Supreme Court of India
15,089 judgments
VST INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
The Supreme Court upheld an interim order restraining further recovery of interest on Entry Tax arrears from the appellant pending final adjudication of the writ petition.
VST INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
The Supreme Court restrained further recovery of interest on Entry Tax arrears from the appellant pending final adjudication of the writ petition challenging the demand.
Maars Software International Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal against the High Court's restoration of FEMA penalty, remanding the case for fresh consideration of material evidence on merits.
Maars Software International Ltd. v. Union of India
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and remanded the case to the High Court for fresh consideration of FEMA penalty appeals, emphasizing the need to consider all relevant material on record.
Naresh Chandra Bhardwaj v. Bank of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court converted the dismissal of a bank officer for sanctioning bad loans into compulsory retirement to uphold parity with similarly placed officers, emphasizing limited judicial interference in disciplinary penalties.
Naresh Chandra Bhardwaj v. Bank of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court modified the dismissal of a bank officer to unauthorized retirement without pension, applying the principle of parity and balancing disciplinary severity with compassionate pensionary benefits.
Naresh Chandra Bhardwaj v. Bank of India
The Supreme Court modified the appellant's disciplinary penalty from removal to compulsory retirement on the ground of parity with similarly placed officers, emphasizing limited judicial interference in punishment quantum.
Rajasthan State v. Birbal Maharaya
The Supreme Court held that remission rules cannot impose conditions beyond the statutory minimum 14 years imprisonment under Section 433-A CrPC and struck down the additional remission requirement in the Rajasthan Jail Rules, 2006.
Rajasthan State v. Mukesh Sharma
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of a rule requiring life convicts to serve at least 14 years and earn 4 years remission before remission consideration, rejecting the High Court's invalidation of the rule.
State of Rajasthan v. Mukesh Sharma
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a State rule requiring life convicts to serve 14 years plus earn four years remission before remission consideration, holding the rule consistent with Section 433-A Cr.P.C. and that non-laying before the legislature was directory.
Nand Kumar Manjhi & Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that appointments made beyond advertised vacancies are illegal and seniority can only be reckoned from the date of regularisation, dismissing the appellants' claim for seniority from their initial illegal appointment date.
Nand Kumar Manjhi & Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld that seniority in the Bihar Forest Service must be reckoned from the date of regularisation, not from illegal initial appointments made beyond advertised vacancies.
ANIL KUMAR ANAND v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)
The Supreme Court held that Customs Valuation Rules must be applied sequentially, setting aside revaluation and penalty orders for failure to consider transaction values of identical or similar goods before resorting to other valuation methods.
कुमार घिमिरे v. मसक्ककम राज्य
The Supreme Court held that an appellate court can enhance sentence only after giving the accused an opportunity to be heard, setting aside the High Court's enhancement of sentence under the POCSO Act for lack of procedural compliance.
Kumar Ghimirey v. State of Sikkim
The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in enhancing the sentence without giving notice to the accused, setting aside the enhanced sentence while affirming conviction and original sentence under the POCSO Act.
Kumar Ghimire v. State
The Supreme Court held that a High Court can enhance a sentence only after giving the accused an opportunity to be heard under Section 386 CrPC, and set aside the High Court's order increasing the sentence under the POCSO Act without such opportunity.
Kumar Ghimirey v. State of Sikkim
The Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot enhance sentence in an appeal filed by the accused without issuing notice for enhancement, setting aside the enhanced sentence while upholding conviction under the POCSO Act.
G. Shashikala v. G. Kalawati Bai
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and remanded the case for fresh hearing after holding that the High Court committed jurisdictional error by improperly deciding applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC without following binding precedents.
G. Shashikala v. G. Kalawati Bai
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and remanded the case for fresh hearing after holding that the High Court committed jurisdictional error in deciding applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC without applying binding precedents.
Bikash Ranjan Raut v. State
A Magistrate cannot suo motu order further investigation after taking cognizance and issuing summons without police application under Section 173(8) CrPC; such orders are beyond jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.