Supreme Court of India

18,256 judgments

Year:

Amalendu Kumar Bera & Ors. v. The State of West Bengal

22 Mar 2013 · Surinder Singh Nijjar; M.Y. Eqbal
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that delay in filing revision petitions by the State cannot be condoned mechanically without sufficient cause, especially after the decree has attained finality and execution proceedings have commenced.

civil appeal_allowed Significant condonation of delay Section 47 CPC execution proceedings sufficient cause

Rakesh v. State of Haryana

22 Mar 2013 · P. Sathasivam; M. Y. Eqbal

The Supreme Court upheld the murder conviction based on a duly recorded and medically certified dying declaration, rejecting the appellants' claims of infirmity and injury-based defense.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC Section 498-A IPC burn injuries

M/s. GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust v. M/s India Infoline Limited

22 Mar 2013 · M.Y. Eqbal; P. Sathasivam
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Supreme Court held that summons against company directors require specific allegations of personal involvement and quashed criminal proceedings against them for lack of prima facie case and abuse of process.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant summons prima facie case vicarious liability criminal breach of trust

Madhavi Amma v. S. Prasannakumari

22 Mar 2013 · Dr. B.S. Chauhan; Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla

The Supreme Court held that Kudikidappukaran status must be determined under Section 80 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, and Land Tribunal decisions under Section 125(3) are binding on civil courts, thereby upholding eviction orders against appellants claiming such status without proper recognition.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Kudikidappukaran Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 Section 80 Section 80B

State of Maharashtra v. Fazal Rehman Abdul

21 Mar 2013 · P. Sathasivam; B. S. Chauhan
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the acquittals of accused in the 1993 Bombay Blast case, emphasizing mandatory procedural compliance for confessions and the principle that appellate courts should not interfere with acquittals unless the trial court's findings are perverse or unsustainable.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 confessional statement Section 15 TADA acquittal

Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra

21 Mar 2013 · P. Sathasivam; Dr. B. S. Chauhan

The Supreme Court upheld the death sentence of Yakub Memon in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts case, affirming procedural requirements for judgments and the admissibility of confessional statements and corroborated evidence in terrorism-related convictions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 Bombay Bomb Blast Case Death sentence Criminal conspiracy

Ahmed Shah Khan Durrani @ A.S. Mubarak S v. State of Maharashtra

21 Mar 2013 · Dr. B.S. Chauhan; P. Sathasivam

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under TADA for possession of arms and explosives in the 1993 Bombay Blast case, affirming the validity of recovery evidence and rejecting challenges to confessional statements and acquittals on conspiracy charges.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 Section 5 TADA confessional statement recovery panchnama

Secretary to Government of India v. Sawinder Kaur

21 Mar 2013 · K. S. Radhakrishnan; Dipak Misra
Cites 7 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that freedom fighter pension granted on secondary evidence is effective only from the date of the order granting pension, not retrospectively from the date of application or scheme commencement.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme Indian National Army secondary evidence

Essa @ Anjum Abdul Razak Memon v. The State of Maharashtra

21 Mar 2013 · P. Sathasivam; Dr. B.S. Chauhan

The Supreme Court upheld life sentences of appellants convicted under TADA for conspiracy and facilitation in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, affirming the admissibility of co-accused confessions corroborated by independent evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant TADA Bombay bomb blasts 1993 criminal conspiracy confessional statements

Sanjay Dutt v. The State of Maharashtra

21 Mar 2013 · P. Sathasivam; Dr. B. S. Chauhan

The Supreme Court upheld convictions under TADA based on confessions recorded by police officers, affirming their admissibility and the appellants' involvement in possession and destruction of arms linked to the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts conspiracy.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant TADA Section 15 TADA confession admissibility Bombay bomb blasts

Ibrahim Musa Chauhan v. State of Maharashtra

21 Mar 2013 · Dr. B.S. Chauhan; P. Sathasivam
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Ibrahim Musa Chauhan for possession and distribution of arms in the 1993 Bombay blasts, affirming the admissibility of confessions and recoveries under TADA and related laws.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 confessional statement Section 15 TADA Section 27 Indian Evidence Act

J. Sundramma v. State of Karnataka & Anr.

21 Mar 2013 · Surinder Singh Nijjar; Pinaki Chandra Ghose

The Supreme Court allowed the widow's appeal to regularize a cancelled plot allotment on humanitarian grounds under Article 142, subject to payment of the balance amount with interest.

civil appeal_allowed Significant allotment cancellation urban development authority payment default laches

Shivdev Kaur By Lrs. & Ors. v. R.S. Grewal

20 Mar 2013 · Dr. B. S. Chauhan; Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla

The Supreme Court held that a life interest granted by a Will to a Hindu female does not convert into absolute ownership under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and dismissed the appeal challenging this principle.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Section 14 life interest absolute ownership

Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan High Court

20 Mar 2013 · R. M. Lodha; Chelameswar; Madan B. Lokur

The Supreme Court held that while recruitment criteria generally cannot be changed after the process begins, procedural changes imposing higher standards may be permissible, and referred the issue for authoritative clarification by a larger Bench.

administrative other Significant recruitment rules rules of the game minimum qualifying marks alteration of selection criteria

Subodh Nath and Anr. v. State of Tripura

19 Mar 2013 · A. K. Patnaik; H. L. Gokhale

The Supreme Court held that a person under 18 years at the time of offence is a juvenile under the 2000 Act and remitted his case to the Juvenile Justice Board, while upholding the conviction of the co-accused based on reliable eyewitness testimony.

criminal appeal_allowed (appellant no.2), appeal_dismissed (appellant no.1) Significant juvenile justice juvenile definition juvenile justice act 2000 juvenile justice act 1986

RAM CHANDRA VERMA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

19 Mar 2013 · H. L. Dattu; Jagdish Singh Khehar

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the life conviction of the appellant for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 302 IPC murder eyewitness testimony post-mortem report

Sushil K. Chakravarty v. M/s. Tej Properties Pvt. Ltd.

19 Mar 2013 · P. Sathasivam; Jagdish Singh Khehar

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's refusal to condone delay and validated the ex-parte decree passed without impleading legal heirs under Order XXII Rule 4(4) CPC, emphasizing the necessity of timely substitution and truthful explanations for delay.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXII Rule 4(4) CPC ex-parte decree condonation of delay legal representatives substitution

Babu and Anr. v. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Chennai

19 Mar 2013 · A. K. Patnaik; H. L. Gokhale

The Supreme Court upheld murder convictions under Section 302 IPC based on common intention and credible eyewitness evidence, rejecting challenges on unlawful assembly and applicability of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.

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

Shantilal Gulabchand Mutha v. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd.

18 Mar 2013 · B. S. Chauhan; Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla

The Supreme Court held that courts must exercise caution and provide reasons before passing an ex parte decree under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC and set aside the impugned decree for fresh adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VIII Rule 10 CPC ex parte decree written statement discretionary power

M/S. PRIME IMPEX LTD. & ORS v. M/S. P.E.C. LTD. & ANR

18 Mar 2013 · H.L. Dattu; Jagdish Singh Khehar

The Supreme Court held that accused persons have a statutory right to be heard before the revisional court under Section 401(2) CrPC when a complaint dismissal order under Section 203 CrPC is challenged, and remanded the case for fresh hearing.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 401 CrPC Section 203 CrPC right to be heard natural justice