Supreme Court of India

8,449 judgments

Year:

Captain Manjit Singh Virdi v. Hussain Mohammed Shattaf

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that at the discharge stage, a prima facie case must be found on prosecution material including psychological tests, and set aside the High Court's order discharging accused in a murder case.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant discharge application prima facie case psychological evaluation polygraph testing

Gian Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, ruling that minor discrepancies in eyewitness accounts do not create reasonable doubt when supported by consistent evidence and medical opinion.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 304 Part II IPC conviction eyewitness testimony minor contradictions

Gian Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, ruling that minor discrepancies in eyewitness testimony do not create reasonable doubt when corroborated by medical evidence and the defence version is inherently contradictory.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 304 Part II IPC eyewitness testimony minor discrepancies medical evidence

Salem Muslim Burial Ground Protection Committee v. State of Tamil Nadu

18 May 2023 · V. Ramasubramanian; Pankaj Mithal

The Supreme Court held that the suit land is not a wakf property due to lack of valid creation and procedural compliance, and dismissed the appeal upholding the grant of possession under Section 19A of the Tamil Nadu Abolition Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant wakf property Section 19A Tamil Nadu Abolition Act ryotwari patta Muslim law

e15c92949c4506b2c87f28f2877527044627afc4605aaaf438eeb6cc112b8c99

18 May 2023 · Ajay Stogi; Bela M. Vithalvadi · 2023 INSC 559

The Supreme Court held that the cut-off date for submission of category certificates in judicial service recruitment is mandatory, and candidates submitting certificates after the cut-off date are not entitled to reservation benefits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant reservation category certificate cut-off date Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010

Sakshi Arha v. Rajasthan High Court

18 May 2023 · Ajay Rastogi; Bela M. Trivedi · 2023 INSC 559

The Supreme Court held that in absence of explicit rules, caste/category certificates for reservation need not be submitted by the last date of application and candidates producing valid certificates when demanded cannot be denied reservation benefits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant reservation category certificate last date of application eligibility cut-off

Sakshi Ardha v. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.

18 May 2023 · Ajay Rastogi; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court held that eligibility for reservation benefits in recruitment must be determined as on the last date of application, and category certificates issued after that date cannot be rejected if no cut-off date is prescribed, directing appointment of candidates accordingly.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant reservation category certificate cut-off date eligibility

Sakshi Arha v. Rajasthan High Court

18 May 2023 · Ajay Rastogi; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court held that in absence of explicit rules, valid category certificates produced after the last date of application but before final selection entitle candidates to reservation benefits in recruitment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant reservation category certificate last date of application eligibility

Ravi Mandal v. State of Uttarakhand

18 May 2023 · Hrishikesh Roy; Manoj Misra

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellants in a murder case due to unreliable chance witness testimony, procedural lapses in weapon recovery, and failure to prove the chain of circumstances beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant last seen evidence chance witness delay in disclosure recovery of weapon

Ravi Mandal v. State of Uttarakhand

18 May 2023 · Hrishikesh Roy; Manoj Misra

The Supreme Court acquitted appellants in a murder case due to unreliable chance witness testimonies, procedural lapses in weapon recovery, and failure to strictly scrutinize prosecution evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant last seen evidence chance witness delayed disclosure recovery of weapon

Aarti Didhikshat v. Sushil Kumar Mishra

18 May 2023 · K. M. Joseph; R. Subhash Reddy
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that failure to deposit decree amount or furnish valid security as mandated under Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act renders an application to set aside a unilateral decree incompetent and liable to be dismissed.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 17 Provincial Small Cause Courts Act Order IX Rule 13 CPC unilateral decree security deposit

Madhu Paschindi Das v. West Bengal State & Ors.; Chanchalpati Das v. West Bengal State & Ors.

18 May 2023 · B. M. Shivabedi

The Supreme Court quashed baseless FIRs under Sections 468, 471, 406, and 120-B IPC, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the criminal justice process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant FIR Section 482 CrPC abuse of process frivolous complaint

Madhupandit Das v. State of West Bengal

18 May 2023 · Ajay Rastogi; Bela M. Trivedi
Cites 6 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against ISKCON leaders for alleged bus theft due to inordinate delay, lack of prima facie evidence, and abuse of process of law.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of criminal proceedings Section 482 CrPC abuse of process inordinate delay

Sebil Elanjimpally v. State of Odisha

18 May 2023 · K. M. Joseph; Aravind Kumar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the non-surrender of a co-accused cannot be a valid ground to deny bail and directed the High Court to reconsider the appellant's bail application expeditiously.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail co-accused Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 20(b)(ii)(C)

M/S B AND T AG v. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

18 May 2023 · Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud; J. B. Pardiwala · 2023 INSC 549

The Supreme Court held that bona fide bilateral negotiations suspend limitation for invoking arbitration, and allowed the petition for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11(6) as not time barred.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Limitation Act, 1963 Article 137

M/S B AND T AG v. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

18 May 2023 · Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud; J. B. Pardiwala

The Supreme Court held that a Section 11(6) petition for appointment of arbitrator is not barred by limitation if filed within three years from the 'breaking point' after bona fide bilateral negotiations, and limitation and arbitrability issues are generally for the arbitral tribunal to decide.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Limitation Act, 1963 Article 137

State (RAJYA RAJYA) v. Ravinder Kumar Jain

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bandal · (2017) 6 SCC 751

The Supreme Court held that subsequent purchasers acquiring land through invalid transactions after acquisition notification under the 1894 Act cannot claim compensation under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, affirming the validity of acquisition proceedings and denying retrospective application of the new law.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act 1894 Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 Section 24(2) Invalid sale transaction

Government of NCT of Delhi v. Ravinder Kumar Jain & Ors.

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court held that a purchaser of land after issuance of Section 4 notification under the 1894 Act cannot claim lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, as such sale transactions are void and confer no rights against the State.

property appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition Section 4 notification Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 24(2)

State of Rajasthan v. Ravinder Kumar Jain

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bandal · (2017) 6 SCC 751

The Supreme Court held that subsequent purchasers of land after issuance of Section 4 notification under the 1894 Act have no right under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act to challenge acquisition or claim compensation, affirming the validity of acquisition proceedings and dismissing the writ petition.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 24(2) Section 4 notification

Government of NCT of Delhi v. Ravinder Kumar Jain & Ors.

18 May 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal

The Supreme Court held that a purchaser of land after issuance of Section 4 notification under the 1894 Act has no right to claim lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, as such sale transactions are void and do not confer title.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act 1894 Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 Section 24(2) Section 4 notification