Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

ARIJIT PASAYAT

1,966 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 1,601–1,800.

RAMESH KRISHNA MADHUSUDAN NAYARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 137 January 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Ramesh Krishna Madhusudan Nayar, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based solely on the testimony of a single eye‑witness, PW‑5, who claimed to have seen Nayar strike the deceased with a wooden log during a quarrel. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that a single witness's testi

ABDUL GAFUR & ORSversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2007 INSC 12366 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, including Abdul Gafur, were convicted by a trial court and the Gauhati High Court for dacoity, robbery and outraging modesty based on the testimony of several witnesses who claimed the accused entered the Gupta household, assaulted the family, looted gold ornaments and committed rape. The prosecution’s

M/S TRIG GUARDS FORCE LTD.versusMAHARASHTRA INDUS. DEV. CORPN. & ORS.

2007 INSC 12386 December 2007Disposed off

Trig Guards Force Ltd built about 50‑60 commercial shops in the Turbhe slum area, one of which pre‑dated the protected‑structure date under the Maharashtra Slums Clearance & Improvement Act, 1971. The Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) issued a demolition notice for the shop without the mandatory 30‑

M/S. HOLICOW PICTURES PVT. LTD.versusPREM CHANDRA MISHRA & ORS.

2007 INSC 12396 December 2007Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court heard a civil appeal challenging a Patna High Court order that had quashed several land allotments made by the State Government to a private company, on the ground that the allotments were irregular. The petition was filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by a spokesperson of a recognized politic

PARKASH SINGH BADAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9606 December 2006Dismissed

The petitioners, including former Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, challenged prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the IPC on the ground that no prior sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was obtained and that the complaints were filed with malafide intent. The Court examined the scope of

LALU PRASAD@ LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CBI (AHD) PATNA

2006 INSC 9616 December 2006Dismissed

The appeals concerned the validity of a sanction to prosecute Lalu Prasad Yadav under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The sanction had been issued under Section 19(1)(b) of the Act and Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but was signed by the Secretary to the Government

K.KARUNAKARANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 9646 December 2006Disposed off

The appellant, K. Karunakaran, was prosecuted for an alleged abuse of office. The High Court held that no sanction under CrPC Section 197 was required because the appellant was not holding the office at the time the court took cognizance of the offence. The appellant further contended that the prosecution was driven by

UMRAO SINGHversusPUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5946 December 2005

Punjabi University advertised three Lecturer positions in Defence & Strategic Studies, requiring a MA, UGC eligibility test or exemption via M.Phil/Ph.D. thesis submission by 31 Dec 2002, and a Punjabi language qualification. The High Court quashed the selections of Umrao Singh, Kewal Krishan and Inderjeet Singh on gro

ISRARversusSTATE OF U.P.

2004 INSC 6966 December 2004Dismissed

The appellant Israr and his co-accused Afzal were convicted for the murder of Zamil Ahmad under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on the dying declaration of the deceased and the testimony of four eye‑witnesses, who were relatives or friends of the victim, as well as medical evidence s

SUNITA DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6976 December 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Sunita Devi filed a complaint alleging assault, attempted rape and robbery by Anuj Kumar and others. Anuj Kumar obtained anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC from the Patna High Court, which granted him an unconditional, unlimited protection. Sunita Devi appealed, contending that such blanket protection cont

SIEMENS PUBLIC COMMUNICATION NETWORKS PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 12506 November 2008Dismissed

The Union of India floated a tender for Digital Radio Trunking Systems for the Army, and three bidders, including Siemens, were shortlisted. After commercial bids were opened, Siemens claimed to be the lowest bidder but alleged that the Evaluation Committee artificially inflated its price by multiplying a unit rate wit

MD. SHAKEELversusSTATE POLICE THROUGH P.S. HANMAKONDA & ANR.

2008 INSC 12546 November 2008Disposed off

MD Shakeel was convicted under IPC sections 304‑B and 498‑A and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for the alleged dowry‑related death of his wife. The conviction was affirmed by the trial court and the first appellate court, while the co‑accused were acquitted. Shakeel filed a revision petition in the Andhra Prade

B. NOHAversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 7876 November 2006Dismissed

B. Noha, a Health Inspector, was accused of demanding and accepting illegal gratuities from a push‑cart owner while performing his official duties. The trial court convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonmen

DHARAMRAJ AND ORS.versusCHHITAN AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7896 November 2006Dismissed

The dispute concerned co‑tenancy rights over land recorded in Khata No. 111 in Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh. The appellants claimed ancestral rights based on a pedigree tracing back to the original ancestor Saltanati, while the respondents asserted exclusive rights as successors of Adhin, whose name was entered after a sett

SACHCHEY LAL TIWARIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2004 INSC 5806 October 2004Dismissed

The case involved two brothers, Sachchey Lal Tiwari and Bachchey Lal Tiwari, who were charged with murder of two sons of Achhaiber Misra after a dispute over a field demarcation line. The trial court convicted both under s.302 IPC, sentencing Sachchey to death and Bachchey to life imprisonment. The Allahabad High Court

EAGLE FLASK INDUSTRIES LTD.versusTELEGAON DABHADE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS.

2004 INSC 5826 October 2004Disposed off

Eagle Flask Industries Ltd imported plastic powder, plastic components and glass refills and paid octroi under protest, seeking a refund of the excess duty. The Talegaon Dabhade Municipal Council levied the duty under the Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules, and the High Court dismissed the writ petition, directi

RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 8976 September 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing Writ Petition (Civil) No. 657 of 1995 filed by the Research Foundation for Science, examined the recurring environmental and occupational hazards associated with ship‑breaking activities at Alang. The Court noted that the controversy over the ship Clemenceau had been resolved but the broader

JAWALA SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusJAGAT SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 5826 September 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that allowed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, without formulating any substantial question of law. The appellants argued that the High Court erred by not stating a specific legal question in t

DEVIDAS RAMSUNDER SHUKLAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 9116 August 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Devidas Ram Sunder Shukla (A‑2), together with his son Santosh Devidas Shukla (A‑1) and two others, were convicted under IPC sections 302, 202 and 34 for the murder of Manoja, who was burnt to death in the house they shared. The prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the presen

SILAK RAM AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2007 INSC 8126 August 2007Dismissed

The appellants Silak Ram, Narotam alias Raja and Bijender alias Binder were convicted for the murder of Jagbir under Sections 302 and 34 IPC. The prosecution relied on three eye‑witnesses (PW10, PW11 and PW14); PW11’s testimony was found cogent and consistent with medical evidence, while PW10’s identification was imper

JAY MAHAKALI ROLLING MILLSversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 8136 August 2007Dismissed

Jay Mahakali Rolling Mills challenged the recovery of excise duty and penalty on the ground that bars and rods made from ship‑breaking scrap were exempt under Notification No.101/87‑CE dated 27 March 1987. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the amendment, communicated through a circular dated 31 March 1987,

M/S. TRUTUF SAFETY GLASS INDUSTRIESversusCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P.

2007 INSC 8146 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Mis. Trutuf Safety Glass Industries, a manufacturer of automobile safety toughened glass, sought a recognition certificate under Section 4‑B of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 for the goods listed in Entry 2 of Annexure III of Notification No. ST‑1/‑755 dated 31‑12‑1976, which reads "Glass and glass wares including optica

CHANIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2006 INSC 4026 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Channi, who had been convicted under the IPC and whose sentence was partially altered by the Allahabad High Court. Channi applied for release on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, alternatively under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but t

STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.versusALAGAR

2006 INSC 4036 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu detained Alagar under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982, on the ground that he was a 'goonda'. The Madras High Court set aside the detention order, hol

V.K. RATHEESHversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 4046 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

V.K. Ratheesh was tried for murder (IPC 302) and the trial court acquitted him, finding serious discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence. The Kerala High Court set aside the acquittal, deeming the discrepancies trivial, and convicted him under IPC 304(1) with a seven‑year sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court exami

K.V.S. AND ORSversusJASPAL KAUR AND ORS.

2007 INSC 6886 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Respondent No.1, a teacher employed by Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS), exercised the option to remain in the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme and was allotted a CPF account number. She later sought to switch to the General Provident Fund (GPF) scheme, but KVS rejected her request, leading to a dispute. The

ANANTA DEB SINGHA MAHAPATRA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2007 INSC 6896 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder (IPC s.304 Part II) and related offences after assaulting the deceased and his family while cutting paddy from their field. They contended that the FIR was tampered with and that they acted in private defence. The Supreme Court held that the FIR was genuine and that the plea of

AJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 6906 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Ajay Singh was convicted of murdering his wife under Section 302 IPC, primarily on the basis of an alleged extra‑judicial confession and the presence of kerosene on his clothing. The Supreme Court examined whether the confession, recorded by witnesses who were either inimical or had a relationship with the

JALESHWAR SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2009 INSC 7176 May 2009Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a land dispute that escalated into a violent altercation in which the deceased, Chintamani Singh, was fatally injured. The prosecution alleged that appellant No.1, Jaleshwar Singh, ordered the assault and that appellant No.2 delivered the fatal blow, leading to a conviction under Section 302 read wi

SUBHASH SONI & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2009 INSC 7186 May 2009Dismissed

The appellants Subhash Soni and others were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for murder, primarily on the basis of an oral dying declaration made by the deceased while being taken to hospital. The High Court upheld the conviction despite discarding the testimony of two eye‑witnesses, relying on the dying

PERLA SOMASEKHARA REDDY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2009 INSC 7196 May 2009Dismissed

The accused were charged with murder and related offences under the IPC and the Explosive Substances Act. The trial court acquitted them, but the High Court, on appeal by the State, convicted several of the accused under sections 302, 302 r/w 149 and 307, while acquitting them of other charges. The State appealed to th

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusHAMIDA KHATOON AND ORS.

2009 INSC 7236 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased employee was killed in a road accident involving a BSF truck. The dependents filed a claim for compensation under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which awarded Rs.1,20,000. The insurer challenged the claim, contending that Section 53 of the Employees' State

SUNKARA LAKSHMINARASAMMA AND ANR.versusSAGI SUBBA RAJU AND ORS. ETC.

2009 INSC 7246 May 2009Disposed off

The petitioners, Sunkara Lakshminarasamma and others, filed an application to be transposed as petitioners in several Special Leave Petitions, asserting in an affidavit that the petitioner's mother‑in‑law had died a year and a half earlier. Respondents later produced evidence and affidavits confirming that the alleged

JAKIRversusSTATE OF M.P.

2009 INSC 7266 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Jakir was one of five accused of abduction and rape under IPC sections 366A and 376(2). The trial court convicted three of the accused, including Jakir, sentencing each to ten years, while two absconded. The victim, during her examination‑in‑chief, positively identified two of the accused (Raju and Pancha

SHINDHU & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 7276 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Sharada allegedly committed suicide by jumping into a well due to alleged cruelty by her relatives. Five persons – the father‑in‑law, mother‑in‑law, husband, brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law – were charged under Sections 498‑A and 306 IPC read with Section 34. The trial court acquitted all five for lack of

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusDIPAK KUMAR SANTRA

2009 INSC 7286 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Dipak Kumar Santra, who was discharged from the Indian Army after failing the clerks' proficiency and aptitude tests. He filed a writ petition challenging his discharge, arguing that the competent authority lacked power under Rule 13(3) of the Army Rules, 1954, and that the Calcutta High Court had no

BHARAT PRASAD & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2009 INSC 7296 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who had been granted Bataidari rights over a parcel of land through a proceeding under Section 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, saw those rights later challenged through multiple criminal proceedings under Sections 144 and 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The High Court refused to quash the criminal

PRAHLAD SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2009 INSC 7046 May 2009Disposed off

The petitioners, operators of 55‑seater stage‑carriage buses, challenged the demand of additional tax under Article II of Part D of the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997, arguing that they only carried passengers and their luggage and should pay tax only under Article I Item 7 for seating capacity. The Hi

SECRETARY, M/O DEFENCE & ORS.versusAJIT SINGH

2009 INSC 7416 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Ajit Singh, an army soldier enlisted on 29-09-1985, suffered a 20% disability due to an electric shock while on casual leave and was medically discharged after 4 years, 11 months of service. He filed a suit seeking a disability pension, which was granted by the trial court, the district court, and the Punjab & Haryana

D. JAYANAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 7466 May 2009Case Partly allowed

The appellant, D. Jayana, was convicted by a trial court of dowry death under Section 304-8 IPC and cruelty under Section 498-A IPC, receiving a life term for the former. The Karnataka High Court upheld both convictions but reduced the sentences to seven years for 304-8 and three years for 498-A, to run concurrently. O

KOTIKALAPUDI SUBBA RAOversusSTATE OF AP. & ANR.

2008 INSC 5976 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant borrowed Rs.30,000 from the deceased and, after refusing to repay, was slapped and threatened the deceased. The following day the appellant, with two accomplices, attacked the deceased with knives, causing his death, and grievously injured a bystander (PW1). The trial court convicted the appellant under S

INDIAN MERCANTILE I.B. ASSON. (TENANTS)versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 5986 May 2008Case Allowed

The appellants, tenants under the Indian Mercantile Association, filed a writ petition under Section 103-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, seeking relief that the High Court dismissed on the ground that an alternative statutory remedy—an appeal—was available. The appellants contended that rel

RAKESH KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2009 INSC 3356 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Kusum Lata died from severe burns and her husband Rakesh Kumar was convicted under IPC sections 304‑8 and 498‑A based on the testimony of her father and letters allegedly written by the deceased. The prosecution also relied on a dying declaration recorded by an Executive Magistrate, while the police failed to record it

PAPPUversusSONU AND ANR.

2009 INSC 3336 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against a High Court order that had declared the accused a juvenile based solely on a doctor's certificate, despite rejecting school records and the mother’s testimony as unreliable. The accused had claimed he was born on 1 January 1989 and sought to be tried as a juvenile under Rul

SAMIRA KHANUMversusMD. AFSAR TOWHEED AND ANR

2009 INSC 3346 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a complaint by Samira Khanum alleging dowry harassment, cruelty and breach of trust under Sections 498‑A and 406 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial magistrate ordered summons against the husband and his parents, which the husband challenged by filing an application unde

INSPECTOR OF CUSTOMS, AKHNOOR J & KversusYASH PAL AND ANR.

2009 INSC 3276 March 2009Dismissed

The respondents Yash Pal and others were convicted by a trial court for offences under Sections 8 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 based largely on their confessions to customs officials after a heroin seizure. The High Court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution had failed to p

PTC INDIA LTD.versusCENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION THR. ITS SECRETARY

2009 INSC 3296 March 2009Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined appeals challenging the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity's declaration that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Fixation of Trading Margin) Regulations, 2006. The Tribunal relied on West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd., which

YUMNAM ONGBI TAMPHA IBEMMA DEVIversusYUMNAM JOYKUMAR SINGH & ORS.

2009 INSC 3306 March 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Yumnam Ongbi Tampha Ibema Devi, claimed that her father‑in‑law Yumnam Gouramani Singh executed a valid will on 13‑8‑1986 bequeathing land to her. The respondents contested the will, alleging it was not duly executed. The Supreme Court examined whether the will complied with Section 63 of the Indian Succe

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusMANGI LAL

2009 INSC 3406 March 2009Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of Mangilal, who was charged with the murder of four members of a family in August 1998. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including alleged illicit relationships, prior threats, a statement under Section 164 CrPC, alleged beating of an eye‑witness who la

STATE OF A.P.versusM. RADHA KRISHNA MURTHY

2009 INSC 3416 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Excise Inspector, demanded a bribe of Rs.4,000 from a toddy shop owner and accepted Rs.2,000, after which a trap was laid and he was caught receiving the money. He was convicted by a Special Judge under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced to two yea

JAGJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2009 INSC 3426 March 2009Dismissed

Jasprit Kaur, married to Jagjit Singh, died within 1 year 3 months of marriage, her body found hanging from a ceiling fan. The prosecution alleged that Jagjit and his parents subjected her to cruelty and demanded Rs 1 lakh for a house purchase, constituting dowry demand, leading to her death. The trial court acquitted

SANTOSH DEVIDAS BEHADE AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 3436 March 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Santosh Devidas Behade and others, upholding their conviction under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the murder of Bharat Kharat. The Court held that the prosecution had proved a common object of the unlawful assembly, satisfying the requirements of S

G. AMALORPAVAM AND ORS.versusR.C. DIOCESE OF MADURAI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1376 March 2006Dismissed

The respondents filed a suit for possession, arrears of rent and damages which was decreed by the trial court. The appellants appealed to the first appellate court, which dismissed the appeal, and a second appeal to the Madras High Court was also dismissed. The appellants contended that the appellate courts had failed

SHAIKH KARIMULLAH @ BABU AND ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P.

2009 INSC 1136 February 2009Case Partly allowed

The appellants were accused of assaulting the deceased during a dispute, resulting in his death. One witness (PW‑1) testified that the appellant struck the deceased with a stick, while the remaining eye‑witnesses testified that the appellant delivered a fist blow. No charge under Section 34 of the IPC (common intention

COLLECTOR OF GANJAM AND ANR.versusRAMESH CHANDER PADHI

2009 INSC 1146 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Collector of Ganjam seized a bus and 42 litres of kerosene for contravening the Orissa Kerosene Control Order. Under Section 6-A(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, the Collector ordered confiscation of the vehicle but, invoking the second proviso, allowed the owner to pay a fine of Rs.20,000 instead. The High Cou

RADHEY SHYAM AGGARWALversusSTATE N.C.T. DELHI

2009 INSC 1156 February 2009Disposed off

The appellant was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for adulterating a small quantity of red chilli. The trial magistrate conducted the case as a warrant case, although Section 16‑A of the Act provides for a summary trial of such offences. The appellant argued that the summary‑trial provisio

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.versusDHARAM SINGH & ORS.

2009 INSC 1176 February 2009Disposed off

The respondents, who were working as J.B.T. teachers, were promoted to the post of Headmaster on the basis of seniority‑cum‑merit and claimed entitlement to promotional increments. The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed their writ petition, relying on an earlier decision (State of Haryana v. Partap Singh) without an

ARJUN SINGHversusSTATE OF H.P.

2009 INSC 1186 February 2009Case Partly allowed

Arjun Singh, a bus conductor, was alleged to have forcibly sexually assaulted a girl under 16 years of age and kidnapped her. He was convicted by the trial court and the Himachal Pradesh High Court under IPC sections 376 (rape), 511 (attempt to commit rape), 365, 366 (kidnapping) and 109 (abetment). On appeal, the Supr

SRI THIMMAIAHversusSHABIRA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 1466 February 2008Case Partly allowed

The plaintiffs (respondent No.1 and No.2) purchased land (site 43) from respondent No.3 and, while demolishing a temporary structure, were interfered with by the appellant (defendant No.1) who attempted to encroach on the property. The plaintiffs filed a suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the appellant's inter

BARKAT ALI & ANR.versusBADRI NARAIN (D) BY LRS.

2008 INSC 1476 February 2008Dismissed

The decree holder obtained a decree against the judgment debtor in a mortgage suit and filed successive execution applications. In the latest execution, after notice and adjournments, the court found no objections and ordered attachment of property under Order XXI Rule 22, proceeding to issue a warrant on 21 September

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusF.H.DUBASH

2007 INSC 1106 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, F.H. Dubash, filed a writ petition seeking promotion to Rear Admiral, arguing that being second on the merit list entitled him to promotion because two vacancies existed. The Delhi High Court agreed and ordered his promotion. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the promotion procedure under the Regula

H.P. PYAREJANversusDASAPPA (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 736 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, H.P. Pyarejan, entered into a sale agreement with five co‑owners, advancing a loan on condition that all would execute the deed. Only four signed, and the plaintiff sued for specific performance including the fifth defendant. The trial court and first appellate court dismissed the suit, finding no eviden

DWARIKA NATH ACOOLIversusDULAL CHANDRA BAYEN AND ORS.

2009 INSC 36 January 2009Disposed off

The appellant, claiming ownership of a property at 18/1 Ramesh Mitra Road, Kolkata, sought eviction of the respondent who alleged he was a Thika tenant under the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981. The respondent filed a Return under Rule 3(a) of the 1981 Rules, which the Thika Controller pro

KARTICK CHANDRA MANDALversusNETAL MONDAL (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2009 INSC 46 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title, possession and permanent injunction based on an alleged amicable partition of land among co‑sharers. The High Court, on a second appeal under CPC s.100, decided that the partition, if any, did not occur before the commencement of Section 14 of the West Bengal Land Re

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusVISAN KUMAR SHIV CHARAN LAL

2008 INSC 14035 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh filed a Letters Patent Appeal against a Division Bench order that had dismissed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking to quash a Labour Court order passed under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The High Court held the appeal non‑maintainable, relying on the petition’s nom

LAXMANJI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2008 INSC 14045 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Four accused went to the victim's house; the unarmed accused No.2 and No.3 restrained the victim while accused No.1, armed with a knife, inflicted fatal blows. The victim died, leading to conviction of accused Nos.1,2,3 under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, while No.4 was acquitted. The appellants, Nos.2 a

ARUN BHAKTA @ THULUversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2008 INSC 14055 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Arun Bhakta (Thulu) was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife Jyotsna, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the "last seen" theory that the couple were together the night before her death. The prosecution's case relied on statements of witnesses that were later contradicted: the sister clai

UNITED BANK OF INDIAversusTAMIL NADU BANKS DEPOSIT COLLECTORS UNION AND ANR.

2007 INSC 12305 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

United Bank of India terminated two commission agents (tiny deposit collectors) in 1984. The Union raised the terminations as industrial disputes, which were referred to the Tamil Nadu Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the bank to lead evidence to justify the dismissals and ruled in its favour. The Madras High

NIRANJAN CINEMAversusPRAKASH CHANDRA DUBEY AND ANR.

2007 INSC 12315 December 2007Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a gate‑keeper at Niranjan Cinema, was alleged to have been absent from work and to have started a betel shop. He claimed that his services were terminated and filed an industrial dispute. The Industrial Tribunal held the termination illegal, ordered reinstatement and back wages, and ruled that his self‑

SALIM SAHABversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2006 INSC 9565 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Salim assaulted his father‑in‑law’s brother Saleem with a pair of scissors during a heated quarrel, causing injuries that led to Saleem’s death. The trial court convicted Salim under Section 324 IPC (grievous hurt) and sentenced him to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court upgraded the conviction

MOHD. AZAD @ SAMINversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2008 INSC 12485 November 2008Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of a young man whose body was found half‑dug in a cemetery after the accused allegedly scaled the wall, consumed wine and later assaulted a worker. The prosecution relied on extensive circumstantial evidence, including eyewitnesses who last saw the accused with the deceased,

TEJINDER KAUR & ORS.versusLADY CONSTABLE RAJ KUMARI & ORS.

2008 INSC 12435 November 2008Disposed off

Raj Kumari, a lady constable, failed to make the grade in a written test for a Lower School Training Course, while several other candidates were declared successful. She sought re‑evaluation of her answer script and, after the High Court ordered a re‑assessment, her marks remained unchanged. She then filed a second wri

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusARJUN

2008 INSC 12495 November 2008Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra prosecuted Arjun (A-2) and another accused (A-1) under IPC sections 302/34 and 201/34 for the murder of Jagnandan Singh. The trial court convicted both based solely on five pieces of circumstantial evidence, including alleged purchase of rat poison, a gunny bag, ropes, and the discovery of the

STATE OF PUNJABversusRAJINDER SINGH & ORS. ETC.

2008 INSC 12445 November 2008Dismissed

The incident on 23 September 1996 involved a violent assault by several accused on the family of Surjit Kaur, resulting in the death of Jangir Singh. The trial court convicted multiple accused under sections 302, 364, 323, 149 and related provisions of the Indian Penal Code. On appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court

STATE LEGAL AID COMMITTEE, J & KversusSTATE OF J & K AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6465 November 2004Disposed off

The Legal Aid Committee of Jammu & Kashmir filed a writ petition challenging the detention of a person under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. The petition contended that the State had not complied with Section 13 of the Act, which mandates that the grounds of detention be disclosed to the detainee and that

SITA RAM AND ORS.versusRADHEY SHY AM

2007 INSC 10045 October 2007Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit for specific performance of a land sale contract, which the trial court decreed in their favour. The first appellate court set aside the decree, holding that the plaint did not comply with Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and the High Court dismissed the appellants' second app

CCE, LUCKNOWversusM/S. WIMCO LTD.

2007 INSC 10055 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Wimco Ltd., a manufacturer of printed paper board boxes, sold waste/scrap/parings generated during production without filing a classification list under Rule 173B or issuing invoices under Rule 52A. The Revenue issued a show‑cause notice and demanded excise duty of Rs 23.20 million with an equal penalty. The CEGAT

U.P. ROLLER FLOUR MILLS ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusGOVT. OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 10065 October 2007Disposed off

The U.P. Roller Flour Mills Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that subsidised wheat stocks meant for the Public Distribution System (PDS) were being diverted by the states of West Bengal, Assam and other North‑East states to rolling flour mills, causing loss to the exchequer and depriving inte

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDSversusS.K. KANOJIA

2007 INSC 10075 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, scientific officers of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), claimed that they were entitled to promotion to Scientist‑D in 1999 after completing five years in the lower grade under the Flexible Complementing Scheme (FCS). BIS argued that the FCS had been amended by a 1998 notification and a 2002 amend

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, TNSTC LTD.versusK.I. BINDU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4855 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

A bus owned by the appellant corporation collided with a motorcycle ridden by Satheesh Kumar, aged 34, who died. The widow, children and mother filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal calculated an annual dependency of Rs 46,752, applied a multiplier of 17 and

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.versusRAM SUKHI DEVI

2004 INSC 5775 October 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

Ram Sukhi Devi, the widow of a part‑time tubewell operator, applied for a compassionate appointment under the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying‑in‑Harness Rules, 1974. A Government Order dated 26 Oct 1998 excluded dependents of part‑time employees from such benefits. The Allahabad Hig

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusJALAL UDDIN AND ORS.

2004 INSC 5785 October 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

Respondent No.1 filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking promotion to Principal of a Government Degree College on the basis of seniority under Rule 16 of the U.P. Higher Education (Group A) Service Rules, 1985. The High Court allowed the petition, directing his promotion. The State of Uttar Pradesh app

RAVIversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2008 INSC 10165 September 2008Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for the killing of Albert Walter, based primarily on the testimony of PW‑1, the deceased's brother, who identified the accused and asserted that sufficient street lighting enabled him to see the incident. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing tha

SHIVAJI @ DADYA SHANKAR ALHATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 10195 September 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Shivaji @ Dadya Shankar Alhat, was convicted of raping and murdering a nine‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death under Sections 302 and 376(2)(5) IPC. The prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including eyewitnesses who saw the accused with the victim, the recovery of the victim’s

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusRAM VEER SINGH AND ORS.

2007 INSC 8925 September 2007Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the Allahabad High Court's acquittal of three accused who had been convicted for murder under Sections 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution's case relied on the identification of a decomposed body recovered a month after the incident, based solely on the clothes worn, and on t

DILAWAR SINGHversusSTATE OF DELHI

2007 INSC 8935 September 2007Disposed off

The appellant Dilawar Singh was accused of robbing a temple priest on 8 August 1984, allegedly with accomplices who tied the priest and stole cash. The prosecution relied solely on the priest's testimony, claiming the accused carried weapons, but no injury was inflicted. The FIR was lodged only on 31 August 1984, creat

MUKESH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 8945 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mukesh Kumar, applied for a compassionate appointment as a clerk after his father retired on medical grounds and the appellant was a minor still pursuing studies. The Post Master General rejected the application on the ground that the family was not financially indigent, and subsequent appeals to the Dir

M.P. STATE AGRO INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. ANDANR.versusJAHAN KHAN

2007 INSC 8955 September 2007Dismissed

The respondent, a branch manager of M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd, was found to have caused a loss of Rs 16,903.41 by failing to recover rent on machinery he had let out. The Managing Director, acting as disciplinary authority, imposed a composite penalty of recovering the loss from the respond

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPN. AND ANR.versusCHANDER BHAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5805 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation advertised for open‑category retail outlet dealers and issued a letter of intent to Chander Bhan (respondent No.1) for a site he claimed was readily available in Gurgaon. Subsequently the Haryana Urban Development Authority allotted a plot at Sector 53, Gurgaon to the corporation for a C

V. RAMANAversusA.P.S.R.T.C. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3995 September 2005Dismissed

V. Ramana, a conductor with the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was removed from service for failing to issue tickets, collect fares and maintain records. He challenged the removal by filing a writ petition, which was upheld by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. On appeal, he argued that the quantum of pun

PRIYA VRAT SINGH & ORS.versusSHYAM JI SAHAI

2008 INSC 9065 August 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Priya Vrat Singh and others, sought to quash criminal proceedings filed under Sections 494, 120B and 109 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged dowry harassment and bigamy. The High Court had dismissed their Section 482 CrPC application, but the Supreme Court examined w

BALJINDER SINGHversusRATTAN SINGH

2008 INSC 9075 August 2008Disposed off

The case concerned the alienation of undivided co‑parcenary property by a Hindu coparcener through a gift deed, two sale deeds and a will. The Supreme Court held that a gift by a coparcener of his undivided interest in joint family property is void, and that the validity of the sale deeds must be examined on the factua

BANGARU VENKATA RAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2008 INSC 9095 August 2008Case Partly allowed

Bangaru Venkata Rao was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing his wife Polamma, who later died. He appealed, claiming the act was in private defence and that only a single blow was given in a sudden quarrel, invoking Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC. The Supreme Court examined the elements of Exception 4

SUPRIYA BASU AND ORSversusWEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARD AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3395 August 2005Dismissed

The dispute concerned the allocation of 156 car parking spaces in Samdrita Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, where owners of Type B flats claimed exclusive entitlement while owners of Type A flats relied on a Housing Commissioner’s letter asserting their rights. The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the soc

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusSIYA RAM AND ANR.

2004 INSC 4215 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The respondent, an Executive Engineer (Mechanical) in the Uttar Pradesh Government, was transferred from Ghazipur to Faizabad on administrative grounds while disciplinary proceedings were pending against him. He challenged the transfer as punitive, alleging it was done without a hearing and before the disciplinary inqu

BAPPA ALIAS BAPUversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 4225 August 2004Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Bappa alias Bapu, was convicted under IPC Section 307 for stabbing the victim, Bibhishan, on the stomach, back and neck, causing serious injuries but not death. He appealed, contending that the injuries did not amount to an attempt to murder and that the ten‑year rigorous imprisonment was excessive. The

SURJIT SINGHversusNAHARA RAM AND ANR.

2004 INSC 4235 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The informant, Surjit Singh, alleged that the accused, Nahara Ram and another, fired shots at him while he was spraying his paddy field, causing injuries. The trial court convicted them under Section 326 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, sentencing them to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,0

ASSISTANT ENGINEER, C.A.D. KOTAversusDHAN KUNWAR

2006 INSC 3985 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a temporary work‑charged employee, was terminated in the early 1980s and, after an eight‑year gap, filed a claim for reinstatement and back wages under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court awarded 30% back wages and ordered reinstatement, but the High Court dismissed the

M/S. INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.versusDEVKI DEVI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3995 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a public sector undertaking, gave contract work to the widows and dependents of employees who died in harness after a union demand, without any compassionate appointment scheme. The contracts were later terminated in 1998 due to the company's severe financial distress, prompting

SHRI BALASAHEB K. THACKERAY AND ANR.versusSHRL VENKAT @ BABRU AND ANR.

2006 INSC 4015 July 2006

The complainant filed a private defamation complaint under IPC s.500 read with s.34 against the editor, printer and publisher of a newspaper. The trial court issued process, but a petition under CrPC s.482 was dismissed by the High Court. While the appeal was pending before this Court, the complainant died. The appella

SHIV ANAND MALLAPPA KOTIversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 6815 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The husband (appellant) was convicted under Section 498‑A of the IPC for the death of his wife by burn injuries, the prosecution alleging a dowry demand. The trial court also convicted the mother‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law under the same provision and the Dowry Prohibition Act, but the High Court acquitted the mother‑in

THE COMMISSIONER. PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, A.P. AND ANR.versusSHARANA GOUDA

2007 INSC 6825 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent owned a jeep that was taken by a friend and used to transport contraband liquor, leading to its seizure under the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968. The respondent filed a writ petition claiming he had no knowledge of the offence and that mens rea was required for confiscation. The High Court accepted this

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBABU RAM

2007 INSC 6835 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Babu Ram, who had been found with contraband in a bag and convicted under Section 17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. The Rajasthan High Court set aside the conviction on the ground that Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which mandates certai

JAGVIR SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE(DELHI ADMN.)

2007 INSC 6845 June 2007Dismissed

The appellants Jagvir Singh and others were convicted by a trial court under IPC sections 342, 365, 330 read with 34. The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction, observing that the appellants’ counsel had not challenged the conviction but only argued on the quantum of sentence, and it found the sentence not disproporti

IQBALBANOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 6855 June 2007Disposed off

Iqbalbano, married in 1959, filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1992 seeking maintenance from her husband, who claimed that he had divorced her by pronouncing "Talaq" three times, had paid the Mehr and that the Iddat period had ended. The Judicial Magistrate granted maintenance, but

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE (NCT) OF DELHI

2007 INSC 6865 June 2007Disposed off

Om Prakash was convicted under Section 7(1) read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling 'Khoya' whose milk‑fat content was 19.07% instead of the prescribed minimum of 20%. The trial court sentenced him to six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000. After the conviction was uph

STATE OF HARYANAversusSURESH

2007 INSC 6875 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant State of Haryana appealed the High Court's acquittal of Suresh, who had been convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act for possession of opium discovered in a false bottom of his attaché case. The High Court set aside the conviction on the ground that the search of the bag violated the mandatory requirem

RAJINDERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2006 INSC 3685 June 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rajinder was convicted for the death of his nephew Subhash, who died from a thigh wound inflicted by a firearm. The trial court and High Court upheld a conviction under Section 302 IPC (murder) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the distinction between murder and culpabl

SHRISHTI NARAIN JHAversusBINDESHWAR JHA AND ORS.

2009 INSC 6785 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Shrishti Narain Jha, alleged that on the night of 5-6 July 1981 a group of 14‑15 dacoits entered his house, assaulted his family, killed his father and stole valuables. The prosecution relied on the informant’s (PW‑7) statement and the testimony of his brothers (PW‑4, PW‑6) who claimed to have identified

BIMLA DEVI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

2009 INSC 6825 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 498-A (dowry harassment) of the Ranbir Penal Code, although the charge originally framed was only under Section 302 IPC (murder) read with Section 34. The High Court upheld the conviction, reducing the sentence fo

AKULA VEERA VENKATA SURYA PRAKASH @BABIversusPUBLIC PROSEUCTOR, HIGH COURT OF AP.

2009 INSC 6865 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of accused No.1 (A‑1) under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Abbai Reddy. The Court found that the testimony of the injured eyewitness (PW‑1) was riddled with inconsistencies, including contradictory statements about the location of the incident, the sequence of attacks, and t

NARENDRAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 6895 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Narendra, was charged with murder and cruelty under Sections 302 and 498A IPC for the death of his wife Mythradevi in February 1994. The trial court acquitted him, accepting his alibi that he was away buying milk and finding the prosecution evidence insufficient. On appeal, the Karnataka High Court set a

BAWA RAM & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH

2009 INSC 6905 May 2009Disposed off

The accused were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly pouring kerosene on the deceased, Nazar Khan, based on two dying declarations. The deceased's father, mother and uncle initially gave statements implicating the accused but later retracted, asserting that the deceased was of unso

RANVIR YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2009 INSC 6945 May 2009Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of Ranvir Yadav under Section 302 of the IPC for murder, arising from a 1982 incident on the Ganges. The appellant contended that the trial court failed to put any incriminating material before him during the examination under Section 313 of the CrPC, thereby denying him a fair

HARYANA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.versusSEEMA SHARMA AND ORS.

2009 INSC 6955 May 2009Disposed off

Seema Sharma (Respondent No.1) challenged the promotion of two junior colleagues in Haryana State Electronics Development Corporation Ltd., claiming she was senior and entitled to promotion. The corporation contended that its promotion policy was based on the principle of Merit‑cum‑Seniority, a point taken in its writt

MOTILAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 6765 May 2009Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of Gyan Chand on 11 November 1993, for which eight persons were tried and several were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The appellants challenged their convictions on the grounds that the First Information Report (FIR) was ante‑dated, showing a discrepancy with

STATE OF U.P.versusPARAS NATH SINGH

2009 INSC 6695 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Paras Nath Singh, a public servant, was convicted by a trial court under IPC sections 409 and 468. The Sessions Judge acquitted him, holding that the sanction for prosecution was not given by an authorized authority, that the charges were improperly framed, and that the examination under Section 313 CrPC was defective.

BRAHAM DASSversusSTATE OF H.P.

2009 INSC 6985 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a bus driver for the Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation, was charged under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code for starting a bus while a passenger was on the roof, leading to the passenger's fatal injuries. The trial court acquitted him, finding no evidence of negligence, but the Hig

STATE OF M.P.versusDEVENDRA

2009 INSC 6705 May 2009Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against directions issued by the Indore Bench of the High Court that mandated the State Government to amend police regulations to require photographs of complainants, material witnesses and accused persons to be taken and attached to charge sheets in all criminal cases except minor

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBHIYA RAM

2009 INSC 6925 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Bhiya Ram and Prahlad Ram were stopped while riding a motorcycle and a large quantity of opium was seized. The seized material was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for analysis, and the accused contended that the samples did not reach the FSL with the seals intact, rendering the evidence inadmi

RAM KUMARversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS

2008 INSC 5795 May 2008Dismissed

During a routine inspection of a bus, a Superintendent and an Inspector of the Narcotics Department seized brown sugar from the exclusive possession of the appellant and a co‑accused. The seized material was sampled, sealed and sent to a laboratory, which confirmed it to be brown sugar, and the appellant voluntarily ad

NHALIYAM MAKKIL RAVEENDRANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2008 INSC 5805 May 2008Disposed off

The appellant was caught on 13 August 1999 in possession of four litres of arrack, packaged in forty 100‑ml packets, while attempting to flee from police in Kerala. He was convicted by the trial court under section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act, 1077 and sentenced to three years' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1

RAM BACHAN RAI AND ORS.versusRAM UDAI RAI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2945 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, judgment debtors, sought to set aside an ex parte decree dated 3 May 1976 and later faced an execution application filed by the decree holders on 5 April 1991. The executing court held that the 12‑year limitation period under Article 136 of the Limitation Act began from the dismissal of a civil revision

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.versusKRISHNAJI PARVETESH KULKARNI

2006 INSC 2145 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents had purchased Indira Vikas Patras (IVPs) from post offices and subsequently lost the certificates. The post offices refused to issue duplicate certificates, relying on Rule 7(2) of the Indira Vikas Patra Rules, 1986, which bars replacement of lost, stolen, mutilated, defaced or destroyed certificates. T

JITU @ JITENDERversusSTATE OF M.P.

2009 INSC 3175 March 2009Case Partly allowed

Four persons, including the appellant Jitu (Jitender), were tried for murder (s.302 read with s.34 IPC) and causing injuries (s.324 read with s.34 IPC) after an incident on 17‑11‑1995 that resulted in the death of Umesh and injuries to three eye‑witnesses. The trial court convicted the appellant under s.302 IPC and a c

RAMESHWAR PRASADversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 3155 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a branch manager of a cooperative bank, was convicted under IPC sections 408 and 462 and sentenced by the trial court. The Sessions Court, on appeal, remanded the case to the trial court under Section 368(8) of the CrPC, citing lacunae in the prosecution case, without deciding the appeal on its merits. T

SATISH AMBANNA BANSODEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 3185 March 2009Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC on the basis of his wife's dying declaration that he had set her on fire. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the victim was not fit to give a dying declaration and that the statement was unreliable. The Supreme Court examined the principles

STATE OF PUNJABversusMADAN LAL

2009 INSC 3165 March 2009Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that allowed the three convictions of Madan Lal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, to run concurrently. The High Court had observed that the offences arose from the same family transaction involving different cheques and directed

PRAVEEN BHATIAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2009 INSC 3195 March 2009Dismissed

The appellant, an Air Force officer, was compulsorily retired under Section 19 of the Air Force Act, 1950 and Rule 15 of the Air Force Rules, 1969 for alleged misconduct, chiefly the belated filing of his property return six years after the prescribed six‑month period. He contended that the Court of Enquiry had cleared

MADAN LAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2009 INSC 3245 March 2009Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the death of Asha G, alleged to have resulted from throttling by her husband’s relatives in connection with a dowry demand. The trial court acquitted the accused, holding that the deceased suffered from epilepsy and her death could have been caused by an epileptic fit. The Allahabad High Court set as

M/S. ALEX ENTERPRISES & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2009 INSC 3265 March 2009Dismissed

The appellant, M/s Alex Enterprises, had obtained customs duty drawback of Rs.42,90,226 on export consignments whose sale proceeds were never repatriated, thereby violating Section 142B of the Customs Act. The Customs authorities ordered recovery of the drawback amount along with a penalty of Rs.20,00,000 and directed

SUBODH KUMAR JAISWAL AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 3085 March 2008Disposed off

The case concerned a police officer (respondent No.4) who was appointed Deputy Superintendent of Police in 1979, confirmed in 1987 and promoted to the IPS in 1991 with a year of allotment recorded as 1987. He later sought to have his year of allotment back‑dated to 1984, claiming eligibility for promotion vacancies in

H.P: STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusRANJEET SINGH AND ORS.

2008 INSC 3095 March 2008Case Allowed

The appellant, H.P. State Electricity Board, appealed against the Labour Court and Himachal Pradesh High Court decisions that had granted daily‑wage workers (respondents) a minimum bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The respondents had filed applications under Section 33‑C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 19

ST ATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusKRISHNARAO DUDHAPPA SHINDE

2009 INSC 1045 February 2009Case Partly allowed

Krishnarao Dudappa Shinde, a police inspector, was convicted under Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for possessing wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income. The Bombay High Court acquitted him, holding that assets acquired before the Act’s commencement on 18‑December‑1964 could no

M/S PRECIOUS OIL CORPORATION AND ORSversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2009 INSC 1025 February 2009Dismissed

Mis Precious Oil Corporation and its proprietor and employee were prosecuted under Section 7(1)(a)(i) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for contravening Clauses 3, 4 and 5(5) of the Lubricating Oil and Greases (Processing, Supply and Distribution Regulation) Order, 1987 by operating without a licence, storing adul

SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPN. LTD.versusB. JEEJEEBHOY VAKHARIA AND ORS.

2009 INSC 1055 February 2009Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained Civil Appeal No. 725 of 2009 filed by Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd. seeking directions for the speedy disposal of a suit (No. 3376 of 2005) pending before the Bombay High Court and an appeal against an order passed on a chamber summons. The Court, invoking its powers under Article 136

MASOOD ALI KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2009 INSC 1065 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Masood Ali Khan, challenged a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court that had granted bail and suspended the life sentences of three convicted murderers (respondents 2‑4) under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure while their appeal was pending. The Supreme Court held that the High Court fai

K. SUDHAKARANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2009 INSC 1075 February 2009Case Partly allowed

The State of Kerala filed a revision petition challenging an order passed under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) that was initiated suo motu by the High Court. The High Court held that while the State could not appeal under Section 341 because it had not filed a complaint, the revision petition was mai

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusBINDU AND ORS.

2009 INSC 1085 February 2009Case Partly allowed

The appellant, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., appealed a compensation award granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in a fatal accident where the deceased, aged 32, earned Rs 7,427 per month. The MACT had used a multiplier of 17 and awarded Rs 10,61,000

SMT. BACHAHAN DEVI & ANR.versusNAGAR NIGAM, GORAKHPUR & ANR.

2008 INSC 1425 February 2008Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the defendants challenging a High Court order that set aside a First Appellate Court's remand of a suit to the trial court under Order 41 Rule 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The key issue was the legal effect of the words "may" and "shall" appearing in the same statutor

BABOOLAL SHARDA & ANR.versusSMT. SAVITRIBAI & ORS.

2008 INSC 1435 February 2008Case Allowed

Respondent No.1 filed a complaint under the Madhya Pradesh Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumi Hadapane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976, alleging that land transferred to the appellants was obtained through a prohibited loan transaction and should be restored. The appellants contended tha

IN RE: DEA TH OF 25 CHAINED INMATES IN ASYLUM FIRE IN TAMIL NADUversus.

2002 INSC 635 February 2002Disposed off

A tragic fire at a mental asylum in Ervadi, Tamil Nadu, killed 25 chained patients, prompting the Supreme Court to take suo motu action under Article 32. The Court examined the failure of the Central and State governments to implement the Mental Health Act, 1987 and related disability statutes, noting that chaining of

BHAG SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2007 INSC 115 January 2007Dismissed

The appellants filed a writ petition alleging that several factories in Mandi Gobindgarh were operating in a residential zone and should be closed. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that under the then‑applicable (old) Master Plan the factories were situated in an industrial area. The appellants contended

AMITSINGH BHIKAMSING THAKURversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 125 January 2007Dismissed

The case arose from a robbery‑murder where the victim’s shop‑assistant (PW‑1) and other eyewitnesses identified four accused persons, including the appellant, after a test identification parade (TIP) and a confession obtained under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The appellant challenged the conviction on three grounds

ISHWAR SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 155 January 2005Dismissed

Ishwar Singh, a manager of Sadul Shahar Kray Vikray Sahakari Samiti, was compulsorily retired under Rule 244(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Service Rules. He challenged the order by filing a revision before the Additional Registrar, who held that the Service Rules did not apply and that retirement required Registrar approval u

KASHIBEN CHHAGANBHAI KOLIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2008 INSC 13974 December 2008Dismissed

The appellant, a landowner, had agreed to sell a parcel of agricultural land to the complainant, who belongs to a Scheduled Tribe, and transferred possession after partial payment. After the complainant began cultivating sugarcane, the appellant forcibly entered the land, used a tractor to till it and destroyed the cro

MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. AND ANR.versusRAJIV DUBEY

2008 INSC 13984 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The Managing Director of Team Finance Company filed a criminal complaint under IPC sections 406, 420, 294, 506 and 34 alleging breach of trust because Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services presented post‑dated cheques despite the debt being discharged by demand drafts as per a tripartite agreement. The appellant had e

GUJARAT POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDversusM/S NICOSULF INDUSTRIES & EXPORT PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2008 INSC 13964 December 2008Dismissed

The Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) had granted M/s Nicosulf Industries permission to discharge effluent subject to conditions. It alleged a breach of condition No.4 after a water sample taken on 22‑June‑1989 was found non‑conforming, and filed a complaint through an Assistant Environmental Engineer. The trial c

SANGAM SPINNERSversusREGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-I

2007 INSC 12234 December 2007

Sangam Spinners set up a factory on 1 September 1995 and claimed exemption from the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 under clause (d) of Section 16(1), which provided a three‑year infancy protection. In 1998, the clause was omitted by amendment Act No. 10 of 1998 with retrospective effect from 22 September 1997, and

M/S. DEVA METAL POWDERS PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, U.P.

2007 INSC 12244 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Deva Metal Powders Pvt. Ltd. was originally assessed as dealing in metal and taxed at 2.2% on its aluminium powder. The assessing officer, relying on Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, invoked Section 22 of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948 to rectify the assessment, treating the powder

MUSTAFIKHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 9454 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant, a junior engineer supervising irrigation tank construction under a government employment guarantee scheme, was alleged to have fabricated muster rolls showing payments to fictitious labourers, thereby misappropriating Rs 6,764.10. Evidence showed that the same 21 labourers were recorded as working simult

P.K. SREEKANTAN AND ORS.versusP. SREEKUMARAN NAIR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9464 December 2006Disposed off

The State acquired 2.8 hectares of land for a market and fixed a compensation award of Rs.45,08,111. Several claimants, including P.K. Sreekantan, filed applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking a reference to a court for enhancement of compensation. The Reference Court, however, also rule

RAMJI RAI AND ANR.versusJAGDISH MALLAH (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 9474 December 2006Dismissed

Ramji Rai and another filed a suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the respondents from interfering with their possession of a disputed land and from obstructing the construction of a boundary wall. The trial court decreed in their favour, but the appellate court set aside the decree on the ground that the appel

STATE OF ORISSAversusKANDURI SAHOO

2003 INSC 6904 December 2003Appeal(s) allowed

On 13 May 1994, Excise officials seized about 12 kg of cannabis from the accused and sent a 50‑gram sample for chemical analysis four days later. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act, but the Orissa High Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution failed to explain the cust

MULA DEVI & ANR.versusST ATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2008 INSC 12424 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Puola Devi, married to the son of Dayal Singh, lived with her mother‑in‑law Mula Devi and sister‑in‑law Rajmati and repeatedly complained of harassment and fear of being killed. She was found dead with asphyxia due to ante‑mortem strangulation and post‑mortem burns. The trial court convicted Dayal Singh, Mula Devi and

STATE OF KERALAversusORISON J FRANCIS & ANR.

2008 INSC 12354 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint under Sections 18(c) and 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 alleged that the accused were manufacturing, selling and storing drugs defined under Section 3(b) without a licence. The accused contended that the seized items were Ayurvedic drugs, governed by Section 3(a), and therefore the complaint

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNEversusM/S. KRIPA CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.

2004 INSC 6414 November 2004Disposed off

The appeal before the Supreme Court concerned the method of calculating the cost of production for excisable products under the Central Excise Act. Two questions were posed: whether excise duty paid on raw material, if modvatted, should be included in the cost of production, and whether the profit earned by a job worke

M.M. MALHOTRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 4734 October 2005Dismissed

M.M. Malhotra, a permanent commission officer of the Indian Air Force, was married to Roopa (Ruby) Malhotra under Hindu rites. The complainant alleged that Malhotra had an illicit relationship and had contracted a second marriage with Miss Anna Suja John, and that he brutally tortured Roopa. A disciplinary enquiry led

USMAN MIAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2004 INSC 5724 October 2004Dismissed

The deceased, Saista Khatoon, was the second wife of appellant No.1 (Usman Mian) and step‑daughter of appellants No.2 and No.3, who were hostile to the marriage. She was found dead on the verandah of the appellants' house with visible injuries; the appellants attempted to bury the body and fled when police arrived. The

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.versusRAJESH SYAL

2002 INSC 4274 October 2002Leave granted

The State of Punjab prosecuted Rajesh Syal, former director of Golden Forest (India) Ltd, for fraudulently collecting public money and failing to return it, leading to multiple criminal cases in different courts under IPC sections 406, 420, 468, 471, 1208 and Punjab Reforms Act s.7(2). Syal filed applications under CrP

JAYANT ACHYUT SATHEversusJOSEPH BAIN DSOUZA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 10144 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the amendment of Regulation 33(7) of the Development Control Regulations, 1991 (Greater Mumbai), alleging that it was being misused to demolish privately owned, sound pre‑1940 buildings and that the regulation imposed unreasonable side‑space restrictions. The Bombay Hig

BEENA PHILIPOSE AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 5774 September 2006Disposed off

The appellants, Beena Philipose and her father, were convicted for forging university mark‑sheets to secure admission to a medical college, offences punishable under Sections 420, 471, 120B, 466 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge sentenced them to one year and three years of imprisonment respectively;

A.GEETHAversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5784 September 2006Dismissed

The appellant, A. Geetha, challenged the preventive detention of her husband under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982, alleging that the detaining authority failed to consider a representation and that the likelihood of his release on bail was remote because of an NDPS case. The High Court dism

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusPAPPU @ AJAY

2008 INSC 8974 August 2008Case Allowed

The accused, Pappu@Ajay, was convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 376(1) read with 511, 324 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to four years of rigorous imprisonment along with fines. The High Court, noting that the accused had already served about five months and 25 days, reduced the se

DINESH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2008 INSC 8984 August 2008Dismissed

The appellant Dinesh Singh and several co‑accused fired at a man identified as Juguntha, who died from a gunshot wound. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the Allahabad High Court convicted Dinesh Singh under Section 304 Part II IPC while acquitting the others, holding that the evidence showed he acted without

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusGAJENDRA SINGH

2008 INSC 8994 August 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant State of Rajasthan convicted Gajendra Singh under Sections 376, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code, sentencing him to ten years rigorous imprisonment for rape and six months for the other offences. The High Court reduced the rape sentence to five years, invoking the proviso to Section 376 that permits a

BALDEV SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2008 INSC 9004 August 2008Disposed off

Baldev Singh was convicted under Section 304‑B IPC for the death of his wife Satwant Kaur, who died by poisoning within two years of marriage. The prosecution proved that she was repeatedly harassed for dowry, including demands for a fridge, TV and a cash amount, in addition to a claim on her share of ancestral propert

DINESH KUMARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2008 INSC 9014 August 2008Dismissed

Dinesh Kumar and four others were charged with murder, attempted murder and related offences under Sections 302, 307, 324, 148, 452, 323 read with 149 of the IPC. The trial court convicted all five, but the Rajasthan High Court acquitted four co‑accused while upholding Dinesh Kumar's conviction. The appellant argued th

I. RAVINDRA REDDYversusSHAIK. KHADER MASTHAN AND ORS.

2008 INSC 9044 August 2008Case Allowed

The case involved the murder of a man (the deceased) who was last seen with accused A‑1 and A‑2. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: the victims' last sighting with the accused, purchase of knives by the accused, discovery of a skeleton and burnt items, and identification of the accused by a key witness

A.P. FOODSversusS. SAMUEL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3914 July 2006Case Partly allowed

A.P. Foods, a non‑profit public‑sector establishment run by the Andhra Pradesh Nutrition Council, was challenged by its employees who demanded bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The Labour Commissioner held the Act inapplicable, but the employer later paid ex‑gratia and subsequently stopped it, prompting a wri

U.P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusBABU RAM

2006 INSC 3924 July 2006Disposed off

The respondent, Babu Ram, was employed on a temporary basis by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and was terminated in 1983. After a fifteen‑year gap, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in 1998, which held the termination illegal and ordered reinstatement with back wages. The corporation challenged th

DEVINDER SINGH AND ORSversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 3934 July 2006Dismissed

The appellants, Devinder Singh and others, filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that they were owners in possession of a parcel of land and that the authorities' orders declaring the land surplus and allotting it were null and void. The respondents contended that the suit was barred by Section 26 of the Haryana Cei

BAPU@ GAJRAJ SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 6794 June 2007Dismissed

The appellant, Bapu/Gajraj Singh, was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC for beheading his wife with a blood‑stained sickle. He claimed exemption under s.84 IPC, asserting that he was of unsound mind at the time of the offence. The trial court and the Rajasthan High Court rejected the plea, and the appellant appealed

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH.versusNISAR

2007 INSC 6804 June 2007Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Nisar for the double murder of two graziers under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution’s case relied on Nisar’s alleged extra‑judicial confession, the recovery of the victims' bodies, and an axe found stained with human blood, although the blood group was not dete

SUBBUSINGHversusSTATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2009 INSC 6624 May 2009Dismissed

Subbusingh, a Sub‑Inspector of Police, demanded a bribe of Rs 500 from parties involved in a land dispute, using his friend Rajappan to collect the money and threatening the complainant with false criminal charges. A trap was set up in which the money was tested with phenolphthalein, which showed a positive result on S

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusY. MOIDEEN KUNHI (DEAD) BY LRS.

2009 INSC 6644 May 2009Hearing Adjourned

The State of Karnataka challenged a Karnataka Land Reforms Tribunal order that declared a partnership firm to be holding 368.16 acres of agricultural land in excess of the ceiling limit. The State alleged fraud by the declarants and the Tribunal's secretary (Tahsiladar) and filed a review petition more than 14 years af

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusPARMENDRA SINGH

2009 INSC 6654 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Parmendra Singh, who had been convicted of murder, dowry death and related offences under the IPC based largely on the victim's dying declarations. The Rajasthan High Court set aside the conviction, holding that the dying declarations were unreliable because the procedur

STATE OF A.P.versusV.V.PANDURANGA RAO

2009 INSC 6674 May 2009Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted V.V. Panduranga Rao for the murder of his wife under IPC s.302, alleging he also attempted suicide. The trial court convicted him, but the High Court acquitted, finding the mother’s testimony unreliable, the telephonic report to police not recorded in writing, no forensic blood‑gr

SHAIKH MAQSOODversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 6684 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Shaikh Maqsood was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her on fire, with the trial and High Courts relying on circumstantial evidence. The appellant appealed, contending that during his examination under Section 313 of the CrPC no question was put to him to explain the

SAYYED SHABIRALLI HAFIZALIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 6634 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant, a Sub‑Engineer of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, was convicted under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding Rs 100 as a bribe to issue a gate pass. The Supreme Court examined whether the gratification was "trivial" under Section 4 of the Act and

LINGEGOWD DETECTIVE & SECURITY CHAMBER PVT. LIMITEDversusMYSORE KIRLOSKAR LIMITED AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2894 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Lingegowd Detective & Security Chamber Pvt Ltd supplied security personnel to Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 ordered Lingegowd to pay minimum wages to its workmen by treating them as engaged in a scheduled employment. Lingegowd challenged the order in a writ petition; a Single Jud

MANAGEMENT, ESSORPE MILLS LTD.versusPRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND ORS.

2008 INSC 4534 April 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The Tamil Nadu Panchalai Workers' Union served a strike notice on 14 March 1991 stating that a strike would commence on or after 24 March 1991, giving only ten days' notice. The Supreme Court held that the notice did not satisfy the six‑week advance notice required under Section 22(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 19

LILAWATI AGARWAL (DEAD) BY LRS AND ORSversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2008 INSC 4544 April 2008Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court heard a civil appeal concerning whether claimants were entitled to the enhanced solatium under Sections 23(1‑A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in view of Section 30 of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. The land was acquired after notifications in 1965 and 1966 and the Colle

SEENIVASANversusPETER JEBARAJ & ANR.

2008 INSC 4574 April 2008Dismissed

The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of a sale and later sought to implead a third party, SA, who had already purchased the suit property. SA subsequently sold the property to the respondents, and an ex‑parte decree was passed against the appellant before SA was served with summons. The respondents later

KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANR.versusK. THANGAPPAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 2014 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a 1979 settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, whereby a workman who had been on the nominal muster roll was to be appointed to a vacancy when one arose. The workman failed to report for duty in 1979 and his name was removed; after nearly two decades he made representations

STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ANR.versusSANJEEV @ BITTOO

2005 INSC 1804 April 2005Disposed off

The State of NCT of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court order that had set aside an externment order issued under Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, which directed a police officer to leave Delhi for one year. The High Court had held that the order lacked sufficient material and reasoning, particularly tha

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusASHFAQ AHMED

2009 INSC 3104 March 2009Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the Rajasthan High Court’s order acquitting Ashfaq Ahmed, who had been convicted by a trial court for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment. The trial court’s conviction was based solely on an alleged dying declaration (Exhibit P‑1)

SRIPATHI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 3114 March 2009Disposed off

On 22 September 1992, during an altercation, Pandit (A.4) stabbed the deceased while three co‑accused (A.1 Sripathi, A.2 Mallikarjun, A.3 Sanjaya) allegedly held the victim as instructed. The trial court acquitted all, but the Karnataka High Court convicted them under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 of the IPC

TRIMBAKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 2924 March 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and assault under Section 324 IPC for striking the deceased with an axe during a verbal altercation, which also injured the deceased's wife. The appellant argued that the killing occurred in a sudden fight without pre‑meditation, undue advantage, or cruelty, i

SHANKAR RAGHO BHAGANEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 2934 March 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Shankar Ragho Bhagane, was convicted by the Sessions Court and the Bombay High Court for the murder of his mother, Girja Ragho Bhagane, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case rested on the eyewitness testimonies of PW2 (the appellant's sister) and PW3 (the appellant's daughter

SALEKH CHAND (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSATYA GUPTA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 2954 March 2008Dismissed

The appeal concerned a suit for partition of a family property where the plaintiff claimed that the original owner, Jagannath, had adopted his sister's son, Chandra Bhan, under a custom of the Vaish community that permitted such adoptions. The respondents argued that no such custom existed and that the adoption was inv

RAVI KUMARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 1214 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Ravi Kumar was accused of killing Hans Raj with a dhangu during a quarrel that escalated into a physical fight. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC for murder and the High Court affirmed the conviction. On appeal, the appellant contended that there was unreasonable delay in lodging the FIR and sending t

JUGAL CHANDRA SAIKIAversusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

2003 INSC 1454 March 2003Dismissed

Dr. Jugal Chandra Saikia was compulsorily retired on 11 April 1994 after a Screening Committee, comprising senior officials, recommended his retirement on grounds of alleged fraudulent transactions and doubtful integrity. He challenged the order through a writ petition, which was upheld by both a Single Judge and a Div

JAGTAMBA DEVIversusHEM RAM AND ORS.

2008 INSC 1344 February 2008Case Allowed

Jagatamba Devi, a Gram Panchayat Pradhan, filed a private complaint under IPC sections 332, 353 and 504/506 against Hem Ram and others for assaulting her while she was performing official duties. After the magistrate issued summons, an Executive Magistrate consigned the case file, deeming it time‑barred, and the accuse

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF WORKS, C.P.W.DversusREGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, (CENTRAL) & ORS.

2008 INSC 1354 February 2008Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a civil appeal filed by the Director General of Works, CPWD, challenging the Delhi High Court's dismissal of a Letter Patent Appeal. The High Court had dismissed the appeal merely by referring to its earlier decision in Surinder Singh & Anr. v. The Engineer in Chief CPWD, without demonstratin

STATE OF ORISSA AND ANRversusM/S. TATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD. AND ORS.

2008 INSC 1364 February 2008Disposed off

The Industrial Development Corporation of Orissa Ltd. (IDCOL) invited technical bids for a chromite deposit joint‑venture project. The technical bids of VISA and TISCO were rejected at the threshold, and Jindal was selected, prompting VISA and TISCO to file writ petitions. The Orissa High Court set aside IDCOL's decisi

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