Supreme Court of India Judgements

46800 Judgements hosted as on 29/06/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Benami ownership – Where the first plaintiff had proved that the properties had been purchased, with his funds, and the sons were minors, with no source of income – Plaintiff also proved that he had possession of the property, by adducing positive evidence of tenants, who paid rent to him – Elements necessary to establish benami ownership within the meaning of Section 4(3)(a) of the Act.

Sep 11, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PUSHPALATA — Appellant Vs. VIJAY KUMAR (DEAD) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindrabhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia,…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 145(3) – Matter Referred to 5-Judge Bench – Constitutional questions relating to interpretation of Schedule X of the Constitution pertaining to disqualification, as well as the powers of the Speaker and the Governor and the power of judicial review thereo

Aug 30, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SUBHASH DESAI — Appellant Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI., Krishna Murari and Hima…

Constitution

Prohibition of benami transactions – Section 3(2) of the unamended 1988 Act is declared as unconstitutional for being manifestly arbitrary – Accordingly, Section 3(2) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is also unconstitutional as it is violative of Article 20(1) of the Constitution – Section 3 (criminal provision) read with Section 2(a) and Section 5 (confiscation proceedings) of the 1988 Act are overly broad, disproportionately harsh, and operate without adequate safeguards in place. Such provisions were still-born law and never utilized in the first place – In this light, this Court finds that Sections 3 and 5 of the 1988 Act were unconstitutional from their inception

Aug 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S. GANPATI DEALCOM PVT. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI., Krishna Murari and…

Constitution

Prevention of Money – Laundering Act, 2002 – Sections 5, 8(4), 15, 17 and 19 – Constitutional validity of Sections 5, 8(4), 15, 17 and 19 of the Prevention of Money – Laundering Act, 2002 is upheld – Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has powers to arrest, attachment, search and seizure – At the stage of issue of summons, the person cannot claim protection under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.

Aug 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and C.T.…

Constitution

Appeal against dismissal of writ for certificate Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) at the rate of 4% in respect of payments received by the Appellant from Oil and Natural Gas Company Ltd. towards work done out of India as well as within India. Judges differed matter put before CJI for orders as to bench

Aug 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH NATIONAL PETROLEUM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY — Appellant Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before…

Constitution

Union of India prayed transferring all writs challenging the constitutional validity of the Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015 HELD the prayer for transfer of the subject petitions is declined and all the interim stay orders are vacated while providing that it shall be permissible for the parties to request the respective High Courts for expeditious hearing and disposal .

Jul 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH UNION OF INDIA ETC. — Appellant Vs. THE UNITED PLANTERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN INDIA ETC. ETC. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh…

Constitution

Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 – Section 2(1)(e) – Organised crime – Actual use of violence is not always a sine qua non for an activity falling within the mischief of organised crime, when undertaken by an individual singly or jointly as part of organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate

Jun 30, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH ABHISHEK — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

You missed

POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Section 376 (3) IPC — Rape — Conviction upheld — Evidence of victim’s mother and medical evidence — Reliability of victim’s mother’s testimony confirmed despite lengthy cross-examination, finding it natural and trustworthy and corroborated by other witnesses and medical evidence — Medical evidence, though partially presented by defense, conclusively supported sexual assault, citing perineal tear and abrasions around anus

Jun 29, 2025 sclaw
Joint Family Property Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 6 (as amended by Amendment Act, 2005) — Retrospective application — Validity of pre-amendment sale deeds — The prohibition contained in the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, does not affect registered sale deeds executed prior to December 20, 2004 (date of introduction of the amending provision) — This principle aligns with the judgment in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1.

Jun 28, 2025 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail Cr P C

Judicial Process — Misuse of process — Challenging bail conditions previously offered voluntarily — Accused offering substantial deposits to secure bail and subsequently challenging the onerous nature of conditions or the counsel’s authority to make such offers — This practice is condemned for undermining the judicial process and preventing consideration of bail applications on their merits — Such conduct leads to setting aside of bail orders and remittal for fresh consideration.

Jun 28, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Social Media Posts — Content-Related Offenses — Retaliatory Action — Quashing of Proceedings — While the court made no final determination on the nature of the petitioner’s social media posts, it acknowledged the petitioner’s counsel’s submission that the tweets were ‘retaliatory’ and were made in response to an incident involving a social media influencer. This assertion formed part of the petitioner’s argument for quashing or consolidating the numerous FIRs, suggesting a motive beyond simple offensive content.

Jun 28, 2025 sclaw