Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

SURYA KANT

149 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

RAJU AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2024 INSC 63331 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and co-accused were alleged to have attacked four youths with knives and lathis on a night in May 1994, leading to an FIR filed by the victims' father who was not an eye‑witness. The trial court acquitted all accused due to lack of clear evidence of who inflicted the stab injuries and the absence of a mot

K. RAMYAversusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2022 INSC 104430 September 2022Disposed off

The deceased businessman K. Kumareshan died in a motor accident, leaving a widow, minor children and parents as dependents who claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 4,29,37,700 based on the deceased's income tax returns and audit reports, but the

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.versusPANKAJ BABULAL KOTECHA & ORS.

2025 INSC 79230 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a theme park developed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) on land alleged to be the site of a 100‑year‑old lake, Khajuria Lake. A public‑interest writ petition before the Bombay High Court ordered demolition of the park and restoration of the lake, a decision later appealed to the

CHETANversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

2025 INSC 79330 May 2025Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder (IPC s.302), misappropriation of property (IPC s.404), and unlawful possession and use of a firearm (Arms Act s.3, s.5) based largely on circumstantial evidence, including the last‑seen theory, forensic ballistics, and his subsequent abscondence. The Supreme Court examined whether

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGERversusM/S TATA STEEL LTD.

2024 INSC 35630 April 2024Disposed off

The insured, Tata Steel Ltd., suffered a fire that destroyed its 20‑Hi cold rolling mill and claimed Rs 35.08 crore under a fire policy issued by New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (NIACL). The policy contained a Reinstatement Value Clause, but the insured failed to provide required documents and could not replace the mill w

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

2020 INSC 10730 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 10930 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 10830 January 2020Disposed off

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

CHOWGULE AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITEDversusGOA FOUNDATION & ORS.

2020 INSC 11030 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

B.R.K. AATHITHANversusSUN GROUP & ANR.

2022 INSC 123629 November 2022Dismissed

The appellant, B.R.K. Aathithan, filed a criminal complaint under Sections 499 and 500 IPC alleging defamation by the respondents for broadcasting his arrest. The Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint, finding that the allegations fell within the fourth exception to Section 499. The appellant sought redress throu

AJAY MALIKversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2025 INSC 11829 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from FIR No. 60/2017 alleging wrongful confinement, trafficking and conspiracy against Ajay Malik for employing a tribal domestic worker. Malik sought quashing of the criminal proceedings and compounding of the offences, supported by a no‑objection affidavit from the complainant, while the State opposed

BINDU KAPUREAversusSUBHASHISH PANDA & ORS.

2025 INSC 78428 May 2025

The Supreme Court examined the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) unauthorised felling of over a thousand trees in the Delhi Ridge and its failure to disclose this during a hearing, despite pending applications for permission. The Court held that these actions amounted to wilful disobedience of its 1996 order in M.C.

ARIF MD. YEASIN JWADDERversusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

2025 INSC 78528 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a lawyer, filed a public interest litigation alleging that up to 171 police encounters in Assam between 2021 and 2022 were fake and that the State had violated the procedural safeguards laid down in the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) guidelines. The Gauhati High Court dismissed the petition as

STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusHEMENDHRA REDDY & ANOTHER. ETC.

2023 INSC 46028 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated alleged disproportionate assets of D. Dwarakanadha Reddy and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, filed a closure report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in 2008, and the Special Judge accepted it. In 2013 the CBI obtain

IVAN RATHINAMversusMILAN JOSEPH

2025 INSC 11528 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ivan Rathinam, was alleged by the respondent and his mother to be the biological father of the respondent, who was born during the respondent's mother's marriage to Mr. Raju Kurian. The parties litigated in a Munsiff Court, a Sub‑Judge Court and a Family Court over a declaration of paternity, a DNA test,

HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED & ANR.DIA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2019 INSC 128927 November 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of writ petitions filed by Hindustan Construction Company Ltd seeking to strike down Section 87 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019 and the deletion of Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment, arguing that they revived an automatic‑stay of arbitral awards and removed th

MANOHAR LAL SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 68227 October 2021Directions issued

The petitioners alleged that the Israeli NSO Group's Pegasus spyware was used to infiltrate the mobile devices of Indian citizens, including journalists and activists, thereby violating their fundamental right to privacy under Article 21. They sought an independent investigation, arguing that the Union of India had fai

MANISHA RAVINDRA PANPATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 76227 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Manisha Ravindra Panpatil, was elected Sarpanch of Vichkheda Gram Panchayat in 2021. Private respondents alleged she was residing in a house built on government land and sought her disqualification. The Collector, without a proper fact‑finding exercise, issued a summary order disqualifying her, which was

MANOJ PARIHAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & ORS

2022 INSC 65427 June 2022Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of Munsiffs appointed in 2003 by direct recruitment, challenged the High Court's order fixing their inter‑se seniority on the basis of roster points under the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005. They argued that seniority should be determined by the merit order prepared by the State Public

SATISH CHANDRA YADAVversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2022 INSC 102426 September 2022Dismissed

The appellants, Satish Chandra Yadav and Pushpendra Kumar Yadav, were dismissed from the CRPF while on probation after it was discovered that they had answered "No" to questions about pending criminal cases in the verification Form-25, despite an FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings against them. The Supreme Court h

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusMAHENDRA ALIAS GOLU

2021 INSC 66525 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order reducing Mahendra alias Golu’s conviction from attempt to commit rape under s.376(2)(f) read with s.511 IPC to a lesser offence of outraging modesty under s.354 IPC. The facts revealed that the accused lured two minor girls to his house,

K. PURUSHOTTAM REDDYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2025 INSC 89425 July 2025Dismissed

The petitioners, K. Purushottam Reddy and others, challenged two notifications issued by the Union of India that effected delimitation of constituencies only for the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, arguing that the exclusion of the states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana violated Article 14 and the statutory manda

PRASHANT SINGH & ORS. ETC.versusMEENA & ORS. ETC.

2024 INSC 38025 April 2024Dismissed

The dispute concerned ownership of ancestral land in Mustafabad village, originally belonging to Angat and inherited by his sons, including Kalyan Singh, who was a co‑owner before consolidation proceedings began. Ram Jai Lal, an uncle, sought to have Kalyan Singh’s name removed from the revenue record under Section 49

DR. SUNIL KUMAR SINGHversusBIHAR LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (THROUGH SECRETARY) AND ORS.

2025 INSC 26425 February 2025Case Allowed

Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh, an MLC from the RJD, was expelled from the Bihar Legislative Council after the Ethics Committee found his conduct unparliamentary and his subsequent refusal to cooperate with the Committee. He challenged the expulsion through a writ petition under Article 32, arguing that the Ethics Committee's p

DIVYANGNAKUMARI HARISINH PARMAR (DEAD) AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 114524 September 2025Dismissed

The appellants, descendants of original Portuguese "Alvara" holders in Dadra and Nagar Haveli, claimed perpetual lease rights over agricultural lands granted under the Organizacao Agraria (OA). The Collector rescinded these grants on 30 April 1974 invoking Article 12 of the OA for non‑cultivation, leading to a protract

M/S. KALAMANI TEX & ANRversusP. BALASUBRAMANIAN M.A. NO. 364 OF 2021 IN

[2021] 1 S.C.R. 67924 February 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 2021 (M/A No. 364 of 2021), reviewed its earlier direction dated 10 February 2021 to transfer Rs. 11,20,000 to the respondent along with accrued interest. It was discovered that the sum was held in a non‑interest‑earning account with UCO Bank, making the payment of

IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATIONMISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 665 OF 2021 IN (SMW (C) NO. 3 OF 2020)versus.

2021 INSC 53623 September 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu, extended the limitation period for all judicial and quasi‑judicial proceedings due to the COVID‑19 pandemic, initially ordering an exclusion of the period from 15 March 2020 to 14 March 2021. After a decline in cases, the Court on 8 March 2021 limited the exclusion to that one‑year s

VISHU VARDHAN @ VISHNU PRADHANversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 88423 July 2025Disposed off

The dispute concerned ownership of a 2‑18‑10 bigha parcel of land in NOIDA, jointly purchased in 1997 by Reddy, Sudhakar and Vishnu. Reddy later sought to establish sole ownership by filing separate suits and a writ petition, suppressing the earlier joint‑ownership litigation, and obtained a High Court order declaring

KISHORCHANDRA CHHANGANLAL RATHODversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 57923 July 2024Case Partly allowed

Kishorchandra Rathod challenged the reservation of the Bardoli Legislative Assembly constituency for Scheduled Castes, which was effected by Delimitation Commission Order No. 33 dated 12‑12‑2006 under the Delimitation Act, 2002. The Gujarat High Court dismissed his writ petition, relying on Article 329(a) of the Consti

X ETC.versusRAJESH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 57923 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Kerala High Court erred in quashing five FIRs filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against a computer teacher accused of inappropriate conduct with female students. The allegations included holding students' hands while using a mouse, asking inva

TANKADHAR TRIPATHYversusDIPALI DAS

2025 INSC 101722 August 2025

The appellant, Tankadhar Tripathy, was elected from the Jharsuguda Assembly Constituency, after which the respondent, Dipali Das, filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices and EVM irregularities. The appellant challenged the petition's maintainability, arguing that the petition lacked a Form 25 affidavit as

TARABAI NAGAR CO-OP. HOG. SOCIETY (PROPOSED)versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 101522 August 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the acquisition of a 9,054‑sq‑m land in a Slum Rehabilitation (SR) Area in Mumbai, owned by Indian Cork Mills Private Limited (ICM) but claimed by the Tarabai Nagar Co‑op. Housing Society. The Court considered whether the owner has a preferential right to redevelop the SR Area

SALDANHA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusBISHOP JOHN RODRIGUES AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 101622 August 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the acquisition of a 1,596.40 sq. m. parcel of land owned by the Basilica of Our Lady of the Mount (a public trust) under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. The High Court had set aside a public notice and an order approving the ac

DAVINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2023 INSC 58522 June 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Davinder Singh, was convicted by the trial court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court for offences under Sections 376, 452 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, based on the allegation that he threatened the prosecutrix with a knife at her residence. On appeal before the Supreme Court, the appellant contended

BARLA RAM REDDYversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA

2025 INSC 53122 April 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined three separate land acquisitions in Narsingi and Poppalguda made under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the Outer Ring Road project. The High Court had enhanced compensation to INR 1.35 crore per acre by relying on post‑notification auction sales of the Golden Mile project, and also granted

M/S. ORIENTAL STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2021 INSC 26922 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s Oriental Structural Engineers Pvt. Ltd., was contracted by the State of Kerala to upgrade two highway stretches. The contract contained a clause (60.8) providing for interest on delayed payments, but the rate for local‑currency interest was left blank in the bid appendix. The arbitral tribunal awarde

MARIAM FASIHUDDIN & ANR.versusSTATE BY ADUGODI POLICE STATION & ANR.

2024 INSC 4922 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a married couple, obtained a passport for their minor child allegedly without the husband’s genuine consent, leading the husband to file a complaint alleging forgery of his signature and cheating. The trial magistrate ordered further investigation, resulting in a supplementary charge‑sheet that added of

HORRMAL (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2024 INSC 79721 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for 302.75 acres of land acquired by the State of Haryana under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arguing that the market value should reflect the land's strategic location and potential. The High Court had restored the lower award given by the Land Acquisition Collector

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusABHISHEK GUPTA ETC.

2024 INSC 79621 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) sought to acquire 952.18 acres of land in Panchkula for a mixed‑use development, but the landowners objected under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, claiming exemption for fruit trees and alleging that their structures were authorized. The High Court quashed th

SUMITHA PRADEEPversusARUN KUMAR C.K & ANR.

2022 INSC 113321 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, mother of a 12‑year‑old girl, alleged that her brother‑in‑law sexually assaulted the child, causing severe trauma and a decline in academic performance. An FIR was filed under IPC sections 354 and 354A and POCSO Act sections 7, 8, 9 and 11. The Sessions Court denied anticipatory bail to the accused, but

SILPPI CONSTRUCTIONS CONTRACTORSversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

2019 INSC 69621 June 2019Dismissed

Silppi Constructions Contractors submitted technical bids for two government tenders but their bids were rejected on the ground that they failed to meet eligibility criteria and that adverse remarks against their sister company were taken into account. The petitioner appealed the rejection, but the appellate authority

JUHRU & ORSversusKARIM & ANR.

2023 INSC 14821 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The deceased Rukseena died by suicide after alleged dowry harassment, leading her brother to file an FIR against her husband, his mother, and the husband’s father‑in‑law, sister‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law. The investigating agency found no incriminating material against the three relatives and only charged the husband a

MUNILAKSHMIversusNARENDRA BABU & ANR.

2023 INSC 94320 October 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against the grant of regular bail to the accused (Respondent No.1) in a murder case involving sections 109, 120B, 201, 302, 450 and 454 IPC. After the bail was granted, key witnesses – the mother, sister and father of the deceased – turned hostile within twenty days, raising concern

MOHAMMED ZUBAIRversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

2022 INSC 73620 July 2022Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Mohammed Zubair, co‑founder of ALT News, who faced five FIRs in Uttar Pradesh and one in Delhi arising from the same set of tweets. The petitioner sought quashing of the FIRs and, alternatively, their consolidation with the Delhi FIR, along with interim bail in all ca

BISHAMBHAR PRASADversusM/S. ARFAT PETROCHEMICALS PVT. LTD. AND ORS

2023 INSC 40620 April 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the status of the Large-Scale Industrial Area (LIA) in Kota, Rajasthan, and held that the land has remained under the uninterrupted ownership and lessor relationship of the State Government, not transferred to RIICO by the 1979 order. It found that the leases granted to JKSL and later to Arfa

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

THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusRAJESH KUMAR @ MUNNU

2025 INSC 33120 February 2025Dismissed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed the High Court’s order acquitting Rajesh Kumar (Munnu) of offences under Sections 376 and 452 IPC, alleging that the trial court’s conviction was based on sufficient evidence. The alleged incident occurred on 13 August 2007, but the FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay, and t

DESH RAJversusBALKISHAN (D) THROUGH PROPOSED LR MS. ROHINI

2020 INSC 5920 January 2020Disposed off

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

M/S. ANANDA SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL TRUSTversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

2020 INSC 20819 February 2020Dismissed

The Ananda Social and Educational Trust was formed on 30 May 2008 and applied for registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act on 10 July 2008, having not yet undertaken any charitable activities. The Commissioner of Income Tax rejected the application on the ground that, in the absence of actual activities, t

VASANT GANPAT PADAVE (D) BY LRS. & ORS .versusANANT MAHADEV SAWANT (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS

2018 INSC 120318 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, long‑time tenants of a parcel of agricultural land, sought to exercise their statutory right to purchase the land after the landlord, a widow, died and her interest passed to her heir. The lower courts held that the tenants had lost the right because they failed to give the required intimation under Sec

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR.versusRAVI KUMAR (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 55018 May 2023Case Partly allowed

The dispute concerned a 183‑bigha parcel of land in Haripur, Nainital, originally leased in 1924 under the Government Grants Act of 1895. The lease was allegedly transferred by a 1947 sale deed, but the deed’s nature—whether it conveyed title or merely lease‑hold rights—was contested. The respondents claimed ownership

ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATIONversusRAHUL MEHRA & ORS

2022 INSC 130418 May 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a Special Leave Petition filed by the All India Football Federation (AIFF) challenging the High Court's setting aside of its 2016 Executive Committee elections. The Court had earlier constituted a two‑member Committee of Administrators (CoA) to draft a new constitution for the AIFF and to

ANSAR AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2023 INSC 72518 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ansar Ahmad, alleged that his son was killed in a contract murder orchestrated by two respondents, Subhash Yadav and Rajesh Vikram Singh. The High Court had granted regular bail to both respondents despite serious charges under multiple IPC sections and the Explosive Substances Act, and despite evidence

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusKRISHIDHAN SEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED

2022 INSC 42818 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

State Bank of India (SBI) filed an application before the NCLT on 19 September 2018 under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) seeking initiation of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited, alleging default on a financial debt dated 10 June 2014 w

JEETENDRAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 30818 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

BHAGWAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2020 INSC 31018 March 2020Case Partly allowed

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

EX-GUNNER VIRENDER PRASADversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2020 INSC 30518 March 2020Dismissed

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

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTversusVED PRIYA & ANR.

2020 INSC 30618 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 30718 March 2020Disposed off

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

GELUS RAM SAHU AND OTHERSversusDR. SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 20218 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

DR. (MAJOR) MEETA SAHAIversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2019 INSC 138717 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Meeta Sahai, a former Army Medical Corps doctor, applied for a General Medical Officer post in Bihar but was denied marks for work experience because the advertisement limited such experience to hospitals run by the Government of Bihar. She challenged this restriction, arguing that the Bihar Health Service (Appoint

VINOD KUMAR BHAGAT AND ORSversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND ORS

2021 INSC 74417 November 2021Disposed off

The appellants, appointed as Judicial Magistrates in 2002‑03, were placed higher in the merit list than the petitioners belonging to reserved categories. The State prepared a gradation list for promotion using Rule 5 of the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005, which applied roster points meant for direct recruitmen

MANUSHA SREEKUMAR & ORS.versusTHE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.

2022 INSC 110217 October 2022Case Partly allowed

The deceased, a 32‑year‑old fish‑vendor‑cum‑driver, died in a 2015 road accident caused by a rash driver of a car insured by United India Insurance Co. The claimants (wife, minor son and mother) sought compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including loss of dependency. The Tribunal awarded Rs 32,39,000, whic

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.versusM/S BSK REALTORS LLP & ANR.

2024 INSC 45517 May 2024

The Supreme Court examined a massive batch of land‑acquisition disputes involving the Government of NCT of Delhi and its agencies versus private landowners, notably M/s BSK Realtors LLP. The core issues were whether the dismissal of a civil appeal by one authority in the first round barred other authorities from filing

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusTEJPAL & ORS.

2024 INSC 45617 May 2024Disposed off

The Delhi Development Authority and other government bodies filed a batch of appeals and petitions seeking condonation of delay for challenging High Court orders that declared land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The appellants argued that subsequent judici

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSANTOSH KARNANI & ANR

2023 INSC 38017 April 2023Disposed off

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated a trap operation in which Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Santosh Karnani allegedly demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs 30 lakhs to influence a tax assessment of Safal Construction. The complainant recorded the demand and the subsequent acknowledgment of paym

SIJU KURIANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 37817 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant Siju Kurian was convicted by the Karnataka High Court for murder, concealment of body, theft and cheating. The conviction rested on circumstantial evidence, the post‑mortem report establishing homicide, witnesses who saw the accused with the deceased, and a voluntary statement made by the accused that led

AFJAL ALI SHA @ ABJAL SHAUKAT SHAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

2023 INSC 25717 March 2023Directions issued

The petitioner, brother of a murder victim, sought transfer of the criminal trial from West Bengal to Assam, alleging bias, witness intimidation, and procedural irregularities including a state‑issued notification to withdraw prosecution. The High Court set aside the withdrawal order and directed the trial to continue,

HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES PVT. LTD. (NOW HP INDIA SALES PVT. LTD.)versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), NHAVA SHEVA

2023 INSC 5017 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Hewlett‑Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd., imported all‑in‑one integrated desktop computers and self‑assessed them under tariff item 8471 50 00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During customs examination the goods were re‑classified as tariff item 8471 30 10, a category for "portable" automatic data

SIDRAMversusTHE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR.

2022 INSC 120416 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 19‑year‑old utensil seller, suffered paraplegia and a 45% permanent disability in a road accident on 18 July 2012. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 6,13,000 in compensation, which the Karnataka High Court enhanced to Rs 9,26,800 by increasing the notional monthly income to Rs 7,000 and th

S. P. MANI AND MOHAN DAIRYversusDR.SNEHALATHA ELANGOVAN

2022 INSC 97016 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.P. Mani and Mohan Dairy, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against a partnership firm and its partners for a dishonoured cheque. The High Court, on a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC, quashed the criminal proceedings against one partner, Dr. Snehalatha Elangova

THE STATE OF KERALA ETC. ETC.versusTHE PRINCIPAL, KMCT MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2025 INSC 51816 May 2025Disposed off

The Kerala Medical Education Act, 2017 created an Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee to fix fees for private medical colleges. The Committee approved a fee of Rs. 20 lakhs for NRI students, directing that Rs. 5 lakhs of each fee be placed in a corpus fund for BPL scholarships, a decision later challenged by the Sta

KAMUKAYI & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 54116 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, Muchamy @ Muthusamy, fell from a moving passenger train on 27 September 2014 and died on the spot. His son purchased a valid ticket for the journey and handed it to him; the incident was investigated under Rule 7 of the Railway Passengers (Manner of Investigation of Untoward Incidents) Rules, 2003, with F

VIJAYAversusSTATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2022 INSC 96415 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vijaya, allegedly ingested a poisonous substance and gave it to her 10‑month‑old daughter, who later died. A statement recorded by a Judicial Magistrate on 11‑Oct‑2012 was treated as a dying declaration, but the appellant survived and subsequently denied making the statement. The trial court and High Cou

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.versusVIRENDRA BAHADUR KATHERIA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 52415 July 2024Disposed off

The case concerned a long‑standing dispute over pay‑scale disparity between Sub‑Deputy Inspectors of Schools/Assistant Basic Shiksha Adhikaris (SDI/ABSA) and Deputy Basic Shiksha Adhikaris (DBSA) and Headmasters of Junior High Schools in Uttar Pradesh. The State had revised Headmasters' pay in 2001 but not that of SDI/

BALASAHEB KESHAWRAO BHAPKAR & ORS.versusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 52515 July 2024Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 filed by the promoters of the Sai Prasad Group seeking the liquidation of the companies' immovable assets to refund investors. The petitioners alleged that SEBI's efforts to auction the properties were inadequate and that the investors had been waiting for

JANSHRUTI (PEOPLE’S VOICE)versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 53615 April 2025Dismissed

The petitioners, Janshruti (People’s Voice), filed a writ under Article 32 seeking gender‑neutral guidelines for domestic violence complaints and a declaration that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) is unconstitutional. The Court examined whether the provision violate

CRYOGAS EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITEDversusINOX INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 48315 April 2025Dismissed

The dispute arose when Inox India Ltd filed a trademark suit alleging that Cryogas Equipment Pvt Ltd and LNG Express infringed its proprietary engineering drawings and related literary works used in cryogenic semi‑trailers. LNG Express moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, arguing that the drawings w

SATISH CHANDER SHARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 49115 April 2025Dismissed

The petitioners, retired officers of the Himachal Pradesh State Forest Development Corporation, challenged the denial of pension benefits under the 1999 corporate sector pension scheme, arguing that the Supreme Court’s decision in State of H.P. v. Rajesh Chander Sood, which upheld a cut‑off date of 02‑12‑2004, was per

AFJAL ANSARIversusSTATE OF UP

2023 INSC 107114 December 2023Case Partly allowed

Afzal Ansari, a sitting Member of Parliament, was convicted under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act and sentenced to four years' imprisonment, resulting in his disqualification from the Lok Sabha under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act. He appealed t

DESH RAJ & ORS.versusROHTASH SINGH

2022 INSC 127914 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, joint owners of a 23‑kanal property, entered into two sale agreements with the respondent, requiring the sale deed to be executed by 16‑08‑2004 and making earnest money forfeitable if the deadline was missed. The respondent paid part of the consideration as earnest money but failed to appear for executi

SONAM LAKRAversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2024 INSC 90114 November 2024Disposed off

The appellant, a 27‑year‑old elected Sarpanch of Sajbahar Gram Panchayat, was removed from office by a Sub‑Divisional Officer on the basis of alleged delays in construction projects, despite her claim that the work order was served after the stipulated period and that delays were due to multiple stakeholders. The appel

SINGAPORE AIRLINES LTD.versusC.I.T., DELHI

2022 INSC 120114 November 2022Case Partly allowed

The case concerned whether the additional amount ("Supplementary Commission") earned by travel agents over and above the standard 7% commission on airline tickets is covered by Section 194H of the Income Tax Act and thus subject to tax deduction at source (TDS). The Supreme Court examined the nature of the relationship

AJMERA SHYAMversusSMT. KOVA LAXMI & ORS.

2025 INSC 99214 August 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Ajmera Shyam, challenged the election of Smt. Kova Laxmi, alleging that she failed to disclose income shown in her income‑tax returns for four financial years in the Form 26 affidavit, marking it as “Nil”. The High Court dismissed the election petition, holding that the omission was not a substantial def

SHAHAJA @ SHAHAJAN ISMAIL MOHD. SHAIKHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 72514 July 2022Dismissed

The appellant, ShaHaja @ ShaHajan Ismail Mohd. Shaikh, was convicted of murdering Mahankal Jaiswal after two eye‑witnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑8) testified that he assaulted the victim with a hammer. The trial court also relied on a discovery panchnama under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, which recorded the appellant pointin

AMARENDRA KUMAR PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 72414 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Amarendra Kumar Pandey, a rifleman of the Assam Rifles, was discharged on 31 January 2004 after accruing four red‑ink entries for various misconducts. He challenged the discharge by filing a writ petition; a Single Judge set aside the order, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and discretion, but the Guwahati Hig

POPATRAO VYANKATRAO PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2020 INSC 18314 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 19414 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

PARTHA CHATTERJEEversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 62713 December 2024Disposed off

The former West Bengal Education Minister, Partha Chatterjee, was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a large‑scale teachers recruitment scam and alleged money‑laundering offences under the PMLA. After raids recovered substantial cash and gold from his associates and companies, he was denied bail

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

2019 INSC 137313 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

SIRAJ AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2019 INSC 136713 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

ARVIND KEJRIWALversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2024 INSC 68713 September 2024Disposed off

The appellant, a three‑time Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested by the CBI in June 2024 in connection with an FIR registered in August 2022 under sections 120B, 477A IPC and section 7 PC Act. He challenged the legality of the arrest under Sections 41A and 41(1)(b)(ii) of the CrPC and also sought regular bail. The Hig

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.versusM/S JAI DURGAA FINVEST P. LTD.

2026 INSC 67813 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana awarded a mining contract for Yamuna sand to M/s Jai Durgaa Finvest P. Ltd., which required the contractor to deposit a security amount. The contractor defaulted on instalments and the contract was terminated on 09.03.2000, with the security forfeited. The contractor later claimed interest on the s

HANUMANTHARAJU B (DEAD) BY LR.versusM AKRAM PASHA & ANR.

2025 INSC 68213 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Sub‑Inspector of the CRPF was injured in a road accident and claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) initially awarded compensation based on a 61.94% disability assessed by a Medical Board, but on reconsideration a Commissioner appointed by the Tri

M/S TOMORROWLAND LIMITEDversusHOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 20713 February 2025Disposed off

M/s Tomorrowland Limited, the highest bidder for a 5‑star hotel site, paid the first instalment but argued that HUDCO (Housing and Urban Development Corporation) was obliged to obtain statutory approvals and execute a sub‑lease before demanding further payments. HUDCO failed to secure the necessary approvals and a perp

MOHAMMAD LATIEF MAGREYversusTHE UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ORS.

2022 INSC 94712 September 2022Dismissed

In an encounter on 15.11.2021, the appellant's son was killed and buried by the authorities. The appellant sought exhumation of the body to perform Islamic last rites, and a single judge of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court ordered disinterment. The Union Territory appealed, and the High Court modified the order, allowing

TUSHAR HIMATLAL JANIversusJASBIR SINGH VIJAN & ORS.

2025 INSC 66312 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant inherited a 22,000‑sq‑ft plot in Chembur and terminated a 1972 lease to a partnership firm, filing an eviction suit. Respondent No.1, claiming tenancy rights over 550 sq ft based on a family settlement agreement, obtained an interim injunction restraining the appellant from dispossessing him, which the Hi

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNLversusSUBHASHCHANDRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 20812 March 2024Disposed off

The Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (Corporation) sought compensation for about 13,000 acres of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for several water and irrigation projects. The Karnataka High Court had enhanced compensation amounts in a series of judgments, but the Supreme Court found that the High C

LAWYERS VOICEversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS

2022 INSC 4312 January 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by Lawyers Voice, an NGO, seeking judicial intervention after the Prime Minister's convoy was stalled for about 20 minutes on a flyover in Firozpur on 5 January 2022, alleging a serious breach of security. The Court heard counsel for the petitioner, the Solicitor Gene

NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusDARSHAN LAL BOHRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 50810 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) sought to acquire 83.761 hectares of land for industrial development, issuing a Section 4 notification in 2013. Several landowners filed objections under Section 5A, claiming their lands were "abadi" and should be exempt, but the Collector dismissed the objections

KAZI AKILODDINversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 50510 July 2024

The appellant, owner of a 1.25‑lac‑sq‑ft land in Akola, challenged the award of compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a flood‑protection wall, contending that the land was not wholly within the statutory ‘Blue Zone’ and that the market value should be based on arm‑length transactions.

M/S TEXCO MARKETING PVT. LTD.versusTATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS.

2022 INSC 11869 November 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd., bought a fire insurance policy from Tata AIG that excluded coverage for basement premises, yet the insured shop was located in a basement. After a fire, the insurer denied the claim relying on the exclusion clause. The State Consumer Commission held the insurer liable for defic

M/S. KEWAL COURT PVT. LTD. AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8849 October 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined the meaning of “vacant land” under Section 2(q) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, focusing on sub‑clause (i) and the conflict between the earlier Johnson two‑judge decision and the later Billimoria three‑judge decision. The appellants argued that land on which construction

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusSAJIB ROY

2025 INSC 10849 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Staff Selection Commission advertised recruitment for Constable (GD) posts with an age limit of 18‑23 years, granting a three‑year relaxation to OBC candidates. Several OBC applicants, including Sajib Roy, availed this relaxation, failed to secure selection in the OBC quota, but scored higher than the last candidat

RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE & ORS.versusPREM CHAND KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 10839 September 2025

The Railway Board issued an employment notice for 659 (later 763) constable ancillary posts in the Railway Protection Force, reserving seats for SC/ST/OBC candidates with age and physical‑measurement relaxations. Several SC/ST candidates who availed these relaxations scored higher than the cut‑off for the unreserved ca

ANITA SHARMA & ORS.versusTHE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 6858 December 2020Case Partly allowed

The deceased, Sandeep Sharma, died from injuries sustained in a night-time collision between his car, driven by its owner Sanjeev Kapoor, and an oncoming truck. His dependents filed a claim for compensation alleging that Kapoor's rash and negligent driving caused the accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal relied

MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 4668 July 2024Dismissed

The appellants challenged the recruitment of Prabodhak teachers in Rajasthan, arguing that Rule 13(v) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008, which gave age relaxation to persons who had served in certain educational projects, violated Article 14 of the Constitution, and that the award of bonus m

DHARMENDRA KUMAR @ DHAMMAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 4808 July 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Dharmendra Kumar, was convicted for murder under s.302 read with s.34 IPC for stabbing Tillu during a dispute over a wall construction, with additional convictions under s.147, 148 and 149 later set aside. The Supreme Court examined whether alleged contradictions in witness testimonies, the inconclusive

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusDR. SANAT KUMAR GHOSH AND ORS.

2024 INSC 4698 July 2024Directions issued

The State of West Bengal appointed 24 Vice‑Chancellors in 2022, but the High Court held the State‑constituted Search Committee invalid for lacking a UGC‑nominated member, rendering those appointments unlawful. Subsequent attempts by the State to extend tenures and appoint interim Vice‑Chancellors were also challenged,

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.versusRAJMATI SINGH

2022 INSC 12617 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Rajmati Singh was appointed as an untrained assistant teacher in 1971 and was relieved in 1973 to undergo mandatory training, which she failed to complete, leading to the termination of her contractual employment in 1974. Over the next three decades she made repeated representations but never approached any judicial or

MOHAR SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH COLLECTOR & ORS.

2023 INSC 10197 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land in Khora village, sought compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs 70 per sq. yard, the Reference Court enhanced it to Rs 106, and other landowners obtained further enhancement to Rs 130 and later Rs 150 per

THE STATE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.versusM/S. SAMARTH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS & ANR.

2022 INSC 9357 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a landowner, entered into a Development Agreement with the respondent developer to construct an apartment complex, also granting a General Power of Attorney. The developer failed to complete the work within the stipulated 15‑month period, prompting the appellant to serve a legal notice terminating the ag

PRATIBHA MANCHANDA & ANRversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR

2023 INSC 6127 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, senior citizens who owned a 15 Kanal 2 Marla plot in Gurugram, alleged that the accused (Respondent No.2) forged a 1996 power of attorney and a 2022 sale deed to illegally transfer the land. An FIR was filed under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B IPC. The accused sought anticipatory bail; the

AMANATULLAH KHANversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI & ORS.

2024 INSC 3837 May 2024

The appellant, Amanatullah Khan, challenged the inclusion of his minor children and wife in a police "History Sheet" that alleged his bad character, arguing that there was no adverse material against them. The Delhi High Court dismissed his writ petition under Article 226 and Section 482 of the CrPC, prompting an appea

SANJAY KUMAR RAIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 2927 May 2021Directions issued

The appellant, Sanjay Kumar Rai, was charged under Sections 504 and 506 IPC for allegedly threatening a journalist and sought discharge under Section 239 CrPC, claiming the investigation was biased and the complainant’s testimony unreliable. The Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the discharge application, and the High

DRAVIDA MUNNETRA KAZHAGAM (DMK)versusSECRETARY GOVERNORS SECRETARIAT AND ORS.

2019 INSC 13266 December 2019IA disposed

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) sought to strike down a Tamil Nadu Government notification that scheduled local body elections in nine newly created districts without first completing a fresh delimitation exercise. The State had increased the number of districts from 31 to 39 and announced an election programme, bu

LOONKARAN GANDHI (D) THR. LR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8186 September 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, heir of a landowner whose property was taken by the Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) for a road scheme in 1970, sought a declaration that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 11‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, an alternative plot in lieu of compensation, and damages for the decades‑long delay in a

CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusM/S. V.K. TRADERS AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 2866 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) blacklisted several rice mills for supplying sub‑standard rice and barred them from receiving paddy for custom milling. To evade the ban, the mill owners executed unregistered lease deeds transferring the mills to new partnership or proprietorship firms, which then applied for paddy

SADHNA CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2020 INSC 2926 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Sadhana Chaudhary, a former Additional District Judge of Uttar Pradesh, was dismissed from service on the ground that she had allegedly awarded excessive compensation in two land acquisition cases, which the enquiry committee deemed "shocking blunders" and indicative of extraneous considerations. The High Court upheld

STATE OF PUNJABversusGURPREET SINGH & ORS.

2024 INSC 1546 February 2024Disposed off

The State of Punjab appealed against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s acquittal of Gurpreet Singh and three co‑accused under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Amarjit Kaur. The trial court had convicted them based on the eyewitness testimony of the victim’s husband and daughter, the reco

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, ROHTAKversusMERINO PANEL PRODUCT LTD.

2022 INSC 12535 December 2022Disposed off

The appellant‑Revenue issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the assessee, Merino Panel Product Ltd, had undervalued sales of excisable decorative laminates to its sister concerns (Merino Industries Ltd and Merino Services Ltd). The Revenue used Rule 11 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, read with Section 4(1)(a)

U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHADversusCHANDRA SHEKHAR AND ORS.

2024 INSC 2105 March 2024Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (the Board) sought to acquire land covered by Khasra No. 673 for a housing scheme, but the High Court quashed the acquisition on the ground that the respondents were not given a pre‑acquisition notice under Section 29 of the 1965 Act, denying them the right to object. The Supr

MURALIversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2021 INSC 25 January 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellants Murali and Rajavelu were convicted for assaulting a victim during a volleyball match, with Murali found guilty under IPC s.324 and s.341 and Rajavelu under s.307 and s.341, receiving three months and five years of rigorous imprisonment respectively. Both appealed their convictions, and later sought to im

AMEENA BEGUMversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2023 INSC 7884 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged a detention order dated 24 March 2023 issued by the Hyderabad Police Commissioner under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986, which sought to detain her husband on the ground that his alleged offences threatened public order. The Court examined whether the offences, many o

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & OTHERSversusSADHU SINGH

2022 INSC 1494 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Sadhu Singh, a former conductor who was compulsorily retired in 2003, filed a suit in 2010 seeking the benefit of first, second and third Selection Grades as per a 1992 office order that granted such grades after 9, 18 and 27 years of service. The trial court partially decreed in his favour and the lowe

THE SURAT PARSI PANCHAYAT BOARD AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 1544 February 2022Disposed off

The Surat Parsi Panchayat Board filed a petition under Article 226 seeking directions to allow the performance of Dokhmenashini, the traditional Zoroastrian funeral rites, asserting that the Union Government's COVID‑19 dead‑body disposal protocols violated their religious freedom under Article 25. The Gujarat High Cour

MARKASH JAJARAversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2023 INSC 10153 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Markash Jajara, struck his son‑in‑law, an alcoholic who habitually abused his daughter, with a bamboo stick inside his house, resulting in the victim's death. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the

SIDDHARTH DALMIA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 3513 March 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, invoking Article 32, sought a court order to stop private hospitals from forcing patients to purchase medicines and consumables exclusively from the hospitals' own pharmacies at inflated prices, alleging exploitation and violation of the right to life under Article 21. They highlighted personal experie

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusTARSEM SINGH & ORS.

2025 INSC 1463 February 2025Dismissed

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) filed a miscellaneous application seeking clarification on whether the Supreme Court's 2019 judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, which mandated payment of solatium and interest to landowners whose land was acquired under the NHAI Act, should operate only prospectiv

DR. ABRAHAM PATANI OF MUMBAI & ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2022 INSC 9042 September 2022Dismissed

The appellants, owners of land in Mumbai, challenged the municipal corporation’s acquisition of their property for a link road, arguing that the road could only be built after amending the Development Plan under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (MRTP Act). The High Court upheld the acquisition, holding that t

SHARMILA VELAMURversusV. SANJAY AND ORS.

2025 INSC 2992 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The mother (appellant) and father (respondent No.4) of Aadith Ramadorai, a 22‑year‑old US citizen with ataxic cerebral palsy and severe cognitive limitations, disputed his custody after the father took him to India without the mother’s knowledge. The mother filed a habeas corpus petition in the Madras High Court, which

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

HARSHAD GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 7761 October 2024Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of rape and criminal intimidation on 30 April 2015, but before his sentencing hearing the presiding judge was transferred. The appellant sought to have the new judge rehear the case, including the conviction, invoking Sections 353 and 354 of the CrPC. The High Court dismissed the petition, h

YADAIAH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 6641 August 2023Dismissed

The case concerned land allotted in the 1960s to landless Scheduled Caste/Tribe persons in Manchirevula village, which the assignees later transferred through a General Power of Attorney to a third party who sold the land. The State of Telangana issued a second show‑cause notice (SCN) alleging violation of the Andhra P

MANOHARANversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARIETY HALL POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE

2019 INSC 8511 August 2019Disposed off

Manoharan was convicted for kidnapping, gang‑rape of a 10‑year‑old girl and the murder of the girl and her 7‑year‑old brother, who were thrown into a canal after a failed poisoning attempt. The prosecution proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt through extensive witness testimony, forensic DNA evidence linking Man

STATE OF KERALAversusUNION OF INDIA

2024 INSC 2531 April 2024Matter referred to larger bench

The State of Kerala filed an original suit under Article 131 of the Constitution challenging the Union of India's imposition of a Net Borrowing Ceiling that limited the State's ability to raise funds, including borrowings by State‑Owned Enterprises and public‑account liabilities. Kerala sought a mandatory interim injun

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