Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL

197 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusMANOJ KUMAR & ORS.

2021 INSC 42831 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, Private Secretaries (Grade‑II) serving in the Eastern Central Railway’s zonal offices, sought pay‑scale parity with their counterparts in the Central Secretariat Stenographers Service, Railway Board Secretariat Stenographers Service and the Central Administrative Tribunal. The dispute centered on wheth

PARMANAND SINGH (D) THR. LRS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2017 INSC 83331 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a descendant of former zamindars, claimed possession of about five acres of land since 1930. The State Government, on behalf of the Union of India, filed a suit under Section 180 of the United Provinces Tenancy Act, 1939, for recovery of possession and damages, which was later dismissed for default. Duri

MATA PRASADversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2022 INSC 12331 January 2022Case Allowed

Mata Prasad, convicted of murder and related offences and sentenced to life imprisonment, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking premature release under the Uttar Pradesh Governor's 2018 policy for Republic Day releases. Although he satisfied the 2018 criteria, his application was rejected, and the State cited

PAPPU TIWARYversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2022 INSC 11831 January 2022Dismissed

On 7 March 2000 Vikas Kumar Singh was shot by Pappu Tiwari and subsequently stabbed by five others, resulting in his death. All six accused were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 and, in Pappu Tiwari's case, also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The appellants challenged the convictions on several grounds, inclu

PRADEEP MEHRAversusHARIJIVAN J. JETHWA (SINCE DECEASED THR. LRS.) & ORS.

2023 INSC 95830 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a landlord, obtained a consent decree in 2005 allowing eviction of the respondents, tenants, upon default of rent. After the tenants defaulted, the executing court on 12 February 2013 ordered execution of the decree. Four years later the tenants filed an application before the same executing court seekin

MANAK CHAND @ MANIversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 95930 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC for allegedly raping his sister‑in‑law’s younger daughter, who was claimed to be a minor at the time. The prosecution’s case rested on the prosecutrix’s delayed testimony, a school register indicating a birth date of 04‑04‑1987, and a medical report that recorded her ag

BIRBAL NATHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS

2023 INSC 95730 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from an armed assault on Birbal Nath's uncle and aunt in a Rajasthan field, resulting in the uncle's death and injuries to the aunt, an injured eye‑witness. The trial court convicted the six accused under Sections 302, 307 and related offences, but the Rajasthan High Court acquitted them of the murder an

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusC.K. KARUNAKARAN

2021 INSC 58230 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

C.K. Karunakar, an employee of State Bank of India, was interviewed for promotion in 1984. While the promotion process was pending, disciplinary proceedings were initiated, leading to a charge‑sheet and a penalty of censure in 1987, with the appeal dismissed in 1988. The promoting authority had placed his promotion rec

SATYANversusDEPUTY COMMISSIONER & ORS.

2019 INSC 58930 April 2019Dismissed

The State of Karnataka granted agricultural land to members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes with a non‑alienation clause prohibiting transfer for fifteen years. After the period, the appellant purchased the lands from the original grantees, claiming that prior government permission was not required. The As

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusK. SURI BABU

2023 INSC 103329 November 2023Dismissed

K. Suri Babu, a helper (workman) employed by Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad, was alleged to have submitted a forged Class VI certificate and disciplinary action was initiated under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (CCA Rules). The respondent contended that, as a workman, disc

HARI BABU THOTAversus*

2023 INSC 105629 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Shree Aashraya Infra‑Con Ltd was placed under corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) and the appointed resolution professional, Hari Babu Thota, submitted a resolution plan drafted by the promoters and approved by the Committee of Creditors. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dismissed the plan, holding t

CHUNTHURAMversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2020 INSC 61629 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Chunthuram and co-accused Jagan Ram were convicted for the murder of Laxman under IPC sections 302 and 34. The Supreme Court examined the prosecution's evidence, finding that the recovered weapons were never forensic‑linked to the crime, the chemical analysis report was missing, and a shirt forensic repor

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusAMIT SHRIVAS

2020 INSC 56529 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Amit Shrivas claimed a compassionate appointment after his father, a work‑charged driver, died in service; the father had become a permanent employee after 15 years but was still paid from the contingency fund. The 2008 Madhya Pradesh policy excluded work‑charged/contingency employees from compassionate a

VITHALDAS JAGANNATH KHATRI (D) THROUGH SHAKUNTALA ALIAS SUSHMA & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT & ORS.

2019 INSC 97629 August 2019Matter referred to larger bench

The case concerned a partition deed dated 31‑January‑1970 in which a Hindu undivided family allotted agricultural land to two minor daughters of Vithaldas Jagannath Khatri. The State of Maharashtra challenged the exclusion of that land from the surplus‑land calculation under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling

SONU @ SUNILversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 40929 May 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Sonu @ Sunil was convicted along with four others for the robbery and murder of Bharosilal in September 2008, based largely on circumstantial evidence, the recovery of a mobile phone from his possession, and the testimony of a witness (PW‑5) who claimed to have overheard a conspiracy. The prosecution alle

YATIN NARENDRA OZAversusHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT

2021 INSC 69028 October 2021Disposed off

Yatin Narendra Oza, a former designated Senior Advocate and President of the Gujarat High Court Bar Association, was stripped of his senior advocate gown after making repeated allegations against judges, which the Gujarat High Court deemed contemptuous. Oza filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the withdra

DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 61428 October 2020Disposed off

The appellants, holders of mining leases in Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh, sought extension of their leases for periods during which mining was prohibited by orders of the National Green Tribunal and subsequent state notifications. The State argued that neither the Uttar Pradesh Mining Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 nor

UNION OF INDIAversusASHOK KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 51728 August 2020Disposed off

The Union of India challenged a High Court order that quashed an FIR registered under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for the alleged sale of unlicensed drugs, holding that prosecution for offences under Chapter IV of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 must be initiated only by persons named in Section 32 of the A

SANJAY PURAN BAGDE & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 76628 July 2022Dismissed

On the night of 2-3 November 2015, the deceased Vilas Gawande was attacked by four accused; two of them wielded an axe while the other two, Sanjay Puran Bagde and Rajratna (Nandu) Bagde, held the victim. The victim’s wife, an eyewitness, testified that all four were present and that the accused had a pre‑meditated plan

THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.versusLEESAMMA JOSEPH

2021 INSC 30928 June 2021Dismissed

The State of Kerala appointed Leesamma Joseph on compassionate grounds despite her 55% locomotor disability and later denied her promotion benefits under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The respondent claimed that sections 32, 33 and 47 of the 1995 Act guarantee reservation in promotion for persons with disabi

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusPHOOLCHAND RATHORE

2023 INSC 44428 April 2023Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the High Court's acquittal of Phoolchand Rathore, who had been convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of his wife under sections 302 and 201 IPC. The prosecution's case rested on alleged motive (a dispute over jewellery), a disclosure statement and recovery of blood

SANTOSH @ BHUREversusSTATE (G.N.C.T.) OF DELHI

2023 INSC 44328 April 2023Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of Hari Shankar whose body was found in an apartment rented by the appellant Santosh @ Bhure. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – tenancy of the flat, the presence of blood, a suicide letter allegedly written by co‑accused Neeraj, and recovery of a knife and blood‑stained c

INDIAN COMMODITY EXCHANGE LIMITEDversusNEPTUNE OVERSEAS LIMITED & ORS.

2020 INSC 66327 November 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined proceedings initiated by the Forward Markets Commission (later merged with SEBI) against Neptune Overseas Ltd (NOL) and its director Kailash Ramkishan Gupta for alleged trading irregularities. A detailed show‑cause notice dated 21 June 2011 was served only on Gupta, and the respondents argued

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.versusPRINCIPAL ABHAY NANDAN INTER COLLEGE & ORS.

2021 INSC 55127 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued Government Orders in 2010 and 2011 directing that Class IV posts in aided schools be filled only through outsourcing, abolishing permanent recruitment. Regulation 101 under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 was subsequently amended to give effect to this policy. Several aided instit

M/S. NEW VICTORIA MILLS & ORS.versusSHRIKANT ARYA

2021 INSC 55227 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a supervisor at New Victoria Mills, applied for the Modified Voluntary Retirement Scheme (MVRS) by submitting a resignation on 12 July 2002. He later requested that his resignation be kept suspended until his provident fund dues were cleared, but the employer accepted his resignation on 28 May 2003, sim

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusS. NARASIMHULU NAIDU (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.

2021 INSC 42527 August 2021Disposed off

The legal heirs of the late S.V. Srinivasulu Naidu claimed that Union of India had illegally grabbed 7,128.5 sq. yards of land that their father had purchased, relying on a prior suit where the plaintiffs were declared owners of 4,971.5 sq. yards. The Union appealed the Tribunal's order under the Andhra Pradesh Land Gr

CHANDRAKANT BABAN MOTKARI & ORS.versusGOTIRAM LAXMAN MOTKARI (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2019 INSC 96227 August 2019Dismissed

The dispute involved the legal heirs of two deceased brothers over eight acres of agricultural land that had been leased in 1944 and later deemed purchased by tenants under Section 32 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. A certificate under Section 32M was issued in 1967 in favour of the younger brot

ERUDHAYA PRIYAversusSTATE EXPRESS TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.

2020 INSC 46627 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 23‑year‑old software engineer, was injured in a bus‑accident caused by the negligent driving of a State Express Transport Corporation bus, sustaining a permanent disability of 31.1%. She filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) award

V. SUKUMARANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2020 INSC 51026 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

V. Sukumaran, who had worked for over seven years as a Casual Labour Roll (CLR) employee in the Kerala Fisheries Department, later entered government service through a regular recruitment process and retired as an Upper Division Clerk. He claimed that his CLR service should be counted as qualifying service for pension

NARASAMMA & ORS.versusA. KRISHNAPPA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.

2020 INSC 50926 August 2020Dismissed

The plaintiff, A. Krishnappa, sued the defendant’s wife, Smt. Narasamma, for possession of a schedule property, claiming full ownership and seeking removal of a temporary structure. The defendant relied on an unregistered sale agreement dated 10‑10‑1976 and a General Power of Attorney dated 08‑08‑1988 to assert title,

SAMSUL HAQUEversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2019 INSC 95326 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The incident occurred on 17 March 1997 at a tea stall in Kalia Hotel where the deceased, Keramat Ali, was allegedly attacked by a group of nine accused. The trial court acquitted accused No.9 (Samsul Haque) and accused Nos.2 and 3 (Abdul Rashid and Imdadul Islam) citing lack of incriminating evidence, while convicting

RAJENDRA @ RAJAPPA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2021 INSC 21926 March 2021Dismissed

The deceased was attacked with weapons by his relatives while returning from work, resulting in his death. The trial court acquitted accused A‑2 to A‑6, but the High Court convicted A‑2 to A‑5 under s.302 read with s.149 IPC, finding the witnesses’ testimony credible despite minor inconsistencies. The appellants challe

JOYDEEP MAJUMDARversusBHARTI JAISWAL MAJUMDAR

2021 INSC 12326 February 2021Disposed off

Joydeep Majumdar, an Army officer, filed for divorce on the ground of mental cruelty, alleging that his wife, Bharti Jaiswal Majumdar, repeatedly made defamatory complaints to his superiors, the State Women Commission, and on public platforms, which damaged his career and reputation. The Family Court granted the divorc

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusVIRENDRA KUMAR & ORS.

2022 INSC 123225 November 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether determining the conditions of service of officers and employees of the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (the Board) is a statutory function of the Board under the 1965 Act. It held that the power to fix service conditions vests in the Board and can be exercised only by regulatio

SHIVANNA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2021 INSC 78725 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned two acres of land that had been granted free of cost to a member of the Adi Karnataka Scheduled Caste in 1941. The grantee’s grandson (respondent No.4) claimed that the subsequent sale of the land to the appellant in 1971 violated Rule 43(8) of the Mysore Land Revenue Code and the Karnataka Scheduled

WAHEED-UR-REHMAN PARRAversusUNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

2022 INSC 24025 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under the UAPA and related statutes, and the trial court declared five prosecution witnesses as protected under Section 44 of the UAPA and Section 173(6) of the CrPC, sealing their statements. The appellant later sought, under Section 207 of the CrPC, redacted copies of those statements so tha

DAYALU KASHYAPversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2022 INSC 9525 January 2022Dismissed

On 11 September 2010, Sub‑Inspector K.S. Singh, acting on information, apprehended Dayalu Kashyap who was carrying ganja in a green polythene bag on a wooden kanwad. The officer served a notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, offering Kashyap the choice of being searched by a gazetted officer, a magistrate, or the of

V. P. SINGH ETCversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2022 INSC 132624 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by three college officials charged under Section 306 of the IPC for alleged abetment of suicide after a student, Gaurav Wahi, was suspended and asked to deposit a security amount as part of disciplinary action. The student subsequently committed suicide, sending an SMS to his brothe

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX-I, NEW DELHIversusMIS. E-FUNDS IT SOLUTION INC.

2017 INSC 104824 October 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether two US‑incorporated companies, eFunds Corp. and eFunds IT Solutions Inc., had a permanent establishment (PE) in India under the India‑US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Revenue argued that a fixed place of business, a service PE, and an agency PE existed through the In

LALA @ANURAG PRAKASH AASREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2021 INSC 41524 August 2021Dismissed

The appellant, Lala @ Anurag Prakash Aasre, was convicted for murder, unlawful assembly and related offences after a group assault with sharp weapons that resulted in the death of Balu Mandpe and injuries to several witnesses. The key dispute was that the appellant’s name was absent from the FIR, though he was identifi

MAH. ADIWASI THAKUR JAMAT SWARAKSHAN SAMITIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 28624 March 2023Reference answered

The case concerned the interpretation of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De‑notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 and the related 2003 and 2012 Rules. The petitioner challenged th

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusLOVE KUSH MEENA

2021 INSC 20824 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan sought to appoint Love Kush Meena as a constable, but the recruitment advertisement disqualified candidates who were not honourably acquitted of offences involving moral turpitude or violence. Meena had been acquitted in a case under IPC sections 302, 323, 341 and 34 on the basis of benefit of do

TALAT SANVIversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2023 INSC 8024 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Talat Sanvi, was granted anticipatory bail by the High Court on the condition that he deposit interim victim compensation. The appellant challenged this condition, arguing that it contravenes Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Supreme Court examined the provisions of Section 357, no

NIKESH TARACHAND SHAHversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2017 INSC 113723 November 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which imposes two additional conditions for granting bail when the offence involves a scheduled offence punishable with imprisonment of more than three years under Part A of the Schedule. The Court h

BELI RAMversusRAJINDER KUMAR & ANR.

2020 INSC 56023 September 2020Dismissed

The plaintiff Beli Ram, owner of a truck, employed a driver who had been driving with an expired licence for nearly three years. The driver suffered a road accident resulting in 20% permanent disability and claimed compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The High Court held the insurer not liable and p

INDRA DEVIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2021 INSC 35623 July 2021Dismissed

Indra Devi alleged that a fraudulent land transaction involving a forged lease was carried out in collusion with municipal officials, including a clerk (Respondent No.2) who was not named in the FIR. Respondent No.2 sought protection under Section 197 of the CrPC, claiming his actions were performed in the discharge of

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD. & ORS.versusM/S. S. KUMAR’S ASSOCIATES AKM (JV)

2021 INSC 35023 July 2021Dismissed

South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (SECL) floated a tender for hiring excavation equipment and awarded the contract to M/s S. Kumar’s Associates AKM (JV) through a Letter of Intent (LoI). The LoI required the successful bidder to deposit a performance security of 5% of the contract value within 28 days and to sign an Integr

G H GIRISH SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2019 INSC 79623 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttarakhand appealed the acquittal of Girish Singh and Jodh Singh, who were charged under Sections 304B r/w 34 and 306 r/w 34 of the IPC for the alleged dowry death of Ishwari Devi, who committed suicide by burning within seven years of marriage. The High Court convicted them, relying on unproduced letters

NAGJI ODHAVJI KUMBHAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2019 INSC 55723 April 2019Dismissed

The appellants, Nagji Odhavji Kumbhar and another, were convicted under Sections 302 and 324 IPC for the murder of Bhura Govind and Lakha Arjan on 1 July 1987. They claimed they acted in private defence and that the incident occurred in the spur of the moment, seeking a reduction of the charge to Section 304 IPC. The S

ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, GOVERNMENT OFversusKAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR. ETC.

2021 INSC 11323 February 2021

The Enforcement Directorate appealed a Bombay High Court order that granted default bail to respondents arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The crux of the dispute was whether the day of remand should be counted when calculating the 60‑day (or 90‑day) period prescribed under Section 167(2)(a)(i

ARVIND KUMAR @ NEMICHAND & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2021 INSC 76422 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a land‑dispute over a pathway between the prime accused Surjaram and the deceased Ladduram, which escalated into a violent clash on 18‑07‑1989 resulting in two deaths and several injuries. The trial courts and the High Court delivered mixed judgments, convicting some accused under Section 302 r.w. S

DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD & ANR.versusSEEMA KAPOOR

2021 INSC 34822 July 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board advertised a post of PGT (English) Female with a provision for five‑year age relaxation for government servants and departmental candidates. Seema Kapoor, a primary teacher employed by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation, applied after exceeding the age limit and claimed

JAFARUDHEEN & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2022 INSC 46422 April 2022Disposed off

The case involved a violent clash between members of two political parties in Kerala, resulting in the murder of a CPI(M) member. Sixteen accused were charged, but the trial court acquitted A-10 to A-16 while convicting five others. The High Court upheld the convictions but reversed the acquittals of A-10 to A-13, rely

ANIL KUMAR ANANDversusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)

2019 INSC 55222 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a regular importer of electric decorative lighting (M/s. Diyas Mantra Lighting Private Ltd. and its directors), was issued a show‑cause notice under s.28 of the Customs Act, 1962 alleging non‑declaration of brand names and undervaluation of imports from a related party in the UK. The assessing authority

NARESH CHANDRA BHARDWAJversusBANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 55322 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Scale II officer of Bank of India, was penalised with removal from service for sanctioning and recommending loans that turned into non‑performing assets, causing a loss of Rs 70.32 lakhs. He contended that two other officers involved in similar misconduct were punished with compulsory retirement and so

SARDAR MEENAversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2022 INSC 22022 February 2022Disposed off

An FIR was lodged against Sarpanch Sardar Meena alleging house trespass, indiscriminate firing and injuries to the complainant. The High Court granted him bail, and a preliminary enquiry under Section 38(1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, read with Rule 22(2) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, led

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2023 INSC 101221 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Pawan Kumar was convicted of murder and attempt to murder (IPC ss.302, 307 read with s.34) and sentenced to life imprisonment and seven years rigorous imprisonment. He contended that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence (01‑12‑1995) and sought the benefit of the Juvenile Justice Act. The trial court and High Co

M/S SHANTI FRAGRANCESversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 97121 September 2017Hearing Adjourned

The appeal concerned the taxability of pan masala containing tobacco (gutka) under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The central issue was whether the specific entry introducing "Pan Masala and Gutka" in the rate schedule overrode the general exe

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusPARASHOTAM DASS

2023 INSC 26521 March 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) are amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Union of India contended that Section 14 of the AFT Act and Article 227(4) barred High Courts from exercising such jurisdiction, relying on the decision in Union of I

MAHENDRANversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

2019 INSC 24821 February 2019Dismissed

In March 1994 a group of caste Hindus attacked the hut of Murugaiyan, the father‑in‑law of PW1, setting it alight and assaulting him with sickles, resulting in his death. The prosecution relied on the testimony of PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW5, along with medical evidence, to identify twenty‑four accused; the trial court convi

PAULversusSTATE OF KERALA

2020 INSC 6921 January 2020Dismissed

Paul was married to Jessy and was accused of cruelty and of causing her death. The trial court initially acquitted him, but the Kerala High Court set aside the acquittal, remanded the case for further examination under Section 313 Cr.PC, and the trial court subsequently convicted him under Section 302 IPC, sentencing h

LOK PRAHARI THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY S.N. SHUKLA IAS (RETD.)versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 26120 April 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a public‑interest writ petition filed by Lok Prahari, addressed the chronic backlog of about 57 lakh cases and the roughly 40% vacancy rate in High Courts. It held that the dormant constitutional provision under Article 224A can be invoked to appoint retired judges as ad‑hoc judges to clear o

IN RE: ADVOCATE ON RECORD INCLUDES A PROPRIETARY FIRM ETC.versus.

2021 INSC 3420 January 2021

Advocate-on-Record Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka filed a writ petition seeking to use the style "Law Chambers of Siddharth Murarka, Sole Proprietor Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka" on his letterhead and Vakalatnama, arguing that such a designation is permissible and that other High Courts allow it. The petition raised two ques

JAYANTILAL VERMAversusSTATE OF M.P. (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2020 INSC 64919 November 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Jayantilal Verma, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the strangulation death of his wife, Sahodara Bai, whose body was found in their matrimonial home. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of the step‑brother (PW‑1) and the post‑mortem report indicating homicidal asphyxia. Althou

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK & ORS.versusOM PRAKASH LAL SRIVASTAVA

2022 INSC 6919 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a clerk‑cum‑cashier of Indian Overseas Bank, was dismissed after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of multiple charges including forging his sister‑in‑law's signature to open a joint account and withdraw a demand draft. The Industrial Tribunal upheld the dismissal, but the Allahabad High Court set

COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF MIZORAM & ORS.

2022 INSC 6419 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) received a complaint alleging that four private firms colluded in the tendering process for Mizoram state lottery distributors, resulting in bid‑rigging and an appreciable adverse effect on competition. The CCI found prima facie evidence of cartelisation among the private bidde

G H BAJRANGA (DEAD) BY LRS.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2021 INSC 2619 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, BAJRANGA (deceased) represented by legal heirs, challenged the State of Madhya Pradesh's declaration of his agricultural land as surplus under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960. He argued that a portion of the land had been decreed in favour of his mother‑in‑law, Jenobai, in a

LAKHVIR SINGH ETCversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2021 INSC 3019 January 2021Disposed off

The appellants, aged 19 and 20, were convicted under Section 397 IPC for grievous hurt and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. While the State argued that the mandatory minimum sentence could not be reduced, the appellants sought release on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, citing their

VENIGALLA KOTESWARAMMAversusMALEMPATI SURYAMBA & ORS.

2021 INSC 2719 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Venigalla Koteswaramma, filed a suit for partition of her step‑mother Annapurnamma's properties, alleging that her siblings were co‑sharers and that defendant 4 had fraudulently obtained thumb impressions to execute a sale agreement and a will. The trial court held that both the alleged will (Ex. B‑9) an

DEBASISH PAUL & ANR.versusAMAL BORAL

2023 INSC 92518 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a tenant, stopped paying rent in February 2005 and was served a notice to vacate in October 2013, after which the landlord filed an eviction suit. The tenant filed an application under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, but the trial court rejected it because it was fi

HARENDRA RAIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 73818 August 2023

The case involves a double murder in which accused Prabhunath Singh, a sitting MP, was originally acquitted along with other co‑accused. The Supreme Court, on appeal, took judicial notice of the Patna High Court's Habeas Corpus judgment, treating it as a public document, and considered the accused's subsequent conduct

BANK OF BARODA & ANRversusMBL INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED & ORS.

2022 INSC 5318 January 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the scope of Section 29A(h) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which bars persons who have executed an enforceable guarantee that has been invoked by a creditor from being a resolution applicant. The Court held that the disqualification arises when the guarantee is invoked, applies

MUNISH KAKKARversusNIDHI KAKKAR

2019 INSC 138417 December 2019

Munish Kakkar filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty, extra‑marital affairs, and a child out of wedlock, after a marriage that had effectively collapsed with the parties living apart for over sixteen years. The trial court granted a decree of divorce, which the

BARASAT EYE HOSPITAL & ORS.versusKAUSTABH MONDAL

2019 INSC 115517 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased land from a raiyat and the respondent, a contiguous raiyat, claimed a pre‑emptive right under Sections 8 and 9 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, alleging that the sale consideration was inflated. The respondent filed an application with only a partial deposit (the alleged actual consid

UFLEX LTD.versusGOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2021 INSC 49217 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over a government tender for polyester hologram excise labels, where two unsuccessful bidders, Kumbhat Holographics and Alpha Lasertek India LLP, alleged that the tender specifications were tailored to favour the successful bidders, UFLEX Ltd. and Montage Enterprises. The Court held

IFCI LTDversusSANJAY BEHARI & ORS.

2019 INSC 104817 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned thirty‑one former IFCI employees who had taken voluntary retirement under the VRS‑2008 scheme and later claimed enhanced pension benefits based on RBI pay‑scale revisions that were applied retrospectively to periods when they were still employees. The employees argued that a clarification in the earl

LACHHMI NARAIN SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS & ORS.versusSARJUG SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2021 INSC 40617 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a Will executed by the deceased Rajendra Singh in favour of Sarjug Singh, which the objectors claimed had been revoked by a registered cancellation deed dated 02‑02‑1963. The trial court held the Will was revoked, but the Patna High Court reversed that finding, granting probate to the applicant, rely

V. KALYANASWAMY (D) BY LRS. & ANR.versusL. BAKTHAVATSALAM (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2020 INSC 45517 July 2020Dismissed

The case involves a property dispute between the branch of Lakshmiah Naidu (respondents) and legatees under a Will (appellants) of Rangaswami Naidu, who died on 01.06.1955 before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The appellants claimed that Rangaswami Naidu had severed the joint family status through a newspaper notice a

VIRENDRASINGversusTHE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

2023 INSC 37217 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant, elected as a member of the Zilla Parishad in Dhule, was disqualified after his son was awarded a road‑repair contract by the Gram Panchayat, a contract that was sanctioned and funded by the Zilla Parishad. Respondent No.3 filed an application under Sections 16(1)(i) and 40 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parish

BIJAY KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.versusRANCHI UNIVERSITY & ORS.

2021 INSC 19117 March 2021Dismissed

The State Government of Bihar issued a Departmental Order (D.O.) on 28 July 1981 to merge the pay scales of Lower Division and Upper Division Assistants/Clerks in Patna University, later extending the scheme to other universities. Subsequent communications in 1982, 1989 and 1990 led the Vice‑Chancellor of Ranchi Univer

SEETHAKATHI TRUST MADRASversusKRISHNAVENI

2022 INSC 4817 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned a 0.08‑cent portion of a 120‑acre land parcel in Chengalpattu, where the appellant Seethakathi Trust claimed title based on a series of registered sale deeds dating back to 1963, while the respondent Krishnaveni sought specific performance of an earlier agreement and claimed possession of the same

MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 91816 October 2023Dismissed

The petitioners, practising advocates, filed a writ under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961 and Rule 2 of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, alleging that the designation of senior advocates creates an unlawful class violating Articles 14, 19

JOHN D’ SOUZAversusKARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

2019 INSC 114716 October 2019Case Partly allowed

John D’ Souza, a former bus conductor, was dismissed by Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation after a domestic enquiry that found him guilty of absenteeism. While an industrial dispute concerning his dismissal was pending before the Labour Court, the corporation sought permission to effectuate the dismissal under

CHAMAN LAL (D) THR. LRS.versusKAMLAWATI (D) THR. LRS.

2019 INSC 76216 July 2019Dismissed

Chaman Lal purchased land in 1949 and executed a gift deed in 1958 in favour of his step‑mother, Gurdev Kaur. The dispute arose when Chaman Lal filed a partition suit in 1987 claiming that only half of the land had been gifted. The trial court and the first appellate court ordered a half‑share partition, but the Punjab

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. MANAGING DIRECTOR & ANR.versusRAMESH KUMAR SHARMA

2020 INSC 4716 January 2020Dismissed

Workmen filed a civil suit in 2005 seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against a fine imposed by Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. The corporation moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC to dismiss the suit and refer the matter to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The application a

ASHOK RAM PARHAD & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 23315 March 2023Dismissed

The appellants were recruited to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) by nomination in 2014, underwent training and were appointed in 2016, while the respondents were promoted to ACF in 2014 without undergoing the training. The appellants sought declaration that their appointment and service should be coun

AJAY KUMAR RADHEYSHYAM GOENKAversusTOURISM FINANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.

2023 INSC 23215 March 2023Dismissed

The Tourism Finance Corporation of India advanced a Rs 30 crore loan to Rainbow Papers Ltd, whose Managing Director Ajay Kumar Goenka signed a post‑dated cheque that was later dishonoured. A demand notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was issued and a criminal complaint was filed against the compa

THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT & ORS. ETC.versusK. CHANDRAN ETC.

2022 INSC 31015 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a government employee convicted of corruption, with a criminal appeal pending, is entitled to his death‑cum‑retirement gratuity (DCRG) under the Kerala Service Rules. The Court held that Rule 3A cannot be read in isolation; it must be read together with Rule 3, Note 2 and Ruling 3, wh

FAKHREY ALAMversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 18315 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR was lodged against Fakhrey Alam under several IPC sections, the Arms Act and Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The police filed a charge sheet for the IPC and Arms offences within the 180‑day period but delayed the UAPA charge sheet beyond that period, filing it after 211 days. The a

DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD.versusAIRPORTS ECONOMIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY & ORS.

2023 INSC 104614 December 2023Disposed off

Delhi International Airport Ltd (DIAL) and Mumbai International Airport Ltd (MIAL) sought relief on the basis of a letter dated 24 May 2011 between the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Airport Economic Regulatory Authority, alleging it affected the computation of the Hypothetical Regulatory Asset Base (HRAB). The Sup

KALICHARAN & ORSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 127714 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a 2000 incident in which several accused were convicted of murder and related offences. The trial court framed charges alleging that the victim, Harpal Singh, was killed by bullet injuries from accused No.2, although the evidence showed he died from injuries inflicted by sharp weapons wielded by acc

YASHWANT SINHA & ORS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR & ANR.

2019 INSC 124214 November 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a review application filed by the Union of India seeking correction of two sentences in paragraph 25 of its 14‑December‑2018 judgment on the Rafale fighter‑jet procurement, and also considered the petitioners' claim that the Court had failed to order registration of an FIR and CBI investig

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.versusS. K. SINGH & ORS.

2019 INSC 114014 October 2019Disposed off

The case concerned promotion of Junior Engineers (JEs) in the Uttarakhand Irrigation Department to Assistant Engineer (AE) posts, where 7.33% of promotion vacancies were earmarked for JEs holding a degree with only three years of service, while diploma‑holding JEs required ten years. Diploma‑holders challenged the acce

ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2018 INSC 49514 May 2018Order modified

The Supreme Court entertained Civil Appeal No. 877 of 2018 filed by Ashok Kumar and others against the State of Jharkhand concerning the payment of differential mandatory benefits, including increments, under the Jharkhand Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 2004. The Court had earlier, on 11 May 2018, issued directi

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM/S. UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION & ORS

2023 INSC 22214 March 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered curative petitions filed by the Union of India seeking to increase the US$470 million settlement awarded in 1989 for the Bhopal gas disaster. The Union claimed errors in victim counts, inflation, and additional environmental and rehabilitation costs, arguing that the original settlement was

A. MANJUversusPRAJWAL REVANNA @ PRAJWAL R & ORS

2021 INSC 88113 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

In a 2019 Lok Sabha election for the Hassan constituency, the appellant A. Manju, who finished second, filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 alleging that the elected candidate, Prajwal Revanna, had committed corrupt practices by filing a false affidavit and concealing ma

MOHAN @SRINIVAS @SEENA @TAILOR SEENAversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

2021 INSC 87913 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns the murder of a police officer for which two accused were acquitted by the trial court. The High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted them for life, relying on the testimony of police witnesses and a purported dying declaration. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the scope of appellate review

RAGHUNATH (D) BY LRS.versusRADHA MOHAN (D) THR. LRS & ORS.

2020 INSC 59013 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a suit filed in 1974 by a co‑sharer seeking to enforce his pre‑emptive right over a sale of a property in Ajmer. The property had previously been transferred in 1945, 1946 and on 5 Nov 1966, the latter after the Rajasthan Pre‑Emption Act, 1966 came into force. The issue was whether the one‑

R. RAGHAVENDRANversusC. RAJA JOHN & ORS.

2023 INSC 84913 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) that, on the basis that the corporate debtor Springfield Shelters Pvt. Ltd. was an MSME, the promoter need not compete with other resolution applicants to regain control of the debtor. The Resolution Professional, acting under the Ins

CHHERTURAM @ CHAINUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2022 INSC 95113 September 2022Disposed off

The appellant, a son, and his father were drinking together when a quarrel erupted on the night of 26-27 July 2010. The son attacked his father with a piece of Nagar wood, inflicting eleven severe injuries to the head, neck, chest and abdomen, leading to the father's death. He was convicted of murder under Section 302

SIVASANKARANversusSANTHIMEENAL

2021 INSC 46713 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and respondent were married in 2002 but the marriage was never consummated and the parties lived apart for almost two decades. The appellant filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty; the trial court granted a decree on the basis of irretrievable breakdown, which was later set aside by the appellate cour

ISMAILBHAI I. KANSARA (D) THROUGH LRversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2021 INSC 33113 July 2021Dismissed

Ismailbhai I. Kansara, an encroacher, occupied an evacuee land parcel in Gujarat since 1976 and was served an eviction notice under Section 19(2)(b) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. He filed a writ petition challenging the eviction, but the High Court and the Division Bench dismisse

HAJI ABDUL GANI KHAN & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 12413 February 2023Dismissed

The petition challenged the increase in seats of the Jammu and Kashmir Union Territory Legislative Assembly and the constitution of a Delimitation Commission under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 and the Delimitation Act, 2002. The Court held that Article 170, which governs State legislatures, does not a

THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERSversusGOEL BUS SERVICE KULLU ETC. ETC.

2023 INSC 2713 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Himachal Pradesh government imposed a special road tax under s.3A(3) of the Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972 on transport vehicles operating without a valid permit. The High Court struck down this provision, holding it to be a penalty and ultra‑vires the State’s legislative competence under List I

K. LUBNA & ORS.versusBEEVI & ORS.

2020 INSC 3313 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of three shop rooms, filed an eviction petition against the respondents for non‑payment of rent and unauthorised sub‑letting of one of the rooms. The trial court granted eviction for all three rooms, but the appellate authority limited eviction to two rooms, and the High Court further limited it

ANAND YADAV & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 58812 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the eligibility of candidates holding a Master of Education (M.Ed.) degree for the post of Assistant Professor (Education) in Uttar Pradesh universities. The Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Service Selection Commission (UPHESSC) initially rejected an M.Ed. holder, but later issued a corrigendum accept

AMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2020 INSC 58712 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Devinder Singh, who was allegedly attacked by three accused wielding hockey sticks and a knife. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the testimony of Parminder Singh (PW‑1), a brother of the deceased, while the other two eye‑witnesses turned hostile. The Supreme Court examined the

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusTRILOK RAM

2019 INSC 102612 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan advertised recruitment for Teacher Grade III (Level I & II) in 2013, requiring candidates to possess the prescribed qualifications as on the last date of application. Respondent Trilok Ram, who was still completing the mandatory B.S.T.C. qualification, applied based on a High Court order and late

MS. INDIRA JAISINGversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA, THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL

2023 INSC 52412 May 2023Directions issued

The Supreme Court revisited the guidelines it had laid down in 2017 for the designation of Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961. It held that voting by secret ballot should be an exception rather than the rule and that the reasons for resorting to such a vote must be recorded. The Court refined

ASHOK GULABRAO BONDREversusVILAS MADHUKARRAO DESHMUKH AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 72412 April 2023Disposed off

The appellant alleged that the respondents forged a personal recognizance bond and a surety bond before they were filed as evidence in a criminal case pending before a Judicial Magistrate. The lower courts dismissed the appellant's complaint and the revisional court directed a preliminary enquiry under Section 340 of t

ASHUTOSH KUMARversusTHE FILM AND TELEVISION INSTITUTE OF INDIA & ANR.

2022 INSC 41812 April 2022Directions issued

The appellant, a colour‑blind candidate, was denied admission to the Diploma in Film Editing at the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) on the ground of his visual deficiency. The Supreme Court, recalling its earlier order that the appellant must undergo the selection process de novo, constituted an expert co

CHANDRU @ CHANDRASEKARANversusSTATE REP. BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CB CID AND ANR.

2019 INSC 17612 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Chandru @ Chandrasekaran and Siva were convicted of murder (s.302 r/w s.120B) based solely on circumstantial evidence and a private complaint filed four years after the death. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the complainants' statements, the delay in filing the private complaint, the lack of a

M/S. RPS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.versusMUKUL KUMAR & ANR.

2023 INSC 81611 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

RPS Infrastructure Ltd entered into a development agreement with KST Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, which later led to an arbitral award in favour of RPS in 2016. While the award was under challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) was initiated against KST Infrastructu

CBIversusR.R. KISHORE

2023 INSC 81711 September 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The CBI registered a case against Dr. R.R. Kishore for alleged bribery under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, but conducted the investigation without the prior approval of the Central Government required by Section 6A(1) of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. The Delhi High Court allowed the trial

NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-V

2020 INSC 54411 September 2020Disposed off

The National Co‑operative Development Corporation (NCDC) earned interest on surplus funds held in its statutory fund and used that interest to make non‑refundable grants to state and national cooperative societies. The Assessing Officer disallowed the grants as capital expenditure, but the Commissioner of Income Tax (A

RAVI KHANDELWALversusM/S. TALUKA STORES

2023 INSC 61511 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord (Ravi Khandelwal) filed an eviction suit in 1985 against the tenant (M/s Taluka Stores) for a shop in Jaipur. The suit was dismissed by the trial court in 2002 for violating Section 14(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, which bars eviction suits within five years of lett

SATENDER KUMAR ANTILversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2022 INSC 69011 July 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court addressed a series of applications concerning bail procedures, directing that any non‑compliance with Sections 41 and 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) automatically entitles the accused to bail. It emphasized that courts must verify compliance with these sections before authorising detenti

ABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYUM ANSARIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 67111 July 2022Disposed off

Abu Salem Abdul Kayyum Ansari, a convicted terrorist, was arrested in Portugal on a fake passport, sentenced there and later extradited to India after the Government of India gave a solemn sovereign assurance that he would not face the death penalty or imprisonment beyond 25 years. The appellant challenged the Indian c

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, BHILAI STEEL PLANT, BHILAIversusMAHESH KUMAR GONNADE & ORS.

2022 INSC 67511 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a management trainee at Bhilai Steel Plant, had joined a Scheduled Tribe (ST) reserved post on the basis of a caste certificate that was later cancelled by a high‑level Caste Scrutiny Committee, which found him to belong to the OBC Halba/Koshti community. The employer terminated his service, but the Chh

VIRENDRAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 67811 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Virendra was convicted for the murder of Main Babu, allegedly committed over a property dispute, along with co-accused Suresh; Baijnath, the third accused, died during trial. The prosecution's case hinged on the testimony of a star eyewitness, PW15, who claimed to have seen Suresh firing the weapon, and o

REGISTRAR OF ASSURANCES & ANR.versusASL VYAPAR PRIVATE LTD. & ANR

2022 INSC 119210 November 2022Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered two related disputes where the Registrar of Assurances, invoking Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, demanded additional stamp duty on properties sold by court‑ordered public auctions – one arising from a partition suit and the other from a company liquidation. In both cases the sale

BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD.versusVCK SHARES & STOCK BROKING SERVICES LTD.

2022 INSC 119310 November 2022Dismissed

Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. (now part of ICICI Bank) granted a term loan and overdraft facility to VCK Shares & Stock Broking Services Ltd., which defaulted. The bank sought recovery of the debt before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDB Act).

RATNAM SUDESH IYERversusJACKIE KAKUBHAI SHROFF

2021 INSC 71210 November 2021Dismissed

The dispute arose from a settlement deed between Ratnam Sudesh Iyer (appellant) and Jackie Kakubhai Shroff (respondent) concerning the sale of shares in Atlas Equifin Private Limited. The deed required the respondent to withdraw criminal complaints and, in return, receive US$1.5 million in escrow and US$2 million upon

BHUPESH RATHODversusDAYASHANKAR PRASAD CHAURASIA & ANR.

2021 INSC 71010 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bell Marshall Telesystems Ltd., through its Managing Director Bhupesh Rathod, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Dayashankar Prasad Chaurasia for dishonouring eight cheques of Rs.20,000 each. The respondent contested the complaint, claiming it was not filed by t

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS.versusISRO DRIVERS ASSOCIATION

2020 INSC 48410 August 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the Government of India challenging the recognition of a service association formed by ISRO drivers. The respondents sought recognition under the Central Civil Services (Recognition of Service Association) Rules, 1993, claiming that drivers constitute a "distinct category" of gov

KIRODI (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRversusRAM PARKASH & ORS.

2019 INSC 67410 May 2019Dismissed

The appellant filed a regular second appeal alleging that the appeal was decided without framing a substantial question of law, relying on decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by the 1976 Amendment Act

CENTRAL BOARD OF DAWOODI BOHRA COMMUNITY & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA &ANR.

2023 INSC 11510 February 2023Directions issued

The Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community sought a mandamus directing the State of Maharashtra to enforce the Bombay Protection of Ex‑communication Act, 1949, challenging the Supreme Court's earlier decision in Sardar Syedna which held the Act void for violating Article 26(b). The Act had been repealed by the Mahara

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIAversusBONNIE FOI LAW COLLEGE & ORS.

2023 INSC 11610 February 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a civil appeal by the Bar Council of India against Bonnie Foi Law College concerning the validity of the Bar Council's power to prescribe pre‑enrolment training and examinations under the Advocates Act, 1961. The Court examined three questions referred by a three‑Judge Bench: (1) whether th

NAWAL KISHORE SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 7310 February 2021Dismissed

The appellant, a seaman, was engaged on a foreign‑going vessel from 18 September 2009 to 18 June 2010 and was subsequently declared permanently unfit for sea service due to dilated cardiomyopathy. He claimed 100% disability compensation under clause 21 of the National Maritime Board Agreement, arguing that his heart co

M/S. IFCI LIMITEDversusSUTANU SINHA & ORS.

2023 INSC 10239 November 2023Dismissed

The appellant IFCI Ltd. had subscribed to Compulsorily Convertible Debentures (CCDs) issued by ICTL, a special purpose vehicle of IVRCL, for financing a highway concession project. When ICTL defaulted, the CCDs were treated as equity under the project’s concession agreement and the Resolution Professional rejected IFCI

NABHA POWER LIMITEDversusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED

2023 INSC 8839 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the recovery of deductions from monthly tariff, specifically the cost of washing coal and the gross calorific value (GCV) under a power purchase agreement between Nabha Power Limited and Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL). The Supreme Court had earlier, on 5 October 2017, ordered PSPCL

SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2021 INSC 4629 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

South Indian Bank Ltd. and other scheduled banks earned tax‑free income from bonds, securities and shares. The Assessing Officer, unable to identify the exact funds used for these investments, proportionately disallowed interest expense under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The banks argued that they had sufficient

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.versusDR. MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA

2021 INSC 3279 July 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a medical officer, was transferred from Uttarakhand to Uttar Pradesh in 2002 but never reported to his posting at Badaun, instead filing a petition for a posting elsewhere and later starting a private practice. He subsequently claimed 50% back wages for the period 2003‑2016, which the State denied on the

IN RE : PROBLEMS AND MISERIES OF MIGRANT LABOURERSversusIN RE:

2020 INSC 4209 June 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu, examined the plight of migrant labourers stranded during the COVID-19 lockdown and the measures taken by the Central and State governments. While acknowledging the large number of Shramik trains and bus services already deployed, the Court noted lapses in registration, supervision, a

THE STATE OF HARYANAversusANAND KINDO & ANR. ETC.

2022 INSC 9398 September 2022Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana appealed the conviction of Anand Kindo and others for the pre‑planned murder of an elderly couple, Major General K.C. Dhingra and his wife, whom they were employed to look after. The accused brutally beat the sleeping victims with a hammer and a tava, disfiguring their faces, and later attempted to

AJIT MOHAN & ORS.versusLEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.

2021 INSC 3248 July 2021Dismissed

In the wake of the February 2020 Delhi communal riots, the Delhi Legislative Assembly constituted a Committee on Peace and Harmony and issued summons to Ajit Mohan, the Vice‑President of Facebook India, and later to Facebook India itself, seeking their testimony on the platform's role in online hate speech. The petitio

PRIYANKA MISHRA & ORSversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 7298 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The wife (Respondent No.2) filed a criminal complaint alleging dowry harassment, cruelty and forced abortion against her husband’s parents and in‑laws under IPC sections 498‑A and 34 and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The appellants moved to quash the FIR under CrPC s.482, arguing that the wife had lived abroad for most of

T. VALSAN (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.versusK. KANAGARAJ & ORS.

2023 INSC 5028 May 2023Dismissed

The appellants, who joined the Puducherry Electricity Department as Junior Engineers with engineering degrees, challenged the promotion of diploma‑holding engineers who obtained a degree during service and were immediately promoted under the degree quota. The issue was whether service rendered before acquiring the degr

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusMANPREET SINGH POONAM ETC.

2022 INSC 2798 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two appeals filed by the Union of India against former and serving officers who sought promotion to Junior Administrative Grade‑I (JAG‑I) and the associated pay‑upgradation. The first appellant had voluntarily retired in 2010 and claimed that he was entitled to promotion and enhanced pay un

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusTHE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER & ORS.

2023 INSC 1048 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The National Insurance Company Ltd. (appellant) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Chief Electoral Officer of Bihar (respondent No.1) to provide group insurance for election workers in 2000. A constable died of sun stroke while on election duty, and his wife (respondent No.2) filed a claim for Rs.10 la

M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LIMITEDversusM/S. INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORP. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 1038 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas allocated natural gas to Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (IPCL) on the condition that IPCL lay its own pipelines. IPCL entered into a gas‑supply contract with GAIL (India) Ltd., a public sector undertaking, which contained clauses charging IPCL for "loss of transportatio

LAXMIBAI CHANDARAGI& ANR.versusTHE STATE OF KARNATKA & ORS.

2021 INSC 678 February 2021Disposed off

Laxmibai Chandaragi and Santosh Singh Yadav, both well‑educated Hindus, married without their parents' consent after Laxmibai travelled from Karnataka to Delhi. Her father filed a missing‑person complaint, leading to FIR No.226/2020 at Murgod Police Station. The investigating officer (IO) insisted that Laxmibai appear

INDIAN BANK & ORS.versusPROMILA & ANR.

2020 INSC 138 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Jagdish Raj, a clerk-cum-shroff of Indian Bank, died on 15 January 2004 leaving behind a wife (who was already employed) and three minor children. The family applied for compassionate appointment for the son on 24 January 2004, which had to be considered under the scheme in force on the date of death – the 4 April 1979

ALOK KUMAR VERMAversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2019 INSC 368 January 2019Disposed off

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Government of India issued orders on 23 October 2018 divesting Director Alok Kumar Verma of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) of his powers, functions and supervisory role. The Director challenged the legality of these orders, arguing that under Section 4B(2) of th

STATE OF UTTARAKHANDversusDARSHAN SINGH

2019 INSC 12217 November 2019Dismissed

The State of Uttarakhand appealed the High Court's acquittal of five accused persons charged with murder and offences under sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the accused, armed with pistols and sharp‑edged weapons, ambushed the deceased while he was on a tractor, shot him and assaulted hi

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusN MURUGESAN ETC.

2021 INSC 6287 October 2021Disposed off

The respondent, N. Murugesan, was appointed Director‑General of the Central Power Research Institute (CPRI) on a five‑year tenure through direct recruitment, with a clause that re‑appointment would depend on suitability. As his tenure ended, he sought extension, claiming that his appointment was a regular post and that

V. PRABHAKARAversusBASAVARAJ K. (DEAD) BY LR. & ANR.

2021 INSC 6267 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought declaration and possession of a house based on a registered Will (Exhibit P4) executed by the deceased in his favour, which was attested by his brother and witnessed by his sister. The respondents admitted the existence of Exhibit P4 but contested it by producing an unregistered Will (Exhibit D1) a

AMIT SAHNIversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

2020 INSC 5797 October 2020Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the occupation of the Kalindi Kunj‑Shaheen Bagh stretch, including the Okhla underpass, by protesters opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act, arguing that it violated their right to protest under Articles 19(1)(a) and (b). The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ without specific directions, p

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF BHALGORA AREA (NOW KUSTORE AREA) OF M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.versusWORKMEN BEING REPRESENTED BY JANTA MAZDOOR SANGH

2021 INSC 4527 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The management of Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL), a Central Government undertaking, recruited SC/ST miners/loaders in 1986 through the Employment Exchange as mandated by the Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959. Thirty‑eight workmen were later alleged to have obtained appointments fraudu

BHAGWANversusSTATE OF MAHARASAHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY HOME, MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 8717 August 2019Dismissed

The appellant Bhagwan was convicted for murdering his wife by setting her ablaze after pouring kerosene, while his two sons also suffered burns. The prosecution's case hinged on the victim's dying declaration, recorded by a Naib Tehsildar, and a medical officer's certificate that she was conscious throughout. The defen

STATE OF UTTARAKHANDversusSUDHIR BUDAKOTI

2022 INSC 4017 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttarakhand, relying on its own 2006 Rules, applied the Central Government's revised pay scale only to teaching faculty (Lecturers) and not to Registrars, who are administrative officers under the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973. Sudhir Budakoti, appointed Registrar, filed a writ petition seekin

ABID-UL-ISLAMversusINDER SAIN DUA

2022 INSC 4027 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an eviction petition under s.14(1)(e) read with s.25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The tenant sought leave to defend under s.25B(5); the Rent Controller denied the application, finding the landlord's bona‑fide need satisfied and the tenant's contentions unsubstantiated. The tenant then approa

JASDEEP SINGH @ JASSUversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 237 January 2022Disposed off

The case involved the murder of a man at a dhaba in Jalandhar, where four accused (A1‑A4) were convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC. The father of the deceased (PW6) initially did not allege that A3 and A4 instigated the shooting, but later, in a supplementary statement under Section 161 CrPC, claimed they did. The t

M.E. SHIVALINGAMURTHYversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BENGALURU

2020 INSC 67 January 2020Dismissed

The case involved a partnership firm (AMC) whose reconstitution in 2009 led the Director of Mines and Geology of Karnataka (the appellant) to issue Mineral Dispatch Permits (MDPs) to the new partners. The Central Bureau of Investigation alleged that the appellant acted without the prior State Government sanction requir

SUDESH CHHIKARAversusRAMTI DEVI & ANR

2022 INSC 12576 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a senior citizen, Ramti Devi (respondent No.1), who had executed a release deed on 14 November 2008 transferring a portion of her land to her daughters, including the appellant Sudesh Chhikra. She later filed a petition under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Ac

JAVED ABDUL RAJJAQ SHAIKHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 12106 November 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh, was accused of murdering his wife by throttling her after demanding half tola gold, money and a dress. The trial court convicted him and three co‑accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and also under Section 498A. The High Court acquitted the co‑accused and c

RAMA NAND AND ORS.versusCHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2020 INSC 4816 August 2020Dismissed

The appellants, who were Telephone Operators in the Delhi Fire Service, were reorganised as Radio Telephone Operators (RTOs) with a higher pay scale, a requirement of at least five years of service and a specialised training programme. They claimed that this conversion was merely a re‑description of posts and that, the

DEV KARAN @ LAMBUversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 8656 August 2019Dismissed

The case involved seven accused who entered the under‑construction house of the deceased, armed with deadly weapons, and assaulted him, resulting in his death and injuries to two witnesses. The trial court convicted six of the accused under Sections 148, 302, 307, 325 read with Section 149 and Section 449 of the Indian

RIPUDAMAN SINGHversusTIKKA MAHESHWAR CHAND

2021 INSC 3206 July 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and respondent, brothers and heirs of the deceased, were involved in a suit for possession of land based on a will. During the suit, the parties reached a compromise that allocated additional land not originally in dispute, resulting in a compromise decree. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether s

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS.versusNIRVAL SINGH

2019 INSC 6326 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Nirval Singh applied for a compassionate appointment after his father's death, relying on a policy dated 21‑11‑2002 that was in force at the time of his application. The employer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., suspended the policy pending a new one, which came into effect on 23‑11‑2004 and offered Singh a solati

SMT. M. HEMALATHA DEVI & ORS.versusB. UDAYASRI

2023 INSC 8705 October 2023Dismissed

The appellants, a group of builders, entered into a sale agreement to construct a villa for the respondent, a home‑buyer, but failed to deliver possession and subsequently terminated the agreement. The buyer filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 before the District Consumer Forum, while the builders

NABHA POWER LIMITED (NPL)versusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PSPCL) & ANR.

2017 INSC 10085 October 2017Case Partly allowed

Nabha Power Ltd (NPL) entered into a 25‑year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) for a 1200 MW plant under a fuel‑specific, pre‑identified site procurement route. The PPA’s energy‑charge formula required the cost of purchasing, transporting and unloading coal "to and at the pr

NAVAL KISHORE MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2019 INSC 7255 July 2019

The victim, the brother and legal heir of a deceased murder victim, challenged the trial court's acquittal of the accused under Sections 452, 302/34 IPC. The State sought leave to appeal under Section 372 read with Section 378 of the CrPC, which was denied. The victim filed an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 (i

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.versusK. SHOBANA ETC. ETC.

2021 INSC 1545 March 2021Dismissed

The Tamil Nadu Government issued a notification for 356 Post‑Graduate Assistant posts in Chemistry, reserving 117 seats for MBC/DNC candidates (74 backlog and 43 current vacancies). The provisional selection list omitted several meritorious MBC/DNC applicants, who alleged that they were placed in backlog vacancies inst

SHRI GOVINDA CHANDRA TIRIAversusSIBAJI CHARAN PANDA & ORS.

2020 INSC 1325 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the absorption of a government employee (respondent No.1) who had been on deputation in the Ministry of Environment & Forests and was later absorbed on the condition that his seniority would be counted from the date of absorption, treating him as a fresh appointee. After the seniority list was issued

D. RAGHU AND OTHERSversusR. BASAVESWARUDU AND OTHERS ETC.

2020 INSC 1305 February 2020Disposed off

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

SHAKEEL AHMEDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 11624 November 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 seeking implementation of the Srikrishna Commission's recommendations on the 1992-93 Mumbai riots, including compensation for victims, tracing of missing persons, and police reforms. The Court observed that while the Commission's report is not binding, the

R. SRINIVAS KUMARversusR. SHAMETHA

2019 INSC 11284 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

JAGBIR SINGHversusSTATE

2019 INSC 10004 September 2019Dismissed

Jagbir Singh was convicted of murder (Sec. 302 IPC) and criminal intimidation (Sec. 506 IPC) for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her ablaze. The victim gave three statements: two early statements (24‑01‑2008 and 25‑01‑2008) describing an accidental fire, and a later dying declaration on 27‑01‑2008 im

UNION OF INDIA AND ORSversusP. BALASUBRAHMANAYAM

2021 INSC 1514 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

P. Balasubrahmanayam, a Group‑B gazetted officer in the Department of Posts, was charged with nine offences, including bribery and procedural lapses. He challenged the charge memo on the ground that, because the allegations involved a vigilance angle, prior approval from the Central Vigilance Officer (CVO) as required

RAJESH YADAV & ANRversusSTATE OF U.P.

2022 INSC 1484 February 2022Dismissed

The appellants Rajesh Yadav and others were convicted for murder and for violating the Arms Act, with the High Court acquitting them of the attempt to murder charge under Section 307 IPC but confirming life imprisonment under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The Supreme Court examined whether the testimonies of related eye‑

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusMUKESH KUMAR & ORS.

2021 INSC 3733 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned HDFC ERGO General Insurance Ltd. challenging directions of the Delhi High Court that required the insurer to provide a prosthetic limb with a lifetime warranty and to maintain it by periodic inquiries, as well as to keep a large interest‑bearing deposit to fund attendant wages for the permanently d

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.versusUTTAM SINGH

2021 INSC 3783 August 2021Leave Granted & Dismissed

The appellant, the State of Uttar Pradesh, challenged the High Court's order granting a compassionate appointment to Uttam Singh, whose father had served as a part‑time tubewell operator but was treated as a regular employee. The father had been appointed against a regular vacancy, served for 13 years, was transferred

M/S. JAGAN SINGH & CO.versusLUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ORS.

2022 INSC 8992 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Ludhiana Improvement Trust acquired land from several owners but failed to pay the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Tribunal. The owners filed execution proceedings, leading to the attachment and auction of the property to M/s. Jagan Singh & Co. for Rs. 22.65 lakhs in 1992. The Trust later sought to set

DR. SHAH FAESAL AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2020 INSC 2532 March 2020Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the President's Constitution Orders 272 and 273 (5 August 2019) that made the entire Indian Constitution applicable to Jammu & Kashmir, arguing that the orders were unconstitutional. They sought a reference to a larger Bench, contending that two earlier Supreme Court judgments—Prem Nath Kaul

D.B. BASNETT (D) THR. LRS.versusTHE COLLECTOR & ANR. EAST DISTRICT, GANGTOK, SIKKIM & ANR.

2020 INSC 2392 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, D.B. Basnett, claimed that the State of Sikkim had illegally occupied his 7.07‑acre land without complying with the procedural requirements of the Sikkim Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1977. The State contended that it had paid compensation of Rs.62,645 in 1980 and therefore possessed the land l

TAIJUDDINversusSTATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2021 INSC 8091 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

A land dispute led to a mob assault on Abdul Wahab, resulting in his death. Thirty‑two persons were convicted under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201 and related provisions of the IPC. The appellant, Taijuddin, was alleged to have merely pointed out the house where the victim was hiding; he was present at the scene beca

THOTA SRIDHAR REDDY & ORS.versusMANDALA RAMULAMMA & ORS.

2021 INSC 5881 October 2021Dismissed

The case concerned a dispute between purchasers (Thota Sridhar Reddy & ors.) who claimed occupancy rights under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955, and protected tenants (Mandala Ramulamma & ors.) who held a certificate of ownership under Section 38‑E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area)

DIST. COLLECTOR SATARA & ANR.versusMANGESH NIVRUTTI KASHID

2019 INSC 11061 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the validity of caste certificates issued under a 30 July 2011 notification that created district‑level Caste Scrutiny Committees to verify certificates for local body elections. The High Court had quashed the notification, directing recovery and destruction of the certificates, but the order was sta

HARENDRA RAIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8061 September 2023Disposed off

The case concerns a murder that occurred in 1995, for which respondent No.2 was initially acquitted by the trial and High Courts but later convicted by the Supreme Court under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC. The principal issue before the Court was the appropriate sentence, including whether the death penalty was warr

SHILPA SAILESHversusVARUN SREENIVASAN

2023 INSC 4681 May 2023Reference answered

The Constitution Bench examined the scope of Article 142(1) of the Constitution, holding that the Supreme Court may depart from statutory procedure and even substantive law to achieve "complete justice" provided the exercise is guided by fundamental public policy. It ruled that, in cases of settlement between parties,

RAVI DHINGRAversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 1821 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellants kidnapped a 14-year-old boy for ransom. The trial court and High Court convicted them under Section 364A IPC (kidnapping for ransom) with life imprisonment. The Supreme Court examined the ingredients of Section 364A, particularly the requirement of a threat to cause death or hurt. The Court found that th

JOGI RAMversusSURESH KUMAR & ORS

2022 INSC 1311 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a Will dated 15 April 1968 in which Tulsi Ram bequeathed half of his self‑acquired property to his second wife, Ram Devi, as a limited life interest, with the remainder to pass to his son, Jogi Ram, after her death. The question was whether Ram Devi’s interest became an absolute ownership under Secti

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