Supreme Court of India

8,449 judgments

Year:

Ritika Sharan v. Sujoy Ghosh

28 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indu Malhotra; Indira Banerjee · 2020 INSC 615

The Supreme Court allowed the mother to take her child to Singapore for employment-related relocation, emphasizing the child's welfare and balancing parental access rights while ensuring jurisdictional control.

family appeal_allowed Significant child custody welfare of the child jurisdiction Hindu Marriage Act

Ritika Sharan v. Sujoy Ghosh

28 Oct 2020 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Indu Malhotra; Indira Banerjee

The Supreme Court allowed the mother to take her child to Singapore for employment reasons, emphasizing the child's welfare over jurisdictional technicalities, while safeguarding the father's visitation rights.

family appeal_allowed Significant welfare of the child custody visitation rights relocation abroad

Smriti Madan Kansagra v. Perry Kansagra

28 Oct 2020 · Indu Malhotra; Hemant Gupta · 2020 INSC 613

The Supreme Court upheld the father's permanent custody of the minor child, emphasizing the child's welfare and preference as paramount in guardianship disputes.

family appeal_dismissed Significant guardianship custody welfare of child natural guardian

Smriti Madan Kansagra v. Perry Kansagra

28 Oct 2020 · Hemant Gupta

The Supreme Court upheld the father's permanent custody of the minor child, emphasizing the child's welfare and preferences as paramount in guardianship disputes.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 custody of minor child best interest of child

M/S. L&T HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED v. M/S. TRISHUL DEVELOPERS

27 Oct 2020 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA; AJAY RASTOGI

The Supreme Court held that a mere technical defect in the name of the secured creditor on a SARFAESI Act demand notice does not invalidate proceedings if no substantial prejudice is caused and the borrower is aware of the creditor's identity.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 13(2) demand notice technical defect secured creditor

Satyama Dubey v. Union of India

27 Oct 2020 · S. A. Bobde; A. S. Bopanna; V. Ramasubramanian · 2020 INSC 612

The Supreme Court directed CBI investigation under Allahabad High Court supervision and CRPF protection for the victim's family in the Hathras gang-rape case, declining to transfer trial or take over monitoring at this stage.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant gang-rape CBI investigation witness protection CRPF security

Satyama Dubey v. Union of India

27 Oct 2020 · S. A. Bobde; A. S. Bopanna; V. Ramasubramanian

The Supreme Court upheld the Allahabad High Court's monitoring of the CBI investigation into the Hathras gang-rape case, directed CRPF protection for the victim's family, and left trial venue and special prosecutor appointment to the High Court's discretion.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant gang-rape CBI investigation Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 protection of witnesses

Suresh Chandra v. Joga Singh Bisht

26 Oct 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that a non-participant in a government bidding process lacks locus standi to challenge a valid license allotment, and mere allegations of revenue loss do not justify judicial interference absent malafides or procedural irregularities.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant locus standi foreign liquor shop license government allotment revenue loss

State of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India

26 Oct 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court held that OBC reservation in Tamil Nadu's All India Quota medical seats cannot be implemented mid-admission process for 2020-21 and must await proper modalities for the next academic year.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant OBC reservation All India Quota medical admissions Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Act 1993

State of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India

26 Oct 2020 · L. Nageswara Rao; Hemant Gupta; Ajay Rastogi

The Supreme Court upheld the deferral of OBC reservation implementation in Tamil Nadu's All India Quota medical seats for 2020-2021, ruling that ongoing admissions cannot be disrupted and reservation must commence from the next academic year.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant OBC reservation All India Quota medical admissions Tamil Nadu

M. Ravindran v. The Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

26 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Vineet Saran
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2), CrPC accrues upon filing the bail application and cannot be defeated by subsequent filing of chargesheet or additional complaint while the bail application is pending.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) CrPC indefeasible right additional complaint

M. Ravindran v. The Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

26 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Vineet Saran
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that an accused is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC upon filing a bail application after expiry of the statutory investigation period, and subsequent filing of additional complaints cannot extinguish this right.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) CrPC Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act statutory right

M. Ravindran v. The Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

26 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; Mohan M. Shantanagoudar; Vineet Saran
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that an accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2), CrPC accrues upon filing a bail application after expiry of the investigation period and cannot be defeated by subsequent filing of chargesheet or complaint during pendency of the bail application.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167(2) CrPC indefeasible right additional complaint

Umesh Kumar Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors.

16 Oct 2020 · Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court dismissed the petitioner's plea to transfer three criminal cases from Uttarakhand courts, holding that mere apprehension of bias without credible evidence does not justify transfer under Section 406 CrPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant transfer petition Section 406 CrPC fair trial malicious prosecution

Umesh Kumar Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors.

16 Oct 2020 · Hrishikesh Roy

The Supreme Court dismissed transfer petitions seeking to move criminal trials from Uttarakhand courts, holding that mere apprehension of bias without credible evidence does not justify transfer under Section 406 CrPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 406 CrPC transfer of criminal cases fair trial apprehension of bias

Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v. State of Uttarakhand

16 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court held that university teachers who superannuate before June 30 are entitled to continue service on re-employment till June 30 following their retirement date under Statute No. 16.24, overruling the High Court's restrictive interpretation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant superannuation Statute No. 16.24 re-employment academic session

Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v. State of Uttarakhand

16 Oct 2020 · Uday Umesh Lalit; S. Ravindra Bhat

The Supreme Court held that university teachers whose superannuation date does not fall on June 30 are entitled to continue service till June 30 following their retirement month as re-employed teachers, overruling the High Court's restrictive interpretation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant superannuation university teachers Statute No. 16.24 re-employment

Uttar Pradesh State v. Suresh Kumar Singh & Ors.

16 Oct 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Naveen Sinha; K. M. Joseph · 2020 INSC 603
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that unilateral cancellation of a contract by a public authority without affording a fair hearing violates natural justice and is liable to be set aside, clarifying the limited scope of judicial review in contractual disputes under Article 226.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant contract cancellation natural justice judicial review Article 226

State of U.P. v. Sudhir Kumar Singh and Ors.

16 Oct 2020 · R.F. Nariman; Navin Sinha; K.M. Joseph · 2020 INSC 603
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that cancellation of a tender without hearing the successful bidder violated natural justice and caused prejudice, warranting interference under Article 14 of the Constitution.

administrative appeal_partially_allowed Significant natural justice audi alteram partem prejudice tender cancellation

Uttar Pradesh State v. Suresh Kumar Singh & Ors.

16 Oct 2020 · R. F. Nariman; Naveen Sinha; K. M. Joseph
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that unilateral termination of a State agency contract without hearing violates natural justice and writ jurisdiction is maintainable in such cases, directing fresh consideration with due process.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant writ jurisdiction Article 226 contract termination natural justice