Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Month: February 2023

Service Matters
Service

Provision of review is not to scrutinize the correctness of the decision rendered rather to correct the error, if any, which is visible on the face of the order / record without going into as to whether there is a possibility of another opinion different from the one expressed HELD new stand for the payment of salary to teachers’ subject-wise, unsustainable in law and is accordingly set aside

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PANCHAM LAL PANDEY — Appellant Vs. NEERAJ KUMAR MISHRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Civil…

Constitution

Delimitation of Assembly and Parliamentary Constituencies – Article 170 will have no application as it forms a part of Chapter III of Part VI which deals with only the State Legislature – It has no application to the Legislatures of Union Territories HELD argument that certain provisions of the J&K Reorganisation Act and actions taken thereunder are in conflict with Article 170 and in particular Clause (3) thereof is clearly misconceived and deserves to be rejected.

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HAJI ABDUL GANI KHAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14 and 300A – Development Control Rules – Rule 19 – Building bye Laws – Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution are not violated by the requirement to reserve 10% of land for open space – It does not amount to compulsory acquisition – Areas covered by the Open Space Regulation area (OSR) cannot be diverted for any other purpose

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASSOCIATION OF VASANTH APARTMENTS’ OWNERS — Appellant Vs. V. GOPINATH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.…

Constitution

HELD whether the protection can be given by Article 26(b) to the practice of ex-communication is to be tested on the touchstone of the concept of Constitutional morality as the said right is subject to morality. This is an important and emergent issue. These are the two main grounds on which the said decision may need reconsideration by a larger Bench. Writ petition tagged to 9 judge bench.

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CENTRAL BOARD OF DAWOODI BOHRA COMMUNITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan…

Constitution

While exercising power of judicial review cannot issue a writ of certiorari quashing the recommendation, or mandamus calling upon the Collegium of the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision – To do so would violate the law as declared, as it would amount to evaluating and substituting the decision of the Collegium, with individual or personal opinion on the suitability and merits of the person

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANNA MATHEWS AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and B.R. Gavai, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

Twin conditions – For the purpose of lapsing the acquisition under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, the twin conditions namely, not taking the possession and not paying the compensation have to be satisfied and if one of the conditions is not satisfied there shall not be any lapse of the acquisition.

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI — Appellant Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ.…

Education

AIBEA examination HELD the role of the universities to impart legal education, in any way, prohibit the Bar Council of India from conducting pre-enrolment examination, as the Council is directly concerned with the standard of persons who want to obtain a license to practice law as a profession.

Feb 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. BONNIE FOI LAW COLLEGE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Abhay…

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