Month: November 2025

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 449, 376, 394 — Appeal against High Court’s upholding of conviction and sentence — Case based on circumstantial evidence — Absence of direct evidence connecting appellant to offense — Falsely implicated — Prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt — No scientific evidence linking appellant — Important witnesses not associated in investigation or produced in court — Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside.

2025 INSC 1269 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHAMED SAMEER KHAN Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Quashing of proceedings — Cheques issued as security and not for consideration — Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) clearly stated cheques were for security purposes to show banks and not for deposit — Complainant failed to read the complete terms of MOU in isolation and misinterpreted it to claim cheques were converted into debt — Court empowered to consider unimpeachable documents at pre-trial stage to prevent injustice — Complaints under Section 138 NI Act liable to be quashed.

2025 INSC 1270 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. NAGENDRA Vs. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

Tender Conditions — Interpretation — Ambiguity — The terms of a tender must be clear and unambiguous — If a tendering authority intends for a specific document to be issued by a particular authority, it must be clearly stated in the tender conditions — Failure to do so may lead to rejection of the bid being deemed arbitrary and dehors the tender terms.

2025 INSC 1276 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 2 JUDGES BENCH KIMBERLEY CLUB PVT. LTD. Vs. KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI PARISHAD AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ.…

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) — Environmental Protection — Monitoring Committee — Powers and Scope — A PIL was filed concerning environmental issues in Delhi, leading to the appointment of a Monitoring Committee. The Supreme Court clarified that the committee was appointed to prevent misuse of residential premises for commercial purposes and not to interfere with residential premises used as such. Their power was limited to making suggestions to a Special Task Force regarding encroachments on public land, not to summarily seal premises.

2025 INSC 1274 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 2 JUDGES BENCH M.C. MEHTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : B. R. Gavai, CJI. and K. Vinod Chandran, J.…

Service Matters

Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 — Section 23 — Minimum qualifications for teachers — Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) — Amendment extending deadline for unqualified teachers to acquire minimum qualifications — Termination of teachers appointed before amendment for not possessing TET at the time of appointment — Held: Termination erroneous as teachers acquired TET within extended deadline.

2025 INSC 1273 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 2 JUDGES BENCH UMA KANT AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI. and K. Vinod Chandran,…

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — Section 179 — Summoning of Advocate by Investigating Agency — Advocate representing accused cannot be summoned directly to elicit case details as it violates advocate-client privilege and constitutional rights of the accused, unless specific exceptions under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) apply.

2025 INSC 1275 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 3 JUDGES BENCH IN RE: SUMMONING ADVOCATES WHO GIVE LEGAL OPINION OR REPRESENT PARTIES DURING INVESTIGATION OF CASES AND RELATED ISSUES. ( Before…

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — Setting aside of arbitral award — Delay in pronouncement — While undue and unexplained delay in pronouncing an arbitral award is not a ground, in itself, to set it aside, it can lead to the award being vitiated if the delay adversely affects the final decision and reflects on the findings, making it conflict with public policy or be patently illegal.

2025 INSC 1277 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 2 JUDGES BENCH M/S. LANCOR HOLDINGS LIMITED Vs. PREM KUMAR MENON AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.…

You missed