Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

State of Gujarat v. Sandip Omprakash Gupta

· S. Abdul Nazeer; J. B. Pardiwala
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld bail granted under the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015, holding that prosecution requires substantive offences committed after the Act's commencement, not merely prior charge sheets.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant continuing unlawful activity Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 bail organised crime

State of Gujarat v. Sandip Omprakash Gupta

· S. Abdul Nazeer; J. B. Pardiwala
Cites 2 · Cited by 4

The Supreme Court upheld bail granted under the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015, holding that continuing unlawful activity requires a substantive offence committed after the Act's commencement, not merely prior charge sheets.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant continuing unlawful activity Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 bail organised crime

Ram Pratap v. The State of Haryana

· B. R. Gavai; Vikram Nath

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to insufficient circumstantial evidence and unexplained delay in FIR, emphasizing that suspicion cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant circumstantial evidence proof beyond reasonable doubt delay in FIR hostile witness

Ram Pratap v. State of Haryana

· B. R. Gavai; Vikram Nath

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant in a murder case due to insufficient circumstantial evidence, emphasizing that suspicion cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant circumstantial evidence proof beyond reasonable doubt delay in FIR hostile witness

Baharul Islam & Ors. v. The Indian Medical Association & Ors.

· B. R. Gavai; B. V. Nagarathna

The Supreme Court held that the Assam Act regulating Rural Health Practitioners was unconstitutional as it encroached upon Parliament's exclusive power under Entry 66 of List I to coordinate and determine standards in medical education, affirming the primacy of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant legislative competence Entry 66 of List I Entry 25 of List III Indian Medical Council Act, 1956

Baharul Islam & Ors. v. The Indian Medical Association & Ors.

· B. R. Gavai; B. V. Nagarathna
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the invalidity of the Assam Act for encroaching upon the Union's exclusive power under Entry 66 of List I, affirming that State legislation on medical education must conform to Central standards under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant legislative competence Entry 66 of List I Entry 25 of List III Indian Medical Council Act, 1956

Elumalai @ Venkatesan v. M. Kamala

· K. M. Joseph; Hrishikesh Roy
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that a Release Deed executed by an heir apparent for consideration creates an equitable estoppel barring the heir and his successors from claiming inheritance rights, notwithstanding their status as Class I heirs under Hindu law.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Release Deed Equitable Estoppel Spes Successionis Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act

Sushil Pandey & Anr. v. State of U.P. Thr. Principal Secretary (Home) & Ors.

· Ajay Rastogi; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court directed recasting of seniority for Assistant Radio Officers by fixing a common date of appointment for promotees and direct recruits, upholding service rules and treating vacancies from death or retirement as fresh.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant seniority promotion direct recruitment combined selection list

Manik Majumder v. Dipak Kumar Saha

· M. R. Shah; B. V. Nagarathna

The Supreme Court held that non-production and non-compliance with statutory requirements of a foundational Power of Attorney preclude drawing a statutory presumption of validity of a sale deed, restoring dismissal of the suit for declaration of title.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Power of Attorney Section 33(1)(c) Registration Act Section 60 Registration Act statutory presumption

Manik Majumder v. Dipak Kumar Saha

· M. R. Shah; B. V. Nagarathna

The Supreme Court held that non-production and non-compliance with statutory requirements of a Power of Attorney preclude drawing a statutory presumption of validity of a sale deed, restoring dismissal of suit for declaration of title.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Power of Attorney Registration Act 1908 Section 33(1)(c) Section 60 Registration Act

Hewlett Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva

· Surya Kant; Vikram Nath
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that All-in-One Integrated Desktop Computers are not 'portable' ADPs under tariff classification and restored their classification under Tariff Item 8471 50 00, allowing the appeals.

tax appeal_allowed Significant tariff classification portable automatic data processing machines Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

State v. Central Bureau of Investigation

· K. M. Shah

The Supreme Court held that default bail granted under Section 167(2) CrPC can be cancelled on merits after investigation completion and charge sheet filing if strong grounds exist, balancing accused's liberty with interests of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) CrPC bail cancellation charge sheet

Sushil Pandey v. State of U.P.

· Ajay Rastogi; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court directed recasting of seniority for Assistant Radio Officers by treating promotees and direct recruits as entering the cadre on a common date, upholding combined selection list principles under the 1979 Rules.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant seniority combined selection list promotion direct recruitment

Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

· M. R. Shah; B. V. Nagarathna
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court struck down discriminatory exclusions in Section 10(26AAA) of the Income Tax Act, holding that all Indians settled in Sikkim before 1975 and Sikkimese women marrying non-Sikkimese after 2008 are entitled to equal income tax exemption under the Constitution.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act Section 10(26AAA) Sikkimese definition old Indian settlers Article 14 discrimination

Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of India

· B. R. Gavai; B. V. Nagarathna · 2023 INSC 2

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 2016 demonetization notification under Section 26(2) of the RBI Act, rejecting challenges on grounds of excessive delegation, violation of fundamental rights, and procedural flaws.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant demonetization Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 Section 26(2) legal tender

Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of India

· B. R. Gavai; B. V. Nagarathna
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 2016 demonetization notification under Section 26(2) of the RBI Act, affirming the Central Government's power to demonetize all series of specified bank notes and limiting judicial interference in economic policy decisions.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant demonetization Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 Section 26(2) legal tender

Smriti Debbarma v. Prabha Ranjan Debbarma and Others

· Sanjiv Khanna; J.K. Maheshwari

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove legal ownership and title to the disputed property, affirming that the burden of proof lies on the party asserting ownership in a civil suit for possession.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant title suit burden of proof Schedule A property Deed of Patta

Smriti Debbarma v. Prabha Ranjan Debbarma and Others

· Sanjiv Khanna; J.K. Maheshwari

The Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal in a title suit over 'Khosh Mahal' property, holding that failure to prove legal ownership and possession mandates dismissal despite defendants' inability to establish title.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant burden of proof title suit possession Deed of Patta

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. v. KAMAL KISHORE PRASAD

· Krishna Murari; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court upheld the retrospective dismissal of a bank officer post-superannuation, clarifying that disciplinary proceedings concluded before retirement validate such dismissal without requiring extension of service or continuation of proceedings.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant disciplinary proceedings dismissal from service superannuation SBI Officers' Service Rules 1992