Supreme Court of India

15,092 judgments

Year:
Showing 2020 — 1206 judgments found

Vikesh Kumar Gupta v. Rajasthan State

07 Dec 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the revised merit list prepared by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission based on expert committee recommendations, limiting judicial interference in academic evaluations and dismissing the appellants' challenge to their non-selection.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant judicial interference examination answer key merit list revision public service commission

Vikesh Kumar Gupta & Anr v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

07 Dec 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA; AJAY RASTOGI

The Supreme Court upheld the select list prepared on the basis of the expert committee's revised answer key, disallowed court re-evaluation of answer keys, and dismissed appeals challenging the selection process to ensure finality and administrative efficiency.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant judicial review examination answer key expert committee selection process

National Medical Commission v. Mothukuru Sriyah Koumudi

07 Dec 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that a meritorious candidate illegally denied PG medical admission is entitled to admission in the next academic year with compensation, but courts cannot direct creation of additional seats beyond sanctioned capacity for the current year.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Post Graduate Medical Admission Illegal Denial of Admission Medical Council of India Regulations NEET PG

National Medical Commission v. Mothukuru Sriyah Koumudi

07 Dec 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that a meritorious candidate illegally denied admission to a PG medical course cannot be admitted beyond sanctioned intake capacity in the same year but is entitled to admission in the next year with compensation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant medical admission post graduate medical course illegal denial of admission creation of additional seats

TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) v. ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD.

07 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah · 2020 INSC 680

The Supreme Court upheld the final and binding allocation of power sector employees between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh by a Court-appointed One-Man Committee under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, rejecting challenges to the Committee's reports and emphasizing limited scope for interference.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 Section 82 One-Man Committee employee allocation

TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) v. ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD.

07 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court upheld the final and binding allocation of power utility employees between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh by the One-Man Committee under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, rejecting challenges to the Committee's Concluding Report.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 Section 82 One-Man Committee employee allocation

Amish Devgan v. Union of India

07 Dec 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Sanjiv Khanna
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that multiple FIRs against a journalist for alleged hate speech in a televised debate are validly registered and not liable to be quashed at threshold, emphasizing the balance between freedom of expression and prevention of hate speech.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant freedom of speech hate speech jurisdiction FIR

Amish Devgan v. Union of India

07 Dec 2020 · A. M. Khanwilkar; Sanjiv Khanna
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that FIRs against a journalist for alleged hate speech during a televised debate cannot be quashed at the threshold, emphasizing the balance between freedom of expression and prevention of hate speech under constitutional and statutory law.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant freedom of speech hate speech jurisdiction FIR

Raghav Gupta v. State

04 Dec 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Ravindra Singh; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court held that mandatory product particulars under food safety rules are satisfied if available in a scannable barcode, quashing prosecution for alleged non-compliance.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Food Adulteration Act Rule 32(E) barcode mandatory particulars

Chaman Lal v. The State of Himachal Pradesh

03 Dec 2020 · M. R. Shah; Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's conviction of the accused for rape of a mentally retarded woman, affirming the appellate court's power to reverse acquittal upon reappreciation of evidence including medical proof of victim's incapacity to consent.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant appeal against acquittal Section 376 IPC rape mental retardation

Chaman Lal v. The State of Himachal Pradesh

03 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M.R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's conviction of the accused for rape of a mentally retarded victim, affirming the appellate court's power to reverse acquittal on reappreciation of evidence including medical proof of victim's incapacity to consent.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant appeal against acquittal Section 376 IPC rape mental retardation

SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA

03 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of GST levy on lotteries as goods including actionable claims under the CGST Act, dismissing the petition challenging the levy as discriminatory and beyond legislative competence.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Goods and Services Tax Lottery Actionable claim Definition of goods

Inderjit Singh Sodhi and Others v. The Chairman, Punjab State Electricity Board and Another

03 Dec 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta; Ajay Rastogi · 2020 INSC 674

Promoted Assistant Engineers without requisite direct recruitment qualifications are not entitled to time bound promotional scales on par with directly recruited Assistant Engineers under Punjab State Electricity Board regulations and circulars.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant time bound promotional scale Punjab State Electricity Board direct recruitment promotion

Inderjit Singh Sodhi and Others v. The Chairman, Punjab State Electricity Board and Another

03 Dec 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta; Ajay Rastogi
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

Promoted Assistant Engineers without requisite qualifications and promoted within 9/16 years are not entitled to time bound promotional scales granted to directly recruited Assistant Engineers under Punjab State Electricity Board regulations.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant time bound promotional scale Punjab State Electricity Board Assistant Engineer direct recruitment

Sumedh Singh Saini v. State of Punjab

03 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy; M.R. Shah

The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to a retired police officer accused of murder in a 29-year-old case, emphasizing delay and procedural irregularities as grounds for bail pending investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 302 IPC delay in FIR malafide FIR

PANKJESHWAR SHARMA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS

03 Dec 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA; AJAY RASTOGI · 2020 INSC 673

The Supreme Court upheld irregular appointments of 22 Sub-Inspectors made to settle prolonged litigation, holding that long service and bona fide State action preclude disturbing such appointments despite merit-based claims by others.

service_law appeal_dismissed Significant merit list recruitment rules Article 14 Article 16

PANKJESHWAR SHARMA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS

03 Dec 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA; AJAY RASTOGI

The Supreme Court upheld irregular appointments made in deviation from the merit list due to prolonged litigation and long service, dismissing appeals challenging the selection process for Sub-Inspector posts in Jammu & Kashmir.

service_law appeal_dismissed Significant merit list recruitment rules Article 14 Article 16

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Jayant

03 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah · 2020 INSC 678
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that Magistrate's order directing FIR registration under Section 156(3) CrPC for illegal mining offences is valid despite compounding under MMDR Act, as offences under IPC and MMDR Act are distinct and Section 22 MMDR Act bars cognizance only upon written complaint by authorized officer.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant MMDR Act Section 22 MMDR Act Section 156(3) CrPC taking cognizance

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Jayant

03 Dec 2020 · Ashok Bhushan; M. R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 6

The Supreme Court held that Magistrates ordering investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC do not take cognizance attracting the bar under Section 22 of the MMDR Act, allowing prosecution under IPC for illegal mining despite compounding under the MMDR Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant MMDR Act Section 22 MMDR Act Section 156(3) CrPC Cognizance of offence

Issak Nabab Shah v. State of Maharashtra

03 Dec 2020 · M.R. Shah; Ashok Bhushan; R. Subhash Reddy · 2020 INSC 677

The Supreme Court reduced the sentence from 10 to 6 years rigorous imprisonment for possession of 6.300 kg Ganja under the NDPS Act, considering mitigating factors and the period already served.

criminal sentence_modified Significant NDPS Act Ganja possession quantum of sentence small quantity