Supreme Court of India

14,826 judgments

Year:

Vikram Bakshi v. R.P. Khosla

20 Aug 2025 · B. R. Gavai; Augustine George Masih · 2025 INSC 1020

The Supreme Court held that criminal courts cannot review or recall their own judgments under Section 362 CrPC except for clerical errors, setting aside the High Court’s impermissible recall of its order in a section 340 CrPC proceeding.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 340 CrPC Section 362 CrPC Review power in criminal proceedings Perjury prosecution

SD. SHABUDDIN v. STATE OF TELANGANA

19 Aug 2025 · Vikram Nath; Sandeep Mehta · 2025 INSC 999

The Supreme Court overturned the conviction under Section 411 IPC, holding that without proof of theft and knowledge of stolen property, mere possession is insufficient for conviction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 411 IPC Dishonestly receiving stolen property Burden of proof Section 379 IPC

Pawan Kumar Tiwary and Others v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board

19 Aug 2025 · J.K. Maheshwari; Aravind Kumar · 2025 INSC 1000
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that appointments made within sanctioned strength without fraud are irregular but not illegal, and must be protected by individualized scrutiny and the doctrine of severability, allowing the appellants' appointments to be restored with continuity of service but without back wages.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant appointment sanctioned strength irregular appointment illegal appointment

A.K. Jayaprakash LRs v. S.S. Mallikarjuna Rao

19 Aug 2025 · B. R. Gavai; Augustine George Masih · 2025 INSC 1003
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court held that delayed payment of dues without wilful disobedience does not constitute contempt and rejected the claim for pensionary benefits in contempt proceedings, awarding compensation for prolonged delay.

civil petition_dismissed Significant civil contempt wilful disobedience delay in compliance pensionary benefits

Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. v. Vinod

19 Aug 2025 · M. M. Sundresh; Rajesh Bindal · 2025 INSC 1004
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's uniform compensation award for land used in power transmission projects under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, emphasizing locality-specific valuation and highlighting procedural gaps requiring legislative reform.

property appeal_allowed Significant Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 compensation right of user transmission lines

Mahesh Chand v. Brijesh Kumar & Ors.

19 Aug 2025 · Rajesh Bindal; Manmohan · 2025 INSC 1005
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Supreme Court held that a subsequent declaration of land as non-agricultural under Section 143 of the UPZALR Act during pendency of litigation confers Civil Court jurisdiction despite absence of such declaration at suit filing, allowing the landlord's eviction suit to proceed.

civil appeal_allowed Significant UPZALR Act Section 143 declaration Civil Court jurisdiction non-agricultural land

Nabha Power Limited v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited

19 Aug 2025 · B. R. Gavai; Augustine George Masih · 2025 INSC 1002
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court held that deemed export benefits under the Foreign Trade Policy do not apply to immovable coal-based power plants and that DGFT notifications withdrawing such benefits do not constitute "Change in Law" under the Power Purchase Agreement, dismissing the appellants' claims for compensation.

contractual / administrative / energy sector appeal_dismissed Significant Deemed export benefits Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014 Change in Law Power Purchase Agreement

M/S SHAH NANJI NAGSI EXPORTS PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA

19 Aug 2025 · Aravind Kumar; N.V. Anjaria · 2025 INSC 1032

The Supreme Court held that procedural errors in shipping bills corrected under Section 149 of the Customs Act cannot defeat substantive entitlement to MEIS benefits and quashed the arbitrary rejection of the claim.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Merchandise Exports from India Scheme MEIS Foreign Trade Policy Section 149 Customs Act

DHARAM SINGH v. STATE OF U.P.

19 Aug 2025 · Vikram Nath; Sandeep Mehta · 2025 INSC 998
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that long-term daily-wage employees performing perennial public duties are entitled to regularization and sanctioned posts, and arbitrary refusals citing financial constraints are subject to judicial scrutiny.

labor appeal_allowed Significant regularization daily-wage employment perennial work arbitrariness

K. Prabhakar Hegde v. Bank of Baroda

19 Aug 2025 · Dipankar Datta; Prashant Kumar Mishra · 2025 INSC 997
Cites 2 · Cited by 4

The Supreme Court upheld dismissal of a bank officer, ruling that non-furnishing of a preliminary inquiry report does not vitiate disciplinary proceedings if not relied upon, and that mandatory questioning under Regulation 6(17) requires substantial compliance without demonstrated prejudice.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant preliminary inquiry report Regulation 6(17) of 1981 Regulations natural justice disciplinary proceedings

Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

18 Aug 2025 · B. R. GAVAI; K. VINOD CHANDRAN · 2025 INSC 990

The Supreme Court upheld the quashing of FIRs for abetment to suicide, holding that continuous harassment without a proximate act and clear mens rea is insufficient to sustain a charge under Section 306 IPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant abetment to suicide Section 306 IPC mens rea proximate incident

Saraswatabai Motiram Tayade v. Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation

18 Aug 2025 · Dipankar Datta; Augustine George Masih · 2025 INSC 1022

The Supreme Court restored the higher multiplier of 15 for compensation of orange trees in land acquisition, emphasizing consistent treatment of similarly situated landowners and rejecting the High Court's reduction to 10.

property appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition multiplier compensation orange trees

BHAYANA BUILDERS PVT. LTD. v. ORIENTAL STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. & ETC

18 Aug 2025 · Manoj Misra; Ujjal Bhuyan · 2025 INSC 1073

The Supreme Court held that a unilateral appointment clause empowering a managing director to nominate a sole arbitrator is invalid due to justifiable doubts about impartiality and the managing director's ineligibility, and directed appointment by an independent institution.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement unilateral appointment independence and impartiality Section 12(5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act

M.V. LEELAVATHI v. DR. C. R. SWAMY

18 Aug 2025 · Vikram Nath; Sandeep Mehta · 2025 INSC 994

The Supreme Court upheld the divorce decree on mental cruelty and enhanced permanent alimony from Rs.15 lakhs to Rs.50 lakhs as a one-time settlement considering the parties' financial capacities.

family appeal_allowed Significant permanent alimony Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 mental cruelty divorce decree

Sanjit Singh Salwan & Ors. v. Sardar Inderjit Singh Salwan & Ors.

14 Aug 2025 · Augustine George Masih; Atul S. Chandurkar · 2025 INSC 988

The Supreme Court held that parties who accept an arbitral award and consent decree are estopped from later challenging its validity on non-arbitrability grounds, allowing execution proceedings to be revived.

civil appeal_allowed Significant estoppel by conduct doctrine of election Section 92 CPC arbitral award

Ajmera Shyam v. Kova Laxmi

14 Aug 2025 · Surya Kant; Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh · 2025 INSC 992
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court upheld the election of a candidate despite non-disclosure of income in the affidavit, holding that such omission was not substantial or corrupt practice warranting voiding the election under the Representation of People Act, 1951.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Representation of People Act, 1951 Form 26 Affidavit non-disclosure of income corrupt practice

Pernod Ricard India Private Limited & Another v. Karanveer Singh Chhabra

14 Aug 2025 · J.B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 981
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Supreme Court allowed the appellants' appeal and granted interim injunction against the respondent's use of the deceptively similar trademark 'LONDON PRIDE', reaffirming the test of overall similarity and protection of well-known marks under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off deceptive similarity anti-dissection rule

A. RANJITHKUMAR v. E. KAVITHA

14 Aug 2025 · Vikram Nath; Sandeep Mehta · 2025 INSC 978

The Supreme Court dissolved a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown under Article 142, setting aside the High Court's order and awarding permanent alimony to the wife and son.

family appeal_allowed Significant irretrievable breakdown of marriage Article 142 Constitution of India divorce cruelty

M/s. SETHIA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. v. MAFATLAL MANGILAL KOTHARI AND ORS.

14 Aug 2025 · Rajesh Bindal; Manmohan · 2025 INSC 985

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's condonation of a 5,250-day delay in restoring a dismissed appeal, emphasizing the need to consider third-party rights and hear all affected parties before restoration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant restoration of appeal condonation of delay non-prosecution dismissal third-party rights

State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan

14 Aug 2025 · J. B. Pardiwala; R. Mahadevan · 2025 INSC 979
Cites 0 · Cited by 22

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's bail order in a serious murder and kidnapping case, emphasizing the need for judicious exercise of discretion considering prima facie evidence and societal interest.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail cancellation of bail medical bail Article 22(1) Constitution of India