking sections 498-A, 312, 313 and 34 of the IPC. The appellants filed a criminal application under section 482 of the CrPC seeking quash of the FIR,

NAVEEN @ AJAYversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 93619 October 2023Disposed off

The appellant, Naveen (alias Ajay), was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a three‑month‑old girl under multiple provisions of the IPC and the POCSO Act. The trial was completed in fifteen days, during which a legal‑aid counsel was appointed only hours before the case began and was not given su

KAVERI PLASTICSversusMAHDOOM BAWA BAHRUDEEN NOORUL

2025 INSC 113319 September 2025Dismissed

Kaveri Plastics issued a cheque of Rs 1 crore to the respondent, which was returned unpaid. The plaintiff served two demand notices under Proviso (b) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, but each notice demanded Rs 2 crore, double the cheque amount. The Delhi High Court quashed the criminal complaint on th

NABHA POWER LIMITEDversusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 100219 August 2025Dismissed

Nabha Power Ltd (NPL) and Talwandi Sabo Power Ltd (TSPL) entered into Power Purchase Agreements (PPA) with Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) for a 700 MW coal‑fired project. They claimed that deemed export benefits under Paragraph 8.3 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2009‑2014 were available at the bid cut‑of

TEESTA ATUL SETALVADversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 63719 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Teesta Atul Setalvad was arrested in June 2022 for alleged offences under Sections 468, 469, 471, 194, 211, 218 and 120B of the IPC, relating to alleged influence over false affidavits concerning documents from 2002‑2012. After being denied bail by the trial court and the High Court, the Supreme Court granted her inter

RAVINDER SINGH SIDHUversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2025 INSC 72719 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, Ravinder Singh Sidhu, faced 64 FIRs across ten states arising from alleged financial fraud. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the clubbing and transfer of all FIRs to a single jurisdiction, later modifying the prayer to consolidation within each state. The Supreme Court examined whether

PRAKASH NISHAD @ KEWAT ZINAK NISHADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 56119 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

A six‑year‑old girl was sexually assaulted, murdered and her body dumped in a drain. Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad was arrested on suspicion and convicted under IPC sections 376, 377, 302 and 201, receiving a death sentence for murder. On appeal, the Supreme Court found serious procedural lapses: the appellant’s

INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIAversusSATYANARAYAN BANKATLAL MALU & ORS.

2024 INSC 31919 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) filed a criminal complaint under Sections 73(a) and 235A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against the former directors of SBM Paper Mills for non‑compliance with a One‑Time Settlement ordered by the NCLT. The Sessions Judge issued process, but the res

BABU SAHEBAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2024 INSC 32019 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted six accused, including A‑1, A‑2 and A‑3, for the alleged murder of Malagounda under sections 302 r/w s.34 IPC, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable and the complainant's testimony contradictory. The State appealed under s.378 CrPC, and the Karnataka High Court reversed the acquittal, co

NBCC (INDIA) LIMITEDversusZILLION INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD.

2024 INSC 21819 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

NBCC (India) Ltd. issued a tender for the construction of a weir and awarded the contract to Zillion Infraprojects Ltd. The contract was governed by a Letter of Intent (L.O.I.) which incorporated the tender documents mutatis mutandis but also stipulated that disputes be resolved only in Delhi courts. Zillion invoked th

IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 99718 December 2024Directions issued

The Supreme Court considered an interlocutory application filed by environmental activist T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad seeking protection for the sacred groves, known as Orans, in Rajasthan. The Court examined the statutory framework, including the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (as amended in 2023), the Wildlife Protect

GEETA DUBEY & ORS.versusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 65218 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The claimants, wife and son of the deceased Chakradhar Dubey, filed a motor accident claim after he was injured and later died following a collision between his car and a truck (MP-19-HA-1197). The First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded compensation of Rs. 50,41,289 against the truck driver and

SIDDHANT @ SIDHARTH BALU TAKTODEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 83718 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Siddhant @ Sidharth Balu Taktode, was arrested under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 and remained incarcerated for about five years without being produced before the trial judge on most of the 102 scheduled dates, and without charges being framed. The Special Judge and the High Court

T. J. PARAMESHWARAPPA@PARAMESHWARAPPA@J. T. PARAMESHWARAPPA@TALALKENA GOWDRA PARAMESHWARAPPAversusTHE BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

2022 INSC 118018 November 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a cleaner, suffered comminuted fractures of both tibiae in a road accident on 15 May 2015 and claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 21,08,400, but the Karnataka High Court reduced the permanent disability assessment to 20% and the award to Rs 7,3

RAJ BALA & ORS.versusRAKEJA BEGAM & ORS.

2022 INSC 110718 October 2022Case Partly allowed

The wife and children of a deceased Head Constable filed a claim under Sections 166 and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking Rs 50 lakh after a bus in which he was a passenger fell into the Chenab River. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 17,73,704 and the Punjab & Haryana High Court enhanced it to R

DIVYAversusTHE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR

2022 INSC 110818 October 2022Disposed off

The appellant, a two‑year‑old girl, suffered near‑total loss of lower‑limb function in a 1998 motor‑vehicle accident and was later certified by a Medical Board as having almost 100% permanent disability. The Motor Vehicles Tribunal dismissed her claim on technical grounds, but the Madras High Court set aside that dismi

ABHINAV MOHAN DELKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 99018 August 2025Dismissed

Seven‑time MP Abhinav Mohan Delkar died by suicide on 22 February 2021, leaving a note that accused several officials of defamation, harassment and extortion. An FIR was filed under Section 306 IPC (now Section 108 BNS) read with Section 107 (now Section 45 BNS) alleging abetment of suicide, and the accused sought quas

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusJAYEETA DAS

2024 INSC 31318 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal appealed against a Calcutta High Court order that quashed the addition of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) offences to an IPC case and set aside extensions of remand. The investigation, conducted by the State police, led the Chief Judge of the City Sessions Court to permit inclusion

KIRPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2024 INSC 31218 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kirpal Singh was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC for the murder of his brother‑in‑law Balwinder Singh. The prosecution’s case relied primarily on the testimony of the victim’s wife, Sharan Kaur (PW‑5), and her son Daljit Singh (PW‑6), who alleged that the appellant acted out of jealousy ov

PUNJAB AND SIND BANKversusFRONTLINE CORPORATION LTD

2023 INSC 38618 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant bank, Punjab & Sind Bank, had mortgaged a suit property to Frontline Corporation Ltd. after the latter defaulted on loans. The bank issued notices under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act and took possession, while the borrower filed a civil suit for specific performance of a settlement agreement and obtained

YOGESH KUMARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 37918 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former stenographer appointed to the District Court, Saharanpur, was terminated after serving eight years due to an excess of appointments. He filed writ petitions seeking payment of salary for the period he worked, but the High Court dismissed them on the ground that the relief could only be obtained

ASSOCIATION OF DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 22618 March 2024Disposed off

The Supreme Court earlier ordered the State Bank of India (SBI) to disclose details of electoral bonds purchased and the contributions received by political parties. A Miscellaneous Application was filed seeking to pre‑date the point from which such disclosure must be made. The Court examined the language of sub‑paragr

NAVAS @ MULANAVASversusSTATE OF KERALA

2024 INSC 21518 March 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of murdering four members of a family, house‑trespass and attempted suicide, and was originally sentenced to death for the murder under s.302 IPC. The High Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment with a direction that the appellant could not be released for 30 years, invoking

MS. XversusMR. A AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 21618 March 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a minor at the time of the alleged incidents, accused the respondents of sexual intercourse based on a false promise of marriage, resulting in pregnancy and a forced termination. The FIR and subsequent restatement contained contradictory statements, and medical evidence disputed the claim of an abortion

JEETENDRAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 30818 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jeetendra, was arrested in 2019 for alleged forgery of property documents that had earlier been used as a personal bond for his bail in a matrimonial dispute. Two police closure reports—one in 2013 and another in September 2019—concluded that no offence was committed. Despite these reports, the High Cour

BHAGWAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2020 INSC 31018 March 2020Case Partly allowed

During his son’s wedding in Uttarakhand, the appellant fired a licensed gun towards the roof, causing pellets to strike five guests, two of whom died. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302 and 307 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and five years’ rigorous imprisonment, respectively. On appeal, the S

EX-GUNNER VIRENDER PRASADversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2020 INSC 30518 March 2020Dismissed

Ex‑Gunner Virender Prasad was convicted by a Summary General Court Martial under Section 69 of the Army Act for murdering a fellow gunner while allegedly acting in a delusional state of a terrorist attack. The conviction and life sentence were affirmed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, and the appellant appealed to the Sup

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTversusVED PRIYA & ANR.

2020 INSC 30618 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Ved Priya, a probationary civil judge, was not confirmed after a two‑year probation and his services were terminated by the State Government on the recommendation of the Rajasthan High Court. He challenged the termination, alleging it was punitive, based on corruption allegations and violated his right to a hearing und

THE BHARAT COKING COAL LTD. & ORS.versusAMR DEV PRABHA & ORS.

2020 INSC 30718 March 2020Disposed off

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) issued an online reverse auction for hiring heavy equipment. Due to connectivity problems, the auction automatically closed at 1:03 pm after AMR‑Dev Prabha’s (Respondent 1) bid remained unresponded for 30 minutes. BCCL, through its facilitator C1‑India, restarted the auction at 2:30 pm aft

GELUS RAM SAHU AND OTHERSversusDR. SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 20218 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the promotion of seven teachers to the post of Principal in Chhattisgarh polytechnic colleges. Respondent No.1, a senior HOD, claimed that a Ph.D. was an essential qualification for the post under the 2010 AICTE Regulations and sought to quash the promotions, relying on a 2016 AICTE Notification that

SAMBHUBHAI RAISANGBHAI PADHIYARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 107217 December 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of kidnapping, brutal sexual assault and murder of a four‑year‑old boy and sentenced to death by the trial court, a sentence confirmed by the Gujarat High Court. The Supreme Court examined whether the circumstantial evidence satisfied the golden principles and whether the presumption under S

VISHWAJEET KERBA MASALKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 78817 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vishwajeet Kerba Masalkar, was convicted and sentenced to death for the alleged murders of his wife, daughter and mother, based largely on the ocular testimony of a single injured neighbour (PW‑12) and circumstantial evidence such as a recovered hammer, blood‑stained clothes and CCTV footage. The Supreme

M/S HERO MOTOCORP LTDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 110017 October 2022Dismissed

The appellants, Hero Motocorp Ltd. and Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., relied on a 2003 Office Memorandum and notification that granted 100% excise duty exemption for ten years to industrial units in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh. After the introduction of the GST regime, the Union of India rescinded those exemptions

NTPC LTD. (SIMHADRI PROJECT)versusRAJIV CHAKRABORTY

2020 INSC 64216 November 2020Disposed off

The appeal arose from a corporate insolvency resolution process under the IBC where the appellant’s claim was listed in the Information Memorandum (IM) under “List of Other Creditors” rather than under “Claims of Operational Creditors”. The appellant contended that the classification was incorrect and that the claim sh

UMC TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2020 INSC 64316 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) awarded a recruitment contract to UMC Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (appellant). After a written exam, police seized documents that appeared to be leaked question papers, prompting FCI to issue a show‑cause notice on 10‑04‑2018 alleging breach of bid conditions. The appellant replied, but F

THE STATE OF HARYANAversusJAI SINGH AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 112216 September 2025Dismissed

The State of Haryana amended the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 by inserting sub‑clause (6) to s.2(g) through Haryana Act No. 9 of 1992, which declared that lands reserved for village common purposes under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 would vest

MAKHAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2022 INSC 83116 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Makhan Singh was convicted under Section 304‑B IPC for the death of his wife Manjit Kaur based on two dying declarations. The first declaration, recorded by Judicial Magistrate Vani Gopal Sharma, was made after a medical officer certified the deceased was fit and conscious, and the magistrate satisfied he

MUKATLALversusKAILASH CHAND (D) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.

2024 INSC 42816 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned Mukatlal's challenge to a revenue suit filed by Kailash Chand, the adopted son and legal heir of the Hindu widow Smt. Nandkanwarbai, seeking partition of an unpartitioned joint Hindu family estate under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Supreme Court examined whether a Hindu wido

T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 42616 May 2024Disposed off

M/s Shewalkar Developers Ltd. sought permission to construct a health/eco‑resort on Plot Nos. 14/3 and 14/4 in Pachmarhi, Madhya Pradesh, claiming the land was not forest land and that its title, derived from a 1991 sale deed, was unchallenged. The State of Madhya Pradesh contended that the plots formed part of the Pac

KARNAIL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2024 INSC 42416 May 2024Case Allowed

The review petition challenged a Supreme Court judgment that had held that vesting of village common lands in the Gram Panchayat was complete upon mere assignment under Section 18(c) of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948. The petitioner argued that this view ignored the C

MR. R.S. MADIREDDY AND ANR. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

2024 INSC 42516 May 2024Dismissed

The appellants, former cabin crew of Air India Limited (AIL), filed writ petitions between 2011 and 2013 alleging stagnation in pay, non‑promotion and denial of allowances, invoking Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. While the petitions were pending, the Government of India disinvested its 100 % share in AIL,

RIKHAB BIRANI & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 51216 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Rikhab Birani and Sadhna Birani, entered into an oral agreement to sell a godown for Rs 1.35 crore, which the buyer, Shilpi Gupta, failed to fully pay, leading the sellers to re‑sell the property at a lower price. The buyer subsequently approached the Metropolitan Magistrate to register an FIR alleging

ASSOCIATION OF ENGINEERS AND OTHERS ETC.versusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS ETC.

2024 INSC 30616 April 2024

The dispute concerned the validity of a Government Order (GO No. 1, 1990) that permitted Technical Assistants, along with Junior Draughting Officers, Draughting Officers and Overseers, to be appointed as Assistant Engineers on transfer after five years of service and possession of a B.E./A.M.I.E. degree. The appellants

IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881versus.

2021 INSC 25716 April 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu under Article 32, examined the massive backlog of cases filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was impeding the disposal of other criminal matters. After hearing the Amicus Curiae, the Solicitor General, the Reserve Bank of India and various state repre

PRADEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 24216 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Pradeep Kumar was convicted for the murder of Umesh Chowdhary based on an alleged extra‑judicial confession, alleged animosity between the parties, and the recovery of keys and money. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the reliability of the confession, the credibility of witnesses who were themselves

NARENDRASINH KESHUBHAI ZALAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 24116 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Narendrasinh Keshubhai Zala, was convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and for offences under the Arms Act based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑3, who claimed to have seen the shooting. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of PW‑3, noting inconsistencies,

UDAYAKUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2023 INSC 23916 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Udayakumar (A‑2) was convicted for the murder of Purushothaman under Section 302 IPC, based primarily on the identification by a single eyewitness, PW‑1. The trial court and the High Court upheld his conviction despite acquitting the alleged conspirators (A‑1 and A‑3) and finding no material linking Udaya

RAVASAHEB @ RAVASAHEBGOUDA ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 23816 March 2023Dismissed

The victim Satyappa was murdered in broad daylight; eight men were accused. The trial court and the Karnataka High Court convicted all eight based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑1, the brother of the deceased, despite most other prosecution witnesses turning hostile. The appellants challenged whe

GUNA MAHTOversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2023 INSC 24016 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Guna Mahto was convicted for murdering his wife under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, based largely on the testimony of a few eyewitnesses and an undisclosed statement of the investigating officer. The prosecution alleged that he killed his wife, disposed of her body in a village well, and later filed a false missing‑

OMKAR RAMCHANDRA GONDversusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 77515 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a candidate with a 44%/45% speech and language disability, qualified the NEET‑UG 2024 and applied for MBBS admission under the PwD quota. The Designated Disability Certification Centre declared him ineligible based on Appendix H‑1 of the 2019 MCI/NMC regulations, which barred persons with 40% or more dis

PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIAversusRAJEEV COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND ORS.

2022 INSC 96515 September 2022Dismissed

The Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) issued resolutions in July and September 2019 imposing a five‑year moratorium on the establishment of new pharmacy colleges, later exempting government institutions, the North‑Eastern region and states with fewer than 50 pharmacy institutes. Several private pharmacy colleges challeng

IN RE: CONSTRUCTION OF MULTI STOREYED BUILDINGS IN FOREST LAND MAHARASHTRA versus

2025 INSC 70115 May 2025

The case concerned 11.89 ha of land in Kondhwa Budruk, Pune, notified as Reserved Forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1878, which was later allotted to the Chavan family in 1998 for agricultural purposes without Central Government approval under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. The Chavan family subsequently sold the

TRISHA SINGHversusANURAG KUMAR

2024 INSC 45015 May 2024Case Allowed

The husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce, and the parties later reached an amicable settlement before a Supreme Court mediator, wherein the husband paid alimony and the wife agreed to dissolve the marriage. The wife subsequently withdrew from the settlement, claiming she wo

C. SUBBIAH @ KADAMBUR JAYARAJ AND OTHERSversusTHE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 41615 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a government teacher, alleged that the accused induced him to invest in benami land deals and later failed to deliver the promised plots and profits, leading him to file both a civil suit and a criminal FIR. The accused sought quashing of the FIR and charge sheet, arguing that the dispute was purely ci

PRABIR PURKAYASTHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2024 INSC 41415 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on 3 October 2023 without the arrest memo containing the specific grounds of arrest, only generic reasons. He was presented before a Remand Judge on 4 October 2023 and remanded to police custody, but the copy of the remand application and

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 20915 March 2024Disposed off

The Election Commission of India (ECI) had earlier submitted data on electoral bonds to the Supreme Court, which was kept in sealed custody as per an interim order dated 12 April 2019. The Court later directed the ECI to upload this data on its website, assuming the ECI retained a copy. The ECI informed the Court that

SUSELA PADMAVATHY AMMAversusM/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED

2024 INSC 20615 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Bharti Airtel Ltd. filed complaints under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Fibtel Telecom Solutions and its two directors, Manju Sukumaran Lalitha and Susela Padmavathy Amma, after several post‑dated cheques were dishonoured. The appellant, Susela, a director but not the authorized signato

CHATRAPALversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 11515 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Class‑IV employee appointed as Ardly, was transferred to the post of Process Server but continued to receive Ardly salary, prompting him to lodge representations alleging salary discrepancy and corruption. The District Judge suspended him and a departmental inquiry was instituted, charging him with usi

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 11315 February 2024

The Supreme Court of India struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and related amendments to the Finance Act 2017, which had introduced anonymous financial contributions to political parties. The Court held that the scheme violated the right to information of voters under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, as informat

AJAI ALIAS AJJU ETC. ETCversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 12715 February 2023Dismissed

The case involved the murder of four members of the Vijay Pal family and the grievous injury of Smt. Pinky (PW‑1) in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. The accused – Ajai alias Ajju, Braj Pal, Ravi and Mukesh – were convicted under IPC sections 302, 149 and 307 and under the Arms Act, with the trial court imposing death sentenc

MOHAMMED ABDUL WAHIDversusNILOFER & ANR

2023 INSC 107514 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by Mohammed Abdul Wahid against Nilofer & Anr concerning whether a party to a civil suit can also be treated as a witness and whether CPC provisions bar the production of documents for cross‑examination of a party. The High Court had held that a party could not be equated with a witnes

KANCHAN KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2022 INSC 95514 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Kanchan Kumar, a former Assistant General Manager of the Bihar State Financial Corporation, was charged under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for allegedly possessing assets disproportionate to his known income during the period 1974‑1988. The charge‑sheet claimed an income of Rs.

ROHITH THAMMANA GOWDAversusRAJINI NALINI RAMESH

2022 INSC 132114 September 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court of India entertained a petition (Conmt. Pet. (C) No. 461/2022) alleging willful disobedience of its earlier judgment dated 29 July 2022 in Civil Appeal No. 4987/2022. The earlier judgment had issued directions (paragraph 18(i) to (iv)) concerning the parties' dispute. The Court, by this order, added a

R. D. KAUSHAL AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2022 INSC 96214 September 2022Disposed off

The appellants, former Assistant and Deputy Foreign Language Examiners of the Research and Analysis Wing, challenged the merger of their two cadres and the consequent calculation of their pension and terminal benefits. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) had earlier directed that the merger order of 26 May 2008 b

EX. CT. MAHADEVversusTHE DIRECTOR GENERAL, BOARDER SECURITY FORCE & ORS.

2022 INSC 64414 June 2022Case Partly allowed

Constable Mahadev, a BSF personnel, was convicted under Section 46 of the BSF Act (equivalent to murder under Section 302 IPC) for shooting and killing a civilian smuggler during a border patrol. He appealed, claiming the shooting was in private self‑defence against a group of armed intruders who had surrounded him. Th

NAND LAL AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 22414 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC, alleged to have participated in an unlawful assembly that killed Kartikram. The prosecution’s case relied on the testimony of interested and injured witnesses, while the accused claimed they were falsely implicated and highlighted a four‑hour delay in lodg

POPATRAO VYANKATRAO PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2020 INSC 18314 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil, was the highest bidder for a sand block auctioned by the Maharashtra State Government and deposited the full auction amount of Rs.62,26,085. Despite his payment, he was never given possession of the sand block nor allowed to excavate sand, due to local opposition, and the file

M/S DHARMARATNAKARA RAI BAHADUR ARCOT NARAINSWAMY MUDALIAR CHATTRAM & OTHER CHARITIES & ORS.versusM/S BHASKAR RAJU & BROTHERS & ORS.

2020 INSC 19414 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a charitable trust, entered into a 38‑year lease deed with the respondents for development of trust land. The lease deeds of 1996 and 1997 were neither registered nor sufficiently stamped under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, and the respondents failed to pay the deficit stamp duty and penalty directed b

BHARTI ARORAversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 104413 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former Superintendent of Police, was implicated by a Special Judge for allegedly fabricating a false story that led to the recovery of opium and was issued a show‑cause notice under Section 58 of the NDPS Act. The Special Judge recorded adverse findings against her and other officers without giving the

GEORGEversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 76913 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, George, was convicted under Sections 294(b), 341 and 302 IPC for the murder of the informant's son, based solely on the testimony of the father (PW‑1), an interested witness. The High Court, however, acquitted two co‑accused on the same testimony, finding it unreliable for them, yet upheld the appellant'

RAJNISH KUMAR MISHRA & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. ETC.

2019 INSC 137313 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were initially appointed on an ad‑hoc basis to the Ambedkar Nagar Judgeship between 1999 and 2001 and continued in service after a 2006 High Court order allowing them to remain pending a recruitment process that was later cancelled. They sought regularisation; a District Judge formed a Committee which re

S. KRISHNA SRADHAversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 136213 December 2019Reference answered

The appellant, a meritorious candidate claiming reservation in the sports and games category, was denied admission to the MBBS course after the statutory cut‑off date of 30 September 2015. The High Court, relying on the decision in Jasmine Kaur, refused admission and awarded only monetary compensation. The Supreme Cour

SIRAJ AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2019 INSC 136713 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Siraj Ahmad was appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as Junior Engineer in 1987 under the U.P. Development Authorities Centralised Service Rules, 1985, without the concurrence of the U.P. Public Service Commission. While in service he obtained a B.Sc. (Engineering) degree and sought promotion to Assistant Engineer under sub‑ru

IN RE: DIRECTIONS IN THE MATTER OF DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURES versus

2024 INSC 86613 November 2024Directions issued

The Supreme Court heard a batch of writ petitions challenging the demolition of residential and commercial structures belonging to persons accused or convicted of crimes, where the demolitions were carried out without following any due‑process requirements. The Court examined whether the executive could impose such a p

M/S. SHIVALI ENTERPRISESversusSMT. GODAWARI (DECEASED) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 95213 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

M/S. Shivali Enterprises entered into an agreement to sell land to the respondents, receiving Rs.1,50,000 of the Rs.1,65,000 purchase price and taking possession, while the respondents were required to obtain an Income‑Tax Clearance certificate and have the revenue records mutated before execution of the sale deed. The

JAMES KUNJWALversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2024 INSC 60113 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, James Kunjwal, was accused of offences under Sections 376 and 504 IPC and was granted bail by the High Court. The complainant sought cancellation of bail, alleging that Kunjwal had filed a false affidavit contradicting her statements. The High Court, finding the affidavit intentionally false, directed th

RABBU @ SARVESHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 72012 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rabbu @ Sarvesh, was convicted of rape, murder and related offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A, 302 IPC and Section 5(g)/6 POCSO, receiving the death penalty for Sections 376A and 302. The defence argued that the three dying declarations were inconsistent and that DNA evidence suggested a

JASEELA SHAJIversusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS

2024 INSC 68312 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jaseela Shaji, challenged the preventive detention of her husband under COFEPOSA, arguing that the detaining authority failed to provide the statement of Ms. Preetha Pradeep, a material document relied upon for the detention, thereby violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution. She also contended that th

PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusSUS ROAD BANER VIKAS MANCH AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 68212 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) and its concessionaire Noble Exchange set up a Garbage Processing Plant (GPP) at Baner, Pune under a 2005 development plan that reserved the land for such a facility. The plant was authorized under the Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 and received environm

YASHODA (ALIAS SODHAN)versusSUKHWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 94612 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an alleged 1993 agreement to sell land, after an earlier suit for declaration was withdrawn without liberty to re‑file. The plaintiff’s plaint stated that no litigation was pending concerning the agreement, while the earlier suit and its withdrawal were not disclos

YOGESH MADHAV MAKALWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 96412 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a medical aspirant, sought validation of his Scheduled Tribe (Koli Mahadev) caste certificate, which had been confiscated and invalidated by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee. The High Court upheld the Committee’s order, dismissing the appellant’s writ petition. On appeal, the Supreme Co

MAHENDRA KUMAR SONKERversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 60012 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Patwari, was accused of demanding a bribe of Rs.500 and was caught in a trap operation organized by the Lokayukta. He was convicted under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting public servants during the trap, and sentenced to six months' imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, the Supreme Cou

KEKHRIESATUO TEP ETC.versusNATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

2023 INSC 36212 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were government servants, were arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on allegations that they had paid money to a terrorist organization. They obtained bail from a Special Court, which held that their payments were made under compulsion and that they were cooperating with th

STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEversusB. RAMU

2024 INSC 11412 February 2024

The case concerned the grant of anticipatory bail to B. Ramu, accused of procuring and supplying 232.5 kg of ganja, a quantity far exceeding the commercial quantity of 20 kg under the NDPS Act. The Madras High Court had allowed the bail application under Section 438 of the CrPC despite opposition from the public prosec

ASMA LATEEF & ANRversusSHABBIR AHMAD & ORS

2024 INSC 3612 January 2024Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction over a property, alleging an oral gift, while the defendants contested the suit's maintainability under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The trial court, ignoring the written statement of one defendant and the pending jurisdictional objecti

BOBYversusSTATE OF KERALA

2023 INSC 2312 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a murder where three accused were convicted based largely on circumstantial evidence, including a "last seen" theory and alleged recoveries of the victim's body, ornaments, and a spade. The prosecution relied on a disclosure statement allegedly made by accused No.3 (Boby) to claim the body was recover

MOHINDER PAL AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF J & K

2023 INSC 2612 January 2023Case Partly allowed

The case involves the death of two young men, J and M, who were allegedly detained and assaulted in the house of accused Lal Chand and his sons. The trial court convicted five of the accused under sections 302, 148 and 149 of the Ranbir Penal Code, while acquitting two; the High Court upheld these convictions. On appea

PRAKASH NAYI @ SENversusSTATE OF GOA

2023 INSC 2412 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Prakash Nayi, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering a shop employee and appealed on the ground of insanity under Section 84 IPC. Medical evidence, including two doctors' reports, indicated that he suffered from chronic schizophrenia, a condition that rendered him incapable of understanding th

RANVIR SINGH ETC. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 2512 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder and related offences under Sections 148, 302/149, 324/149 and 304 Part‑II of the IPC based largely on a statement recorded by the investigating officer (PW‑20) from the deceased Hukum Singh, thumb‑impression evidence, and eye‑witness testimony. The Supreme Court examined the cre

ARJUN S/O RATAN GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 63711 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Arjun was detained for twelve months under section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act on the ground that his bootlegging activities threatened public peace. The detaining authority relied on six excise cases involving illicit liquor and on vague statements of two unnamed witnes

BABY SAKSHI GREOLAversusMANZOOR AHMAD SIMON AND ANOTHER

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 95811 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a child of seven years, suffered grievous injuries and moderate mental retardation in a motor vehicle accident, resulting in 75% disability which the Court treated as 100% for compensation purposes. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.5,90,750, which the Delhi High Court enhanced by Rs.5,60,000

SURENDRA KOLIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 130811 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Surendra Koli, a former domestic help at the Nithari residence, was convicted for the murder, rape and related offences of a minor based on a Section 164 confession and alleged discoveries under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court had earlier affirmed his conviction and death sentence in 2011, and a revie

AMIT SINGHversusRAVINDRA NATH PANDEY & ORS. ETC. ETC

2022 INSC 120011 November 2022Dismissed

The petitioners, promoted to Assistant Consolidation Officers (ACOs) in 1997, claimed seniority over direct recruits appointed in the same recruitment year, invoking Rule 8(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Seniority Rules, 1991. The State and direct recruits argued that seniority should be based on the vacan

GIREESAN NAIR & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2022 INSC 119911 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for rioting, destruction of public property and related offences based largely on the testimony of eyewitnesses identified through two Test Identification Parades (TIPs). The witnesses had earlier seen the accused while they were in police custody, and the TIPs were conducted after a signi

LALANKUMAR SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 106111 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, directors of Cachet Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., were charged under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for manufacturing a sub‑standard drug (Hemfer syrup) and were summoned as accused under sections 16, 18 and 34. They challenged the summons, a criminal revision and a writ petition, arguing that mere dire

IN RE: N. PEDDI RAJU AND OTHERS versus

2025 INSC 98911 August 2025

A transfer petition seeking to move a criminal case from the Telangana High Court to the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) contained scandalous remarks against the Telangana High Court judge hearing the matter. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and, suo moto, issued contempt notices to the petitioner’s lawyer, th

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