Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

Mohd. Firoz v. State of Madhya Pradesh

· Uday Umesh Lalit; S. Ravindra Bhat; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and death sentence of Mohd. Firoz for the rape and murder of a minor, affirming the application of the last seen theory and principles of circumstantial evidence while rejecting claims of unfair trial.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory Section 313 CrPC death penalty

Jagjeet Singh v. Ashish Mishra @ Monu

· N.V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Hima Kohli
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s bail order in a serious criminal case for non-application of mind and denial of victims’ right to be heard, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant victim rights bail application Section 2(wa) CrPC Section 439 CrPC

Som Dutt & Ors. v. The State of Himachal Pradesh

· Bela M. Trivedi; Sanjiv Khanna

The Supreme Court upheld the theft convictions but granted the appellants probation of good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act, releasing them on furnishing bonds and undertaking.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 379 IPC Section 34 IPC Probation of Offenders Act Section 361 Cr.P.C

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 2 v. M/S. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd

· S. Ravindra Bhat
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

An assessment order passed in the name of an amalgamating company that ceases to exist post-amalgamation is void and must be issued in the name of the amalgamated company, and such defect is not curable under Section 292B of the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant amalgamation assessment order Income Tax Act, 1961 Companies Act, 1956

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 2 v. M/S. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd

· S. Ravindra Bhat
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that an income tax assessment order issued in the name of a non-existent amalgamating company is void and must be made in the name of the amalgamated company, dismissing the revenue's appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant amalgamation assessment order Income Tax Act, 1961 Companies Act, 1956

Prabha Tyagi v. Kamlesh Devi

· M. R. Shah; B. V. Nagarathna

The Supreme Court held that a woman who has lived in a shared household with the respondent is entitled to relief under the Domestic Violence Act even after the husband's death, and a Domestic Incident Report is not mandatory if the application is filed directly by the aggrieved person.

family appeal_allowed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Domestic Incident Report Domestic relationship Shared household

Muzaffar Husain v. State of Uttar Pradesh

· Bela M. Trivedi; Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud

The Supreme Court upheld disciplinary findings of misconduct against a retired judicial officer for awarding enhanced compensation in violation of law, affirming limited judicial review over disciplinary actions and emphasizing high standards of judicial integrity.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant judicial misconduct disciplinary proceedings Land Acquisition Act enhanced compensation

Cox and Kings Limited v. SAP India Private Limited & Another

· N. V. Ramana · 2022 INSC 523

The Supreme Court referred to a larger bench the question of the validity and scope of the group of companies doctrine and the interpretation of 'claiming through or under' in arbitration law, emphasizing party autonomy and legal basis for binding non-signatories.

arbitration other Significant group of companies doctrine arbitration agreement non-signatories party autonomy

Cox and Kings Limited v. SAP India Private Limited & Another

· N. V. Ramana
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court referred to a larger bench the question of whether and how the 'group of companies doctrine' applies under Indian arbitration law to bind non-signatories to arbitration agreements.

arbitration other Significant group of companies doctrine arbitration agreement non-signatory party autonomy

In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India and Ors.

Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld prohibitions on mining within protected forests and mandated eco-sensitive zones around sanctuaries to ensure sustainable environmental protection balanced with regulated economic activity.

environmental appeal_allowed Significant Forest Conservation Act, 1980 Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 Eco-sensitive zones Mining leases

Sunil Sikri v. Guru Harkrishan Public School

· K. M. Joseph; Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
Cites 3 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court held that only the Managing Committee under Rule 121 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, has the power to decide pay and allowances on reinstatement, and the Tribunal lacks express power to award back wages.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi School Education Act, 1973 Rule 121 back wages reinstatement

Sunil Sikri v. Guru Harkrishan Public School

· K. M. Joseph; Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the Delhi School Education Tribunal lacks power to award back wages, which is exclusively vested in the Managing Committee under Rule 121 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, and dismissed the appeal challenging this scheme.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi School Education Act, 1973 Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 Rule 121 back wages

Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. v. Deepak Aggarwal

· A. M. Khanwilkar; Abhay S. Oka; C. T. Ravikumar · 2022 INSC 767

The Supreme Court held that issuance and publication of Section 4(1) notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 marks the initiation of acquisition proceedings for the purpose of Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act, with procedural continuance under the L.A. Act and compensation determination under the 2013 Act.

property other Significant land acquisition Section 24(1) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. v. Deepak Aggarwal

· A. M. Khanwilkar; Abhay S. Oka; C. T. Ravikumar

The Supreme Court held that issuance and publication of a Section 4(1) notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 constitutes initiation of acquisition proceedings for the purposes of Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act, with compensation determined under the 2013 Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 4(1) notification Section 6 declaration

Rajasthan State v. Kistura Ram

· B. R. Gavai
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's acquittal of the accused in a murder case, emphasizing limited interference in acquittal appeals and the need for corroboration of judicial confession evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 201 IPC judicial confession scope of interference

Union of India v. Bharat Forge Ltd.

· K. M. Joseph; Hrishikesh Roy · 2022 INSC 837

The Supreme Court held that the tendering authority has no duty to specify GST rates or HSN Codes in tender documents, and bidders alone bear tax liabilities, setting aside the High Court's direction to ensure a level playing field by clarifying GST applicability.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant writ of mandamus judicial review tender process GST liability

Union of India v. Bharat Forge Ltd.

· K. M. Joseph; Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court held that the purchaser in a tender process is not obliged to clarify GST applicability or HSN Codes, and the responsibility to quote correct GST rates lies with bidders, limiting judicial intervention in State contracts to ensuring fairness without overstepping statutory and commercial boundaries.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant writ of mandamus judicial review tender process GST liability

Shabbir Mohammad Sayed v. Noor Jehan Mushtter Shaikh

· K. M. Joseph; Hrishikesh Roy · 2022 INSC 784

The Supreme Court upheld the rejection of the appellant's application to recall execution of a tenancy decree, holding that the tenant's assignment without landlord's ratification violated Section 26 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Tenancy Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Rent Control Tenancy Act Section 26 assignment of tenancy ratification

Shabbir Mohammad Sayed v. Noor Jehan Mushtter Shaikh

· K. M. Joseph; Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court upheld the tenancy decree in favor of the plaintiff, ruling that the appellant's assignment of tenancy rights was illegal under Section 26 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Tenancy Act without landlord's ratification and dismissed the appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Rent Control Tenancy Act Section 26 Section 52 Transfer of Property Act Section 55 Tenancy Act

Suneel Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors.

· K. M. Joseph; Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court held that compassionate appointment must be to a post equivalent to that held by the deceased government servant, denying the appellant's claim to a higher post but directing appointment to the same post as the deceased.

administrative appeal_partly_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Rule 5 Uttar Pradesh Recruitment Rules 1974 suitable employment Class-III post