Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI

301 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–301.

RAM NIWASversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2022 INSC 81811 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Niwas was convicted by the Sessions Court and the High Court for the murder of Dalip Singh under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, based primarily on an alleged extra‑judicial confession to two witnesses and the recovery of ash from his memorandum. The defence argued that the dead body could not be positively identified, t

DR. JAYA THAKURversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 61611 July 2023Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the Central Vigilance Commission (Amendment) Act, 2021, the Delhi Special Police Establishment (Amendment) Act, 2021 and the Fundamental (Amendment) Rules, 2021 on the ground that they allowed arbitrary extensions of the tenure of the Director of Enforcement and the Director of CBI, thereby e

PRIYA PRAMOD GAJBEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 66311 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Priya Pramod Gajbe, secured admission to an MBBS programme under a Scheduled Tribe (ST) seat, claiming membership in the Mana tribe. The Scrutiny Committee rejected her claim on the basis that she failed the Affinity Test and could not prove ancestral residence in the tribe's traditional area; the High C

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 19511 March 2024

The Supreme Court had earlier declared the Electoral Bond Scheme unconstitutional and directed the State Bank of India (SBI), as the authorized bank, to furnish the Election Commission of India (ECI) with details of each bond purchased and redeemed between 12 April 2019 and 15 February 2024. SBI filed a Miscellaneous A

RUPA AND CO. LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusFIRHAD HAKIM AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 24511 February 2025Directions issued

The appellants Rupa & Co. Ltd paid Rs.4,00,92,000 for a plot of land in New Town, Kolkata, based on HIDCO's promise to convey it on a free‑hold basis. HIDCO later altered the terms to a 99‑year lease and subsequently demanded additional payment at market rates, prompting the appellants to file a writ petition which the

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERSversusYOGENDERA MOHAN SENGUPTA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 3011 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh prepared a draft development plan for the Shimla Planning Area under the Himachal Pradesh Town & Country Planning Act, 1977, which was stayed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in 2014 and again in 2022. The State challenged the NGT orders before the Himachal Pradesh High Court, while th

M/S BAWA PAULINS PVT. LTD.versusUPS FREIGHT SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 119410 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Bawa Paulins Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, exported 234 packages of messenger bags to County Seat Stores, USA, under a Free on Board (FOB) contract and an irrevocable Letter of Credit (LC) opened by the consignee’s bank. The forwarding agents (respondents 1‑3) issued a Forwarder Cargo Receipt (FCR) that incorrectly lis

MANILALversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 67510 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a reserved‑category candidate, applied for the post of Teacher Grade‑III (Level II) in a Scheduled Area of Rajasthan but was rejected because his graduation percentage (44.58%) fell short of the 45% threshold. He had secured admission to a B.Ed. programme on 23 October 2009, after the NCTE notification d

KHEMA @ KHEM CHANDRA ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 81010 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder, attempted murder and rioting under Sections 302, 307 and 148 of the IPC based primarily on the testimonies of two relatives of the deceased, one an alleged eye‑witness (PW‑1) and the other an injured witness (PW‑2). The Supreme Court examined the credibility of these witnesses,

BRAJESH SINGHversusSUNIL ARORA & ORS.

2021 INSC 38810 August 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a contempt petition filed by Brajesh Singh alleging that several political parties wilfully disobeyed the Court's order dated 13‑02‑2020, which required parties to disclose the criminal antecedents of their candidates and the reasons for their selection, within 48 hours of nomination. The

MIR MUSTAFA ALI HASMIversusTHE STATE OF A.P.

2024 INSC 50310 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Forest Section Officer, was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe from a saw‑mill operator. The prosecution relied on the complainant’s testimony, a friend who acted as a shadow witness, and the recovery

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusUNION OF INDIA

2024 INSC 50210 July 2024Directions issued

The State of West Bengal filed an original suit under Article 131 of the Constitution seeking a declaration that the Union of India’s registration of cases by the CBI after the State withdrew its consent under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act is unconstitutional, and asked for an injunctio

PHR INVENT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETYversusUCO BANK AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 29710 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The borrower defaulted on a loan from UCO Bank, which led to an auction of four mortgaged properties; PHR Invent Educational Society (the appellant) was the highest bidder and paid the full consideration, after which the sale was confirmed and registered. The borrower filed a securitization application under the SARFAE

RAVISHANKAR TANDONversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 29910 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder under Sections 302, 34, 120B and 201 of the IPC based largely on their statements recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and the subsequent recovery of the victim's body from a pond. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt tha

ANNA MATHEWS AND OTHERSversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 12210 February 2023Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the appointment of an individual as an Additional Judge of the Madras High Court, alleging that the collegium had not properly considered the candidate's suitability and seeking a writ of certiorari and mandamus to quash the recommendation and compel reconsideration. The Court examined whethe

ANURADHA BHASINversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 3110 January 2020Disposed off

The Court examined the Jammu and Kashmir government's orders that shut down mobile, landline, and internet services and imposed Section 144 restrictions on 4‑8‑2019, which the petitioners claimed violated their fundamental rights to free speech, press, and trade. The petitioners sought production of all orders, a decla

LT. COL. SUPRITA CHANDELversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 9429 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Lt. Col. Suprita Chandel, a Short Service Commissioned officer in the Army Dental Corps, was denied a third chance for permanent commission after a 2013 amendment to the age‑relaxation rules. A batch of similarly situated officers successfully obtained a one‑time age relaxation and permanent commission from the Armed F

MADANversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 9909 November 2023Disposed off

The case arose from a 2003 incident in Muzzafarnagar where six persons were killed by indiscriminate firing by the appellants Madan, Sudesh Pal and others, allegedly motivated by political rivalry. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced Madan and Sudesh Pa

MANISH SISODIAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 5959 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, was arrested in 2023 in connection with CBI and ED investigations into alleged irregularities in Delhi’s excise policy. He remained in custody for about 17 months without trial, and his multiple bail applications were rejected by the trial court and the Delhi

GAURAV MAINIversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2024 INSC 4889 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for kidnapping a minor for ransom, robbery and criminal conspiracy under IPC sections 364A, 392 and 120B. The prosecution's case relied on the statements of the victim and his father, but the victim's family never reported the incident to police and the key witness, the grandfather, was ne

VINOD JASWANTRAY VYAS (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 4909 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against the conviction of two police officers for the death of Jeeva, who allegedly died from custodial torture at Amraiwadi police station. The trial and High Court had upheld the conviction, later reducing the charge from murder (Sec. 302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to

TATA MOHAN RAOversusS. VENKATESWARLU AND OTHERS ETC.

2025 INSC 6789 May 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a Tehsildar, was ordered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court to consider representations for regularising houses on government land and to maintain the status quo pending a decision. Despite the orders, he led a police force to demolish structures and evict families, beating women and children. The High Cou

M/S UTKAL SUPPLIERSversusM/S MAA KANAK DURGA ENTERPRISES & ORS.

2021 INSC 2429 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a Tender Call Notice issued by the SCB Medical College Hospital, Cuttack, which required bidders to submit a "valid labour licence". M/s. Utkal Suppliers (appellant) was awarded the contract, while M/s. Maa Kanak Durga Enterprises (respondent No.1) was disqualified for not having a contract‑labou

GOVERDHAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 479 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The trial court convicted two brothers, Goverdhan and Rajendra, and their father Chintaram for the murder of Suraj under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, based primarily on the testimony of Suraj's mother, Lata Bai, who was the sole eye‑witness. The High Court upheld the convictions of the brothers but acquitted t

T.P. GOPALAKRISHNANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2022 INSC 12628 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former Agricultural Officer, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC for misappropriating funds during 1992-1994. He argued that the prosecution in the 2003 cases was barred by double jeopardy because he had already been tried, convicted, or acquitted in three earlier cases (1999)

ALLARAKHA HABIB MEMON ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 5908 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 120B of the IPC based on the testimony of two alleged eyewitnesses – a police constable (PW‑12) and the first informant (PW‑11). The Supreme Court found that PW‑12, who had actually brought the weapons to the police station, never lodged a formal complaint

MOHAMMAD WAJID AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6838 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an FIR registered under Sections 395, 504, 506 and 323 IPC alleging that the appellants assaulted the complainant, seized Rs.2 lakh and forced signatures on a stamp paper during a land dispute. The Court considered whether the FIR disclosed the ingredients of dacoity, criminal intimidation or

SALIB @ SHALU @ SALIMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2023 INSC 6878 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Husna filed FIR No.175/2022 alleging that several persons threatened her to withdraw an earlier FIR against her father‑in‑law. The appellant, Salib alias Salu, was not named in the original FIR but his name appeared for the first time in the informant’s further statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The

A. SREENIVASA REDDYversusRAKESH SHARMA AND ANR.

2023 INSC 6828 August 2023Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant General Manager of State Bank of India, was accused of conspiracy to cheat the bank by sanctioning a large corporate loan and was charged under Sections 120‑B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The bank initially declined, then later granted, sanct

SELVAMANIversusTHE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2024 INSC 3938 May 2024Dismissed

The appellant, one of five accused, was convicted for gang rape and criminal intimidation under Sections 376(g) and 506(1) of the IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The victim, her mother and aunt turned hostile during cross‑examination, three and a half months after their exami

JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS.versusMB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED & ORS.

2024 INSC 238 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) was asked to approve the procurement of 1,000 MW of power through a competitive bidding process. After negotiations, the Commission approved only 500 MW and adopted the tariffs of the lowest bidders, while the higher‑priced bids of L‑4 and L‑5 were reje

RAMKRISHNA MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTREversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 8457 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The Director of Medical Education, acting on an interim order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, directed two medical colleges to keep one MBBS seat vacant for the 2023-24 academic year. The interim order was issued to protect the interests of students challenging the amendment of the Mukhyamantri Medhavi Vidyarthi Yoja

SWACCH ASSOCIATION, NAGPURversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 11997 October 2025Dismissed

The Swacch Association filed a public‑interest litigation alleging that Futala Tank in Nagpur was a wetland and that several constructions – a musical fountain, a viewer’s gallery, a parking plaza and an artificial banyan tree – were permanent structures violating the Wetlands (Conservation & Management) Rules, 2017. T

THE BLUE DREAMZ ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusKOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

2024 INSC 5897 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Kolkata Municipal Corporation awarded a tender to Blue Dreamz Advertising for advertising on street hoardings, but disputes arose over reciprocal obligations such as work orders, bank guarantees, and the number of hoardings installed. The Corporation issued a show‑cause notice and subsequently debarred the company

TUSHARBHAI RAJNIKANTBHAI SHAHversusKAMAL DAYANI & ORS.

2024 INSC 5887 August 2024

The Supreme Court granted the petitioner absolute interim anticipatory bail on 8 December 2023, ordering his release on bail if arrested. Despite this, the police remanded him to custody on 13 December 2023, and the magistrate failed to release him after the remand period, resulting in an illegal detention of about 48

KAMALversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2023 INSC 6787 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Hoshiyar Singh was found dead at his home, and the prosecution alleged that his son Prem Singh, who had a property dispute with him, fled the scene and later implicated Kamal Kishore and Manoj as accomplices. The trial court and the Delhi High Court convicted the three accused under Section 302 read with S

VINOD KUMAR & ORS.versusDISTRICT MAGISTRATE MAU & ORS.

2023 INSC 6067 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Government acquired parcels of land in Mau district for a highway widening project under the National Highways Authority Act, 1956. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) determined the total compensation and apportioned shares among the landowners, a determination accepted by the appellants but contes

SUKHPAL SINGHversusNCT OF DELHI

2024 INSC 3857 May 2024Dismissed

The appellant Sukhpal Singh was convicted of murdering his wife Usha under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution relied heavily on the sworn statement of the complainant, Ashok Kumar Pathak, recorded under Section 299 of the CrPC, as well as a confession note and handwriting expert report. The appellant challenged the admis

PRADEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusPOST MASTER GENERAL AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 1567 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased Kisan Vikas Patras (KVPs) in joint names and, relying on an agent named Rukhsana, handed the certificates to her for transfer. Rukhsana encashed the KVPs at a different post office and received Rs. 25,54,000 in cash, which she kept. The appellants filed a consumer complaint; the NCDRC dismissed

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

2019 INSC 13266 December 2019IA disposed

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

M/S. UNICORN INDUSTRIESversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2019 INSC 13366 December 2019Dismissed

Unicorn Industries, a manufacturer in Sikkim, claimed that a 2003 exemption notification under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which exempted basic excise duty and certain additional duties, also covered the National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD), education cess and secondary/higher education cess imposed

MIHIR RAJESH SHAHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 12886 November 2025Directions issued

The appellant, Mihir Rajesh Shah, was arrested for a fatal hit‑and‑run involving his BMW, but the police failed to provide him with a written copy of the grounds of arrest as required by Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The High Court upheld the arrest de

DEVENDRA KUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 8416 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants assaulted the deceased, Bahal, with lathis and an axe after threatening to kill him, during a land dispute that created prior enmity between the families. Bahal later died from head injuries, and the trial court convicted the appellants under Section 302 IPC and Section 307 read with Section 34, sentenci

SACHIDHANANDAM SINCE DEAD THROUGH HIS LRS.versusE. VANAJA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 9846 November 2023Disposed off

The case concerned a partition suit filed by E. Vanaja, the widow of a pre‑deceased son, seeking a share in the properties of her mother‑in‑law under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The trial court awarded her a one‑eighth share; the first appellate court reduced it to one‑sixteenth of certain schedule properties, and

IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 9966 August 2025Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined applications concerning the eco‑sensitive hill station of Matheran, Maharashtra, where heavy monsoon rains were causing soil erosion on the main access road and hand‑pulled carts were being used for transport. The petitioners sought permission to lay paver blocks on the Dasturi Naka–Shivaji M

DRAVIDA MUNNETRA KAZHAGAMversusTHIRU. C. VE. SHANMUGAM

2025 INSC 9766 August 2025Disposed off

The Tamil Nadu government launched the "Ungaludan Stalin" welfare scheme, naming it after a living political leader. An opposition Member of Parliament filed a representation before the Election Commission under Clause 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, and subsequently a writ petition

THE MADRAS ALUMINIUM CO. LTD.versusTHE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.

2023 INSC 6076 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd., a sick industrial unit, applied on 24 December 2001 to reduce its contracted maximum electricity demand from 23,000 KVA to 10,000 KVA. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) failed to act on the request for over two and a half years, during which the company was forced to pay charges for

SIDDHI SANDEEP LADDAversusCONSORTIUM OF NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITIES AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 7146 May 2025

The Supreme Court examined appeals challenging the High Court's order on six disputed Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) questions. It evaluated the correctness of answer keys for Questions 56 and 77, upheld the High Court's answer for Question 78, and found that Questions 88, 115 and 116 were either improperly framed or

IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 1786 March 2024Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined whether tiger safaris can be treated like zoos under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and whether the proposed tiger safari at Pakhrau in Corbett Tiger Reserve was lawful. It held that a zoo, as defined in s.2(39), is an ex‑situ conservation establishment and tiger safaris, as envisioned b

RAVINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2024 INSC 2116 March 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Ravinder Kumar, was convicted for the murder of his wife Meena under Section 302 IPC, along with convictions under Sections 304B/34 and 498A/34. The prosecution's case relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including blood‑stained clothes recovered from the appellant's parental home, an English cale

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

2020 INSC 2866 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

SADHNA CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2020 INSC 2926 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

ABDUL NASSARversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2025 INSC 356 January 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Abdul Nassar, was convicted of raping and murdering a nine‑year‑old girl, offences punishable under Sections 376 and 302 of the IPC, and was sentenced to death. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts, forensic DNA evidence linking the appellant’s semen to the victim’s clothing, and te

MUKUL KUMAR TYAGIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 8325 November 2024Case Allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation (UPPCL) advertised for 2,211 Technician Grade‑II posts requiring a Certificate of 80‑hour Course on Computer Concepts (CCC) to be produced at the interview. Candidates who produced the CCC certificate at the interview were selected and issued appointment letters on 14 July 2015. A Hi

NABHA POWER LIMITED & ANR.versusPUNJAB STATE POWER COROPORATION LIMITED & ANR.

2024 INSC 8335 November 2024Dismissed

The appellants, Nabha Power Ltd. and its associate, bid for a mega‑power project under a Request for Proposal (RFP) that required bidders to consider the law as defined in Clause 1.1 of the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). They argued that a press release dated 01‑Oct‑2009 announcing Cabinet approval of modifications to

MAKKELLA NAGAIAHversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2023 INSC 8005 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Makkella Nagaiah was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for a murder committed on 21‑12‑2005 and sentenced to life imprisonment. He later filed a writ petition under Article 32 claiming that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, asserting a date of birth of 02‑05‑1989, which would make

SHAIL KUMARIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 9365 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Shail Kumari was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly drowning her two children after taking them to a pond. The trial court and the Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the conviction primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑2, while other potential witnesses were not examined. On appeal, the Supreme C

VANASHAKTIversusUNION OF INDIA

2025 INSC 9615 August 2025Case Partly allowed

The petition challenged the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change’s notification dated 29 January 2025 (S.O. 523(E)) and the accompanying Office Memorandum of 30 January 2025, which altered the regime of environmental clearance for building and construction projects under Entry 8(a) and 8(b) of the 2006 Sc

JANHIT ABHIYANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 4755 August 2020Directions issued

The petitioners challenged the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019, which inserted clauses 15(6) and 16(6) permitting a 10% reservation for economically weaker sections in educational institutions and public employment. They argued that the amendment violated the basic structure of the Constitution

PRITINDER SINGH @ LOVELYversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2023 INSC 6145 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Pritinder Singh (alias Lovely) and Manjit Kaur, were convicted for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC based on circumstantial evidence, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, and the "last seen" theory. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the extra‑judicial confession, the

ARUN DEV UPADHYAYAversusINTEGRATED SALES SERVICE LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 6105 July 2023Dismissed

The dispute arose from a representation agreement between D.M.C. Management Consultants Ltd. and Integrated Sales Service Ltd., which contained an arbitration clause. After the arbitrator awarded US $6.9 million against DMC, the award was sought to be enforced against non‑signatory parties, including Arun Dev Upadhyaya

TRUST ESTATE KHIMJI KESHAWJI & ANRversusTHE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

2023 INSC 6095 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a trust owning a six‑storey building, was served a notice under Sections 238 and 271 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, alleging that it was using domestic water for non‑domestic purposes without permission. The notice was addressed only to the owner and did not specify the alleged violation

PRABHAT KUMAR MISHRA @ PRABHAT MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2024 INSC 1725 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a District Savings Officer, was charged under Section 306 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act for the suicide of a senior clerk who left a suicide note blaming work pressure and harassment. The charge sheet was based solely on that note, and the investigating agency had initially filed a clos

NAEEMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 1695 March 2024

The deceased Shahin Parveen was set ablaze by her brother‑in‑law and his relatives, leading to her death. Her dying declaration, recorded at the District Hospital, identified the brother‑in‑law as the principal assailant and named his wife and brother as aides. The trial court and High Court convicted all three accused

P.M. LOKANATH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 2025 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of a property in Bangalore, filed two civil suits to protect their possession and claim ownership. Respondent No.2, a rival heir, lodged an FIR under IPC sections 448 and 506 alleging threats by the appellants to withdraw the suits, leading to a criminal case. The appellants sought quashing of th

PRADEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2024 INSC 215 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Pradeep Kumar was convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Shamsher Singh, based solely on circumstantial evidence and an alleged extra‑judicial confession. The prosecution relied on the testimonies of three key witnesses (PW‑10, PW‑11, PW‑12) and forensic reports tha

GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2019 INSC 13144 December 2019Dismissed

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd., owner of a tug, entered into a six‑month time charter agreement with New Mangalore Port Trust. The Karnataka tax authorities directed the company to register under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, claiming the agreement attracted tax under section 5C, which taxes the transfer of t

MUNNA PANDEYversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2023 INSC 7934 September 2023Disposed off

The appellant Munna Pandey was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a ten‑year‑old girl, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of witnesses whose statements to police were not properly confronted. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court erred in confirming the convi

KOUSIK DAS & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2025 INSC 4484 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, who were in‑service elementary teachers as of 10 August 2017, completed an 18‑month Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) through NIOS under the NCTE’s ODL scheme and applied for recruitment under a 2022 West Bengal notification. The High Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Jaiveer S

DARSHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2024 INSC 194 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Darshan Singh, was convicted of murdering his wife, Amrik Kaur, under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, based on the prosecution's claim that he and his paramour Rani Kaur administered aluminium phosphide poison. The trial and High Courts relied primarily on circumstantial evidence, especially the testimon

PARSHURAMversusSTATE OF M.P.

2023 INSC 9733 November 2023Disposed off

The case arose from a violent clash in a Madhya Pradesh village where the accused, including Parshuram and Jalim Singh, formed an unlawful assembly after a buffalo damaged a shed built by the accused. The assembly allegedly assaulted members of the complainant party, resulting in the death of Madan. The trial court and

TARINA SENversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2024 INSC 7523 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, two women related to a co‑accused, were charged under Sections 120‑B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for alleged loan fraud involving a bank. The borrowers later entered into a One‑Time Settlement with the bank, paid the full amount

KHALSA UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 7513 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab government enacted the Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 to repeal the Khalsa University Act, 2016, singling out Khalsa University among sixteen private universities. The appellants challenged the repeal on the grounds that the Act arbitrarily discriminated against them and violated Article 14 of the Cons

K. BHARTHI DEVI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA AND ANR.

2024 INSC 7503 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were wives of borrowers, were charged by the CBI under sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act for alleged fraud in a bank loan. The borrowers had settled the entire debt through a One Time Settlement and the bank closed the loan account, obtaining a No Dues Certificate. The appella

ARDHENDU KUMAR DASversusTHE STATE OF ODISHA AND ORS.

2022 INSC 6383 June 2022Dismissed

A public‑interest litigation was filed in the Orissa High Court challenging the construction of toilets, drains, electricity rooms and other amenities within the prohibited area of the Shree Jagannath Temple complex, alleging violation of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. The High Co

MAHENDRA SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2022 INSC 6373 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 148, 302 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Bhagat Singh, based primarily on the testimony of Amol Singh (PW6). The Supreme Court examined whether PW6's testimony could be relied upon, applying the three‑tier classification of witnesses (wholly reliable, whol

VALLAL RCKversusM/S SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 6363 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a promoter of M/s Siva Industries, sought withdrawal of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) that had been initiated against the corporate debtor after the Committee of Creditors (CoC) approved a settlement plan with 94.23% voting share. The Resolution Professional filed an application under

BALWANT SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 4823 May 2023Disposed off

Balwant Singh was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in the 1995 bomb blast that killed Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh. A mercy petition on his behalf was filed by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee in 2012, but the petitioner himself never lodged any petition. The petitioner claimed an inordina

RAM KISHAN (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2025 INSC 4413 April 2025Disposed off

The appellants, landowners in Dharuhera village, Haryana, challenged the compensation awarded for their lands acquired under a 2008 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arguing that it should be enhanced to match the higher compensation granted for adjoining villages (Malpura and Kapriwas) acquired under a l

NIKHIL CHANDRA MONDALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2023 INSC 1983 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of murdering his wife, with the prosecution relying primarily on an extra‑judicial confession he allegedly made to three witnesses and on recovered blood‑stained clothes and a knife. The trial court found the witnesses' testimonies contradictory, disbelieved the confession, and rejected the ph

KARAN @ FATIYAversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 1973 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant Karan was convicted under IPC and the POCSO Act for heinous offences and sentenced to death, which the High Court affirmed. While the appeals were pending, the appellant claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, prompting a trial‑court inquiry that established his date of birth as 25‑07‑2002,

UTTAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 6342 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Uttam was convicted under s.302 IPC for allegedly murdering his wife Pushpabai by pouring kerosene on her and setting her ablaze. The conviction rested on two written dying declarations recorded by a Special Executive Magistrate and an Investigating Officer, and two oral dying declarations given to the victim's father

BALLU @ BALRAM @ BALMUKUND AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 2582 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with murder and related offences under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the IPC for the death of Mahesh Sahu, allegedly due to a love‑relation dispute. The trial court acquitted them, finding that the prosecution's circumstantial evidence was unreliable, witnesses were inconsistent, and the chain

THE STATE OF GOA & ANR.versusNAMITA TRIPATHI

2025 INSC 3062 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa filed a complaint alleging that the respondent's professional laundry service operated as a factory without a valid licence, violating the Factories Act, 1948. A Judicial Magistrate First Class issued summons on the basis of the complaint, but the High Court quashed the process, holding that dry‑cleani

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

2020 INSC 2532 March 2020Disposed off

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

GODREJ PROJECTS DEVELOPMENT LIMITEDversusANIL KARLEKAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 1432 February 2025Case Partly allowed

The respondents booked an apartment with Godrej Projects and paid a 20% earnest money deposit as per the Apartment Buyer Agreement. After the developer offered possession in June 2017, the respondents cancelled the purchase citing a market recession and demanded a full refund of Rs.51,12,310 with interest. The NCDRC or

BAINI PRASAD (D) THR. LRS.versusDURGA DEVI

2023 INSC 952 February 2023Dismissed

The respondent, Durga Devi, owned an 11‑biswas land parcel in Kullu and sued the appellant, Baini Prasad, for possession and demolition of a verandah he had constructed on that land in 1986, claiming he believed it to be his own. The trial court ordered demolition and restoration of possession to the respondent; the Fi

KIRANversusRAJKUMAR JIVRAJ JAIN & ANR.

2025 INSC 10671 September 2025Disposed off

The case arose from an FIR filed by Kiran, a member of the Scheduled Caste ‘Mang’, alleging that Rajkumar Jain and others assaulted him, his mother and aunt with an iron rod, used caste‑based slurs and threatened to burn their house after he voted against a candidate. The accused sought anticipatory bail under Section

THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. ETC.versusKALLURI NAGA NARASIMHA ABHIRAM & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 10581 September 2025Disposed off

The State of Telangana and its agencies challenged the High Court's expansion of the definition of ‘local candidate’ under the Telangana Medical & Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, arguing that the definition is prescribed by the Presidential Order issued under Article 371D and the 1983 Act and cannot be altered b

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusRAGHU RAMAKRISHNA RAJU KANUMURU (M.P.)

2022 INSC 6331 June 2022Disposed off

The appellant, operating a resort at Rushikonda Hill, was prohibited by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) from further construction, despite an interim order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court permitting the work. The appellant challenged the NGT orders, arguing that the High Court already had jurisdiction over the same

MOHAMMED KHALID AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA

2024 INSC 1581 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act for allegedly transporting about 80 kg of ganja seized from a vehicle. The prosecution relied on a seizure panchnama, samples sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, and confessions recorded by police officers, but failed to

BERNARD FRANCIS JOSEPH VAZ AND OTHERSversusGOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 31 January 2025Disposed off

The appellants purchased residential plots in Bengaluru between 1995 and 1997, which were later acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) under a preliminary notification dated 29 January 2003. Although possession was taken in 2005, no compensation award was made until a Special Land Acquisit

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusGAGAN NARANG & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 21 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) sought approval from the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) to conduct a tariff‑based competitive bidding for a 28 MW waste‑to‑energy (WTE) project at Narela Bawana, invoking Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Waste to Energy Research & Technology Council c

M/S NARESH POTTERIESversusM/S AARTI INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 11 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Naresh Potteries (appellant) filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M/s Aarti Industries (respondent No.1) for the dishonour of a cheque issued in the appellant's favour. The complaint was filed by the manager, Neeraj Kumar, who held a power of attorney from the sole proprieto

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