Supreme Court of India

8,182 judgments

Year:

RAM BALAK SINGH v. STATE OF BIHAR

· Pankaj Mithal; Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale · 2024 INSC 360

The Supreme Court held that a civil suit for declaration of rights based on a final order of the Consolidation Authority is not barred by Section 37 of the Bihar Consolidation Act and restored the trial court's decree recognizing the appellant's title and possession.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Bihar Consolidation Act Section 37 Consolidation Act Consolidation Officer order Civil Court jurisdiction

Balasaheb Keshawrao Bhapkar & Ors. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors.

· Surya Kant; K. V. Viswanathan · 2024 INSC 525

The Supreme Court constituted a High-Powered Sale Committee to expedite auction and liquidation of attached assets of Sai Prasad Group companies and ordered interim bail for Petitioners, balancing investor protection and justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant SEBI asset liquidation High-Powered Sale Committee Article 142 Constitution

New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. Harnand Singh

· Surya Kant; K.V. Viswanathan · 2024 INSC 509

The Supreme Court revised compensation for land acquired by NOIDA to INR 403 per sq. yd. applying the principle of guesstimation, allowed parity applications in the interest of justice, and clarified the limited precedential value of the Bir Singh judgment.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Compensation enhancement Section 23(1) Section 28A

Dharmendra Kumar @ Dhamma v. State of Madhya Pradesh

· Surya Kant; K.V. Viswanathan · 2024 INSC 480
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness testimony, admissible dying declaration recorded under Section 161 CrPC, and voluntary disclosure leading to weapon recovery, dismissing the appellant's challenge on contradictions and forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration Section 161 CrPC statement Section 27 Indian Evidence Act disclosure statement

Maitreyee Chakraborty v. Tripura University

· J.K. Maheshwari; K.V. Viswanathan · 2024 INSC 616

The Supreme Court held that an appointee selected against a lien vacancy must be confirmed upon vacation of the lien and satisfactory performance, and quashed the university's arbitrary denial of confirmation, directing regularization of the appellant's service.

civil appeal_allowed Significant lien vacancy regularization legitimate expectation arbitrariness

Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India

· Abhay S. Oka; Augustine George Masih · 2024 INSC 604
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court allowed bail to the appellant under UAPA, holding that the prosecution failed to establish reasonable grounds for believing the accusations were prima facie true as required under Section 43D(5).

criminal appeal_allowed Significant UAPA bail prima facie case Section 43D(5)

R. SHAMA NAIK v. G. SRINIVASIAH

· J. B. PARDIWALA; R. MAHADEVAN · 2024 INSC 927
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's dismissal of specific performance relief due to the plaintiff's failure to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance readiness and willingness Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act, 1963 agreement of sale

Kirpal Singh v. Government of India, New Delhi & Ors.

· Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha; Manoj Misra · 2024 INSC 944

The Supreme Court held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act applies to Section 34 applications under the Arbitration Act, allowing exclusion of delay periods and thereby condoning the appellant's delayed filing to challenge an arbitral award.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 14 Limitation Act Section 34 Arbitration Act Limitation period Arbitral award

NOIDA Toll Bridge Company Ltd v. Federation of NOIDA Residents Welfare Association

· Surya Kant; Ujjal Bhuyan · 2024 INSC 1027
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the invalidation of toll collection by NTBCL on the DND Flyway, ruling that the power to levy tolls cannot be delegated to a private entity and emphasizing judicial scrutiny of public contracts to protect public interest.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Concession Agreement toll collection delegation of taxing power Article 14 of Constitution

Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif

· Bela M. Trivedi; Satish Chandra Sharma · 2024 INSC 1045
Cites 4 · Cited by 17

The Supreme Court held that delayed compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is a procedural irregularity that does not vitiate trial or entitle bail, and remanded the bail application for fresh consideration under mandatory Section 37 conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 52A Section 37 bail

Kamla Devi v. State of Haryana

· Surya Kant; Ujjal Bhuyan · 2024 INSC 1028

The Supreme Court restored the Reference Court's compensation award for land acquired by the State of Haryana, setting aside the High Court's reduction and directing payment with statutory benefits.

property appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition compensation assessment Land Acquisition Act 1894 valuation of land

Partha Chatterjee v. Directorate of Enforcement

· Surya Kant; Ujjal Bhuyan · 2024 INSC 975

The Supreme Court granted bail to a former State Minister accused in a large-scale recruitment and money laundering scam, emphasizing the right to liberty against prolonged pre-trial detention while imposing strict conditions to safeguard the investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Prevention of Money Laundering Act Article 21 prolonged incarceration

M.S. Sanjay v. Indian Bank

· J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 177
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court allowed the auction purchaser's appeal, holding that procedural irregularities in auction notice periods under the SARFAESI Act do not warrant setting aside the sale when the purchaser has paid consideration and developed the property, emphasizing the discretionary nature of writ jurisdiction and equity.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act auction notice period Article 226 discretionary jurisdiction guarantor challenge

Ajay Malik v. State of Uttarakhand; State of Uttarakhand v. Ashok Kumar

· Surya Kant; Ujjal Bhuyan · 2025 INSC 118

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against Ajay Malik for wrongful confinement and trafficking due to lack of prima facie evidence, upheld discharge of Ashok Kumar, and directed the government to consider a legal framework for protecting domestic workers.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant wrongful confinement human trafficking Section 482 CrPC quashing of criminal proceedings

Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap v. State of Maharashtra

· B. R. Gavai; Prashant Kumar Mishra; K. V. Viswanathan · 2025 INSC 116

The Supreme Court set aside the appellant's conviction and death sentence due to inadmissibility of crucial CCTV evidence for non-compliance with Section 65-B of the Evidence Act and insufficient proof beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant circumstantial evidence Section 65-B Indian Evidence Act CCTV footage admissibility death sentence

Om Prakash Ambadkar v. State of Maharashtra

· J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 139

The Supreme Court held that a Magistrate must apply judicial mind before ordering police investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., quashed the mechanical order directing investigation against a police officer for offences not prima facie made out, and emphasized procedural safeguards codified in the BNSS.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Police investigation Cognizable offence Section 294 IPC

Balbir Singh & Anr v. Baldev Singh (D) Through His Lrs & Ors

· J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 81
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's order permitting deposit of balance sale consideration beyond 20 days under a merged decree for specific performance and rejected rescission under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance Section 28 Specific Relief Act 1963 doctrine of merger rescission of contract

Vijay @ Vijayakumar v. State

· J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 90

The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder but reduced the sentence to the period already served, clarifying the strict conditions for applying Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC on grave and sudden provocation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant culpable homicide not amounting to murder Exception 1 Section 300 IPC grave and sudden provocation reasonable man test

BHUDEV MALLICK ALIAS BHUDEB MALLICK & ANR v. RANAJIT GHOSHAL & ORS

· J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 175

The Supreme Court held that execution of a permanent injunction decree can be sought at any time upon breach, but arrest and detention orders require mandatory procedural compliance and recorded findings of wilful disobedience, failing which such orders are jurisdictionally invalid.

civil appeal_allowed Significant permanent injunction execution of decree Order XXI Rule 32 CPC Order XXI Rule 11-A CPC

Nirmiti Developers v. State of Maharashtra

· J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 265

The Supreme Court held that prolonged failure by authorities to acquire land under the MRTP Act causes reservation to lapse, but benefits of original owners' purchase notices under Section 49 do not automatically extend to subsequent purchasers who must initiate their own acquisition proceedings.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Section 49 purchase notice Section 127 lapsing of reservation land acquisition