Supreme Court of India

8,449 judgments

Year:

Raghunath Behera v. State of Odisha

01 Nov 2022 · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha · 2022 INSC 1146

Raghunath Behera v. State of Odisha

01 Nov 2022 · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

The provided text contains only the case title and an extensive list of diary numbers without substantive judgment content.

other

D. KRISHNA MOHAN v. HON’BLE SECRETARY

01 Nov 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; M.R. Shah; Sanjiv Khanna

The Supreme Court dismissed the Review Petition and refused permission to list it in open court, holding that no grounds existed to justify interference with the earlier order.

civil petition_dismissed Review Petition Inherent Jurisdiction Supreme Court Legal Service Committee Application for listing

झारखंड राज्य v. शैलेंद्र कुमार राय उर्ा पांडव राय

31 Oct 2022 · डॉ. निंजय वाई चंद्रचूड़

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction based on a reliable dying declaration and medical evidence, rejecting the High Court's acquittal and condemning the unscientific 'two-finger test' in sexual assault cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dying declaration Section 32(1) Indian Evidence Act rape murder

The State of Jharkhand v. Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai

31 Oct 2022 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Hima Kohli

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction based on a credible dying declaration recorded by police, rejecting the High Court's acquittal and deprecated the use of the two-finger test in rape cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dying declaration Section 32(1) Indian Evidence Act rape murder

Union of India v. Munshi Ram

31 Oct 2022 · M. R. Shah; B. V. Nagarathna · 2022 INSC 1141
Cites 3 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court held that Commission Vendors absorbed into regular Railway service are entitled to count 50% of their pre-absorption service as qualifying service for pensionary benefits, affirming uniform treatment across Railway zones and upholding constitutional equality.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Commission Vendors Pensionary benefits Qualifying service Absorption

Union of India v. Munshi Ram

31 Oct 2022 · M. R. Shah; B. V. Nagarathna
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that Commission Vendors absorbed into regular Railway service are entitled to count 50% of their pre-absorption service as qualifying service for pensionary benefits, affirming parity with similarly situated employees across Railway zones.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Commission Vendors pensionary benefits qualifying service absorption

Anurag Purushottam v. R. R. Prasad Government

31 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that the chief editor not named as editor in the publication cannot be held liable for criminal defamation at the summons stage, and exceptions to defamation are to be examined at trial, allowing his appeal while dismissing that of the reporter.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant criminal defamation editorial liability Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 Section 7

Aroon Purie v. State of NCT of Delhi

31 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court held that an Editor-in-Chief cannot be held liable for defamation without specific allegations of control, quashed proceedings against him and public servants, but allowed trial against the article's author.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant defamation Editor-in-Chief liability Section 7 Press and Registration of Books Act Section 499 IPC exceptions

Saurabh Sukla v. Ra. Ra. Chedal Government

31 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court clarified the liability of editors under the Press and Registration of Books Act and limited judicial interference under Section 482 CrPC in defamation complaints, allowing criminal proceedings against the article's author but quashing them against the main editor and certain public servants.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant defamation Section 499 IPC Section 482 CrPC Press and Registration of Books Act

Aroon Purie v. State of NCT of Delhi

31 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court held that an Editor-in-Chief can be held liable for defamation only on specific allegations of control and knowledge, quashed proceedings against the Editor-in-Chief and public servants, but upheld summons against the article's author.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant defamation Section 499 IPC Editor-in-Chief liability Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867

Directorate of Enforcement v. Padmanabhan Kishore

31 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi

The Supreme Court held that a person handing over money with intent to bribe is liable under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act as involved in proceeds of crime, allowing prosecution to continue.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 proceeds of crime money laundering bribery

Directorate of Enforcement v. Padmanabhan Kishore

31 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Supreme Court held that a person handing over money with intent to bribe a public servant is liable under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act as the money constitutes proceeds of crime.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 proceeds of crime bribery Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

Chander Prakash Wadhwa v. State (NCT of Delhi)

22 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi · 2022 INSC 1138

The Supreme Court allowed the petitioner to file fresh bail applications on new medical grounds and directed the Trial Court to consider such applications with the aid of a Medical Board if necessary.

criminal other Significant interim bail medical grounds Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Medical Board

Chander Prakash Wadhwa v. State (NCT of Delhi)

22 Oct 2022 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Bela M. Trivedi
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court directed the Trial Court to reconsider the petitioner's bail application on fresh medical grounds, allowing a fresh bail plea or challenge to the earlier rejection with the possibility of a Medical Board examination.

criminal other Significant interim bail medical grounds Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Medical Board

Dental Council of India v. Sailendra Sharma

21 Oct 2022 · M. R. Shah; M. M. Sundresh

The Supreme Court held that postgraduate dental admissions granted unilaterally by private colleges after the prescribed deadline and without following counselling procedures are illegal and must be cancelled, rejecting the High Court's order allowing such admissions to continue.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant postgraduate dental admissions illegal admissions counselling procedure vacant seats

Dental Council of India v. Sailendra Sharma

21 Oct 2022 · M. R. Shah; M. M. Sundresh
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Supreme Court held that admissions granted by private dental colleges after the prescribed deadline and without following counselling procedures are illegal, and such admissions cannot be validated by interim orders or sympathy, thereby restoring cancellation of those admissions.

education appeal_allowed Significant postgraduate dental admissions counselling procedure admission deadline illegal admissions

Professor Sreejith P.S. v. Dr. Rajasree M.S.

21 Oct 2022 · M. R. Shah; C. T. Ravikumar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that appointments of Vice Chancellor must comply with UGC Regulations which prevail over conflicting State University Acts, and quashed an appointment made contrary to these Regulations as void ab initio.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Vice Chancellor appointment UGC Regulations University Act Search Committee

HARISH ISHWARBHAI PATEL v. JATIN ISHWARBHAI PATEL & ORS.

21 Oct 2022 · Aniruddha Bose; Vikram Nath

The Supreme Court restored the trial court’s order granting temporary injunction to maintain status quo over disputed properties under a challenged Will, emphasizing protection of parties’ interests pending trial.

civil appeal_allowed Significant temporary injunction status quo Will validity undue influence

Ajit Kumar Shrivastava v. State of Madhya Pradesh

21 Oct 2022 · Ajay Rastogi; C. T. Ravikumar
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Supreme Court held that without any departmental enquiry pending under the Rules 1969, an officer's candidature cannot be kept in a sealed cover during promotion, and directed the promotion of the appellant with consequential benefits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Departmental Promotion Committee sealed cover All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 departmental enquiry