Supreme Court of India

18,256 judgments

Year:

Vijay Kumar Ghai v. State of West Bengal

26 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Ahsanuddin Amanullah · 2023 INSC 438

The Supreme Court held that its judgment is binding but must be applied after factual scrutiny in each case, dismissing the applicant's plea for blanket application and quashing of criminal proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Section 132 Section 135 abuse of process

Vijay Kumar Ghai v. State of West Bengal

26 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Ahsanuddin Amanullah

The Supreme Court dismissed an application seeking intervention and clarification of its earlier judgment, holding that the applicability of its law must be tested on facts of each case and cannot be generalized.

criminal petition_dismissed Customs Act, 1962 Section 132 Section 135 criminal prosecution

Mukul Agarwal & Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr

26 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Ahsanuddin Amanullah · 2023 INSC 437

The Supreme Court dismissed an application by a non-party seeking clarification of its earlier judgment on quashing criminal proceedings based on civil court findings, holding that applicability must be tested by the concerned court on facts.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant clarification of Supreme Court order civil court findings criminal proceedings quashing abuse of process of law

Mukul Agarwal & Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr

26 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Ahsanuddin Amanullah

The Supreme Court dismissed a non-party’s application seeking clarification of its earlier order on quashing criminal proceedings based on civil court findings, holding that applicability of the law must be tested on facts by the concerned court.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant clarification of Supreme Court order intervention by non-party civil court findings criminal proceedings quashing

State of Gujarat v. Dr. P. A. Bhatt

26 Apr 2023 · V. Ramasubramanian; Pankaj Mithal

The Supreme Court held that different pay scales based on educational qualifications within the same medical cadre are valid and that AYUSH doctors do not perform equal work as MBBS doctors to claim equal pay.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Tikku Pay Commission AYUSH doctors MBBS doctors equal pay

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India

26 Apr 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Vikram Nath; Sanjay Karol

The Supreme Court modified its June 2022 directions on Eco-Sensitive Zones to exempt notified/proposed ESZs, mandate site-specific boundaries, prohibit mining within one kilometre of protected areas nationwide, and require adherence to MoEF & CC Guidelines balancing environmental protection with local livelihoods.

environmental appeal_allowed Significant Eco-Sensitive Zones National Parks Wildlife Sanctuaries Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India

26 Apr 2023 · B.R. Gavai; Vikram Nath; Sanjay Karol

The Supreme Court modified its earlier directions on Eco-Sensitive Zones around Protected Areas, emphasizing site-specific notifications under statutory procedure, prohibiting mining within one kilometre, and balancing environmental protection with residents' rights.

environmental appeal_allowed Significant Eco-Sensitive Zones National Parks Wildlife Sanctuaries Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

RITU CHHABARIA v. UNION OF INDIA

26 Apr 2023 · KRISHNA MURARI; C. T. RAVIKUMAR

The Supreme Court held that filing incomplete chargesheets to deny default bail violates the accused's fundamental right to liberty under Article 21, mandating release if investigation is not completed within statutory time.

criminal petition_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) CrPC fundamental right Article 21

Ravinder Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Sanjay Kumar · 2023 INSC 426

The Supreme Court held that only High Courts and the Supreme Court can impose fixed minimum terms exceeding 14 years in life imprisonment sentences and directed a 20-year minimum term for the appellant convicted of raping his minor daughter.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant life imprisonment special category sentence remission Section 376 IPC

Ravinder Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Sanjay Kumar · AIR 1961 SC 600

The Supreme Court held that only High Courts and the Supreme Court can impose fixed-term life sentences exceeding 14 years without remission, and accordingly modified the appellant's sentence to life imprisonment with a minimum 20-year term for the rape of his minor daughter.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant life imprisonment special category sentencing remission Section 376 IPC

Kusum Lata Sharma v. Arvind Singh

25 Apr 2023 · Dinesh Maheshwari; Sanjay Kumar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its limited revision jurisdiction by disturbing eviction orders based on bona fide requirement, restoring the Rent Controller's orders and affirming a broad construction of 'family' under the Delhi Rent Control Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant bona fide requirement eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e)

Harbhajan Singh v. State of Haryana

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that mere ownership of a vehicle without proof of knowledge or consent cannot sustain conviction under Section 25 of the NDPS Act and set aside the appellant's conviction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 25 NDPS Act Section 35 NDPS Act knowledge and consent owner liability

Harbhajan Singh v. State of Haryana

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that mere ownership of a vehicle without proof of knowledge or consent cannot sustain conviction under Section 25 of the NDPS Act and set aside the appellant's conviction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 25 NDPS Act Section 35 NDPS Act knowledge and consent owner liability

N.N. Global Mercantile Private Limited v. Indo Unique Flame Limited

25 Apr 2023 · K. M. Joseph; C. T. Ravikumar

The Supreme Court held that non-payment of stamp duty on a commercial contract does not invalidate the arbitration agreement contained therein, which is a distinct and enforceable agreement, and referred the issue to a Constitution Bench for authoritative resolution.

civil other Significant Arbitration Agreement Stamp Act, 1899 Section 35 Stamp Act Section 11(6A) Arbitration Act

Shanti Bhushan thr. Lr. & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Stamp duty on sale of property must be calculated on the market value as on the date of sale deed execution, allowing deductions for tenancy encumbrances, with valuation to be evidence-based and penalty waived if prior adjudication sought.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Indian Stamp Act, 1899 stamp duty market value tenancy encumbrance

Yogesh Navinchandra Ravani v. Nanjibhai Sagrambhai Chaudhary

25 Apr 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Vikram Nath

The Supreme Court held that a cancelled Power of Attorney holder cannot restore a withdrawn appeal and quashed the High Court's restoration order and strictures against the advocate.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Power of Attorney Legal Representatives Second Appeal Restoration of Appeal

Amresh Kumar Sinha v. State of Bihar

25 Apr 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Pankaj Mithal

The Supreme Court held that higher educational qualifications prescribed for promotion are not required for grant of ACP benefits, which are purely financial upgradations to avoid stagnation.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant Assured Career Progression ACP Scheme financial upgradation promotion

Shanti Bhushan thr. Lr. & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Stamp duty on sale deeds must be calculated on the market value of the property on the date of execution, considering tenancy encumbrances, with the matter remanded for fresh valuation and adjudication.

tax appeal_allowed Significant stamp duty market value Indian Stamp Act 1899 Section 47-A

Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur v. Prakash Chand Lunia

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that loss on confiscation of smuggled goods is not allowable as business loss under the Income Tax Act, distinguishing the Piara Singh precedent and upholding tax additions under Section 69A.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 69A Section 37(1) Explanation 1

Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur v. Prakash Chand Lunia

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that loss on confiscation of goods due to illegal acts in a legitimate business is not allowable as business loss under the Income Tax Act, overruling the High Court's contrary decision relying on Piara Singh.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 69A Section 37(1) Explanation 1