Supreme Court of India

16,357 judgments

Year:

Vinod Dua v. Union of India & Ors.

03 Jun 2021 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Vineet Saran
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court declined to quash an FIR against journalist Vinod Dua for his critical COVID-19 commentary, affirming the protection of free speech under Article 19(1)(a) and emphasizing sparing exercise of Article 32 jurisdiction in quashing FIRs.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Article 32 Constitution of India Freedom of speech and expression Section 124-A IPC Quashing of FIR

Jigya Yadav v. C.B.S.E. (Central Board of Secondary Education)

03 Jun 2021 · A.M. Khanwilkar; B.R. Gavai; Krishna Murari · 2021 INSC 303

The Supreme Court upheld CBSE's Examination Byelaws restricting corrections in certificates to conformity with school records, emphasizing judicial restraint and procedural compliance in academic identity corrections.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant CBSE Examination Byelaws 2007 Correction of name in certificates Change of date of birth Fundamental rights and identity

Jigya Yadav v. C.B.S.E. (Central Board of Secondary Education) & Ors.

03 Jun 2021 · A.M. Khanwilkar; B.R. Gavai; Krishna Murari

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of CBSE's Examination Byelaws restricting corrections in certificates to conformity with school records, balancing individual identity rights with administrative integrity and judicial restraint in academic matters.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant CBSE Examination Byelaws 2007 Correction of name in certificates Change of date of birth Fundamental rights and identity

Union of India v. Rakesh Malhotra and another

31 May 2021 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; L Nageswara Rao; S Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court held that the Union of India's decentralized and differential pricing COVID-19 vaccination policy is prima facie arbitrary and directed a review to ensure equitable, transparent, and constitutionally compliant vaccine distribution.

constitutional other Significant COVID-19 vaccination policy Liberalized Vaccination Policy differential pricing constitutional validity

Ompal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

28 May 2021 · N.V. RAMANA; SURYA KANT; ANIRUDDHA BOSE

The Supreme Court held that the High Court cannot grant protection from arrest after dismissing anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C., but may do so under its inherent powers in exceptional cases with reasons.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. protection from arrest inherent powers

Ompal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

28 May 2021 · N.V. RAMANA; SURYA KANT; ANIRUDDHA BOSE

The Supreme Court held that the High Court cannot grant protection from arrest after dismissing anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. without reasons and proper balancing of interests, setting aside such orders granting 90 days protection.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. protection from arrest inherent powers

Satbir Singh & Another v. State of Haryana

28 May 2021 · N. V. Ramana; Aniruddha Bose
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court upheld conviction under Section 304-B IPC for dowry death based on proximate cruelty and dowry demand but set aside conviction under Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide due to lack of proof of suicide.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry death Section 304-B IPC Section 306 IPC Section 113-B Evidence Act

Satbir Singh & Another v. State of Haryana

28 May 2021 · N. V. Ramana; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under Section 304-B IPC for dowry death due to proven cruelty and harassment but set aside convictions under Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide due to lack of evidence of suicide.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry death Section 304-B IPC Section 306 IPC Section 113-B Evidence Act

Sunil Kumar @ Sudhir Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh

25 May 2021 · Dinesh Maheshwari; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that courts must explicitly specify whether multiple sentences run concurrently or consecutively, and modified the appellants' sentences to a maximum of 14 years imprisonment to avoid disproportionate punishment.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 31 CrPC concurrent sentences consecutive sentences single transaction principle

Sunil Kumar @ Sudhir Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh

25 May 2021 · Dinesh Maheshwari; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that courts must specify whether multiple sentences run concurrently or consecutively, and in absence of such specification, sentences run consecutively by default, but modified the appellants' total imprisonment to 14 years considering proportionality and time served.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 31 CrPC concurrent sentences consecutive sentences single transaction principle

Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India

21 May 2021 · L. Nageswara Rao; S. Ravindra Bhat · 2021 INSC 297
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the Central Government's power to selectively notify provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for personal guarantors to corporate debtors, validating the impugned notification and rejecting challenges of ultra vires and unconstitutional delegation.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Section 1(3) IBC Personal guarantors Conditional legislation

Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India

21 May 2021 · L. Nageswara Rao; S. Ravindra Bhat
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the Central Government's power under Section 1(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to selectively bring into force provisions applicable to personal guarantors to corporate debtors, dismissing challenges to the impugned notification as constitutionally valid.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Section 1(3) IBC Personal guarantors Conditional legislation

INDIA RESURGENCE ARC PRIVATE LIMITED v. M/S. AMIT METALIKS LIMITED & ANR.

13 May 2021 · Vineet Saran; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the approval of a resolution plan by the Committee of Creditors under the IBC, holding that its commercial wisdom regarding security interests and distribution is final and not subject to judicial interference except on limited grounds.

corporate appeal_dismissed Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Committee of Creditors Resolution Plan Commercial Wisdom

India Resurgence ARC Private Limited v. M/S. Amit Metaliks Limited & Anr.

13 May 2021 · Vineet Saran; Dinesh Maheshwari

The Supreme Court upheld the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors in approving a resolution plan under the IBC, holding that consideration of security interest value is discretionary and not subject to judicial interference except on limited grounds.

corporate appeal_dismissed Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Committee of Creditors Resolution Plan Commercial Wisdom

Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. and Anr. v. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited and Anr.

12 May 2021 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indira Banerjee

Labour Cess under the BOCW Act is not payable on supply contracts lacking construction work, and recovery without proper levy and assessment under the Cess Act is unlawful.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Labour Cess Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 BOCW Act Supply Contract

Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. and Anr. v. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited and Anr.

12 May 2021 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Indira Banerjee

Labour cess under the BOCW Act is leviable only on construction work following statutory assessment, and supply contracts without construction activity do not attract such cess; recovery without proper assessment is impermissible.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Labour Cess Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 BOCW Act Cess Act

KOMAL KRISHAN ARORA v. SANDEEP KUMAR

08 May 2021 · J.K. MAHESHWARI; VIJAY BISHNOI · 2025 INSC 1123
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld interim custody of a minor child with the father in India, emphasizing the child's welfare as paramount in cross-jurisdictional custody disputes and dismissing the mother's appeal.

family appeal_dismissed Significant child custody habeas corpus best interest of child interim custody

Mangala Waman Karandikar v. Prakash Damodar Ranade

07 May 2021 · N.V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose · 2021 INSC 288

The Supreme Court held that a clear contract to continue an existing business cannot be reinterpreted as a license or lease of premises under the Bombay Rent Act by extrinsic evidence, restoring the Trial Court's decree in favor of the business owner.

civil appeal_allowed Significant contractual interpretation license agreement Bombay Rent Act Section 92 Indian Evidence Act

Mangala Waman Karandikar v. Prakash Damodar Ranade

07 May 2021 · N.V. Ramana; Surya Kant; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court held that a clear contract for continuation of business cannot be reinterpreted as a license or tenancy under the Bombay Rent Act by extrinsic evidence, restoring the Trial Court's decree and affirming its jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant contractual interpretation license agreement Bombay Rent Act Section 15A

Rajkumar Sabu v. M/S Sabu Trade Private Limited

07 May 2021 · Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a criminal trademark infringement case from Salem to Delhi, holding that mere inconvenience or overlapping civil suits do not justify transfer under Section 406 CrPC without credible evidence of bias.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant transfer petition Section 406 CrPC trade mark dispute criminal trial