Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: September 2022

Cr P C

Cr P C Section 406 – ‘Whether the criminal cases pending before different Trial Courts in four States can be transferred to one Trial Court in one State?; Whether transfer of case of one of the criminal case which is at the final stage of trial before concerned Court in Nagpur, can be directed to be transferred at such belated stage?’ HELD that to meet the ends of justice and fair trial, the transfer petitions deserve to be allowed.

Sep 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH KETAN KANTILAL SETH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari, J. ) Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos.…

Consumer

Medical negligence – Reduction of compensation – Wrong diagnosis and wrong treatment, which led to rashes on the body of the complainant-girl – so as to do the substantial justice to the complainant – If the amount of compensation is enhanced to a total sum of Rs. 4 lakhs (instead of Rs. 1 lakh awarded by the District Forum), the same shall meet the ends of justice.

Sep 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH CHANDIGARH NURSING HOME AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SUKHDEEP KAUR — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Bail Declined Murder

Cancellation of bail – Grounds on which the said co-­accused was released on bail and the grounds on which the present respondent is released on bail are same – Once the bail in favour of co­-accused has been cancelled by this Court, the bail in the present case also requires to be cancelled – Bail cancelled.

Sep 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH JOSEPH JOHNSON N. MAITHKURI — Appellant Vs. SUBRAHMANYA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Juvenile Justice

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 136 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 – Section 7A – Plea of juvenility could be raised in any court, at any stage even after the final disposal of the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. If two views possible on evidence then view holding accused to be juvenile be favoured in borderline cases.

Sep 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH VINOD KATARA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Criminal)…

Constitution

HELD After a body has been buried, it is considered to be in the custody of the law; therefore, disinterment is not a matter of right. The law does not favour disinterment, based on the public policy that the sanctity of the grave should be maintained. Once buried, a body should not be disturbed.

Sep 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH MOHAMMAD LATIEF MAGREY — Appellant Vs. THE UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and J.B.…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Case – In a democratic society governed by the rule of law, the rights of an individual carry immense importance and are the foundational blocks on which our legal, social, and political milieu thrives – Under no circumstances should the rights of individual citizens be trodden upon arbitrarily and any curtailment of them must be scrutinized with utmost care.

Sep 12, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH DR. ABRAHAM PATANI OF MUMBAI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and…

Compassionate Appointment

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14 – An appointment to the heirs of the employees on their retirement and/or superannuation shall be contrary to the object and purpose of appointment on compassionate grounds and is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Sep 12, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH AHMEDNAGAR MAHANAGAR PALIKA — Appellant Vs. AHMEDNAGAR MAHANAGAR PALIKA KAMGAR UNION — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

Bail Granted

IPC Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 – Going by the allegations made in the First Information Report that the incident in question had occurred five months before the First Information Report was lodged and the attending circumstances, in our view, the case of anticipatory bail is made out.

Sep 12, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH BEERBAL PRASAD RAJORIYA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI. and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ.…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) – It is for the accused to account satisfactorily for the money/assets in his hands – Onus in this regard is on the accused to give satisfactory explanation – Accused cannot make an attempt to discharge this onus upon him at the stage of Section 239 of the CrPC. State appeal allowed.

Sep 12, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH STATE THROUGH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE — Appellant Vs. R. SOUNDIRARASU ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw