Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

PANKAJ MITHAL

38 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

SURESHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. R1: STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH R2: DEVI SINGH

2025 INSC 91831 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Suresh alleged that his paternal uncle and the uncle's son, Respondent No.2, forcibly entered his house and the son shot his brother Rajesh, resulting in death. Respondent No.2 claimed juvenility, asserting he was 16 years old at the time, based on a school transfer certificate from the first school he at

KAMARUDDIN DASTAGIR SANADIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH SHO KAKATI POLICE

2024 INSC 90829 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi, was charged with cheating (Sec. 417 IPC) and abetment of suicide (Sec. 306 IPC) after a 21‑year‑old woman, who loved him, committed suicide when he refused to marry her. The trial court acquitted him, finding no evidence of a promise to marry, physical relationship, or any act

NAVIN KUMAR & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

2024 INSC 65628 August 2024Dismissed

The State of Chhattisgarh appointed primary school teachers with B.Ed qualifications after the Supreme Court’s decision in Devesh Sharma, which held that a Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed) is the essential qualification for such posts. B.Ed‑qualified candidates challenged a Chhattisgarh High Court order that q

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANRversusVIJAYANAGARAM CHINNA REDDAPPA

2023 INSC 72628 April 2023Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that granted a writ of habeas corpus, directing the release of a life convict (P. Reddy Bhaskar) who had escaped twice and was later sentenced to a one‑year simple imprisonment for kidnapping. After being granted special remission for his life sentence, th

ABDUL WAHID & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2025 INSC 29528 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Ahsan Ali under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC based on the testimony of a single eyewitness and alleged recovery of weapons. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the eyewitness, the absence of forensic evidence linking the accused to the crime, and the suspect

SAMTOLA DEVIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 40427 March 2025Dismissed

The case concerned a dispute over a house owned by the late Kallu Mal, where his eldest son Krishna Kumar continued to occupy a portion of the house and run a utensil business. The parents, Samtola Devi and the deceased Kallu Mal, alleged mental and physical abuse by Krishna Kumar and sought eviction under the Maintena

C. SELVARANIversusTHE SPECIAL SECRETARY-CUM-DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 90026 November 2024Dismissed

The appellant, C. Selvarani, born to a Christian father and a mother who allegedly converted to Hinduism, applied for a Scheduled Caste (SC) community certificate to secure a government job reserved for SC candidates. The authorities rejected her application on the ground that she does not profess Hinduism, Buddhism or

JANARDAN DAS & ORS.versusDURGA PRASAD AGARWALLA & ORS.

2024 INSC 77826 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, operating a petrol pump on a jointly owned property, claimed a specific performance of an oral agreement dated 06‑06‑1993 to purchase the land, alleging that the co‑owner brother had authority to bind the three sister co‑owners via a General Power of Attorney. The trial court dismissed the suit, finding

ANURAG BHATNAGAR & ANR.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2025 INSC 89525 July 2025Dismissed

The dispute arose between Sunair Hotels Ltd (SHL) and VLS Finance Ltd over a failed Memorandum of Understanding for a hotel project, leading to multiple FIRs and arbitration. SHL filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC on 1 July 2005, prompting a Metropolitan Magistrate to order registration of FIR No.380/2005 f

N. THAJUDEENversusTAMIL NADU KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD

2024 INSC 81724 October 2024Dismissed

The Tamil Nadu Khadi and Village Industries Board (respondent) sued to confirm its title and recover possession of a property it claimed to have received by a registered gift deed dated 5 March 1983 from the appellant. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that the gift deed was never accepted or acted upon,

SHYAMSUNDAR RADHESHYAM AGRAWAL & ANR.versusPUSHPABAI NILKANTH PATIL & ORS.

2024 INSC 73024 September 2024Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit for declaration and injunction, after which the defendant sought impoundment of six agreements for sale on the ground that they effected transfer of possession and were therefore conveyances requiring stamp duty and registration. The trial court and the High Court ordered the documents impou

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusKAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR.

2024 INSC 5824 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a chargesheet on 15 October 2022 against 75 persons, including Kapil Wadhawan and Dheeraj Wadhawan, for alleged conspiracy, fraud and corruption involving DHFL. The respondents applied for default bail under the proviso to Section 167(2) of the CrPC, arguing that the char

MOHD. TAHIR HUSSAINversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 10022 January 2025

Mohd. Tahir Hussain, an under‑trial accused in multiple FIRs including rioting and the murder of an IB official, has been in custody since March 2020 and sought interim bail to contest and campaign in the 2025 Delhi Assembly elections. The Delhi High Court allowed only a custodial parole for filing his nomination, prom

K.C. KAUSHIK AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 80321 October 2024Dismissed

The appellants, retired lecturers and principals of government‑aided private colleges in Haryana, sought parity with government‑college teachers by claiming a revised pension under the Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pension) Part I Rules, 2009, together with interest on the delayed payment of arrears dating back to 1 

LENIN KUMAR RAYversusM/S EXPRESS PUBLICATIONS (MADURAI) LTD.

2024 INSC 80221 October 2024

The employee, Lenin Kumar Ray, was appointed as Junior Engineer and later promoted to Assistant Engineer in a newspaper publishing company, drawing a salary well above the pre‑amendment threshold of Rs.1,600 per month. He was relieved on 8 October 2003 with payment of one month’s salary in lieu of notice, which he acce

STATE OF LOKAYUKTHA POLICE, DAVANAGEREversusC B NAGARAJ

2025 INSC 73619 May 2025Dismissed

The respondent, C B Nagaraj, an Extension Officer, was alleged to have demanded a Rs 1,500 bribe from a teacher, E R Krishnamurthy, for issuing a spot‑inspection report required for a validity certificate. The Lokayuktha police recovered the alleged bribe using a phenolphthalein‑smeared trap and the trial court convict

SMT. SHAIFALI GUPTAversusSMT. VIDYA DEVI GUPTA & ORS.

2025 INSC 73919 May 2025

The mother and younger son filed a suit for partition, possession, declaration, injunction and accounting of properties claimed to be Joint Hindu Family assets against the elder son, his wife and other family members. The elder son’s wife (defendant No.2) and subsequent purchasers (defendants No.5 and 6) sought to have

THAMMINENI BHASKARversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 112417 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Thammineni Bhaskar, was convicted by the trial court and the High Court for kidnapping and murdering the son of an informant under IPC sections 302, 364 and 201. The prosecution's case relied on the allegation that the accused forcibly took the victim into an auto and that the victim was later found dead

M SAMBASIVA RAOversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 86817 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Assistant Administrative Officer in an insurance company, was accused of demanding a bribe of Rs.40,000 to expedite a claim settlement and of conspiring with a regional manager and his brother in a demand‑and‑trap operation. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court reversed the acquit

RAJESH KUMARversusANAND KUMAR & ORS.

2024 INSC 44417 May 2024Dismissed

The appellant entered into an agreement to sell land with a power of attorney holder acting for several co‑owners, paid earnest money and obtained extensions for registration of the sale deed. The attorney holder later executed a sale deed in favour of the respondents, prompting the appellant to send a notice and event

SUBRAMANIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2026 INSC 24917 March 2026Dismissed

The appellant Subramani was accused of murdering his wife by pouring kerosene on her, setting her alight, and also of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC. The trial court acquitted him, relying on the small size of the bathroom and questioning the reliability of the victim's dying declaration. On appeal, the High Cou

IDBI BANK LTD.versusRAMSWAROOP DALIYA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 78016 October 2024Dismissed

IDBI Bank conducted an e‑auction of a property on 10 April 2018, where the respondents were the highest bidders and paid 25% of the bid amount. The bank required the balance payment of Rs.1,06,50,000 within 15 days but did not accept the amount, citing a pending CBI complaint and an ED advisory, and later cancelled the

RAGHUNATH SHARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 72316 May 2025Case Allowed

The appellants entered into a series of sale agreements and a compromise deed, after which an FIR (No.432/2014) for offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC was filed. The High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, quashed the FIR on the basis of the compromise. The complainant later applied

S.C. GARGversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 49315 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.C. Garg, Managing Director of Ruchira Papers Ltd., was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating respondent R.N. Tyagi after the parties had already resolved a dispute over seven dishonoured cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The earlier NI Act case resulted in Tyag

RENJITH K.G. & OTHERSversusSHEEBA

2024 INSC 77314 October 2024Dismissed

The appellants, representing the original decree holder, sought to enforce a partition decree dated 9 March 1970 that awarded them a share of a one‑acre property in Kerala. The decree was engrossed on stamp paper in 1990 and an execution petition for possession was filed in 1991, resulting in the plaintiff taking posse

SANDEEPversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2024 INSC 77114 October 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant Sandeep was convicted by the Sessions Court and affirmed by the High Court for murder under section 302 read with section 34 of the IPC, based on eyewitness testimony that he shot the deceased after being urged by co‑accused. He was acquitted of the Arms Act charges and the co‑accused were also acquitted

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS.versusM/S SHREE NIWAS RAMGOPAL & ORS.

2025 INSC 83214 July 2025Dismissed

The dispute arose when Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) stopped supplying kerosene to a partnership firm after one of its three partners died, despite the partnership deed stating that death would not dissolve the firm. The partnership filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing IOCL to continue supply unti

VICTORY IRON WORKS LTD.versusJITENDRA LOHIA & ANR

2023 INSC 23014 March 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a dispute arising out of a corporate insolvency resolution process involving Avani Towers (the corporate debtor), Energy Properties (the ostensible owner of a 10.19‑acre land), and Victory Iron Works (a licensee of a 10,000 sq ft portion). The corporate debtor had financed the purchase of t

M/S. BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD.versusRAMBHA DEVI AND ORS

2023 INSC 83213 September 2023Directions issued

The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a holder of a light motor vehicle (LMV) licence may drive a transport vehicle of the same class (unladen weight up to 7,500 kg) without a separate endorsement. The issue arose from the earlier decision in Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Co., which had interpreted th

KANCHANA RAIversusGEETA SHARMA & ORS.

2026 INSC 5413 January 2026Dismissed

The deceased Dr. Mahendra Prasad died in 2021 leaving three sons; one son, Ranjit Sharma, died after his father’s death and his wife Geeta Sharma filed a maintenance petition under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, claiming she was a dependant. The Family Court dismissed the petition, holding she was not a

VANEETA PATNAIKversusNIRMAL KANTI CHAKRABARTI & ORS.

2025 INSC 110612 September 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a faculty member of NUJS, filed a complaint on 26 December 2023 alleging sexual harassment by the Vice‑Chancellor, claiming the last incident occurred in April 2023. The Local Complaint Committee dismissed the complaint as time‑barred because the filing was beyond the three‑month statutory period and the

A. KARUNANITHIversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2025 INSC 96712 August 2025Disposed off

The case concerned two village officials, A‑1 (Village Administrative Officer) and A‑2 (Village Assistant), who were convicted under Sections 13(1)(d), 13(2) and 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for demanding and receiving a bribe of Rs.500. A trap was laid using phenolphthalein‑treated notes, leading to the

R. SAVITHRI NAIDUversusM/S THE COTTON CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 15012 February 2026Dismissed

The dispute arose from a sale of cotton bales between CCI and M/s Lakshmi Ganesh Textiles Ltd, which led to an arbitral award for recovery of money in 2001. The award was challenged but the challenge was dismissed in 2013. Subsequently, ICICI Bank, as a secured creditor, attached the debtor's properties under the SARFA

N. MANOHARAN, ETC.versusTHE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 14311 February 2026Dismissed

The case concerned whether the retired employees of the Heavy Water Plant (HWP) of the Department of Atomic Energy, Tuticorin, are covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The employees had received gratuity under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and sought the higher amount prescribed under the Gratuity Act, leading

JYOTI LIMITEDversusBSE LIMITED & ANR

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 111710 December 2024Dismissed

Jyoti Limited sought to list equity shares on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) that were allotted to an Asset Reconstruction Company (RARE) after converting part of its debt into equity. The BSE rejected the application, stating that Jyoti had not obtained in‑principle approval from the exchange and had not secured a sh

VINOD KUMAR PANDEY & ANR.versusSEESH RAM SAINI & ORS.

2025 INSC 109510 September 2025Disposed off

The case concerned two Central Bureau of Investigation officers, Vinod Kumar Pandey and Neeraj Kumar, who were alleged to have committed a series of cognizable offences under the IPC, prompting writ petitions seeking registration of FIRs against them. The Delhi High Court, after examining the complaints and a prelimina

MANISHA MAHENDRA GALA & ORS.versusSHALINI BHAGWAN AVATRAMANI & ORS.

2024 INSC 29310 April 2024Dismissed

The appellants (the Gala family) claimed a right of way over a 20‑ft road (the disputed rasta) situated on the respondents' land, asserting that the easement was acquired by prescription, necessity, or a 1994 sale deed. The trial court initially decreed in their favour, but the appellate courts set aside that decree, h

RUSSI FISHERIES P. LTD. & ANR.versusBHAVNA SETH & ORS.

2026 INSC 3399 April 2026Dismissed

The case concerns a suit for specific performance of an 1988 agreement to sell agricultural land, where the plaintiff paid Rs.7,75,000 and claimed readiness to execute the sale deed, but the defendants alleged non‑payment of cash and lack of willingness. The trial court dismissed the specific performance claim, but the

MAURICE W. INNISversusLILY KAZROONI @ LILY ARIF SHAIKH

2026 INSC 3409 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the execution of a compromise decree dated 14 July 2017 that divided a 51‑R plot of land between the parties. The defendant, as decree holder, obtained an order from the executing court that altered the portions of land allotted to each party, citing impracticalities such as non‑conforming construc

HANSRAJversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 1789 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Hansraj was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Ramlal, based solely on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution alleged a motive of wage dispute, that Hansraj left for his native place, returned with a punctured cycle, and was seen fleeing with a farsi, the alleged murder weapon. The Supreme Court examin

RAVIversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 1709 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Ravi was convicted of murdering his first wife Jamni by strangulation based largely on circumstantial evidence and hostile witness testimony. The prosecution's case relied on a Zero FIR, a post‑mortem report indicating asphyxia, and the recovery of a rope, while key eyewitnesses turned hostile. The Suprem

AMRIT YADAVversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

2025 INSC 1769 February 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the recruitment of Class‑IV employees in Jharkhand where an advertisement dated 29 July 2010 failed to disclose the number of posts and reservation details, rendering it void under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Court held that the advertisement was illegal and any appointments m

NO.2809759H EX-RECRUIT BABANNA MACHCHEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 959 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Four ex‑recruits of the Maratha Light Infantry were dismissed in 2013 on the ground that they had secured enrollment under the Unit Headquarters Quota by producing forged relationship certificates. The appellants contended that they had applied as general‑category candidates and never submitted any such certificates. T

NEHA ENTERPRISESversusCOMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 4768 April 2025Dismissed

Neha Enterprises, a registered dealer under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, claimed an input tax credit of Rs. 6,42,260 for purchases related to sales made to a manufacturer‑exporter under Form‑E for the assessment year 2010‑11. The assessing officer initially allowed the credit but later disallowed it und

ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2026 INSC 438 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Ultratech Cement Ltd., which operates two cement plants in Gujarat, used heavy earth‑moving and construction equipment such as dumpers, loaders, excavators and dozers within its factory premises. The Gujarat State authorities directed registration of these machines and levied road tax under the Gujarat Motor Vehicles T

RAJENDRA SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL ETC.

2025 INSC 11937 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a father, son and son‑in‑law, were accused of murdering Pushpendra Singh and were acquitted by the trial court but later convicted by the High Court on the basis of alleged ocular testimony and the recovery of swords and a kanta. The Supreme Court examined whether the appellants could be positively iden

HABBAN SHAHversusSHERUDDIN

2026 INSC 4516 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Habban Shah, had agreed to sell agricultural land to the respondent, Sheruddin, for a stipulated price, receiving an advance but requiring the balance payment before execution of the sale deed. The trial court decreed specific performance, directing the appellant to execute the deed within three months o

THARAMMEL PEETHAMBARAN AND ANOTHERversusT. USHAKRISHNAN AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 1346 February 2026Dismissed

The plaintiff, sister of the first defendant, executed a limited Power of Attorney (PoA) on 31 July 1998, which she later cancelled after learning that the first defendant had used it to sell her immovable properties to the second and third defendants on 15 March 2007. The plaintiff alleged that the PoA presented by th

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

2026 INSC 85 January 2026Dismissed

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

AKANKSHA ARORAversusTANAY MABEN

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 9544 December 2024Disposed off

The High Court, exercising its powers under Section 125 CrPC, fixed interim maintenance for the appellant-wife. Dissatisfied with the amount, she filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking enhancement, which the High Court dismissed on the ground that she should have invoked a revision under Section 397 CrPC. The

SADIQ B. HANCHINMANIversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. R1: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R2: CHNDRUMAL R3: SANJAY R4: NANDKUMAR R5: VIJAY

2025 INSC 12824 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, Sadiq B. Hanchinmani, filed a private criminal complaint alleging that the accused had forged an e‑stamp rent agreement to illegally occupy his property and had committed offences under Sections 120B, 201, 419, 471, 468 and 420 IPC. The Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) referred the matter to the

SMT. LAVANYA C & ANR.versusVITTAL GURUDAS PAI SINCE DESEASED BY LRS. & ORS.

2025 INSC 3254 March 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellants, originally defendants in a suit concerning a Joint Development Agreement, gave an undertaking through their counsel in 2007 not to alienate the subject property, which the trial court later incorporated into a court order. In 2011 the plaintiffs filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A alleging br

MOHTASHEM BILLAH MALIKversusSANA AFTAB

2026 INSC 1184 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute involved the custody of two minor sons of an Indian couple married under Muslim Personal Law and residing in Qatar. After a divorce, the Qatar court granted custody of the children to the mother and guardianship to the father, but later revoked the mother's custody when she removed the children to India wit

CHOUDAPPA & ANR.versusCHOUDAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS. & ORS.

2024 INSC 6913 September 2024Dismissed

A suit filed in 1963 for possession and correction of mutation was decreed in 1973, directing an inquiry into mesne profits from the suit's filing date under Order XX Rule 12 of the CPC. After execution, the respondents obtained possession in 2005 and, in 2014, filed an application under Section 141 CPC or Order XX Rul

JITENDRA NATH MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR

2023 INSC 5762 June 2023Dismissed

The appellant, brother of an accused named Dharmendra Nath Mishra, was summoned to stand trial under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure despite not being named in the FIR. The FIR, registered under several IPC sections and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleged that Dharmendra, his brother and an

ANIL KUMARversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2023 INSC 9651 November 2023Dismissed

Anil Kumar was convicted of murder and dowry harassment for setting his wife on fire after she poured kerosene on herself during a quarrel. The prosecution proved that Kumar, under the influence of alcohol, assaulted his wife, after which she drenched herself in kerosene to deter further violence, and Kumar deliberatel

RAM BALAK SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2024 INSC 3601 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Balak Singh, claimed possession of 0.32 decimal of land that had been settled in favour of his adoptive father Makhan Singh by an ex‑landlord and later recorded in his name by the Consolidation Officer under the Bihar Consolidation Act. After the consolidation proceedings closed, the State of Bihar a

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