Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 2012

100 judgments, newest first.

PURUSHOTTAM DAS BANGUR & ORS.versusDAYANAND GUPTA

2012 INSC 50031 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords, trustees of a trust, sued the tenant for eviction under Section 13(1)(b) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, alleging that the tenant had erected a permanent structure without the landlord's consent by replacing a tin‑sheet roof with a concrete slab and constructing a brick passage. The trial

MOHD. HUSSAIN @ JULFIKAR ALIversusTHE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI

2012 INSC 36631 August 2012Reference answered

Mohd. Hussain @ Julfikar Ali was convicted and sentenced to death for planting a bomb on a public bus in 1997, causing four deaths and twenty‑four injuries. The trial court denied him the assistance of counsel, violating his right to legal aid and due process. The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction, but the Supreme

M.C. GUPTAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DEHRADUN

2012 INSC 36831 August 2012Disposed off

The appellants, M.C. Gupta and Mohan Lal Gupta, were convicted for misappropriating company funds by issuing a bank draft in 1988, an offence that occurred before the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 came into force. An FIR was lodged in 1990 under the repealed Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and the trial court

STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHIversusAJAY KUMAR TYAGI

2012 INSC 36531 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of NCT of Delhi and Ajay Kumar Tyagi were simultaneously facing criminal prosecution under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and a departmental inquiry for the same alleged bribe. The departmental enquiry officer found the charge not proved, but the disciplinary authority had not yet rende

LAVESHversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2012 INSC 36931 August 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Lavesh, elder brother of the husband of a woman who allegedly committed suicide due to dowry harassment, was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code after failing to cooperate with the investigation. He sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, but his

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSIBY GEORGE & ORS.

2012 INSC 31131 July 2012Dismissed

The Oriental Insurance Company appealed against the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation’s order directing it to pay simple interest at 12% per annum from the date of the accident (12 July 2006) on a compensation claim. The issue before the Supreme Court was when compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 19

KRISHNAPPA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA BY BABALESHWARA POLICE STATION

2012 INSC 31031 July 2012Dismissed

The deceased Bhimappa Biradar was attacked and murdered by a group of armed men who had a long-standing feud with his family. The trial court convicted three accused (A13, A14, A17) under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and acquitted four others (A1, A15, A16, A21) who were alleged to have only dragged the victim

SYED AHMEDversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2012 INSC 31231 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant, a police officer, was alleged to have demanded and accepted illegal gratification from Nagaraja (PW1) in exchange for inquiring into a complaint. The prosecution presented testimony of Nagaraja and two independent trap witnesses, corroborating the transaction of tainted currency notes, while the trial co

JOSHNA GOUDAversusBRUNDABAN GOUDA & ANR.

2012 INSC 5831 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2007 election for Sarpanch of Kulagada Gram Panchayat, the appellant Joshna Gouda was declared elected. The respondent Brundaban Gouda filed an election petition under Sections 31 and 34 of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1964, alleging that the appellant was ineligible because she had not attained the age of 21,

JEEVAN CHANDRABHAN IDNANI & ANR.versusDIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, KONKAN BHAVAN & ORS.

2012 INSC 5631 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the formation of a post‑poll "aghadi" (front) by councillors of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation after municipal elections. The petitioners argued that the second proviso to sub‑section (2) of Section 31A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 allows the creation of an aghadi or

YOGRAJ INFRAS. LTD.versusSSANG YONG ENG. & CONSTRN. CO. LTD. & ANR.

2012 INSC 5731 January 2012Disposed off

Yograj Infra Ltd. furnished bank guarantees under a construction contract with Ssang Yong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. After the contract was terminated for alleged non‑performance and over‑payment, the respondent invoked the guarantees. Yograj filed a Section 9 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusDR. MANMOHAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 5931 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a representation with the Prime Minister seeking sanction to prosecute the then Minister of Communications, A. Raja, for alleged corruption in the 2G spectrum allocation. After repeated reminders and a CBI FIR was registered 16 months later, the Delhi High Court dismissed his writ petition,

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW & ORS.versusPRABHAT SINGH

2012 INSC 55230 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Prabhat Singh, sought appointment on compassionate ground after his father, a government employee, died in 1996. He filed applications before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in 2005 and 2006, but his claim was rejected on grounds of lack of vacancy and his ineligibility under the Office Memoran

PRAMOD BHANUDAS SOUNDANKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 55130 November 2012Case Partly allowed

A dacoity was committed in which ten accused stole gold, silver and cash. One of the accused, Shivaji Kale, stole four silver chips weighing one kilogram each and sold them to jeweller Pramod Bhanudas Soundankar, the appellant. The appellant was charged under Sections 411 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code for dishonestl

BHUPENDRA NATH HAZARIKA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

2012 INSC 55330 November 2012Dismissed

The Assam Public Service Commission advertised 30 regular (direct) APS vacancies and later 20 special‑batch vacancies. Although the regular candidates were recommended first, the State appointed the special‑batch recruits before the regular ones, exceeding the 5% quota prescribed in Rule 5(1)(c) of the Assam Police Ser

THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & ANR.versusS. SAMUTHIRAM

2012 INSC 55030 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

S. Samuthiram, a police officer of the Tamil Nadu Armed Reserve, was charged with eve‑teasing a married woman at a bus stand while intoxicated and with being absent from duty. A departmental inquiry found the charges proved and dismissed him from service. While his service appeal was pending, a criminal court acquitted

M/S THAKKER SHIPPING P. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL)

2012 INSC 49930 October 2012Dismissed

The appellant, a customs house agent, was involved in the clearance of a seized container of electronic goods and later faced suspension of its licence, which was restored by the Tribunal. The Commissioner of Customs filed an application under Section 1290(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, but delayed it by ten days and sou

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusDINESH PRASAD

2012 INSC 49730 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Dinesh Prasad, a washerman/rifleman in the Assam Rifles, was absent without leave for 808 days and was charge‑sheeted under Section 39(a) of the Army Act, 1950. A summary court‑martial was convened and presided over by the Commandant, Col. A.S. Sehrawat, who had also signed the charge sheet. Prasad pleaded guilty and w

ANUP SARMAHversusBHOLA NATH SHARMA AND ORS.

2012 INSC 49630 October 2012Dismissed

The petitioner bought a vehicle on hire‑purchase and alleged that the financier forcibly repossessed it, filing a criminal complaint. The Judicial Magistrate ordered interim custody to the petitioner, but the High Court of Assam quashed the criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court examined whether a financier’s reposses

RAMACHANDRANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2012 INSC 49830 October 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Ramachandran, was convicted of murdering his wife Remani by forcibly administering the pesticide Furadan and subsequently smothering her. The trial court, upheld by the Kerala High Court, relied on testimonies of family members and a neighbour indicating daily physical abuse, a motive stemming from alleg

KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, NARSINGHPURversusM/S. SHIV SHAKTI KHANSARI UDYOG AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 36430 August 2012Dismissed

The respondents, operators of sugar factories in Madhya Pradesh, challenged notices issued by market committees that required them to obtain licences under the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Act, 1972 and to pay market fees on purchases of sugarcane. The High Court quashed the notices, holding that the transactions w

RAJAN PUROHIT & ORS.versusRAJASTHAN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE & ORS.

2012 INSC 36330 August 2012Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined admissions to a private unaided medical college in Rajasthan where 117 students were admitted without a competitive entrance test, contrary to Regulation 5(2) of the MCI Regulations. The Court held that there was no consensual agreement between the college and the State to admit students on t

COLUMBIA SPORTSWEAR COMPANYversusDIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

2012 INSC 30730 July 2012Disposed off

Columbia Sportswear Co., a US company with liaison offices in India, sought an advance ruling from the Authority for Advance Rulings (Income Tax) on taxability and permanent establishment issues. The Authority issued a binding ruling, which the company challenged by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 1

JAINENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. TR. PRINL. SEC. HOME & ORS.

2012 INSC 30930 July 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, a police constable recruit, concealed the existence of a pending criminal case in the affidavit he submitted during selection. After his appointment was confirmed and he began training, the authorities discovered the omission and terminated his services. The High Court upheld the termination, relying on

DEEPAK KHINCHIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 19430 April 2012Disposed off

Deepak Khichi, a trader of explosive and inflammable substances, was implicated in a fire that killed 14 people and injured many others. The Sessions Court initially discharged him of charges under the Explosive Substances Act (ESA) on the ground that no sanction under Section 7 of the Act had been produced. The Distri

RAMESHKUMAR AGARWALversusRAJMALA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2012 INSC 15630 March 2012Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement in 2007. In 2008 the plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to implead additional parties and to detail how the consideration was paid. The High Court allowed the amendment in part, which the appellant (defendant) challenged on the ground that it al

R. MOHAJAN & ORS.versusSHEFALI SENGUPTA & ORS.

2012 INSC 15530 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, transferred to the Indian Railways, sought seniority and promotion benefits under a 2005 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The department allegedly failed to fully implement the order, prompting the respondents to file a contempt petition before the CAT, which in 2010 directed the app

SHOBHAN SINGH KHANKAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2012 INSC 15430 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an academic expert appointed to the Jharkhand Public Service Commission interview board, was named in an FIR alleging large‑scale manipulation of marks and conspiracy with JPSC officials. He applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was rejected by both the

M/S. PUSHPA SAHAKARI AVAS SAMITI LTD.versusM/S. GANGOTRI SAHAKARI AVAS S. LTD. AND ORS.

2012 INSC 15330 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

In a suit for permanent injunction, the parties entered into a compromise decree dated 06‑09‑1996 requiring the defendant to pay a sum within six months. The defendant failed to pay, and the decree-holder filed an execution petition on 17‑02‑1997, before the six‑month period had expired. The defendant objected under Se

STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.versusKARTAR SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS.

2012 INSC 54929 November 2012Disposed off

The State of Haryana acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the reference court enhanced compensation in 1980, awarding 15% solatium and 6% interest. After the 1984 amendment to the Act, the landowners filed applications under CPC sections 151 and 152 in 1989 seeking the enhanced benefits of the amended

SALAUDDIN AHMED & ANR.versusSAMTA ANDOLAN

2012 INSC 35929 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Government issued notifications granting reservation in promotion for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, which were later quashed by the Rajasthan High Court because the State had not complied with the quantifiable data requirements laid down in M. Nagaraj's case. General‑category employees filed civi

GURU BASAVARAJ @ BEENE SETTAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2012 INSC 35629 August 2012Dismissed

Guru BasavaraJ @ Beene Settappa, the driver of a tractor‑trailer, was convicted under IPC sections 279, 337, 338 and 304‑A and Motor Vehicles Act section 187 for a highway accident that caused multiple injuries and one death. The accused claimed the crash resulted from mechanical failure and argued that his young age a

PATASI DEVIversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2012 INSC 35829 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Patasi Devi owned a 14-kanal plot on which she had constructed a house before the Haryana Government issued a Section 4 notification on 15‑12‑2006 for acquiring land for the development of Sector 36, Rohtak. The land was later declared acquired under Section 6 and an award was passed on 9‑12‑2009, after which the State

VIJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF DELHI

2012 INSC 36129 August 2012Case Partly allowed

Vijay Singh was convicted under Section 307 IPC for stabbing PW‑4 on 11‑03‑1998 and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. He later claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, relying on a school leaving certificate showing a date of birth of 01‑12‑1981, which would make him 16 years old on the incid

MOHAMMED AJMAL MOHAMMAD AMIR KASAB @ ABU MUJAHIDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 35729 August 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab, was one of ten Pakistani terrorists who launched a coordinated attack on Mumbai on November 26, 2008, killing 166 people and injuring 238. He was convicted by the trial court on multiple charges including waging war against the Government of India, murder, and terroris

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAIversusM/S. FIAT INDIA (P) LTD. & ANR.

2012 INSC 36229 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, manufacturers of Fiat Uno cars, declared wholesale prices that were well below their manufacturing cost, claiming the price was the normal price under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act. The Revenue issued show‑cause notices alleging short levy and demanded differential duty, arguing that the pr

STATE OF M.P.versusAYUB KHAN

2012 INSC 36029 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Ayub Khan was apprehended in Guna, Madhya Pradesh, possessing a country‑made barrel gun, two bullets and 50 grams of explosives without a licence. He was convicted under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959 and the trial court sentenced him to one year of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.100, accounting for se

JUGENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 25329 May 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Jugendra Singh, was charged with attempting to rape a nine‑year‑old girl and causing her death by strangulation. The trial court acquitted him, citing minor discrepancies in witness testimonies, but the High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting him under IPC sections 302, 376 and 511 and imposing lif

THE SECRETARY, MIN.OF DEFENCE & ORS.versusPRABHASH CHANDRA MIRDHA

2012 INSC 25229 May 2012Disposed off

The case concerned an Assistant Foreman of an Ordnance Factory who was served a charge memo alleging bribery and challenged the disciplinary proceedings on the ground that the charge memo was issued by an authority subordinate to his appointing authority. The Central Administrative Tribunal quashed the charge memo, a d

NARENDRA CHAMPAKLAL TRIVEDIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 25129 May 2012Dismissed

The appellants, Narendra Champaklal Trivedi and Harjibhai Devjibhai Chauhan, were accused of demanding and accepting a Rs.50 bribe for providing a survey report. The trial court and the Gujarat High Court convicted them under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and imposed the statutory minimum sentence

MANO DUTT & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 12129 February 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Mano Dutt and Ram Narain for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Court held that the accused had a pre‑planned common intention to assault and kill the deceased during a land‑dispute, and that the presence of fewer than five participants does not prec

KISHOR KUMAR & ORS.versusPRADEEP SHUKLA & ORS.

2012 INSC 12029 February 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered Special Leave Petitions challenging the selection of 766 pharmacist vacancies advertised by the Uttar Pradesh government. The petitioners argued that, despite higher merit, they were excluded because the State applied Rule 15(2) of the U.P. Pharmacists Service Rules, 1980, which mandates ba

RAJENDRA PRALHADRAO WASNIKversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 11929 February 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik, was convicted of raping and murdering a three‑year‑old girl under IPC sections 376(2)(f), 377 and 302. The prosecution relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence, including eyewitness testimony that the accused last saw the child with him, the discovery of the child's nude b

VINAYAK KASHINATH SHILKARversusDY. COLLECTOR & COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 11829 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Vinayak Kashinath Shilkar filed a writ petition seeking declaration that proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 concerning his land in Thane were abated after the Repeal Act of 1999 was adopted in Maharashtra on 29‑11‑2007. He contended that, although the land had vested in the State under

THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, M.P.versusS.K. DUBEY & ANR.

2012 INSC 12229 February 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The case concerned a former High Court judge who, after retirement, served as President of the Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for nearly five years. He claimed pension for that period based on a 2002 executive order of the State Government, although the Madhya Pradesh Consumer Protection Ru

MANUBHAI RATILAL PATEL TR. USHABENversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2012 INSC 43828 September 2012Dismissed

An FIR for offences under sections 467, 468, 471, 409 and 114 IPC was filed against the appellant. He sought quashing of the FIR and a stay of investigation under Section 482 CrPC, but was arrested before the stay order took effect. The magistrate remanded him to police custody and later to judicial custody. The High C

CHLORO CONTROLS (I) P. LTD.versusSEVERN TRENT WATER PURIFICATION INC. AND ORS.

2012 INSC 43628 September 2012Dismissed

Chloro Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd. filed a suit seeking declaration and injunction against Severn Trent Water Purification Inc. and related entities over a joint‑venture arrangement involving multiple agreements, some of which contained arbitration clauses. The respondents moved under Section 45 of the Arbitration and C

SPEAKER HARYANA VIDHAN SABHAversusKULDEEP BISHNOI & ORS.

2012 INSC 43728 September 2012Disposed off

Five Haryana MLAs merged with the Indian National Congress and the Speaker accepted the merger. Kuldeep Bishnoi filed disqualification petitions under Article 191 and the Tenth Schedule, alleging the merger violated paragraph 4(1). The High Court, invoking Order 41 Rule 33 CPC, directed the Speaker to decide the petiti

MANGAL AMUSEMENT PARK (P) LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS

2012 INSC 35528 August 2012Dismissed

The Indore Development Authority (IDA) allotted a 7‑acre parcel of land to Mangal Amusement Park Ltd. for a children's amusement park under a document labeled a "license" for 15 years, with a provision for renewal. The State of Madhya Pradesh later changed the land‑use from "commercial" to "regional park" and directed

NARAYAN MANIKRAO SALGARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 35428 August 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 148, 302 read with 149, 341, and 323 of the IPC for the death of Khushal Salgar. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses, a dying declaration, and forensic evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether the evidence established a common object to cause mur

BRAJENDRASINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2012 INSC 11628 February 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Brajendrasingh, was convicted of murdering his wife and their three young children after alleging an illicit affair between his wife and a neighbour. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, forensic findings, and the appellant's own statements under Section 313 CrPC, while the defence claimed

OM KR. DHANKARversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2012 INSC 11428 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a transport operator, complained that a Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (respondent No.2) demanded payment of passenger tax at his residence, received Rs. 2 lakh, and released the appellant's impounded buses, allegedly cheating him and embezzling public money. The Judicial Magistrate issued a sum

SURENDRA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 11528 February 2012Dismissed

Five men (Surendra, Narendra, Yogesh, Amar Pal and Anil Kumar) attacked Ramchandra Singh with a burri, knife and lathis after a pending criminal dispute, inflicting multiple injuries that caused his death the next day. The trial court convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC, along with Section

RAMNARESH & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2012 INSC 11728 February 2012Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of four accused for the rape and murder of Rajkumari, based primarily on the testimony of a 16‑year‑old servant, PW6, who was the sole eye‑witness. The Court found that PW6's statement was reliable, corroborated by medical evidence and the testimony of the victim's mother, and

GURPAL SINGHversusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 54427 November 2012Case Partly allowed

Gurpal Singh, a Judicial Magistrate First Class in Rajasthan, was suspended on 20 December 1985 after being arrested in connection with the murder of an advocate. He was acquitted by the trial court in May 2002 and the CBI's appeal was dismissed by the Delhi High Court on 27 September 2005, but his suspension continued

MADALA VENKATA NARSIMHA RAOversusSTATE OF A.P.

2012 INSC 54827 November 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellant was charged with raping and murdering a young woman, Lalitha. Witnesses saw him fleeing the house with blood‑stained clothes and heard him push them as they entered, and the victim gave a dying declaration that he had struck her with a grinder. The trial court acquitted him of both charges, but the High C

CIPLA LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2012 INSC 54227 November 2012Disposed off

Sugen Inc. and Pharmacia & Upjohn were granted Indian Patent No. 209251 for a pharmaceutical invention. Cipla Ltd. filed an opposition under Section 25(2) of the Patents Act, 1970, and the Controller revoked the patent on 24 September 2012 relying on the Opposition Board’s recommendation, but without furnishing the Boa

RAJU @ BALACHANDRAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2012 INSC 54327 November 2012Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Veerappan and his mother Marudayi based primarily on the testimony of PW‑5 Srinivasan, the victim's brother and a related, interested witness who also harboured enmity against the accused. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that PW‑5’s evidence should be cl

M/S. LAXMI DYECHEMversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2012 INSC 54627 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chemical supplier, filed forty complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that the respondent company’s post‑dated cheques were dishonoured because the signatures did not match the specimen signatures on file. The High Court quashed the complaints, holding that a signature

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusN.R. PARMAR & ORS.

2012 INSC 54727 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of Income Tax Inspectors appointed by promotion (promotees) and those recruited directly (direct recruits) for vacancies of the 1993‑94 year. The parties disputed whether seniority of direct recruits should be based on their actual appointment date, the date the vacancy arose,

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusAMITBHAI ANIL CHANDRA SHAH AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 43427 September 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered CBI's appeal against the Gujarat High Court's grant of bail to former Home Minister Amitbhai Shah in the Sohrabuddin encounter case and a petition to transfer the trial out of Gujarat. The Court noted that Shah, as a minister, could potentially influence witnesses and tamper with evidence,

V.K. SASIKALAversusSTATE REP. BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2012 INSC 42927 September 2012Disposed off

The appellant, V.K. Sasikala, was on trial for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. While her examination under Section 313 CrPC was in progress, she applied for certified copies and, alternatively, inspection of certain unmarked and unexhibited documents that had been forwarded to the court under Section 1

RE: SPECIAL REFERENCE N0.1 OF 2012versus--

2012 INSC 42827 September 2012Reference answered

The President of India made a reference under Article 143(1) of the Constitution seeking the Supreme Court's opinion on whether auction is the only permissible method for disposal of all natural resources, following the Court's judgment in the 2G case which had quashed spectrum licenses and directed auction. The Court

LAXMANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 43127 September 2012Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Nagoba, for which six of eleven accused were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The appellants (A‑1 and A‑2) challenged their convictions on the grounds that the key prosecution witnesses were relatives of the deceased, that there was a delay in lodging the FIR

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IIversusM/S. KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI

2012 INSC 43327 September 2012Dismissed

The Mandi Samiti, a market committee established under the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964, collects market fees and is statutorily required to transfer certain amounts to the Mandi Parishad. Both entities are registered under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue argued that these tr

AJAY KUMAR PARMARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 43527 September 2012Dismissed

The appellant Ajay Kumar Parmar was accused of raping the complainant, who later approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to record a statement under Section 164 CrPC claiming the FIR was false. The CJM directed a Judicial Magistrate to record the statement, but the complainant was not produced before the magistr

M/S NEW HORIZON SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusGOVT. OF PONDICHERRY TH. ADDL. SEC. & ANR.

2012 INSC 43027 September 2012Dismissed

New Horizon Sugar Mills Ltd and its directors, who had guaranteed a bank loan, defaulted and faced attachment of their properties under the Pondicherry Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004. They challenged the validity of that Act and a government order attaching properties, arguin

ABDUL REHMAN & ANR.versusMOHD. RULDU & ORS.

2012 INSC 43227 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who had purchased land from the predecessor-in-interest, filed a suit for a permanent injunction against respondents who claimed title based on later sale deeds. They later sought to amend the plaint to include a declaration of title and cancellation of those sale deeds. The trial court and the High Cou

POOJA RANAversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2012 INSC 35327 August 2012Dismissed

Pooja Rana, born in 1993, married Sachin Kumar Rana of her own choice, after which her parents and maternal uncle filed an FIR against her husband under IPC sections 363, 366, 328 and 504. She filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking the quash of the FIR and direction to register a criminal ca

U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD.versusRAJESH KUMAR & ORS.

2012 INSC 18927 April 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 3(7) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Servants (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 and Rule 8‑A of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Seniority Rules, 1991 (as inserted by the 2007 amendment), which pro

AVISHEK GOENKAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2012 INSC 18627 April 2012Case Partly allowed

The petitioner, a public‑spirited citizen, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a direction that all motor vehicles in India be fitted only with safety glass having 100% visual light transmission (VLT) and that the use of black films on vehicle windshields and side windows be prohibited. The petition also dem

P.A. MOHAMMED RIYASversusM.K. RAGHAVAN & ORS.

2012 INSC 19227 April 2012Dismissed

The appellant, P.A. Mohammed Riyas, contested the 2009 Lok Sabha election from Kozhikode and filed an election petition alleging that the respondent, M.K. Raghavan, committed corrupt practice by publishing false statements, invoking Sections 81, 100, 101 and 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petiti

AVISHEK GOENKAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2012 INSC 18827 April 2012Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, led by Avishek Goenka, raised a public‑interest writ alleging that prepaid SIM cards were being sold without proper identity verification, posing security risks and violating Department of Telecommunications (DoT) notifications. The petitioner sought strict enforcement of verification norms, physical r

MEHRAWAL KHEWAJI TRUST (REGO.), FARIDKOT & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2012 INSC 19027 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation awarded for 33 acres of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellants argued that the reference court erred by averaging several sale exemplars instead of using the highest bona‑fide transaction (Exhibit A‑61) and by not granting interest on solatium and

SRI MARCEL MARTINSversusM. PRINTER & ORS.

2012 INSC 19127 April 2012Dismissed

The Bangalore Municipal Corporation sold a residential property, originally leased to S, to S's son (the appellant) after S's death, with the sale price contributed by the appellant, S's husband and daughters (respondents). The respondents sued for a declaration of co‑ownership and an injunction, but the trial court di

ANEETA HADAversusM/S. GODFATHER TRAVELS & TOURS PVT. LTD.

2012 INSC 18727 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether an authorised signatory of a company could be prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and Section 67/85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 without the company itself being named as an accused. The Court held that Section 141 of the Negotiable Instrume

SUNIL KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 15027 March 2012Dismissed

Sunil Kumar was convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for possessing and selling large quantities of blue kerosene and was sentenced to one year imprisonment and a fine. His appeal against the conviction was dismissed by the High Court, and a subsequent application seeking modification of the

NARSING PRASADversusANIL KUMAR JAIN & ORS.

2012 INSC 14927 March 2012Case Partly allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad appointed the appellant, a Superintending Engineer, to officiate as Chief Engineer. The senior-most respondent challenged the appointment, arguing that in the absence of a merit‑based selection the senior officer should be given the charge. The Allahabad High Court quashed the

MULCHAND KHANUMAL KHATRIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2012 INSC 15127 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a joint owner of land in Palanpur, Gujarat, challenged a government acquisition of his property and obtained interim relief from the Gujarat High Court. While the proceedings were pending, the Land Acquisition Act was amended in 1984 inserting Section 11A, which mandates that an award be made within two

IN RE : NETWORKING OF RIVERSversus.

2012 INSC 10927 February 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition seeking directions to the Union and several State governments to nationalise rivers and inter‑link them for flood control and drought mitigation. The petitioners relied on the National Water Policy, the 1980 National Perspective Plan and various feasibility

LALITA KUMARIversusGOVERNMENT OF U.P. & OTHERS

2012 INSC 10827 February 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The petition arose from the kidnapping of a six‑year‑old girl, Lalita Kumari, whose father reported the incident to the police but the FIR was registered only after a month and no investigative action was taken. The petitioner sought a writ of habeas corpus, contending that the police had a statutory duty under Section

DEEPAK KUMAR ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC.

2012 INSC 11327 February 2012Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined the validity of auction notices issued by the Haryana government for the extraction of minor minerals (boulders, gravel, sand) in parcels not exceeding 5 hectares, including river‑bed mining. Petitioners argued that the notices were issued without any environmental impact assessment (EIA) and

SMT. K. LAKSHMIversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2012 INSC 11127 February 2012Dismissed

The case concerned the recruitment of District and Sessions Judges in Kerala where an initial notification sought to fill six vacancies. After the written exam, only seven candidates qualified, but the recruitment committee awarded moderation marks to all examinees, expanding the pool to 45 candidates. The High Court l

M/S IFB INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2012 INSC 11227 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

IFB Industries Ltd., a manufacturer of home appliances, offered trade discounts to its dealers, some of which were granted through credit notes after sales targets were met. The dispute centered on whether such discounts, not shown on the original sales invoice, could be deducted from taxable turnover under Rule 9(a) o

BIMAL KUMAR & ANOTHERversusSHAKUNTALA DEBI & OTHERS

2012 INSC 11027 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

A partition suit filed in 1962 was compromised in 1964, with the decree allocating exclusive possession of specific properties to each party. The predecessor of the appellants later challenged the compromise decree on grounds of fraud, but the suit was dismissed in 1994 and the subsequent appeal in 2004 was also dismis

ARUP DAS & ORS.versusSTATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2012 INSC 5427 January 2012Dismissed

The Director of Land Records and Survey, Assam advertised 160 seats for the Assam Survey and Settlement Training Institute and selected 160 candidates. Subsequent lists of candidates were prepared, but the Government refused to approve them, prompting petitions. The petitioners argued that appointments could be made fr

A.V. PADMA & ORS.versusR. VENUGOPAL & ORS

2012 INSC 5327 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The widowed mother and her two educated daughters of a deceased motor accident victim were awarded compensation, which was later enhanced by the High Court. The insurer deposited the full amount with the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which ordered a portion to be placed in long‑term fixed deposits despite the claiman

JASVIR KAURversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2012 INSC 54026 November 2012Case Partly allowed

Jasvir Kaur and her husband Ginder Singh, a Head Constable, were convicted under Section 420 of the IPC for cheating an informant by promising a police job and extracting Rs.70,000. Both were sentenced to two years' imprisonment and a fine. The Supreme Court entertained only the appellant's challenge to the sentence. I

ALOK KUMAR PANDITversusSTATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2012 INSC 54126 November 2012Dismissed

The appellant, an OBC candidate, applied for the Assam Civil Service through the Assam Public Service Commission and secured a higher merit score than many open‑category candidates, yet was not placed in his preferred service. He challenged the commission’s selection, arguing that more meritorious reserved‑category can

ASHRAFKHAN @ BABU MUNNEKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 42526 September 2012Disposed off

The case involved 60 accused charged under TADA, the Arms Act and the Explosive Substances Act, of whom 11 were convicted by a Designated Court. The appellants contended that the FIR under TADA was registered without the mandatory prior approval of the District Superintendent of Police under s.20‑A(1) of TADA, renderin

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSURENDRA KORI

2012 INSC 42726 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh alleged that Surendra Kori, a Deputy Registrar, facilitated the registration of over one hundred forged sale deeds to enable fictitious buyers to claim benefits under a Special Rehabilitation Package for the Sardar Sarovar Project. FIRs and charge‑sheets were filed under IPC sections 420, 46

MSR LEATHERSversusS. PALANIAPPAN & ANR.

2012 INSC 42426 September 2012Reference answered

The appellant MSR Leathers sued the respondents for dishonour of four cheques. The cheques were presented, dishonoured, and a statutory notice was served; the drawer failed to pay. The cheques were presented a second time, again dishonoured, and a fresh notice was served before a complaint was filed. The issue was whet

ARVINDKUMAR ANUPALAL PODDARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 30426 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Arvindkumar, was charged with murdering his first wife, Sita Devi, under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence, including the last sighting of the appellant with the victim, blood‑stained clothes, recovery of a knife, post‑mortem fi

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