Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

C T RAVIKUMAR

74 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

BHISHAM LAL VERMAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 95530 October 2023Dismissed

The petitioner, a project director, was charged under several IPC offences and the Prevention of Corruption Act. After the government sanctioned prosecution, a charge sheet was filed and the trial court took cognizance. In 2018 the petitioner filed a Section 482 CrPC petition challenging only the sanction order, which

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusGEETA DEVI AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 95430 October 2023Dismissed

A motor accident in 2010 caused the death of a motorcyclist, leading the victim's dependents to claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation but held that the insurer, IFFCO Tokio, was not liable because the driver of the insured Tempo vehicle possessed

AMANDEEP SINGH SARANversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 102829 November 2023Disposed off

The appellant, Amandeep Singh Saran, was charged with offences including IPC Section 409, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment or up to ten years, and was being tried before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) of Raipur, a court that can impose at most seven years imprisonment. Having already spent ove

BASAVARAJversusINDIRA AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 15129 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents filed a suit for partition of ancestral property in 2005, acknowledging an earlier compromise decree dated 14 Oct 2004. At the final stage of trial, they sought to amend the plaint to include a prayer that the compromise decree be declared null and void, alleging oversight and mistake. The trial court r

ABHISHEK SAXENAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR

2023 INSC 108828 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Abhishek Saxena, was charged under IPC sections 323, 384 and 406 for alleged assault, extortion and criminal breach of trust arising from a FIR filed on 4 September 2016. He had earlier filed a petition for dissolution of marriage and a guardianship application under the Guardians & Wards Act, 1890, befo

SANDEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR

2023 INSC 65428 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an informant and prosecution witness, identified three persons named in the FIR but omitted from the charge‑sheet as assailants during his examination‑in‑chief. He moved an application under Section 319 of the CrPC to summon these persons, which the trial court allowed. The High Court, on revision, set a

ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2022 INSC 87526 August 2022Directions issued

The petitioners challenged pre‑election promises of free goods (“freebies”) made by political parties, arguing that such promises strain state finances and violate the spirit of free and fair elections. They sought judicial intervention, contending that the promises amount to corrupt practices under Section 123 of the

SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS

2022 INSC 87326 August 2022Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the lifting of the ceiling limit on iron‑ore production in the Karnataka districts of Bellary, Tumkur and Chitradurga, arguing that removal could lead to unregulated mining and violate inter‑generational equity. The State, the CEC, the Ministry of Steel and mining lease‑holders sought a compl

ANIRUDDHA KHANWALKARversusSHARMILA DAS & OTHERS

2024 INSC 34226 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant married respondent No.1, who had previously concealed her existing marriage and presented a forged divorce decree, inducing the appellant to part with Rs. 2 lakh and later discover her pregnancy. The appellant filed a criminal complaint alleging cheating and criminal conspiracy under Sections 420 and 120‑

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAMJAN KHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 82325 October 2024Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged Ramjan Khan, Musab Khan and Habib Khan with murder of Naseem Khan under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 IPC. The trial court convicted them based largely on oral testimonies of the deceased’s mother (PW‑8) and his two minor brothers (PW‑5, PW‑9), treating an alleged oral dying declaration

MANIK & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 73425 September 2024

The case involved police officers accused of torturing a suspect, Shama @ Kalya, while in custody, leading to his death and alleged tampering with evidence. The prosecution relied on witness testimony, a fingerprint test linking an unidentified burnt body to the victim, and claims of a staged escape, while the defence

ZAKIA AHSAN JAFRIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2022 INSC 65324 June 2022Dismissed

The case arises from the 2002 Gujarat riots following the Godhra train burning incident, in which the appellant's husband was killed in the Gulberg Society massacre. The appellant filed a complaint alleging a larger criminal conspiracy at the highest level of the state government, including the then Chief Minister, to

FULESHWAR GOPEversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 71823 September 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Fuleshwar Gope, was alleged to be a director of a company used to collect funds for the People’s Liberation Front of India and was charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). He challenged the sanction order, arguing violations of statutory timelines, lack of independent review, misjoi

A.S. PHARMA PVT. LTD.versusNAYATI MEDICAL PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2024 INSC 69023 July 2024Disposed off

A.S. Pharma Pvt. Ltd. filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against Nayati Medical Pvt. Ltd. The respondents offered to settle and applied to compound the offence under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., but the trial court dismissed the application. The Delhi High Court then exercised it

RAMACHANDRAN & ORS.versusVIJAYAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 88522 November 2024Dismissed

The case concerned the devolution of property governed by Marumakkathayam law in a Kerala joint family. The dispute arose over two sets of scheduled properties: one acquired through a 1950 partition deed and the other through a mortgage deed after the death of a male member. The key questions were whether a female’s sh

K.S. MURALIDHARversusR. SUBBULAKSHMI & ANR.

2024 INSC 88622 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K.S. Muralidhar, suffered a severe spinal injury resulting in 100% functional disability after his company vehicle collided with a negligently driven lorry. The Tribunal awarded Rs.58,09,930 plus interest and future medical expenses, while the Karnataka High Court enhanced the award to Rs.78,16,390, calc

AMIT RANA @ KOKA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2024 INSC 54322 July 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for attempting to murder a victim, causing a spinal injury that resulted in paralysis. The trial court sentenced each appellant to rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and a fine, a sentence affirmed by the High Court. The Supre

KAUSHIK NARSINHBHAI PATEL & ORS.versusM/S S.J.R. PRIME CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED

2024 INSC 54222 July 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants, a group of flat buyers, filed a consumer complaint against the developer, M/s S.J.R. Prime Corporation, alleging delayed possession and various charges. The NCDRC ordered the developer to pay delayed compensation and to construct promised amenities, but the developer had previously been declared by the

VIKAS CHANDRAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 26122 February 2024Dismissed

The appellant Vikas Chandra challenged the summons issued to respondent No.2, the former Secretary of Mandi Samiti, for alleged abetment of his father's suicide under Section 306 IPC. The father had died by poison after allegedly being denied salary, and a suicide note blamed the respondent, but the note contained no r

BIJAY AGARWALversusM/S MEDILINES

2024 INSC 91821 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Bijay Agarwal, an authorized signatory and director of M/s Gee Pee Infotech Pvt. Ltd., was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of cheques issued by the company. The trial court imposed a fine and the appellate court suspended the sentence on the condition that Agarwal deposit

M. VIJAYAKUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2024 INSC 17721 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M. Vijayakumar, was convicted under IPC sections 306, 342 and 365 for allegedly kidnapping and wrongfully confining the deceased, leading to the latter's suicide. The prosecution argued that the appellant’s abduction and confinement forced the victim to commit suicide, thereby satisfying the elements of

M.R. AJAYANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2024 INSC 88120 November 2024

The case arose from allegations that a piece of evidence (an underwear) seized in a 1990 NDPS case was tampered with after being released from judicial custody, leading to the conviction of an Australian national being set aside and a subsequent FIR being lodged against court staff and a junior lawyer for conspiracy an

VIVEK KAISTH & ANRversusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS

2023 INSC 100720 November 2023Disposed off

The Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission advertised eight vacancies for Civil Judge (Junior Division) in 2013, but later added two names, including Vivek Kaist[h] and Akansha Dogra, to the select list via a government notification. The High Court held that these appointments were illegal because the added vacanci

MOTURU NALINI KANTHversusGAINEDI KALIPRASAD (DEAD, THROUGH LRS.)

2023 INSC 100420 November 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Moturu Nalini Kanth, filed a suit as a minor claiming absolute title to the properties of the deceased Venkubayamma based on a registered will dated 03.05.1982 and a registered adoption deed dated 20.04.1982. The trial court upheld the suit, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court reversed the decision, holdin

RAJEEV KUMAR UPADHYAYversusSRIKANT UPADHYAY & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 112219 December 2024Disposed off

The case arose from an FIR registered under multiple IPC sections and the Witch (Daain) Act after a woman was accused of witchcraft, physically assaulted, verbally abused and publicly disrobed along with another woman. Thirteen persons were named; initially only one was sent to trial, but the Additional Chief Judicial

TIRITH KUMAR & ORS.versusDADURAM & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 66519 December 2024Dismissed

The dispute concerned 13.95 acres of land originally owned by Mardan, who died in 1951, before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force. The appellants (descendants of Puni Ram) claimed exclusive ownership, while the respondents (Mardan’s daughters and their heirs) sought a share. The pivotal question was whether

ASHOK VERMAversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 74319 December 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Ashok Verma, was convicted under Sections 302, 201 and 498A of the IPC for the death of his wife, Pushpa, which occurred in their matrimonial home. He claimed the death was a suicide, pleaded an alibi that he was in a nearby garden, and argued that the non‑rupture of the hyoid bone indicated strangulatio

SANJEEVKUMAR HARAKCHAND KANKARIYAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 86619 December 2024Dismissed

The appellant filed a civil suit for specific performance which was referred to mediation under Section 89 of the CPC and settled amicably; he sought a full refund of the court fees paid, but the trial court allowed only a 50% refund. He challenged this in a writ petition, arguing that Section 16 of the Court Fees Act,

MANSOOR SAHEB (DEAD) & ORS.versusSALIMA (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 92319 December 2024Dismissed

The case concerned a dispute over agricultural and house property owned by Sultan Saheb, who died in 1978. The plaintiffs claimed they were entitled to a one‑sixth share as heirs, while the defendants alleged that Sultan had partitioned the land among his sons during his lifetime and later gifted two portions to them.

P. MANIKANDANversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.

2024 INSC 100718 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, P. Manikandan, was originally convicted of kidnapping and murdering a four‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death, but the Madras High Court acquitted him on the ground of reasonable doubt. The High Court, however, ordered the transfer of the case file to the CBI and directed a de‑novo reinvestigation and

SAJEENA IKHBAL & ORS.versusMINI BABU GEORGE & ORS.

2024 INSC 78717 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Ikhbal was killed in a road accident where his motorcycle was allegedly struck by a car driven by respondent No.2. The appellants, his widow, child and parents, claimed compensation from the car's insurer, but the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim on the ground that the car’s involvement a

GURMAIL SINGH & ANRversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 109717 October 2022Dismissed

The case arose from a land dispute in Rampur, Uttar Pradesh, where the deceased Dalip Singh was attacked and killed by a group of ten men, including the appellant Gurmail Singh, who were armed with firearms and other weapons. The trial court convicted all ten under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC, and the

LALU YADAVversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 78216 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Lalu Yadav, was charged under Sections 376 and 313 of the IPC for alleged rape on a false promise of marriage, based on an FIR filed in 2018 for incidents allegedly occurring between 2013 and 2018. The complainant claimed that Yadav had deceived her, established a physical relationship without consent, a

THE STATE OF MEGHALAYAversusLALRINTLUANGA SAILO & ANR.

2024 INSC 53716 July 2024Disposed off

The State of Meghalaya challenged two bail orders granted by the High Court to Smt. X, an HIV‑positive accused charged under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act for possession of heroin, including a commercial quantity of 1.040 kg. The High Court had released her on bail solely on the ground of her HIV status, withou

SMT. SHYAMO DEVI AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 43016 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were allotted residential plots on land originally designated as a Panchayat Ghar, challenged the cancellation of their allotments initiated 13 years after the allotment under Section 122-C of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The authorities relied on a Lekhpal report alle

RAM PRAKASH CHADHAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 52215 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Prakash Chadha, was charged in a custodial death case (FIR No.371/1993) with offences including murder and criminal conspiracy, and he sought discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.PC. The trial court rejected his discharge application, relying on alleged suspicions that he had facilitated the police’

BABA NATARAJAN PRASADversusM. REVATHI

2024 INSC 52315 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, husband of the first accused, filed a private complaint alleging that his wife, while still married to him, contracted a second marriage and bore a child, constituting bigamy under s.494 IPC. The trial court convicted the two accused and sentenced them to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a Rs.2,000

RAMACHANDRA REDDY (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.versusRAMULU AMMAL (DEAD) THR. LRS.

2024 INSC 86814 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a 1963 instrument by which two brothers transferred their share of a family property to their sister-in-law Govindammal. The lower courts held that the instrument was a valid settlement deed granting her a two‑thirds share, while the High Court reversed this, deeming it a gift deed for lack of ad

NEELAM GUPTA & ORS.versusRAJENDRA KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.

2024 INSC 76914 October 2024

The plaintiff, Rajendra Kumar Gupta, claimed ownership of a 7.60‑acre parcel of land in Mowa village, asserting that he purchased it by a registered sale deed in 1968 and had peacefully possessed it until dispossessed in 1983. The defendants, his cousins, contended that the land was joint Hindu family property, that th

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

SRIKANT UPADHYAY & ORSversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2024 INSC 20214 March 2024Dismissed

The appellants were charged under several IPC offences and the Daain Act, failed to appear after summons and bailable warrants, and subsequently faced non‑bailable warrants and a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC. They filed an anticipatory bail application in November 2022, which was adjourned without interim protect

BABAN BALAJI MORE (DEAD) BY LRS. & OTHERSversusBABAJI HARI SHELAR (DEAD) BY LRS. & OTHERS

2024 INSC 20314 March 2024Dismissed

The case concerned agricultural Watan lands in Maharashtra held by the heirs of the original Watandar after his death in 1958. The appellants sought possession of the lands under sections 5, 11 and 11A of the Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act, 1874, arguing that the tenancy created by the tenants had terminated. The r

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusHARSOLIA MOTORS AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 36713 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. denied fire‑insurance claims of Harsolia Motors, a commercial enterprise, which led the respondents to file a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (CPA 1986). The Gujarat State Commission held the respondents were not "consumers" because the insurance was for a com

RAJPALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2023 INSC 108912 December 2023Dismissed as withdrawn

The petitioner, Rajpal, challenged the denial of his bail application, arguing that his co‑accused had been granted bail by a coordinate bench of the Rajasthan High Court for the same FIR. The Supreme Court noted that despite its earlier directives, High Courts continue to list bail applications arising from the same F

WIPRO FINANCE LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2022 INSC 41712 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Wipro Finance Ltd. borrowed a foreign‑currency loan to finance its leasing and hire‑purchase business and incurred a loss due to exchange‑rate fluctuations while repaying the loan. The company claimed a deduction for this loss under section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and also sought to treat a sum previously capit

SIBY THOMASversusM/S. SOMANY CERAMICS LTD

2023 INSC 89010 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former partner of a partnership firm, challenged a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that the complaint did not specifically allege that he was in charge of the business at the time the cheque was issued and that he had resigned

NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.versusSUBHASH CHANDER KHATRI & ORS.

2023 INSC 33910 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the National Capital Territory of Delhi and others against a Delhi High Court order that declared land acquisition proceedings to be deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, b

M/S US TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTDversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2023 INSC 32910 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s US Technologies International Pvt. Ltd., had deducted tax at source (TDS) but remitted it to the government after a delay of up to ten months. The Revenue levied a penalty equal to the amount of TDS under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which the High Court upheld. The appellant contended t

KRISHAN KUMAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 6798 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 201, 300 and 302 IPC read with Section 34 for the murder of Devinder based largely on circumstantial evidence, including a disputed 'last seen' theory, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, a claimed motive, and the recovery of a chunni as the murder weapon. The Supreme Cour

NARESH KUMARversusSTATE OF DELHI

2024 INSC 4648 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Naresh Kumar was convicted under Section 302 IPC, read with Section 34 IPC, for the murder of Arun Kumar, based on two incriminating circumstances – his exhortation to kill and his act of holding the victim to enable the brother’s stabbing. The conviction was affirmed by the High Court, but the appellant

DR. JOE JOSEPH & ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2022 INSC 4098 April 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court heard petitions concerning the safety of the Mullaperiyar Dam after the enactment of the Dam Safety Act, 2021. The Court noted that the Act creates a multi‑tier institutional framework, including a National Dam Safety Authority (NDSA) under s.8 with functions detailed in s.9. Since the regular NDSA is

BALVEER BATRAversusTHE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY & ANR.

2024 INSC 3618 February 2024Disposed off

The appellant, father of a deceased motor‑vehicle accident victim, filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) at Nainital. The Tribunal, after hearing witnesses, held that it lacked territorial jurisdiction and, on that basis alone, dismissed the cl

DEREK A C LOBO & ORS.versusULRIC M A LOBO (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.

2023 INSC 10937 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants sought probate of a Will dated 10‑Nov‑1992 executed by their mother, Cecelia Gertrude Lobo, which was contested by one brother (defendant No.5) on grounds of alleged suspicious circumstances. The trial court found that the Will was duly executed, satisfying Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and Sec

C. SIVASANKARANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 8337 December 2021Directions issued

C. Sivasankaran, an Ambassador-at-large of Seychelles, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution claiming diplomatic immunity to avoid criminal proceedings in India. The Madras High Court rejected his claim, holding that he does not fall within the definition of a "diplomatic agent" under Article 1 of

RAMJI LAL BAIRWA & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 8467 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from an FIR lodged under the IPC, POCSO Act and SC/ST Act against a school teacher for allegedly rubbing the breast of a 16‑year‑old girl, a sexual assault under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. The teacher and the victim's father later entered into a compromise, and the teacher sought quashment of the FIR un

CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW THROUGH HIS MOTHERversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 3877 May 2024Disposed off

The appeal was filed by a child in conflict with law (CCL) challenging a High Court order that set aside a Juvenile Justice Board's order directing his trial as an adult in a Children’s Court. The key issues were whether the three‑month period for completing a preliminary assessment under s.14(3) of the Juvenile Justic

XXXXversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 1816 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought to quash FIR No. 52, registered under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC, alleging that the complaint was an abuse of process because the complainant, a married woman, had voluntarily entered into a relationship with him. The High Court dismissed the petition, but the Supreme Court examined the complai

SUBRATA CHOUDHURY @ SANTOSH CHOUDHURY & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2024 INSC 8345 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed an original complaint on 11.11.2010 alleging offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 IPC, which led to a police investigation and a negative final report accepted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) on 06.06.2011 after rejecting the complainant's protest (narazi) petition. Dissatisfied, the comp

SHIVANI TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2024 INSC 3435 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Shivani Tyagi, a 31‑year‑old woman, suffered 30‑40% burns and permanent facial disfigurement after an acid attack. Five accused were convicted under Sections 307/149 and 326A/149 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Allahabad High Court suspended their sentences and released them on bail, conditioning the

BHAGGI @ BHAGIRATH @ NARANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 825 February 2024Case Partly allowed

The petitioner was convicted under Section 376AB of the IPC for raping a seven‑year‑old girl in a temple and also under various provisions of the POCSO Act. The trial court awarded death penalty, which the High Court commuted to life imprisonment. The petitioner challenged whether the commuted life sentence required fu

SHAZIA AMAN KHAN AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 1634 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the custody of a 14‑year‑old twin daughter who had been raised since infancy by her paternal aunt (appellant No.2) and the aunt's husband (respondent No.10). The biological father (respondent No.2) sought to have the child returned to his care, prompting the High Court to order her recovery and hando

THANGAM AND ANOTHERversusNAVAMANI AMMAL

2024 INSC 1644 March 2024Dismissed

The case concerned a registered Will dated 9 October 1984 executed by the deceased Palaniandi Udayar in favour of Navamani Ammal, the daughter of his brother. The widow (Thangam) and the minor daughter of the testator challenged the Will, alleging that the testator was ill‑health, that the Will was executed under suspi

SRINIVAS RAGHAVENDRARAO DESAI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusV. KUMAR VAMANRAO @ ALOK AND ORS.

2024 INSC 1654 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs filed a suit in 1999 seeking a share in family properties, alleging a partition of the family estate. The High Court based its decision on an alleged 1965 partition, awarding shares accordingly, despite the fact that the 1965 partition was never pleaded in the original suit and the plaintiffs' amendment

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)

SUDEEP CHATTERJEEversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2024 INSC 5672 August 2024Disposed off

The appellant, Sudeep Chatterjee, was accused under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act by his wife. The High Court of Patna granted him provisional pre‑arrest bail on the condition that he file a joint affidavit within four weeks undertaking to fulfil all physical and financial needs of his wif

DERHAversusVISHAL & ANR.

2023 INSC 7851 September 2023Dismissed

The case concerned the share of Derha Ram, son of Kesar Bai, in Mitakshara coparcenary property of his grandfather Phannuram Sahu who died in 1959. Kesar Bai had filed a partition suit claiming her ancestral share; after her death, Derha succeeded to her estate. The trial court awarded Derha a one‑third share, but the

DEEPENDRA YADAV AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 3621 May 2024

The Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (MPPSC) conducted a recruitment process for 571 posts, but an amendment to Rule 4 of the Madhya Pradesh State Service Examination Rules, 2015 on 17‑02‑2020 altered the method of segregating reservation‑category candidates and was applied to the ongoing examination. This led

URMILA DIXITversusSUNIL SHARAN DIXIT AND ORS.

2025 INSC 201 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior citizen, had executed a Gift Deed in 2019 transferring her property to her son on the condition that he would provide her maintenance, a condition also reflected in a contemporaneous promissory note. She later alleged that the son failed to fulfill this obligation and that relations had broken d

KIM WANSOOversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 81 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a foreign national serving as Project Manager for Hyundai Engineering & Construction India LLP, was named in FIR No.64/2020 alleging conspiracy and cheating in a Rs 9‑crore payment default involving multiple subcontractors. The appellant sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that the allegations were

DALJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 211 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Daljit Singh, was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. for failing to appear after summons in a cheque‑related criminal case filed in 2010. He was later acquitted of the underlying offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and an FIR under Section 174A IPC was filed for his

THE STATE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusA. SATISH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 111 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed appeals against a High Court order that quashed FIRs and subsequent proceedings against two Central Government employees accused of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondents argued that, following the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, the CBI req

SRI MAHESHversusSANGRAM & ORS

2025 INSC 141 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, an adopted son, claimed entitlement to half of his adoptive mother's joint family property and challenged two alienations— a sale deed (2007) and a gift deed (2008) executed by the adoptive mother after his adoption. The dispute hinged on whether the adoption of a widow’s son relates back to the husband'

GOPAL KRISHAN & ORS.versusDAULAT RAM & ORS.

2025 INSC 181 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gopal Krishan claimed title to a one‑quarter share of land in Gurdaspur based on a Will executed by the deceased Sanjhi Ram on 7 November 2005, which was subsequently transferred and sold. The respondents challenged the Will, alleging it was forged and that the attesting witness had not testified that the

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