Supreme Court of India

18,257 judgments

Year:

Mohar Singh v. State of Rajasthan

11 May 2015 · Dipak Misra; Prafulla C. Pant

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 307 IPC based on credible evidence but reduced the sentence considering a subsequent compromise, rejecting the compromise's effect on the non-compoundable offence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 307 IPC Attempt to murder Non-compoundable offence Compromise rejected

State of Rajasthan v. Sri Chand

11 May 2015 · Pinaki Chandra Ghose; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court upheld conviction under Section 354 IPC for outraging modesty but acquitted on attempt to rape, denying probation and sentencing the accused to two years rigorous imprisonment.

criminal sentence_modified Significant attempt to rape Section 354 IPC Probation of Offenders Act minor victim

The Chairman & Managing Director, TNHB v. S. Saraswathy

11 May 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Prafulla Chandra Pant

The Supreme Court held that quashing of land acquisition benefits only parties before the Court and purchasers post-acquisition cannot claim rights against the State, setting aside High Court orders favoring such purchasers.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 4 notification Section 6 declaration quashing acquisition

HC Pradeep Kumar Rai v. Dinesh Kumar Pandey

11 May 2015 · Ranjan Gogoi; Pinaki Chandra Ghose

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Uttar Pradesh police promotion process conducted under the 1999 Government Order, dismissing challenges to the interview procedure, number of candidates called, and marking method, emphasizing limited judicial interference absent mala fide.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant promotion process Constables and Head Constables Sub-Inspector Government Order 27.02.1999

M/S. MAAN ALUMINIUM LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE

08 May 2015 · A. K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant's appeal, holding that findings of clandestine removal based on alleged admissions were perverse and that permissible manufacturing tolerances explained the weight discrepancies, thus quashing the excise duty demand.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Act clandestine removal excise duty evasion extended limitation period

Sanjeev Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand)

08 May 2015 · Pinaki Chandra Ghose; R.K. Agrawal

The Supreme Court upheld life convictions under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, holding that spontaneous common intention within an unlawful assembly and consistent eyewitness and medical evidence suffice to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite minor discrepancies.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC unlawful assembly common intention

PURUSHOTTAM DASHRATH BORATE & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

08 May 2015 · H.L. Dattu; S.A. Bobde; Arun Mishra

The Supreme Court upheld the death sentence for the appellants convicted of gang-rape and murder, holding the case as 'rarest of rare' where aggravating factors outweigh mitigating ones.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rarest of rare doctrine death penalty gang-rape murder

M/S. SERVO-MED INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI

07 May 2015 · A. K. Sikri; R. F. Nariman
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Sterilization of disposable syringes and needles does not amount to manufacture under excise law as it does not transform the product into a new commercial commodity, and thus no excise duty is leviable on sterilization.

tax appeal_allowed Significant manufacture sterilization excise duty transformation test

Khenyei v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

07 May 2015 · H.L. Dattu; S.A. Bobde; Arun Mishra
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

In cases of composite negligence involving multiple vehicles, the claimant can recover full compensation from any one joint tortfeasor, with liability being joint and several, and apportionment of damages is only for inter se adjustment among tortfeasors.

civil appeal_allowed Significant composite negligence joint tortfeasors joint and several liability apportionment of compensation

Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala v. M/s. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

07 May 2015 · A. K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that a vend fee compulsorily payable to the government is deductible under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act only on actual payment, reversing the High Court's deletion of disallowance.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 43B Income Tax Act vend fee statutory levy

Iqbal and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh

06 May 2015 · T. S. Thakur; R. Banumathi
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Supreme Court set aside convictions under Section 396 IPC due to unreliable eyewitness identification in pitch darkness and lack of corroborative evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 396 IPC dacoity with murder eyewitness identification test identification parade

KIRSHNA TEXPORT & CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. v. ILA A. AGRAWAL & ORS.

06 May 2015 · Pinaki Chandra Ghose; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court held that separate statutory notices under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are not required to be issued to company directors before prosecuting them under Section 141, overruling contrary High Court decisions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Section 141 Dishonour of cheque

K.S. Ravindran v. Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

06 May 2015 · V. Gopala Gowda; C. Nagappan
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that illegal termination without enquiry entitles the employee to reinstatement with back-wages unless the employer proves gainful employment during the period.

labor appeal_allowed Significant termination of service domestic enquiry principles of natural justice back-wages

State of Andhra Pradesh v. P. Venkateshwarlu

06 May 2015 · Pinaki Chandra Ghose; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court restored the conviction of a Sub Registrar for accepting bribe, holding that recovery of tainted money and corroborated eyewitness testimony suffice to prove demand and acceptance under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) Section 20

State of U.P. v. Damodar & Anr.

06 May 2015 · Pinaki Chandra Ghose; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal, setting aside the High Court's dismissal of leave to appeal and remanding the case for fresh consideration of evidence in a dowry death involving suspicious burn injuries.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dowry harassment burn injuries Section 498A IPC Section 304B IPC

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD v. M/S VINAY HEAVY EQUIPMENTS

06 May 2015 · VikramaJit Sen; Shivakirti Singh

The Supreme Court upheld the arbitral award holding the main contractor primarily liable to pay the subcontractor despite 'back-to-back' subcontract clauses, affirming the principle of privity of contract and binding effect of admissions in arbitration.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant back-to-back contract subcontractor liability privity of contract arbitration award

State of West Bengal v. Calcutta Mineral Supply Co. Pvt. Ltd.

06 May 2015 · M. Y. Eqbal; Amitava Roy

The Supreme Court held that renewal of lease is a fresh grant subject to prospective terms including salami payment, and that land held within ceiling limits under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act cannot be resumed under the Estates Acquisition Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 West Bengal Land Reforms Act lease renewal salami payment

State of Andhra Pradesh v. Kesavapatnam China Swamy

06 May 2015 · Pinaki Chandra Ghose; Uday Umesh Lalit

The Supreme Court restored the conviction of a public servant for accepting bribe, rejecting the High Court's acquittal based on unsubstantiated doubts about trap proceedings and evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 bribery phenolphthalein test trap proceedings

M/S. COAL HANDLERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

05 May 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that services limited to liaison and supervision without actual clearing and forwarding operations do not qualify as Clearing and Forwarding Agent services liable to service tax under the Finance Act, 1994.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Clearing and Forwarding Agent Service Tax Finance Act 1994 Section 65(25)

M/S. SECURE METERS LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

05 May 2015 · A.K. Sikri; Rohinton Fali Nariman

The Supreme Court held that LCDs imported as parts of electricity meters must be classified under the specific tariff heading 9013.80, not as parts under 9028.90, applying Chapter Note 2(a) of the Customs Tariff.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Customs classification Liquid Crystal Display Chapter Heading 9013.80 Chapter Heading 9028.90