Supreme Court of India Judgements

46950 Judgements hosted as on 04/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Bombay Riots – Compensation to victims – The houses, places of business and properties of the citizens were destroyed – These are all violations of their rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India – One of the root causes of their suffering was the failure of the State Government to maintain law and order. Therefore, the affected persons had a right to seek compensation from the State Government.

Nov 14, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SHAKEEL AHMED — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and Vikram Nath,…

Constitution Corporate

Benefit of Additional licence – Export of processed iron ore – Merely because some others are granted the benefit wrongly, the appellant cannot be permitted to pray for the similar benefits – There cannot be any negative discrimination which may perpetuate the illegality

Nov 14, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHOWGULE & COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna…

Constitution State Laws

Allotment of land – Deputy Collector possess the powers to pass the orders of allotment – High Court has seriously erred in setting aside orders on the ground that the Deputy Collector was not having jurisdiction and therefore order is coram non judice – Matter is remitted to the High Court

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJARAM ABASAHEB DESHMUKH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil…

Constitution Cr P C

Draft Rules of Criminal Practice, 2021 – Rule 4 – Supply of documents – Right of the accused to receive the list of documents, material, etc. would only apply after the draft rules are adopted – would lead to an anomalous situation where the right of the accused in one state, prejudicially differs from that afforded to an accused, in another.

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH P. PONNUSAMY — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat and Bela…

Constitution

Article 129 of the Constitution of India – Contemnor acts clearly lower the authority of SCOI – interfered with the due course of judicial proceedings and obstructed the administration of justice which is a clear case of criminal contempt. Held sentence of 6 months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs 12,50,000 each on two counts of civil and criminal contempt. Fine when realisd be paid to wife.

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH IN RE: PERRY KANSAGRA – CONTEMNOR ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI. and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. ) Suo-Motu Contempt Petition (Civil) No.…

Constitution Corporate

Company Secretaries Regulations, 1982 – Regulations 92(2) and 117(2) – Applicability of Regulation 92(2) – Regulation 92(2) shall be applicable only in a case of absence and not in a case where the post of Chairman and/or office bearer has fallen vacant – There is a distinction between the absence and the post fallen vacant

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH INSTITUTE OF COMPANY SECRETARIES OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. BIMAN DEBNATH AND OTHERTS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…

Constitution Limitation

Army Act, 1950 – Sections 45 and 122 – Martial Proceedings – Period of limitation for trial – For the purpose of Section 122, the two dates will be relevant i.e., the date when the alleged offence comes to the knowledge of the person aggrieved and the date on which the authority competent to initiate action comes to know about the alleged offence

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH IC-56663X COL ANIL KUMAR GUPTA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., and Bela…

Constitution

Jharkhand High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 – HELD allegations made by petitioner vague, very much generalized and not at all substantiated by anything worthy to be called an evidence. Allegations of corruption and siphoning of money from shell companies are nothing but a bald allegation, without substantiating the allegations. Petitioner non- disclosure of the credentials of the petitioner and the past efforts made for similar reliefs. PILs dismissed.

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH STATE OF JHARKHAND — Appellant Vs. SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat and…

Constitution

Stamp (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1990 – Section 47A – Public auction – Market value of property – Determination of – to say that even in a court monitored auction, the Registering Authority would have a say on what is the market price, would amount to the Registering Authority sitting in appeal over the decision of the Court permitting sale at a particular price.

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH REGISTRAR OF ASSURANCES AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ASL VYAPAR PRIVATE LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S.…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14, 21 — Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) — Substantive Equality and Inclusion — Scope and Spirit — The measure of a just society demands the removal of barriers for all citizens to realize their potential, transforming formal equality into substantive inclusion — Constitutional vision requires every person, regardless of physical or sensory limitation, to participate with dignity — Rights guaranteed to persons with disabilities are expressions of the constitutional promise of equality, dignity, and non-discrimination, not acts of benevolence. (Paras 1, 12, 13)

Dec 4, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 321 — Withdrawal from prosecution — Requirement of High Court permission for withdrawal of cases against sitting or former MPs/MLAs — Following Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India — High Court must exercise judicial mind and give a reasoned order when considering an application for permission to withdraw prosecution against sitting/former legislators — Application must disclose reasons for withdrawal and records of the case must be before the High Court — Absence of requisite permission from the High Court means that the withdrawal application cannot be granted and the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on this ground — High Court’s rejection of quashing petition confirmed. (Paras 2, 7, 9, 10)

Dec 4, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 313 — Examination of Accused — Object and Scope — Non-compliance with mandatory requirement — Fair Trial — The object of Section 313 CrPC is to ensure a fair trial by providing the accused with an opportunity to explain all incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them personally — It is a mandatory, non-negotiable obligation upon the Court and is not a mere formality; it is based on the cardinal principle of natural justice (audi alterum partem) — The statement cannot be the sole basis for conviction and is neither substantive nor a substitute piece of evidence. (Paras 6, 7.1, 7.2)

Dec 3, 2025 sclaw
Property Matters

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Section 14(1) — Mandamus to acquire land — Power of State Government to acquire land for Slum Rehabilitation Scheme — Preferential Right of Owner — The power of the State Government to acquire land under Section 14 read with Section 3D(c)(i) of the Slum Act is subject to the preferential right of the owner to redevelop the area — Acquisition is not warranted when the owner is willing to undertake development in exercise of their preferential right, and the process must be kept in abeyance until such right is extinguished — No mandamus can be issued to the State Government to acquire the subject property under Section 14 of the Slum Act where the subsequent purchaser from the original owner (Respondent No. 4) has a subsisting preferential right to develop the property. (Paras 63, 64, 71, 72, 77(1))

Dec 3, 2025 sclaw