Supreme Court of India

16,355 judgments

Year:

Ebha Arjun Jadeja v. State of Gujarat

16 Oct 2019 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

Non-compliance with the mandatory prior approval requirement under Section 20-A(1) of the TADA Act vitiates prosecution under the Act, leading to discharge of accused from TADA offences while allowing prosecution under other laws.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 20-A(1) TADA Act prior approval recording of information mandatory provision

Walaiti Ram Charan Dass v. State of Punjab

16 Oct 2019 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Punjab Rules regulating allotment of plots to old agricultural market licensees, affirming eligibility conditions and allowing limited equitable relaxation for excusable non-compliance.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board Rules allotment of plots license renewal minimum turnover

Walaiti Ram Charan Dass v. State of Punjab

16 Oct 2019 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Punjab's agricultural market allotment rules, affirming reasonable eligibility criteria and limited equitable relief for minor non-compliance.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board Rules preferential allotment license continuity turnover criteria

Union of India v. Gautam Khaitan

15 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai · 2019 INSC 1143

The Supreme Court held that the Central Government validly notified the Black Money Act's commencement from 01.07.2015 to enable declarations without retrospectively applying penal provisions, setting aside the High Court's interim restraint order.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Black Money Act retrospective applicability taxation of undisclosed foreign income Section 59 declaration

Union of India v. Gautam Khaitan

15 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court held that the Black Money Act notification bringing the Act into force from 01.07.2015 was valid to enable one-time declarations and did not retrospectively apply penal provisions, quashing the High Court's interim restraint order.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Black Money Act retrospective applicability tax charging provisions penal provisions

H. S. YADAV v. SHAKUNTALA DEVI PARAKH

15 Oct 2019 · Deepak Gupta; Surya Kant

The Supreme Court held that a State Legislature cannot provide a direct appeal to the Supreme Court from a tribunal under Article 323B, striking down Section 13(2) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act as unconstitutional.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant State Legislature competence Supreme Court jurisdiction Article 323B tribunals High Court supervisory jurisdiction

Shiv Kumar & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

14 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai

Purchasers of land after Section 4 notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 acquire no title and cannot invoke Section 24 of the 2013 Act to challenge acquisition or claim lapse thereof; such sales are void and confer no rights.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act 1894 Section 4 notification Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 Section 24

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Sabal Singh

14 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that land recorded as 'Bir' (Grass) land before abolition of Zamindari does not qualify as Khudkasht land and vests in the State, denying pakka tenancy and Bhumiswami rights to Zamindars' successors.

property appeal_allowed Significant Zamindari Abolition Act Khudkasht land Bir land Bhumiswami rights

Ajay Bhatt v. State of Uttarakhand

14 Oct 2019 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; M.R. Shah

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of accelerated promotion quotas for Degree-holding Junior Engineers, allowing reasonable classification based on educational qualifications under Articles 14 and 16.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant accelerated promotion educational qualification Articles 14 and 16 reasonable classification

Kantilal v. State of Gujarat

04 Oct 2019 · L. NAGESWARA RAO; HEMANT GUPTA

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant in a dowry harassment and suicide case due to lack of corroborative evidence supporting allegations of physical assault.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry harassment suicide Section 498A IPC corroboration

Nusli Neville Wadia v. Ivory Properties

04 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M.R. Shah; B.R. Gavai
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that under Section 9A of the CPC as amended by Maharashtra, jurisdiction includes limitation, which must be decided as a preliminary issue before interim relief, overruling contrary views and emphasizing the provision's overriding effect over Order XIV Rule 2 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 9A CPC jurisdiction limitation preliminary issue

Fainul Khan v. State of Jharkhand

04 Oct 2019 · Navin Sinha; B.R. Gavai

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under Sections 302/149 IPC, ruling that procedural defects in charge framing and examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. do not invalidate a trial absent demonstrated prejudice.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 313 Cr.P.C. Section 302 IPC unlawful assembly common object

Fainul Khan v. State of Jharkhand

04 Oct 2019 · Navin Sinha; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under Sections 302/149 IPC, ruling that procedural omissions do not vitiate trial absent demonstrated prejudice and that credible injured eye witness testimony suffices to sustain conviction.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 313 Cr.P.C. Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC unlawful assembly

Vidhi Himmat Katariya v. The State of Gujarat

04 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court held that eligibility for MBBS admission under the PwD quota must be determined as per the amended 2019 regulations and dismissed petitions of disabled candidates who did not meet the prescribed physical criteria.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Persons with Disability Act 2016 PwD reservation Graduate Medical Education Regulations 1997 Appendix H

Vidhi Himmat Katariya v. The State of Gujarat

04 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai

The Supreme Court held that eligibility for PwD reservation in MBBS admissions must be determined as per the amended 2019 regulations at the time of admission, dismissing petitions of students who did not meet the prescribed physical criteria.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Persons with Disability Act 2016 PwD reservation Graduate Medical Education Regulations 1997 Appendix H

Duncans Industries Ltd. v. A. J. Agrochem

04 Oct 2019 · Arun Mishra; M. R. Shah; B. R. Gavai · 2019 INSC 1136

The Supreme Court held that insolvency proceedings under Section 9 of the IBC are maintainable without prior consent of the Central Government under Section 16G of the Tea Act, 1953, where management has not been actually taken over by the Government.

corporate appeal_dismissed Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Tea Act, 1953 Section 16G Section 9 IBC

Raj Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh

04 Oct 2019 · Deepak Gupta; Aniruddha Bose

The Supreme Court upheld conviction for milk adulteration despite marginal deviation from standards, affirming strict compliance with statutory food quality norms and limiting court powers to commute sentences.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 food adulteration milk standards marginal deviation

State of Arunachal Pradesh v. Ramchandra Rabidas @ Ratan Rabidas & Anr.

04 Oct 2019 · Indu Malhotra; Sanjiv Khanna
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that prosecution for motor vehicle offences can be initiated under both the Motor Vehicles Act and the Indian Penal Code, setting aside the High Court's direction restricting prosecution solely under the Motor Vehicles Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Indian Penal Code, 1860 road traffic offences rash and negligent driving

R. Srinivas Kumar v. R. Shametha

04 Oct 2019 · M. R. Shah; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court allowed divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage under Article 142, dissolving a 22-year separated marriage despite absence of consent, while awarding permanent alimony to protect the wife's financial interests.

family appeal_allowed Significant irretrievable breakdown of marriage Article 142 Constitution of India divorce Hindu Marriage Act 1955

R. Srinivas Kumar v. R. Shametha

04 Oct 2019 · M. R. Shah; Sanjay Kishan Kaul

The Supreme Court allowed divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage under Article 142, dissolving a 22-year separated marriage despite absence of mutual consent, while awarding permanent alimony to the wife.

family appeal_allowed Significant irretrievable breakdown of marriage Article 142 Constitution of India divorce Hindu Marriage Act 1955