Supreme Court of India
17,225 judgments
Afjal Ali Sha @ Abjal Shaukat Sha v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
The Supreme Court transferred a murder trial within West Bengal to a competent court in Calcutta, rejecting transfer outside the State, holding that a fair trial can be ensured with proper judicial supervision despite State's earlier mala fide conduct.
Vishalakshi Amma v. State of Kerala
The Supreme Court held that the 180-day time limit for filing declarations under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 is mandatory and cannot be relaxed, dismissing the appellant's delayed application for ownership certificate.
Vishalakshi Amma v. State of Kerala
The Supreme Court held that the 180-day time limit for filing declarations under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 is mandatory and cannot be relaxed, dismissing the appellant's claim for ownership certificate filed beyond the prescribed period.
Prakash Kumar Jena & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the entitlement of Home Guards in Orissa to Duty Call-up Allowance at Rs.533 per day from the date of filing the writ petition, affirming compliance with its earlier Grah Rakshak judgment.
Prakash Kumar Jena & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the entitlement of Home Guards in Orissa to Duty Call-up Allowance at Rs.533/- per day from June 2018, affirming compliance with its earlier Grah Rakshak judgment and rejecting the State's appeal.
State of Orissa & Anr. v. Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board Karmachari Sangh & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that employees of the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board are not entitled to pensionary benefits contrary to the unchallenged Regulation 52 excluding pension, and financial constraints justify denial of retrospective pension, setting aside the High Court's directions to amend the regulations.
State of Orissa & Anr. v. Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board Karmachari Sangh & Anr.
The Supreme Court held that employees of the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board are not entitled to pension benefits under existing regulations, and the High Court erred in directing amendment to grant such benefits.
R SUNDARAM v. THE TAMIL NADU STATE LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
The Supreme Court held that denial of post-retirement benefits based on a delayed and procedurally flawed enquiry into the appellant's community certificate violated his constitutional right to pension and principles of natural justice, and directed payment of withheld benefits with interest.
R Sundaram v. Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee
The Supreme Court held that post-retirement benefits cannot be withheld without due process and proper enquiry into the genuineness of a Scheduled Tribe community certificate, emphasizing the right to pension as a constitutional right.
Neeraj Dutta v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi)
The Supreme Court held that demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, allowing circumstantial evidence but setting aside conviction where such proof was lacking.
ICON EDUCATION SOCIETY v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS
The Supreme Court held that minority unaided educational institutions must submit proposed fees to the AFRC for regulatory approval under the Madhya Pradesh Act, but the AFRC cannot unilaterally fix fees, balancing minority rights with regulatory oversight.
ICON EDUCATION SOCIETY v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS
The Supreme Court held that minority educational institutions must submit proposed fees to the regulatory committee for supervision but the committee cannot unilaterally fix fees, balancing minority rights with regulatory oversight under the Madhya Pradesh Act of 2007.
Meenu Prakash Bhantu v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court held that summoning an additional accused under Section 319 CrPC requires strong evidence of complicity, and mere suspicion or weak material is insufficient, setting aside the High Court's order summoning the appellant in a bank fraud case.
Meenu Prakash Bhantu v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court held that summoning an additional accused under Section 319 CrPC requires strong evidence indicating near probability of complicity, and dismissed the application to summon the appellant who merely supplied an illegible account statement.
Guna Mahto v. State of Jharkhand
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the murder conviction due to failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of circumstantial evidence and the impact of non-examination of the Investigating Officer.
Guna Mahto v. State of Jharkhand
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the murder conviction due to failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of circumstantial evidence and the impact of non-examination of the Investigating Officer.
Udayakumar v. State of Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court overturned the murder conviction of Udayakumar due to unreliable eyewitness identification and lack of corroborative evidence, emphasizing the necessity of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Narendrasinh Keshubhai Zala v. State of Gujarat
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to unreliable sole eyewitness testimony and lack of corroborative evidence, emphasizing the necessity of trustworthy evidence for conviction.
Ravasaheb @ Ravasahebgouda v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of eight accused for murder based on credible testimony of a single eyewitness and principles of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC, dismissing the appeals for lack of merit.
Pradeep Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh
The Supreme Court acquitted the accused due to failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the weak evidentiary value of extra-judicial confession without corroboration.