Supreme Court of India
17,536 judgments
Reliance Industries Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India
The Supreme Court held that SEBI must disclose all relevant expert opinions and reports to the accused in criminal proceedings to ensure a fair trial, rejecting claims of litigation privilege and ordering disclosure of withheld documents.
XYZ v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court held that police must register FIR upon cognizable offence complaints and Magistrates must direct police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC when prima facie evidence exists, especially in sexual harassment cases, setting aside the High Court's refusal to do so.
XYZ v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court held that police must register FIRs for cognizable offences and Magistrates have a duty under Section 156(3) CrPC to direct police investigation when prima facie evidence exists, especially in sexual harassment cases requiring sensitive handling and retrieval of material evidence.
Jai Prakash Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court set aside the conviction under Section 307 IPC due to insufficient corroboration, failure to properly consider defence and alibi, and inadequate examination under Section 313 CrPC, emphasizing the necessity of a fair trial.
JAI PRAKASH TIWARI v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
The Supreme Court set aside the conviction under Section 307 IPC due to lack of independent corroboration, contradictions in prosecution evidence, and failure to properly consider the accused's defence under Section 313 CrPC.
M/s Mitra S.P. (P) Ltd. v. Dhiren Kumar
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order allowing a workman's writ petition without merit discussion and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication on the application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
Manjit Singh Sodhi v. The Custodian
The Supreme Court held that the Limitation Act does not apply to execution proceedings before the Special Court under the 1992 Act, upheld the order directing asset disclosure, and dismissed the appeal challenging limitation and liability.
Honnaiah T.H. v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court held that a trial court's refusal to mark the informant's statement as an exhibit, which forms the basis of the FIR, is not an interlocutory order barred from revision, and the informant has locus standi to challenge such order under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC.
Honnaiah T.H. v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court held that a trial court’s refusal to mark the informant’s statement as an exhibit, which forms the basis of the FIR, is not an interlocutory order barred from revision and allowed the informant’s criminal revision petition to prevent miscarriage of justice.
Delhi Transport Corporation v. Sandeep Kaushik
The Supreme Court modified a High Court order directing appointment after a flawed recruitment, awarding compensation instead of actual appointment due to changed circumstances and delay.
Delhi Transport Corporation v. Sandeep Kaushik
The Supreme Court modified the High Court’s order directing appointment after a flawed recruitment, awarding monetary compensation instead due to changed circumstances and delay.
Sultan v. State of U.P.
The Supreme Court acquitted appellants due to doubts over the reliability of the dying declaration and contradictions in the prosecution evidence, emphasizing careful scrutiny of dying declarations before conviction.
Sultan v. The State of U.P.
The Supreme Court set aside the murder conviction based on an unreliable dying declaration and procedural lapses, granting benefit of doubt to the appellants.
Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
The Supreme Court held that service tax was not leviable on composite works contracts prior to the 2007 amendment to the Finance Act, reaffirming the Larsen and Toubro Limited precedent and rejecting the Revenue's plea for reconsideration.
Satyajit Kumar v. State of Jharkhand
The Supreme Court held that the Governor's notification providing 100% reservation for local residents in Scheduled Areas violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and upheld the High Court's quashing of such reservation and related appointments.
Satyajit Kumar v. State of Jharkhand
The Supreme Court held that 100% reservation for local residents in Scheduled Districts under the Fifth Schedule violates Articles 14 and 16, declaring the notifications unconstitutional but allowed protection of appointments already made to prevent public interest disruption.
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & OTHERS v. DRAGENDRA SINGH JADON
The Supreme Court held that reinstatement after wrongful dismissal includes continuity of service for seniority and pay fixation, and principles of res judicata do not bar distinct claims for such benefits.
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & OTHERS v. DRAGENDRA SINGH JADON
The Supreme Court held that reinstatement restores continuous service for seniority and pay fixation purposes, and a subsequent writ petition on distinct relief is maintainable despite earlier proceedings.
J. Vijayan v. State of Kerala
The Supreme Court held that the age of superannuation of university and college teachers is a State subject governed by statutory rules and cannot be overridden by UGC Regulations, dismissing the appeal challenging Kerala's refusal to enhance retirement age.
J. Vijayan v. State of Kerala
The Supreme Court held that the age of superannuation of university teachers is a State policy matter and the State of Kerala is not bound to enhance it to 65 years under the UGC Regulations, 2010.