SHAILESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. (NOW STATE OF UTTARAKHAND)
2024 INSC 14326 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based on a dying declaration, eyewitness testimony, and the recovery of a weapon, despite serious irregularities in the investigation. The Supreme Court examined the purpose of criminal investigation, the role of the investigating officer, and the interplay be…
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSURENDRA PATWA & ORS
2025 INSC 57225 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The Reserve Bank of India issued Master Directions on Frauds to enable banks to detect and report fraudulent accounts, leading the appellant banks to declare the respondents' accounts fraudulent (an administrative action) and to refer the matter to the CBI, resulting in FIRs and criminal proceedings. The High Courts qu…
MURLIDHAR AGGARWAL (D.) THR. HIS LR. ATUL KUMAR AGGARWALversusMAHENDRA PRATAP KAKAN (D.) THR. LRS. AND ORS.
2025 INSC 56424 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a landlord, sought eviction of a tenant who had occupied a cinema building in Allahabad since 1952 under a ten‑year lease that had long expired. The Prescribed Authority had allowed eviction on the ground of bona‑fide need, noting the landlord's limited income, his crippled son’s dependence, and the tena…
JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS.versusADANI POWER RAJASTHAN LTD. & ANR.
2025 INSC 77023 May 2025Dismissed
The dispute arose from a Coal India notification dated 19‑12‑2017 imposing Evacuation Facility Charges (EFC) on coal dispatches, which the power generator (Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd.) claimed constituted a "change in law" under the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with the Rajasthan distribution companies. The generator …
MD. FIROZ AHMAD KHALIDversusTHE STATE OF MANIPUR & ORS.
2025 INSC 53522 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a Muslim member of the Manipur Bar Council, was appointed to the State Waqf Board under Section 14(1)(b)(iii) of the Wakf Act, 1995. After a former board member (respondent No.3) lost his Bar Council seat, he challenged the appointment, arguing that Explanation II to Section 14(1)(b) only applies to MPs …
KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS KALPATARU PROJECTS INTERNATIONAL LTD.)versusVINOD AND ORS. ETC.
2025 INSC 100419 August 2025Disposed off
The case concerned compensation disputes arising from the erection of transmission towers and power lines under a 400 kV project that traversed four districts in Haryana. Landowners claimed that the compensation awarded by the District Judges and upheld by the High Court was inadequate, while the contractor sought to l…
SUNITA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR
2024 INSC 44817 May 2024Dismissed
The case arose from a POCSO trial in which the Special Judge conducted the proceedings in extreme haste, denying the accused the opportunity to consult counsel, receive documents, and present a defence, and ultimately imposing a death sentence that was set aside by the Patna High Court and a de novo trial ordered. The …
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY NEW DELHIversusOWAIS AMIN @ CHERRY & ORS.
2024 INSC 44717 May 2024Case Partly allowed
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) investigated a terrorist plot in Jammu & Kashmir and filed a chargesheet on 25 September 2019 under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) 1989. The Special Judge, NIA, refused to take cognizance of the conspiracy charge under Section 120‑B of the Ranbir Penal Code because the req…
SATENDER KUMAR ANTILversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.
2025 INSC 90916 July 2025Dismissed
The State of Haryana filed an application seeking modification of a Supreme Court order that required police to serve notices under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, only through the mode prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and not via electronic means such as WhatsApp. …
KUM. SHUBHA @ SHUBHASHANKARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR
2025 INSC 83014 July 2025Dismissed
The appellant A-4, a young woman engaged to B.V. Girish, was unwilling to marry him and confided her grievance to friend A-1, who enlisted cousin A-3 and A-2 to murder the fiancé. The deceased was fatally injured with a steel rod on 3 December 2003; eyewitnesses were later discredited and the case hinged on circumstant…
SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
2024 INSC 26714 March 2024Directions issued
The Supreme Court heard applications arising from the long‑standing illegal mining controversy in Bellary, Chitradurga and Tumkur districts of Karnataka. The petitioners sought directions for demarcating seven mining leases that straddle the Karnataka‑Andhra Pradesh boundary, for the implementation of Reclamation and R…
PARADIP PORT AUTHORITYversusPARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD.
2025 INSC 97112 August 2025
The Paradip Port Authority (formerly Paradip Port Trust) and Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. entered into a 1985 agreement for a captive berth, with tariff rates subject to periodic revision. Dispute arose when the Authority unilaterally increased rates in 1993, leading to arbitration, an appellate authority order, and a High…
STATE OF HARYANAversusMOHD. YUNUS & ORS.
2024 INSC 3412 January 2024Dismissed
Four persons were tried for the killing of Akbar on 9 January 1999. The trial court convicted A1, A2 and A3 under sections 302 and 323 read with section 34 of the IPC, while acquitting them of section 325, and later the High Court altered the convictions, acquitting A1 of 302/34 and A2 of 302/34 but upholding A2's conv…
OM PRAKASH @ ISRAEL @ RAJU @ RAJU DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
2025 INSC 437 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, convicted of culpable homicide amounting to murder for a 1994 incident, claimed he was a minor at the time of the offence, asserting a plea of juvenility under s.9(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Despite earlier courts treating him as an adult based on a bank‑accou…
NAZIM & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
2025 INSC 11846 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerns the murder of a ten‑year‑old boy, Muntiyaz Ali, whose body was found on 6 June 2007. The appellants Nazim, Aftab and Arman were convicted under Sections 302, 201 and 120‑B IPC based largely on the testimony of three prosecution witnesses and circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether …
SARFARAZ ALAMversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2024 INSC 184 January 2024Dismissed
The appellant challenged the validity of a preventive detention order issued under Section 3 of the COFEPOSA Act against the detenue, alleging that the authorities failed to serve the grounds of detention and did not inform him of his right to make a representation as mandated by Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The …