Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

P SATHASIVAM

455 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–400.

ARSHAD HUSSAINversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 47717 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Arshad Hussain, was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of Iqbal, based on the prosecution claim that he fired three shots from a 12‑bore gun after being prompted by his brothers, Mujaffar and Shahjad. The High Court acquitted the brothers on alibi grounds, but uphe

RAJENDRA SHARMAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 47617 July 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a taxi driver, was convicted along with two others for committing dacoity under Sections 395 and 397 of the IPC, as well as offences under the Arms Act and the Explosive Substances Act, after a gold jewellery workshop was looted and the perpetrators fled in two taxis. The trial court sentenced each accus

NAGAPPANversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 47817 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the murder of Pasupathy by four accused (A-1 to A-4) in Tamil Nadu. The trial court convicted all four under IPC s.302 read with s.34 based largely on the testimony of two brothers (PW‑1 and PW‑3) who were relatives of the deceased, and on a post‑mortem report by Dr. PW‑10. The appellant, Nagappan (A‑

JAIPUR SHAHAR HINDU VIKAS SAMITIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2014 INSC 28817 April 2014Dismissed

The Jaipur Shahar Hindu Vikas Samiti filed public interest litigations seeking a declaration that the Galta Peeth/Thikana properties are public trust assets, clarification of succession, and a direction for the State to take over its management. The Rajasthan High Court, noting that the same questions were pending befo

CUSTODIAN OF TEXTILES UNDERTAKING, BOMBAYversusHALL & ANDERSON LTD. & ORS.

2011 INSC 5217 January 2011Dismissed

Hall & Anderson Ltd., originally a departmental store in Calcutta, purchased a textile mill in Bombay in 1950 and later operated both businesses separately. The textile mill was nationalised under the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983 and the Textile Undertaking Nationalisation Act, 1995. The g

ANUP BHUSHAN VOHRAversusTHE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTIA

2011 INSC 69216 September 2011

A local committee staged a satyagraha outside the Jalpaiguri District Court, preventing judges from entering the premises. The Calcutta High Court issued suo motu contempt rules against 16 agitators and several officials, finding them guilty of criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act and sent

STATE OF U. P. & ORS.versusNEERAJ CHAUBEY & ORS.

2010 INSC 61916 September 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Dr. Neeraj Chaubey challenging an advertisement for an Assistant Professor position that required seven years of experience instead of the statutory five years. The Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, instead of listing the petition, issued directions concerni

M/S V.K.M. KATTHA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2013 INSC 53816 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, V.K.M. Kattha Industries Pvt. Ltd., a running industrial unit, challenged a land acquisition notification issued by the Haryana Government under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the development of an industrial estate. The company argued that the notification was not published in the local

COROMANDEL INDAG PRODUCTS (P) LTD.versusGARUDA CHIT & TRADING CO. P. LTD. & ANR.

2011 INSC 57916 August 2011Dismissed

Coromandel Indag Products Ltd. entered into a sale agreement with Garuda Chit & Trading Co. to purchase a property for Rs. 82 lakhs, paying an advance and subsequent installments while the vendor was to furnish title documents and an income‑tax clearance. The vendor supplied the tax clearance but failed to provide a so

HARJINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2010 INSC 51416 August 2010Disposed off

Harjinder Singh was convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh. He appealed to the High Court, but his counsel was absent on the hearing date and no one appeared on his behalf; the High Court nevertheless affirmed the con

MEGHMALA & ORS.versusG. NARASIMHA REDDY & ORS.

2010 INSC 51616 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased land by a registered sale deed dated 21‑May‑1980. The respondents alleged that an earlier agreement to sell the land to a cooperative society in 1976 gave them a right, and they accused the appellants of fraud and land grabbing. A Special Court under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibitio

CHAKALI MADDILETY & ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2010 INSC 51716 August 2010Dismissed

The deceased Harijana Ayyanna was attacked and stabbed by a group of accused (A1‑A7) who were armed with daggers and a stick. The FIR was lodged promptly and named all the accused. Eye‑witnesses, the deceased's son (PW‑1) and wife (PW‑2), testified that the accused surrounded and stabbed the victim, and their statement

M/S. JINDAL STAINLESS LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 21516 April 2010Matter referred to larger bench

The petitioners, including M/s. Jindal Stainless Ltd., challenged the validity of various State entry tax statutes on the ground that they violated Articles 301, 302, 303 and 304 of the Constitution. The Division Bench observed that several High Courts had treated Article 304(a) and 304(b) as independent, concluding th

SANTURAM YADAV AND ANR.versusSECRETARY, KRISHI UPAJ M.S. SEMETARA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 10116 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Santuram Yadav and other daily‑wage workers were employed as Nakedar and, facing removal, entered into a compromise with their employer that provided for reinstatement and seniority from their first appointment. The Labour Court initially awarded reinstatement, but the workers were later dismissed again. Their claim fo

J. SAMUEL AND OTHERSversusGATTU MAHESH AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 3116 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents filed a suit for specific performance of a sale contract, but their plaint omitted the mandatory averment under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act that they were ready and willing to perform. After the trial concluded and the matter was reserved for judgment, they sought to amend the plaint under

MAULANA MOHD. AMIR RASHADIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2012 INSC 3216 January 2012Dismissed

The appellant, president of a political party, alleged that the second respondent, a sitting Member of Parliament, attacked his convoy on 12 August 2009, resulting in one death and one injury. The second respondent was arrested and later filed a bail application, which the High Court granted conditionally despite the a

C. SHAKUNTHALA & ORS.versusH.P. UDAYAKUMAR & ANR.

2012 INSC 2816 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, children and legal representatives of the deceased landlord, filed a contempt petition under Section 11(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that the respondents had abused the process of the court by filing a second application in execution proceedings. The High Court Division Bench on 9 Ju

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusJUJHAR SINGH

2011 INSC 49615 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Jujhar Singh, an army retiree, suffered a severe injury in a road accident while on annual leave in 1987. The Medical Board assessed a 60% disability but expressly held that the injury was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. After superannuation in 1998 he received a normal pension and sought a

STATE OF A.P.versusGOURISHETIY MAHESH & ORS.

2010 INSC 40515 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed against the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s order quashing a criminal proceeding for the alleged transport of 5,040 kg of black jaggery intended for illicit liquor production. The police seized the jaggery, and a chemical examiner reported it was fit for fermentation producing alcohol u

MUTHU KARUPPANversusPARITHI LLAMVAZHUTHI AND ANR.

2011 INSC 30315 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose when an elected MLA, Parithi Llamvazhuthi, was granted conditional bail to take oath in the Tamil Nadu Assembly, but an application filed by Inspector Rajendra Kumar sought cancellation of that bail on the basis of a false statement that the MLA was in police custody. The MLA alleged that the Commissione

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusANIL KUMAR SARKAR

2013 INSC 16615 March 2013Dismissed

The respondent, a senior accounts officer in the North‑East Frontier Railway, was placed on the extended select panel for promotion to Group A (Junior Scale) by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) in February 2002. When his batch‑mates were promoted on 21‑April‑2003, he was not promoted. He claimed that the DPC’

JITENDRA RAGHUVANSHI & ORS.versusBABITA RAGHUVANSHI & ANR.

2013 INSC 16415 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act after a matrimonial dispute. While the criminal case was pending, the parties reached a mutual settlement, and the complainant wife filed an affidavit supporting the settlement. The trial court rejected the application to d

NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORP. LTD.versusHARMEET SINGH PAINTAL AND ANR.

2010 INSC 9815 February 2010Dismissed

The appellant, National Small Industries Corporation Ltd., filed criminal complaints under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the managing director and a director of the defendant company for dishonoured cheques. The High Court quashed the summoning orders against the director(s

AJMER SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2009 INSC 19115 February 2009Dismissed

Ajmer Singh was apprehended by police who, after giving him a choice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, searched his bag and recovered 500 g of charas. He was convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS Act. On appeal he argued that the search violated Section 50, that the prosecution’s evidence lacked independent witnesses,

RAM VISWASversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2012 INSC 61314 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Ram Viswas, was convicted of murdering his wife by pouring kerosene on her and setting her ablaze. The victim, Maladeep, gave a dying declaration naming her husband as the perpetrator, which was recorded by a Naib Tahsildar after medical certification of her fitness to testify. The appellant challenged t

KUMAR ETC. ETC.versusKARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL COOP. BANK LTD. & ANR.

2012 INSC 61414 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka Industrial Co-operative Bank alleged that the appellants obtained loans by pledging fake gold ornaments and secured convictions in a criminal revision proceeding. The trial court had acquitted the appellants, but the High Court, exercising its revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC

CHANDRADHOJA SAHOOversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 61714 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Chandradhoja Sahoo, claimed to be a landless person who was granted a lease of two acres of surplus government land in 1979, but the Record of Rights was never corrected. The State of Orissa alleged that the 1979 case file, including the lease order, was forged and that the land, recorded as "kanta jungl

TULSHIRAM SAHADU SURYAWANSHI & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 40114 September 2012Dismissed

The appellants, a married couple and their son, were convicted for the murder of the son's wife, who was allegedly killed by being tied with a saree border and thrown into a well over a dowry demand. The trial court and High Court upheld convictions under IPC sections 302, 304B, 498A read with section 34, based solely

MUSTAFA SHAHADAL SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 40314 September 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Mustafa Shahadal Shaikh, was convicted for the dowry death of his wife, who committed suicide by poisoning within seven months of marriage. The prosecution relied on the testimony of the deceased's close relatives, who detailed repeated harassment and demands for dowry by the appellant and his family, in

SHYAMRAO MAROTI KORWATEversusDEEPAK KISANRAO TEKAM

2010 INSC 60914 September 2010Case Partly allowed

After the mother died shortly after giving birth, the child was placed with his maternal grandfather, who applied for guardianship under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. The father also filed a petition for custody under the same Act. The District Judge appointed the grandfather as guardian until the child turned 12,

ABDUL SAYEEDversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2010 INSC 60814 September 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Chand Khan and his son Shabir Khan, for which five appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds that no charge under Section 34 was framed, that the injuries could not be linked to them due to co

M/S. SPEEDLINE AGENCIESversusM/S. T. STANES & CO. LTD.

2010 INSC 32614 May 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Speedline Agencies, occupied a building and land leased from United Coffee Supply Co. Ltd., later renamed Stanes Tea and Coffee Ltd., for over four decades. The landlord filed a petition under sections 10(3)(a)(i) and (iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 seeking eviction f

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusKAMAL AHMED MOHAMMED VAKIL ANSARI & ORS.

2013 INSC 16214 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned two separate prosecutions arising from the July 2006 Mumbai suburban train bomb blasts. In Special Case No. 21 of 2006, the accused‑respondents sought to summon four Deputy Commissioners of Police (who had recorded confessional statements of three other accused in a later Special Case No. 4 of 2009)

KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATIONversusVINCENT PAUL & ANR.

2011 INSC 20414 March 2011Disposed off

The Kerala Financial Corporation (KFC) took over a defaulting borrower under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 and invited tenders for the sale of the borrower’s assets. Vincent Paul submitted the sole tender, paid earnest money and was later offered a price of Rs. 8.25 lakh subject to conditions

B.N. SHIVANNAversusADVANTA INDIA LIMITED & ANR.

2011 INSC 20214 March 2011Dismissed

The appellant, advocate B.N. Shivanna, was retained by Advanta India Ltd. and allegedly fabricated High Court orders and embezzled Rs 72 lakhs by misusing his position. The Karnataka High Court suo motu and on the company’s complaint initiated criminal contempt proceedings, convicted him and sentenced him to six months

BANSI LALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 12014 February 2011Dismissed

Bansi Lal was convicted under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 306 of the IPC for the suicide of his wife Sarla, who had left the matrimonial home after a year of marriage, stayed with her parents for 14 months, and returned following a panchayat assurance. The prosecution proved a consistent demand for a scooter by the accus

R.L. KALATHIA & CO.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2011 INSC 4714 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The partnership firm R.L. Kalathia & Co. was awarded a contract by the Gujarat State Government to construct the Fulzer Dam. During execution, the Executive Engineer ordered several additions and alterations, for which the contractor performed extra work and later submitted a consolidated claim. The contractor accepted

SUMIT MEHTAversusSTATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

2013 INSC 61513 September 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Sumit Mehta, was charged under IPC sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 and the Delhi High Court granted him anticipatory bail on the condition that he deposit a fixed deposit of Rs 1 crore in the complainant's name. Mehta appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that the condition was unreasonable, unrelated

A.C. NARAYANANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2013 INSC 61213 September 2013Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be filed and verified by a power of attorney holder on behalf of the payee or holder in due course. The appellant, a company director, challenged the issuance of process based on complaints filed by a power of attorne

RESURGENCE INDIAversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR.

2013 INSC 61713 September 2013Disposed off

Resurgence India, an NGO, observed that many candidates in the 2007 Punjab Legislative Assembly elections filed affidavits with blank entries for criminal, asset and educational details, violating the spirit of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petition sought a direction that Returning Officers must reje

SANDUR MANGANESE & IRON ORES LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2010 INSC 60313 September 2010Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the renewal and re‑grant of mining leases for iron and manganese ores in Karnataka. Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd. and MSPL Ltd. challenged the Karnataka State Government’s recommendation to grant a mining lease to Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd. and Kalyani Steels Ltd., arguing that the recommendat

LALU PRASAD @ LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2013 INSC 53313 August 2013Dismissed not complying condition order

The appellant, Lalu Prasad Yadav, sought transfer of the fodder‑scam criminal trial from the Special Judge (CBI) to another court, alleging that the judge was biased because of a familial link to a political rival. The Supreme Court examined the long‑running case, noting that the trial had been ongoing since 1997 and w

MADAN MOHAN SINGH AND ORS.versusRAJNI KANT AND ANR.

2010 INSC 51313 August 2010Dismissed

The dispute concerned the inclusion of Rajni Kant and Anjani Kumar as heirs of the late Chandra Deo Singh in land records (khata) under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. The respondents claimed they were legitimate children born out of a long‑standing live‑in relationship between the deceas

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusKAMLA VERMA

2010 INSC 51113 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over a parcel of land in Lucknow Cantonment that had been granted to a civilian on "old grant" (cantonment tenure) terms in 1948 and later sold to the respondent, Kamla Verma, in 1996. The respondent sought de‑hiring of the premises, claiming ownership, but the government argued tha

ARULMIGHU DHANDAYUDHAPANISWAMY THIRUKOIL, PALANI, TAMIL NADU, THR. ITS JOINT COMMISSIONERversusTHE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POST OFFICES, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS & ORS.

2011 INSC 48913 July 2011Dismissed

The ancient Arulmigu Dhandayuthapani Swamy Temple deposited Rs.1,40,64,300 under the Post Office Time Deposit Scheme in 1995, but the scheme had been discontinued for institutions effective 1 April 1995. The Post Master later refunded the amount without interest, prompting the temple to claim interest as a deficiency i

BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LTD. ETC.versusM/S. V.G. QUENIM & ORS.

2012 INSC 17113 April 2012Disposed off

Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. and related companies filed multiple recovery suits against the respondents and sought various interim injunctions. The respondents gave an undertaking not to part with certain shares, a bungalow, and mining machinery, but later demolished the bungalow, prompting the appellants to file furth

LIFE CONVICT BENGAL @ KHOKA @ PRASANTA SENversusB.K. SRIVASTAVA & ORS.

2013 INSC 10113 February 2013Dismissed

The petitioner, a life convict sentenced under IPC s.302/34, filed a contempt petition claiming that, having served over 20 years with remission, he was entitled to release under the West Bengal Correctional Services Act and a Supreme Court order. The State of West Bengal, through its Sentence Review Board, declined to

AWANI KUMAR UPADHYAYversusTHE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AND ORS.

2013 INSC 10213 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Awani Kumar Upadhyay, an Additional District & Sessions Judge, challenged severe strictures placed against him by the Allahabad High Court in a second appeal judgment, which also directed that the remarks be sent to the Chief Justice for possible disciplinary action. He filed a modification application to have the rema

RAMESH KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 4113 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Kumar was appointed on a casual basis as a Mali in the Haryana Public Works Department in December 1991 and was terminated on 31 January 1993 without any notice or retrenchment compensation. He claimed that he had worked more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months, invoking the protection of Section 25F of the

DEOKI PANJHIYARAversusSHASHI BHUSHAN NARAYAN AZAD & ANR.

2012 INSC 58612 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The husband filed a writ petition challenging the interim maintenance granted to his wife under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, alleging that she was already married to another man, as evidenced by a marriage certificate under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The trial court rejec

DR. MOHAMMAD KHALIL CHISTIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 58412 December 2012Disposed off

The case arose from a 1992 altercation in Ajmer that resulted in the death of Idris and injuries to several persons, leading to two FIRs (cross‑FIRs). The trial court convicted four accused (Yasir, Khalil, Akil and Farukh) under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonmen

LALITA KUMARIversusGOVT. OF U.P. AND ORS.

2013 INSC 74812 November 2013Reference answered

The Constitution Bench examined whether a police officer must register a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) upon receiving information of a cognizable offence, or may first conduct a preliminary inquiry to test its veracity. Relying on the literal meaning of

MURUGESAN AND ORS.versusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2012 INSC 46712 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted 23 accused of charges including criminal conspiracy (s.120B IPC) and murder (s.302 IPC) based on inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony, a doubtful dying declaration, and lack of corroborative evidence. The Madras High Court reversed the acquittal of 19 accused, convicting them on the same ch

BABY DEVASSY CHULLY @ BOBBYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2012 INSC 46812 October 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Bobby, was arrested for alleged diesel oil smuggling and granted bail on 12 April 2005, which he did not avail, remaining in custody when a preventive detention order was issued under COFEPOSA on 3 May 2005. He challenged the order by filing a writ petition under Article 226, which the Bombay High Court

STATE OF U.P.versusMUNESH

2012 INSC 47012 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Munesh, who was charged with raping and murdering an 11‑year‑old girl. The trial court had convicted him under Sections 302 and 376 of the IPC, but the High Court set aside the conviction, citing contradictions in the statements of two eye‑witnesses (PWs 2 and 3) and

JAKIA NASIM AHESAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2011 INSC 67112 September 2011Disposed off

The appellant, whose husband was killed in the 2002 Gulberg Society riots, filed a writ petition under Article 226 and Section 482 CrPC seeking registration of a private complaint as an FIR and investigation by an independent agency. The High Court dismissed the petition, directing the appellant to use the remedies und

RAM MEHAR SINGHversusSTATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ORS.

2011 INSC 57712 August 2011Disposed off

The case arose from a dispute over immovable property in which the police, invoking Sections 107 and 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), detained the writ petitioners for a day. The petitioners filed writ petitions alleging illegal detention and violation of their fundamental rights; the Delhi High Court quas

RAJINDER SINGH PATHANIA & ORS.versusSTATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS.

2011 INSC 57812 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition in which two police constables and a head constable were accused of illegal detention after they booked two intoxicated individuals under Sections 107 and 151 of the Cr.P.C. and sent them to judicial custody for failing to furnish bail bonds. The Delhi High Court had quashed t

KISHAN SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS.versusGURPAL SINGH & ORS.

2010 INSC 50912 August 2010Disposed off

The dispute arose from two agreements to sell the same parcel of land, leading to parallel civil suits for specific performance. The appellant's father, after losing the civil suit, filed an FIR alleging forgery of the earlier agreement and the respondents obtained a quashing order from the High Court, which relied on

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S. KRAFTERS ENGINEERING & LEASING (P) LTD.

2011 INSC 48312 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged an arbitral award that granted interest on amounts payable to M/s. Krafters Engineering & Leasing (P) Ltd. under a works contract, arguing that Clause 1.15 of the General Conditions expressly prohibited any interest on such amounts. The High Court had upheld the award, but the Supreme Cour

ALLAHABAD HIGH SCHOOL SOCIETY ALLAHABAD & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 39212 May 2011Dismissed

The Allahabad High School Society amended its Rules, Constitution and Bye‑laws on 28 May 2007 and registered the changes on 30 May 2007. The Assistant Registrar, exercising powers under Section 12D(b) of the U.P. Societies Registration Act, 1860, cancelled the registration, finding that the amendments were made arbitra

B. KOTHANDAPANIversusTAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.

2011 INSC 39312 May 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a foreman, suffered partial loss of eyesight and amputation of a finger in a motor vehicle accident caused by the negligence of a state transport corporation driver. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him a total compensation of Rs.5,05,053.45, including Rs.1,50,000 for permanent disability. The

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.versusM/S JAGANNATH & CO. & ORS.

2013 INSC 25012 April 2013Dismissed

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) terminated the dealership licence of Jagannath & Co. after a routine inspection in August 2005, alleging that samples of motor spirit and diesel failed quality tests. The dealer contested the termination, arguing that the sampling and testing procedures violated the 2005 Marketi

SUDIPTA LENKAversusSTATE OF ODISHA AND ORS.

2014 INSC 18712 March 2014Disposed off

A contractual government teacher in Odisha was sexually harassed by a Sub‑Inspector of Schools, lodged multiple complaints, and was later set ablaze, dying from her injuries. The petitioner, a law student, filed a writ under Article 32 seeking transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) a

RAMSWAROOP AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2013 INSC 15212 March 2013Dismissed

The deceased's cows damaged the plaintiffs' crops, leading to a heated altercation during which the accused formed an unlawful assembly, entered the victim's house and assaulted him with lathis and a lethal weapon, causing fatal injuries. The victim's mother, an injured eyewitness, identified the appellants as the pers

BAKSHISH RAM & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 15712 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the alleged dowry death of Surinder Kaur, who was burnt to death allegedly by her husband Bakshish Ram and his parents. The prosecution relied primarily on the testimony of the deceased's mother, who recounted hearsay statements made by the deceased's father about dowry harassment. The trial court an

DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 77011 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, Neeru Gupta, committed suicide in 1985 and her brother filed a complaint alleging dowry demand and ill‑treatment by her husband and in‑laws. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding no proof of dowry demand or cruelty and noting the deceased suffered from mental illness. The High Court reversed the

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusJEEV RAJ & ORS.

2011 INSC 57611 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan sought to cancel a 1969 order by the Public Health and Engineering Department (PHED) that restored 460.15 bighas of agricultural land to the respondents, arguing that PHED lacked authority under the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act to grant land. The respondents contended that the order was valid and t

BABUversusSTATE OF KERALA

2010 INSC 49511 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Babu was charged under IPC s.302 for allegedly murdering his wife by giving her sodium cyanide disguised as an ayurvedic contraceptive. The trial court acquitted him due to lack of direct evidence and doubts about the prosecution's version, but the Kerala High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted hi

SAQUIB ABDUL HAMEED NACHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 49911 August 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a confession or statement recorded under Section 32 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) can be used as substantive evidence against co‑accused. The Bombay High Court Full Bench had held that such a confession could not be substantive evidence against co‑accused but could b

VENTURE GLOBAL ENGINEERINGversusSATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LTD. AND ANOTHER.

2010 INSC 50111 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Venture Global Engineering, a US‑based company, entered into a joint‑venture with Satyam Computer Services Ltd. (the first respondent) and later obtained an arbitral award ordering it to transfer its shares in the joint venture to Satyam. After the award, Satyam’s chairman confessed to massive financial fraud, leading

CHANDRA KUMAR CHOPRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 23111 May 2012Dismissed

Major Chandra Kumar Chopra was tried by a General Court Martial under the Army Act, 1950 for three offences involving fraud, misuse of Leave Travel Concession and improper use of a railway warrant. He challenged the composition of the court martial, alleging bias because he had lodged a statutory complaint against the

FLG. OFFICER RAJIV GAKHARversusMS. BHAVANA @ SAHAR WASIF

2011 INSC 38011 May 2011Dismissed

The appellant, an Indian Air Force pilot, married the respondent at an Arya Samaj temple after being told she was a Hindu spinster. He later discovered she had previously converted to Islam, married a Muslim, had two children, and divorced, but claimed she had reconverted to Hinduism through Shudhikaran ceremonies befo

VIMALESHWAR NAGAPPA SHETversusNOOR AHMED SHERIFF & ORS.

2011 INSC 38111 May 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Vimaleshwar Nagappa Shet, bought a dwelling house from several co‑sharers of a deceased owner but the agreement of sale did not include the minor grandson (Defendant No. 3). The minor did not join the sale and later offered to purchase the 9/11 share, prompting the High Court to fix a market value and di

K.A. ABBASversusSABU JOSEPH & ANR.

2010 INSC 31011 May 2010Disposed off

K.A. Abbas was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a bounced cheque and was sentenced to one year imprisonment with a direction to pay Rs 5 lakhs compensation to the complainant under Section 357(3) of the CrPC, with a default imprisonment of two months for non‑payment. He paid par

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA

2010 INSC 30611 May 2010Directions issued

The Madras Bar Association challenged the constitutional validity of the National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005 and the provisions of Article 323B (and Article 3238) of the Constitution, arguing that the Act undermines the basic structure by creating a parallel tribunal system under executive control. The petition also contes

GOVINDAPPA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2010 INSC 31211 May 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of three accused (A-1, A-2 and A-4) for cruelty to a woman under IPC s.498‑A read with s.34 and murder under s.302 read with s.34. The deceased, Renuka, was burned after the accused poured kerosene on her and set her alight. Her dying declaration was recorded by a taluk magistrat

KULVINDER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 29011 April 2011Dismissed

Kulvinder Singh and Jasvinder Singh were convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the killing of Amardeep. The prosecution relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence: a motive arising from a prior quarrel, the accused’s presence near the victim before the crime, witnesses hearing shrieks and seeing the

KULDIP YADAV & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 28611 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from two FIRs (11/97 and 12/97) lodged on 28‑29 April 1997 concerning a violent incident in which a man named Suresh Yadav died and several others were injured. Eleven accused were charged under IPC sections 302, 324 and 149 and were convicted by the trial court, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On

SUNITA KUMARI KASHYAPversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2011 INSC 29111 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-wife alleged that her husband and in‑laws subjected her to dowry‑related cruelty and forced her to leave the matrimonial home in Ranchi and return to her parental home in Gaya. She filed an FIR in Gaya under IPC sections 498A, 406 r/w 34 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The High Court quashed t

BUDH SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2013 INSC 14411 March 2013Dismissed

Budh Singh was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of Section 32A of the NDPS Act, which bars any remission of sentence for convicts

VIJAYANDER KUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2014 INSC 8911 February 2014Dismissed

The appellants, directors of a textile firm, were accused by a supplier (informant) of fraudulently transferring company assets and issuing post‑dated cheques that later bounced, leading to an FIR under Sections 420 and 120‑B IPC. The police concluded the matter was civil, but the magistrate rejected this view and took

MOHD. IMRAN KHANversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2011 INSC 73610 October 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by Mohd. Imran Khan and Jamal Ahmed against their conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC. The Court held that the prosecutrix, Monika, was a minor (under 16) at the time of the offence, based on her birth certificate and the acknowledged margin of error in radiological age estimate

VILAS PANDURANG PAWAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 38610 September 2012Dismissed

The complainant, Savita Madhav Akhade, alleged that she and her family were insulted and assaulted on caste grounds by Vilas Pandurang Pawar and others, leading to an FIR under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The accused applied for anticipatory

M/S. REAL ESTATE AGENCIESversusGOVT. OF GOA & ORS.

2012 INSC 38710 September 2012Disposed off

The petitioners, a real‑estate partnership, claimed ownership of a 19,250 sq m open space in Miramar, Goa, based on a 1977 deed and sought a writ to restrain the Government of Goa and the Panaji Municipal Corporation from undertaking developmental works on the land. The High Court dismissed the writ, directing the peti

ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYOOM ANSARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2010 INSC 60210 September 2010Dismissed

Abu Salem, an absconding accused in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, was arrested in Portugal and extradited to India under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the Indian Extradition Act, 1962 (applied to Portugal by a 2002 notification). Portugal granted extradition for certain offen

SUSHIL KUMAR SINGHALversusTHE REGIONAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

2010 INSC 49310 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant, a peon of Punjab National Bank, was convicted under Section 409 IPC for embezzling Rs 5,000 and was dismissed from service. While his criminal appeal upheld the conviction, the appellate court released him on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The bank dismissed him under Section 10(1)

BALRAJE @ TRIMBAKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 30210 May 2010Dismissed

Balraje (appellant) was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for inflicting a knife blow to the chest of Kailas, resulting in his death. The prosecution relied on eye‑witness testimony of the deceased's son (PW‑1), wife (PW‑2) and a neighbour (PW‑4), who identified Balraje as the assailant. The defence argued that

MONIRUDDIN AHMED @ LALU DEALER & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 30310 May 2010Dismissed

On 21 October 1982, the appellants, armed with spears, axes and bombs, attacked an informant and his associates, chasing them through paddy fields. Eye‑witnesses PW7, PW8, PW9 and PW12 testified that the appellants threw bombs and that appellant No.1 (Moniruddin Ahmed @ Lalu Dealer) struck the deceased with a spear, ca

K V.S. RAOversusC.B.I & ORS

2014 INSC 18010 March 2014Case Allowed

The petitioners sought transfer of two criminal proceedings pending in the Special Court, Lucknow, to the Special Court, Delhi, arguing that the cases were similar in nature and that most witnesses were medical officers, with the ultimate decision taken at the ministerial level in Delhi. The CBI opposed the transfer, c

POOJA BHATIAversusVISHNU NARAIN SHIVPURI & ANR.

2014 INSC 17910 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Vishnu Narayan Shivpuri was charged under IPC sections 342, 326‑8 and 506 for allegedly throwing sulphuric acid on his wife, Pooja Bhatia. The Sessions Court denied his bail, but the High Court later released him on bail. After his release, the Superintendent of Police submitted a counter‑affidavit stating that Shivpur

PRATIMA CHOWDHURYversusKALPANA MUKHERJEE & ANR.

2014 INSC 8710 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Pratima Chowdhury, a member of a West Bengal cooperative housing society, sought to transfer her flat and membership to Kalpana Mukherjee, claiming the transfer was a gift without consideration. The arbitrator found the transfer invalid, noting that the letters effecting the transfer were likely drafted by Partha Mukhe

DIPAK SHUBHASHCHANDRA MEHTAversusC.B.I. AND ANR.

2012 INSC 8510 February 2012Disposed off

The appellant, a joint managing director of a large export company, was arrested in 2010 on several economic offences alleged by multiple banks and the CBI. After a prolonged period of custody, intermittent interim bail on medical grounds, and the filing of charge sheets without framing of charges, the High Court rejec

V.S. ACHUTHANANDANversusR. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI & ORS.

2011 INSC 11610 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the award of a hydro‑electric project contract by the Kerala State Electricity Board to K.P. Poulose at rates far above the probable amount, allegedly facilitated by Minister R. Balakrishna Pillai, a Board member and a close associate. The prosecution proved that the Minister, the Board member and an

HARDEEP SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2014 INSC 2110 January 2014

The Supreme Court examined the scope of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which empowers a court to proceed against persons not originally accused if evidence shows their involvement. It held that the power can be exercised at any time after the charge‑sheet is filed and before judgment, provided the

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusMADHAV PRASAD SHARMA

2011 INSC 2510 January 2011Case Partly allowed

Madhav Prasad Sharma, a police constable, was absent without authorized leave for 101 days and was subsequently terminated from service. He appealed the termination, which was rejected by the DIG, and then obtained a writ order from the High Court Single Judge quashing the termination on the ground that he had been sub

C.K. JAFFER SHARIEFversusSTATE (THROUGH CBI)

2012 INSC 5179 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

C.K. Jaffer Sharief, then Union Railway Minister, was accused of having the Managing Directors of RITES and IRCON approve the travel of four persons to London for his medical treatment, allegedly causing pecuniary loss to the PSUs. The FIR alleged that the journeys were arranged without any public interest and that the

SHANTIBHAI J. VAGHELA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2012 INSC 5189 November 2012Dismissed

Two minor children residing in a Gurukul (ashram) went missing and were later found dead in the Sabarmati river. An FIR was lodged against seven ash​ram inmates under Section 304 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act and other offences. The High Court quashed the FIR in

EX-HAV. SATBIR SINGHversusTHE CHIEF OF THE ARMY STAFF, NEW DELHI & ANR.

2012 INSC 5149 November 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a Havildar in the Indian Army, was discharged on 1 April 1995 after a show‑cause notice alleging four "Red Ink Entries" in his service record. He challenged the discharge in the Delhi High Court, which set aside the termination but ordered his reinstatement without salary or other allowances for the peri

MALAYALAM PLANTATIONS LTD.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 7619 November 2010Case Partly allowed

Malayalam Plantations Ltd., a private plantation company, owned five estates in Kerala and sought exemption of 2,588 hectares of land from the vesting provisions of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971, on the grounds that the land was planted with eucalyptus before vesting and used for firewoo

G. REDDEIAHversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2011 INSC 6699 September 2011Dismissed

The appellant, G. Reddeiah, brother‑in‑law of R. Sreenivasulu, challenged a preventive detention order issued under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986, which was passed on 12 November 2010 after the detenue had been released on bail. The detenue was alleged to have repeatedly felled, cut an

CANTONMENT BOARD, JAMMU & ORS.versusJAGAT PAL SINGH CHEEMA

2012 INSC 3289 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Jagat Pal Singh Cheema, a Section Officer of the Cantonment Board, Jammu, was removed from service following a departmental inquiry. The Board later reconsidered the decision, and its President referred the matter to the Officer Commanding‑in‑Chief (OCIC) under Section 51 of the Cantonments Act, 1924. The OCIC issued a

SAEED ZAKIR HUSSAIN MALIKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 3299 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Saeed Zakir Hussain Malik, challenged a preventive detention order issued under COFEPOSA against his brother, alleging that the order was passed 15 months after the alleged offence and was served 14.5 months later, violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The Supreme Court examined whether such delay

PHOOL KUMARIversusOFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL JAIL, TIHAR, NEW DELHI AND ANR.

2012 INSC 3319 August 2012Disposed off

Phool Kumari was convicted under IPC sections 323, 342, 307 and 34 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, later reduced to five years. While incarcerated in Tihar Central Jail she was assigned work as a Sewadar in the Medical Inspection room. She claimed wages for the work done, but the prison superintendent and a vis

LAKHANversusSTATE OF M.P.

2010 INSC 4899 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Lakhan, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly burning his wife, Savita. Two dying declarations were recorded: the first by an Executive Magistrate stating the death was accidental, and the second by a police ASI accusing the appellant of pouring kerosene and setting her alight. The trial and

ATBIRversusGOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

2010 INSC 4919 August 2010Dismissed

The appellants Atbir and Ashok were convicted for the murder of three members of their step‑mother's family, based solely on the dying declaration of the surviving victim, Sonu (Savita), recorded by a police officer in the presence of a doctor. The Supreme Court held that the declaration was reliable, made in a fit sta

CHANDRAN RATNASWAMIversusK.C. PALANISAMY AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 3349 May 2013Disposed off

The dispute arose from a joint venture agreement in which the appellant, Chandran Ratnaswami, alleged that the respondent, K.C. Palanisamy, misappropriated Rs.75 crore and transferred assets improperly. The matter was finally resolved by the Company Law Board and upheld by the Madras High Court, which ordered repayment

NIMMAGADDA PRASADversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 3299 May 2013Dismissed

The Central Bureau of Investigation filed a case against MP Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy and 73 others, including Nimmagadda Prasad, under IPC sections 420, 409, 477‑A and the Prevention of Corruption Act for alleged land allocation, illegal gratification, hawala transactions and other economic offences. After the charge‑she

Y.S. JAGAN MOHAN REDDYversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 3319 May 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered the bail application of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, accused in a massive economic offence case involving alleged corruption, land allotments, and money laundering under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CBI had filed multiple charge sheets and reported that investigations into s

ANAMIKA ROYversusJATINDRA CHOWRASIYA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 3279 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-landlady, Anamika Roy, filed a suit under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 seeking eviction of the tenant, Jatindra Chowrasiya, on the ground of bona‑fide personal requirement of the entire ground‑floor flat. Both the trial court and the first appellate court decreed eviction of the whole premis

KUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 3289 May 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Kumar, was convicted for raping his sister‑in‑law and then murdering her and her 13‑month‑old daughter by setting them on fire. The prosecution’s case rested on an extra‑judicial confession made by the accused to a neighbour (PW‑2), corroborated by the neighbour’s testimony, statements of other witnesses

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusV. VIJAY SAI REDDY

2013 INSC 3339 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed an appeal seeking cancellation of bail granted to V. Vijay Sai Reddy (A‑2) in a case involving alleged conspiracy, fraud and corruption under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Court had granted bail, and the High Court affirmed it, but the Supreme

O.P. SHARMA & ORS.versusHIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

2011 INSC 3679 May 2011Disposed off

Advocates O.P. Sharma and others verbally abused and threatened a Judicial Magistrate in a Faridabad court, using filthy language and slogans. The High Court, acting suo motu, convicted them of criminal contempt under s.2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and sentenced them to simple imprisonment and fine. The adv

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAIversusTHOMAS MATHEW & ORS.

2012 INSC 1679 April 2012Dismissed

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai issued notices under Section 314 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, directing occupants to remove patra structures on footpaths; after non‑compliance it demolished the structures and later issued another notice to demolish a reconstructed building. The occupants c

STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.versusMAMATA MOHANTY

2011 INSC 1139 February 2011Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a group of appeals challenging High Court orders that granted UGC pay‑scale benefits to lecturers appointed in aided colleges without meeting the statutory eligibility of 54% marks in their Master's degree and without following the prescribed advertisement procedure. The Court held that appoi

RAVI KUMARversusJULMIDEVI

2010 INSC 929 February 2010Dismissed

The husband filed a divorce petition on the grounds of cruelty and desertion; the trial court granted the decree, but the High Court, exercising its power under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, set aside the decree. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the High Court, as the first appellate court, may re‑appreci

MRS. ANITA MALHOTRAversusAPPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL & ANR.

2011 INSC 7898 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Anita Malhotra, a former non‑executive director of Lapareil Exports (P) Ltd., resigned on 31‑08‑1998. In 2004 the company issued cheques that were later dishonoured, and the Apparel Export Promotion Council filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, naming Malhotra as accused director. Malho

T.C. GUPTA & ANR.versusHARI OM PRAKASH & ORS.

2013 INSC 6948 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents challenged the acquisition of their land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Punjab & Haryana High Court ordered the state officials (appellants) to furnish names of landowners whose lands were released without filing objections under Section 5A. The appellants mistakenly supplied information abou

DULCINA FERNANDES & ORS.versusJOAQUIM XAVIER CRUZ & ANR.

2013 INSC 6958 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Nicolau Fernandes was killed when his scooter was struck by a pick‑up van driven by Joaquim Xavier Cruz on 29 June 1997. His wife and daughters filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which assessed compensation of Rs 6,66,041.78 b

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

2013 INSC 6998 October 2013Disposed off

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Election Commission of India (ECI) to incorporate a voter‑verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) in electronic voting machines (EVMs) to allow voters to confirm their votes. The High Court dismissed the petition, prompting an ap

SUSHIL SHARMAversusTHE STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

2013 INSC 6908 October 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Sushil Sharma, was convicted of murdering his wife Naina Sahni and conspiring with an employee, A2, to burn her body in the tandoor of his restaurant. The prosecution proved the murder and the disposal of the body through a chain of circumstantial evidence, forensic analysis, and the recovery of the appe

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND & ORS.

2013 INSC 6888 October 2013Disposed off

The National Federation of the Blind filed a writ petition seeking enforcement of Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, alleging that the Union failed to provide the mandated 3% reservation for persons with disabilities, especially the blind and low‑vision categories. The High Court directed modificati

GURBUX SINGHversusHARMINDER KAUR

2010 INSC 6898 October 2010Dismissed

The appellant, a principal of an ITI college, filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 alleging cruelty by his wife, primarily citing an incident on the Lohri festival where she verbally abused his elderly parents. The trial court and the High Court dismissed the petition, finding t

D.R. RATHNA MURTHYversusRAMAPPA

2010 INSC 6968 October 2010Dismissed

The appellant purchased a plot of land on 23 April 1986 and sold it the next day to the respondent by a registered sale deed. In 1991-92 the appellant claimed the deed was conditional, asserting that the word "Avadhi" and a clause allowing repurchase within ten years had been inserted after execution. The trial court,

KAMMANA SAMBAMURTHY (D) BY LRS.versusKALIPATNAPU ATCHUTAMMA (D) AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6978 October 2010Dismissed

The vendee, Kammana Sambamurthy, entered into a sale agreement with the vendor, Kalipatnapu Kamaraju, for an entire house, paying an advance of Rs.10,000. The vendor's wife, Kalipatnapu Atchutamma, later claimed a half‑share in the property under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act and sought cancellation of the agr

HAR NARAIN (DEAD) BY LRS.versusMAM CHAND (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 7008 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the legal representatives of the deceased Har Narain, entered into an agreement for sale of eight kanals of land with the owner, Mam Chand, who later executed a sale deed in favour of respondents 2‑6 on 2 August 1971. The deed was registered on 3 September 1971, after the appellant had filed a suit for s

OMPRAKASH VERMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

2010 INSC 6918 October 2010Dismissed

The appellants challenged the validity of the State's allocation of land in Survey No. 83 under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, arguing that the land was agricultural and that the earlier High Court judgments declaring the proceedings void should stand. The Supreme Court examined whether the doctrine

MANJAPPA & ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2010 INSC 5838 September 2010Dismissed

The appellants were charged with kidnapping a 13‑year‑old girl, taking her to Bombay, and selling her for prostitution, violating IPC sections 366A, 372, 373 read with section 34. The trial court convicted two of the accused and acquitted the third; the State appealed, leading the Karnataka High Court to set aside the

DHARMARTH TRUST J & K JAMMU & ORS.versusDINESH CHANDER NANDA

2010 INSC 5848 September 2010Dismissed

The architect Dinesh Chander Nanda sued the Dharmarth Trust for professional fees after the Trust terminated his services. The Trust contended that the suit was governed by Article 56 of the Jammu and Kashmir Limitation Act, 1995 and was therefore time‑barred, while the lower courts held it fell under the residuary Art

KAMLESH VERMAversusMAYAWATI AND ORS.

2013 INSC 5268 August 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court reviewed a petition filed by Kamlesh Verma seeking a review of its July 6, 2012 order that quashed FIR No. RC 0062003A0019 against Mayawati, finding that the order was correctly based on the earlier judgment that the 18 September 2003 direction did not authorize a separate FIR on disproportionate asse

AMIT SINGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2011 INSC 5528 August 2011Case Allowed

Amit Singh was convicted of multiple offences, including murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment. He filed a writ petition under Article 32, claiming that he was a juvenile (under 18) at the time of the offence on 1 May 1999, based on his birth certificate and school records showing a birth date of 10 May 1982. The

SATYA JAIN (D) & ORS.versusANIS AHMED RUSHDIE (D) TH. LRS. & ORS.

2013 INSC 3248 May 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court had decreed specific performance, directing the defendants to execute a sale deed for the suit property at its market price as on the date of the judgment. Several interim applications (I.A.s) were filed thereafter seeking modification, clarification, correction of typographical errors, impleadment of

MOHINDERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 2238 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant was seized on 23 August 1991 while carrying a tin from which police recovered 3.5 kg of opium. He was charged under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and convicted, receiving ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh. The appellant challenged the convict

LAL BAHADUR & ORS.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2013 INSC 2258 April 2013Dismissed

The case arose from the 1984 anti‑Sikh riots that followed the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, where a mob led by the appellants attacked two houses, burnt alive the husband and father‑in‑law of the complainant and looted property. The trial court acquitted the appellants, but the Delhi High Court convic

AMITBHAI ANILCHANDRA SHAHversusTHE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2013 INSC 2248 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, including Amit Shah, challenged the registration of a second FIR (dated 29‑04‑2011) and a fresh charge‑sheet (dated 04‑09‑2012) filed by the CBI in connection with the alleged fake encounter of Tulsiram Prajapati, arguing that it violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 20 and 21 and contra

NARMADA BAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS

2011 INSC 2858 April 2011Case Allowed

Narmada Bai, the mother of Tulsiram Prajapati, filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that her son was killed in a fake police encounter in Gujarat and that senior police officials and a politician were involved. She sought a direction for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR, investiga

STATE OF U.P.versusNARESH AND ORS.

2011 INSC 1898 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted four accused for the murder of Sri Ram and the serious gunshot injuries to Balak Ram arising from a dispute on 16 October 1979. The trial court convicted them under sections 302, 307 and 379 of the IPC, but the Allahabad High Court acquitted them, relying on alleged minor contradic

CHITTOOR CHEGAIAH & ORS.versusPEDDA JEEYANGAR MUTT & ANR.

2010 INSC 1308 March 2010Dismissed

The case concerned a 29‑acre property originally owned by Pedda Jeeyangar Mutt, which was subject to a permanent lease patta dated 11‑03‑1931 in favour of Mandaram Munikannaiah and subsequently sold to the appellants. The Mutt sought eviction of the appellants on the ground of non‑payment of rent under the Andhra Prade

THAKUR KULDEEP SINGH (D) THR. L.R. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 1318 March 2010Dismissed

The appellants owned a 2,475‑sq‑yd plot in Karol Bagh, Delhi, which the Union of India acquired for the public purpose of constructing Joshi Memorial Hospital. The Land Acquisition Collector fixed the market value at Rs 550 per sq yd, which the appellants challenged under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; t

THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.versusBRIJESH REDDY & ANR.

2013 INSC 868 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) had acquired certain lands under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the 1960s and 1970s. In 1995 Brijesh Reddy purchased a portion of such land and later filed a suit in a civil court seeking a permanent injunction restraining the BDA from interfering with his possession. The tr

STEPHANIE JOAN BECKERversusSTATE AND ORS.

2013 INSC 848 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Stephanie Joan Becker, an American citizen, applied under Sections 7 and 26 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, to be appointed guardian of a 10‑year‑old Indian orphan named Tina and to take her abroad for adoption. The trial court and the Delhi High Court rejected the applications, holding that Becker, at 53 years o

PARIMALversusVEENA @ BHARTI

2011 INSC 1108 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Parimal filed a divorce suit against his wife Veena. The wife repeatedly refused to accept the court's notice, after which the trial court proceeded ex‑parte and granted a decree of divorce. Four years later she applied under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set aside the decree, alleging improper service, fraud and lack of suf

MULLA & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 898 February 2010Disposed off

The appellants Mulla and Guddu were convicted for abducting and murdering five villagers for ransom, based on the testimony of injured eye‑witnesses and a test identification parade (TIP) conducted after a delay. The Supreme Court held that the TIP was properly conducted and its evidence admissible, and that the eye‑wi

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.versusVIVEKANANDA M. HALLUR & ORS.

2012 INSC 5707 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka government allotted residential sites to members of a charitable society (the Sangha) through lease‑cum‑sale agreements, which were stamped and later, after ten years, converted into absolute sale deeds. The stamp duty on the sale deeds was collected on the market value at the time of execution, with a cr

M/S. NAGPUR GOLDEN TRANSPORT COMPANY (REGD.)versusM/S. NATH TRADERS & ORS.

2011 INSC 8387 December 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Nagpur Golden Transport Company, a common carrier, was ordered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to pay Rs.3,60,131 to the consignees (Nath Traders & Ors.) for damaged monoblock pumps. The consignees had already paid this amount to the consignor (respondent No.3), who retained the damaged

M/S VIRGO INDUSTRIES (ENG.) P.LTD.versusM/S.VENTURETECH SOLUTIONS P.LTD.

2012 INSC 3837 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Virgo Industries (Eng.) Ltd filed two suits in 2005 seeking a permanent injunction against VentureTech Solutions Ltd to prevent alienation of two parcels of land. In 2007, while those suits were still pending, Virgo filed two additional suits for specific performance of the same sale agreements. The High Court held the

MARUTI NIVRUTTI NAVALEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2012 INSC 3857 September 2012Dismissed

The appellant, founder and managing trustee of a technical education society, was accused by a charity trust of forging lease deeds and submitting false information to obtain permission for running a school. The trust alleged that the appellant altered documents, forged a lease for 87 years, and misrepresented facts to

SHYAM BABUversusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 3827 September 2012Dismissed

The case concerns a 1978 incident in which seven accused, including Shyam Babu, were alleged to have fired on a group of villagers, resulting in five deaths and one injury. The trial court acquitted all seven, but the High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted three of the accused; four had died during the penden

GOPAKUMAR B. NAIRversusC.B.I. & ANR.

2014 INSC 2557 April 2014Dismissed

The appellant, GOPAKUMAR B. Nair, sought to have criminal proceedings quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing that a private settlement with the bank had extinguished the dispute. The High Court of Kerala declined to quash the case, where the appellant was charged with criminal conspiracy under the Prevention of

MALLAMMA (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

2014 INSC 2517 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased driver of a tractor, employed by Jeeva Rathna Setty, died in an accident while the tractor was owned by Setty, although the original registration was in the name of Gangadhara. The claimants filed a workmen's compensation claim, and the Commissioner held that the insurance policy, though originally issued

PURNYA KALA DEVIversusSTATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2014 INSC 2537 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Purnya Kala Devi, a widow, claimed compensation after her husband was killed in a road accident caused by a private bus owned by Md. Abdul Salam, which was under requisition by the State of Assam and uninsured at the time of the accident on 16 February 1993. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held the registered owner

MALATHI DAS (RETD.) NOW P.B. MAHISHY & ORS.versusSURESH & ORS

2014 INSC 1747 March 2014Disposed off

The case arose from a contempt petition filed by 74 daily‑rated employees (respondents) who alleged that the State of Karnataka had failed to implement a High Court order dated 15 December 1999 directing their regularisation. While many similarly situated employees had been regularised under a scheme dated 29 December

K. GUNAVATHIversusV. SANGEETH KUMAR & ORS.

2014 INSC 1777 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Tamil Nadu Government created 1,880 Computer Instructor posts in higher secondary schools and initially regularized many ad‑hoc instructors without a B.Ed. degree through a special test. After legal challenges, the Supreme Court allowed a one‑time exception for those tests but held that lowering the minimum marks w

SANJAY KUMAR SHUKLAversusM/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.

2014 INSC 857 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Petroleum advertised for retail outlet dealerships; the appellant was ranked first with 78.04 marks and respondent No.7 second with 77.75 marks. Respondent No.7 complained that the appellant's land was under a partition suit and that the appellant had not received a Letter of Intent, leading the High Court Singl

ABP PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 827 February 2014Dismissed

The petitioners, a consortium of newspaper management firms, challenged the constitutionality of the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 and its 1974 amendment, alleging violations of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, as

HEMAversusSTATE, THR. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MADRAS

2013 INSC 97 January 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a clerk in a travel agency, was convicted under sections 120B, 420, 511, 465 and 471 of the IPC for conspiring to obtain 42 passports using forged applications and documents. The prosecution alleged that the travel agency, run by a co‑accused, submitted ante‑dated applications with duplicate file numbers

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusPRADEEP SHARMA

2013 INSC 8106 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged Pradeep Sharma and co‑accused with murder and conspiracy (IPC ss.302, 120B, 34) for allegedly poisoning the deceased. Both accused were declared absconders and proclaimed offenders under CrPC s.82, and the High Court granted them anticipatory bail under s.438. The Supreme Court exami

ALSIA PARDHIversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2013 INSC 8076 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Alsia Pardhi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the production of his 14‑year‑old niece, Rajnandani, alleging that forest officials had abducted her from a fish market. The State police, acting on the High Court's direction, recorded statements only of the forest officials and ignored eyewi

KALABHARATI ADVERTISINGversusHEMANT VIMALNATH NARICHANIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 5716 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Kalabharati Advertising, an advertising hoarding firm, had obtained permission from a society and the Municipal Corporation to erect a hoarding in Mumbai. A public interest litigation led the High Court to form a committee that found the hoarding violated certain guidelines, prompting the corporation to issue orders su

MS. MAYAWATIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2012 INSC 2726 July 2012Case Allowed

Mayawati, then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging FIR No. RC 0062003A0019 dated 05.10.2003, which the CBI had lodged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act alleging disproportionate assets. The FIR was said to be based on a Sup

MURUGAN @ SETTUversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2011 INSC 3626 May 2011Dismissed

The appellants Murugan @ Settu (A1) and his accomplices A2 and A3 were convicted for kidnapping, compelling marriage and raping a girl, Shankari (PW‑4). The appellants contended that Shankari was an adult who voluntarily went with A1 and that the birth and school certificates were unreliable. The Supreme Court examined

SMT. RASILA S. MEHTAversusCUSTODIAN, NARIMAN BHAVAN, MUMBAI

2011 INSC 3646 May 2011Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the notification of Smt. Rasila Mehta and Smt. Rina Mehta under the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, which was based on a complaint by Canbank Financial Services Ltd. The Court held that the notification was proper despite the

CHAIRMAN-CUM-M.D., COAL INDIA LTD., & ORS.versusANANTA SAHA & ORS.

2011 INSC 2766 April 2011Disposed off

A Medical Officer employed by Coal India Ltd and posted at its subsidiary Eastern Coalfields Ltd assaulted his senior officer and other staff, leading to disciplinary proceedings that resulted in his dismissal by the subsidiary's CMD. The dismissal was challenged in the Calcutta High Court, which quashed the order and

RAJENDRA PRASAD BAGARIAversusPHARMACY COUNCIL OF STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2012 INSC 756 February 2012Dismissed

Rajendra Prasad Bagaria obtained registration as a pharmacist in Rajasthan on the basis of a registration he had earlier obtained in Sikkim, where he had worked only for two months. The Rajasthan Pharmacy Council, after receiving complaints about ineligible pharmacists, examined his registration and found it irregular,

RATTAN BAI & ANR.versusRAM DASS & ORS.

2012 INSC 766 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Respondents 1‑3 instituted a suit for specific performance of a sale of immovable property. They later filed an application (P‑2) and a joint statement (P‑4) claiming a compromise and seeking dismissal of the suit, but subsequently respondent 1 filed an affidavit (P‑5) alleging that he had never filed the suit and that

STATE OF PUNJABversusBALWINDER SINGH AND ORS.

2012 INSC 96 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

In 1992 a bus and a truck, both traveling at high speed, collided on a highway in Punjab, resulting in the deaths of five passengers. The drivers of the bus (Balwinder Singh) and the truck were convicted under IPC sections 304A, 337 and 279 and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment for the 304A charge and six mo

AKRAM KHANversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2011 INSC 8355 December 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Akram Khan, was one of seven accused who kidnapped a four‑year‑old boy in Kolkata and demanded ransom, threatening to kill the child if the demand was not met. The prosecution proved the kidnapping, detention, and ransom demands through the testimony of the child, his father, a newspaper vendor and a tel

GAYTRI BAJAJversusJITEN BHALLA

2012 INSC 4505 October 2012Dismissed

The parties were married in 1992 and had two daughters. They obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent in 2003, expressly agreeing that the husband would have sole custody of the children and the wife would forego visitation rights. The wife later challenged the decree on grounds of fraud and also sought custody/v

BALIYA@ BAL KISHANversusSTATE OF M.P.

2012 INSC 4515 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Baliya and Gopal were convicted under Sections 120B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Pradeep, based on alleged conspiracy to kill him after a pamphlet scandal. The prosecution relied on two alleged eye‑witnesses, one of whom was declared hostile, and on circumstantial evidence such as t

SHAHEJADKHAN MAHEBUBKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 4535 October 2012Disposed off

The appellants were arrested for transporting 500 grams of brown sugar, a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, and were convicted under Sections 8(c), 21 and 29, receiving 15 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1.5 lakh with a default imprisonment of three years for non‑payment. They appealed, seeking redu

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYAM ANSARI AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6715 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed a decision that allowed a co‑accused to cross‑examine an approver whose pardon, granted under Section 307 of the CrPC, was later forfeited by a certificate under Section 308. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme of Sections 306, 307 and 308, holding that forfeiture of the pa

MRINAL DAS & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA

2011 INSC 6505 September 2011Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Tapan Chakraborty on 31 August 2000, for which thirteen persons were charged. One accused, Ratan Sukladas (A‑12), applied for and was granted pardon, becoming an approver whose testimony formed the core of the prosecution's case. The trial court convicted only two accused (A‑5 and A‑11)

THE NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION LTD.versusNARESHKUMAR BADRIKUMAR JAGAD & ORS.

2011 INSC 6515 September 2011Dismissed

The National Textile Corporation Ltd. (NTC) occupied premises that were originally leased to Poddar Mills, a textile undertaking taken over by the Central Government under the Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995. The owners of the premises filed an eviction suit under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999

RAGHBIR CHAND & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 5155 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, four accused, were charged with murder (s.302), voluntarily causing grievous hurt (s.324) and simple hurt (s.323) read with s.34 IPC for assaulting several witnesses and killing the deceased Rajinder Kumar. The trial court and High Court convicted all four under s.302 read with s.34, as well as under s.

SHRIDHAR NAMDEO LAWANDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 5115 August 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Shridhar Namdeo Lawand, was convicted under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and appealed to the High Court. The High Court disposed of the appeal without the appellant being present and without examining the evidence, relying solely on the State’s counsel. The Supreme Court he

ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYYUM ANSARIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2013 INSC 5125 August 2013Disposed off

Abu Salem, an accused in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, was extradited from Portugal to India in 2005 on the assurance that he would not face the death penalty or imprisonment beyond 25 years. After his return, the Designated Court framed additional charges beyond those covered by the extradition, which Abu Salem argued

SADANANDA MONDALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 5165 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sadananda Mondal, was charged along with 13 others for the murder of Bharat Mondal, who died from a gunshot wound during a picnic dispute. The trial court convicted eight accused, including the appellant, under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, while the High Court acquitted all but the appellant. On appea

SHAH NAWAJversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2011 INSC 5485 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR was lodged under Sections 302 and 307 IPC against Shah Nawaj. His mother applied to the Juvenile Justice Board claiming he was a minor, relying on his school mark sheet and school leaving certificate showing a birth date of 18‑06‑1989. The Board declared him a juvenile, but the Additional Sessions Judge and the

BUDH RAM & ORS.versusBANSI & ORS.

2010 INSC 4815 August 2010Dismissed

Budh Ram & Ors. appealed against a decree that declared them co‑owners of land along with Smt. Parwatu, a proforma defendant who died during the pendency of the appeal. The appellants sought substitution of Parwatu's legal representatives but failed to obtain condonation for the delay. The lower appellate court held th

S. SUBRAMANIAM BALAJIversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2013 INSC 4445 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant challenged the Tamil Nadu government's distribution of free colour television sets, laptops, mixers, and other welfare items promised in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) election manifesto, alleging that the expenditure was unauthorized, violated Article 14 and amounted to a corrupt practice under Sect

S.D. BANDIversusDIVISIONAL TRAFFIC OFFICER, KSRTC & ORS.

2013 INSC 4405 July 2013Disposed off

The appeal arose from the appellant, a driver of KSRTC, who failed to vacate a government quarter after being transferred and whose eviction order was upheld by the High Court but later set aside by the Supreme Court. The Court examined the effectiveness of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act,

THE STATE OF KARNATAKAversusTHE ASSOCIATED MANAGEMENT OF (GOVT. RECOGNIZED UNAIDED ENGLISH MEDIUM) PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS & ORS.

2013 INSC 4415 July 2013Matter referred to larger bench

The State of Karnataka appealed against the High Court's partial upholding of its 1994 Government Orders mandating mother‑tongue or Kannada as the medium of instruction in primary schools, which had been challenged by unaided English‑medium schools. The Supreme Court examined whether the State could compel the mother t

STATE OF J & K AND ORS.versusSAT PAL

2013 INSC 755 February 2013Disposed off

Sat Pal, a Scheduled Caste candidate, appeared in the merit list for Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade‑II posts and sought appointment after a higher‑ranked candidate, Trilok Nath, declined the offer. The High Court directed the State to consider his claim, which the State rejected on the ground that the waiting list had e

SUNDER @ SUNDARARAJANversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2013 INSC 745 February 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Sunder @ Sundararajan, was convicted of kidnapping a seven‑year‑old boy for ransom and subsequently murdering him. The prosecution relied on eyewitness identification, phone‑call records, a confessional statement, and forensic evidence. The key issue was whether circumstantial evidence could establish th

G.V. SIDDARAMESHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2010 INSC 805 February 2010Dismissed

The appellant Siddaramesh was convicted for the death of his wife Usha, who committed suicide by hanging within seven years of marriage. The prosecution proved that the husband and his family had repeatedly demanded dowry—gold, cash and a motorcycle—and that the wife was subjected to mental and physical cruelty when sh

MANGESHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2011 INSC 135 January 2011Disposed off

The appellant, Mangesh, was angry that his sister Sandhya was in a love affair with Prashant, the deceased, and on a night he saw them together he stabbed Prashant three times with a knife. Prashant died three days later. The trial court and the High Court convicted Mangesh under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (m

PRITHIPAL SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. ETC.

2011 INSC 7844 November 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by five police officials convicted for the abduction, illegal detention and murder of human‑rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra. The trial court and High Court had found the appellants guilty based on the testimony of several witnesses, including an accomplice, despite the absence

J & K HOUSING BOARD & ANR.versusKUNWAR SANJAY KRISHAN KAUL & ORS.

2011 INSC 7854 November 2011Dismissed

The J&K Housing Board sought to acquire 181 kanals of land for a housing colony, issuing a Section 4 notification in two newspapers but only one in the regional language as required by the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990. The landowners challenged the acquisition, and the High Court quashed the proceedings

BHIMANNAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2012 INSC 3774 September 2012Disposed off

The appellants, three agricultural workers, trespassed onto the deceased's land, leading to a heated verbal altercation and an assault with axes and a wooden plough part, after which the victim fell and later died from grievous injuries. The trial court convicted the principal assailant under Section 302 IPC read with

BAKSHI DEV RAJ & ANR.versusSUDHIR KUMAR

2011 INSC 5454 August 2011Dismissed

The appellants Bakshi Dev Raj & Anr. challenged a decree modified by the High Court in a second appeal, alleging that their counsel settled the matter without a written agreement and that the subsequent review petition was barred because their Special Leave Petition (SLP) had been dismissed as withdrawn. The Supreme Co

BHUSHAN KUMAR & ANR.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2012 INSC 1644 April 2012Dismissed

The appellants were summoned by a Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 204 of the CrPC after a FIR under Section 420 IPC was lodged by Respondent No.2 in a property dispute concerning the assets of the late Gulshan Kumar. The appellants challenged the summoning order, arguing that the magistrate had not provided reaso

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