Supreme Court of India Judgements

37270 Judgements hosted as on 24/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Exercise of Writ Jurisdiction — High Court’s power under Article 226 is extraordinary and discretionary, subject to self-imposed restrictions — Ordinarily, it should not be exercised when an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person, such as pursuing remedies under statutory frameworks like the CrPC or BNSS, unless specific exceptions apply.

May 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 442 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUJAL VISHWAS ATTAVAR AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih,…

Constitution

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 2(c) — Criminal Contempt — Publication of scandalous matter or doing any act that scandalises or tends to scandalise, lowers or tends to lower the authority of any court, prejudices or interferes with judicial proceedings, or obstructs justice — Appellant, President of the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Association and a senior advocate, made unwarranted and disreputable allegations in a press conference against the High Court and its Registry, calling it a ‘gambling den’ and alleging preferential treatment — The High Court initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against the Appellant. Judicial Magnanimity and Reform — The Supreme Court demonstrated exceptional magnanimity and a desire for reform by suspending the conviction and sentence, emphasizing that while accountability is paramount, it must be balanced with patience to guide and elevate, rather than resorting to punitive destruction.

May 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 470 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YATIN NARENDRA OZA Vs. SUO MOTU, HIGH COURT OF GUJARATAND ANOTHER ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.…

Constitution Cr P C I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Registration of FIR — Mandatory upon disclosure of cognizable offence (Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P.) — No preliminary inquiry generally permissible — Remedies for non — registration under Section 154(3) and 156(3) are efficacious.- Magistrate’s power to direct FIR registration and investigation is pre-cognizance — Sanction under Sections 196 & 197 CrPC operates at cognizance stage, not investigation stage.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 943…

Constitution

Protracted Government Inaction and Third — Party Rights — Despite an initial timeline of two months for an inquiry and subsequent hopes for completion within six months, the government showed significant delay, stretching over six years without a final decision — During this period, extensive third — party rights were created through land sales and construction of villas and flats by innocent purchasers — The Court observed that it’s inappropriate for a welfare state to attempt to undo decades — old transactions, especially when innocent citizens have invested their hard — earned money, and basic amenities should not be denied to occupants of constructed properties.

Apr 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 407 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, AND OTHERS ETC. Vs. S. RAJA AND OTHERS ETC ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and…

Constitution Rent

Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 vs. Government Grants Act, 1895 — Relationship Governed by Grant — A lease originating from a Government grant, as governed by the Government Grants Act, 1895, is not subject to the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 — The incidence and enforceability of such a grant are governed solely by its tenor — The legal character of the grant does not derive from conventional landlord — tenant relationships but from the sovereign grant and its embedded conditions — Therefore, eviction proceedings under the Delhi Rent Control Act are not maintainable for holdings originating from a Government grant.

Apr 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 406 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA Vs. SIR SOBHA SINGH AND SONS PVT. LTD ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

Constitution

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Prisoners with Disabilities — This case concerns the rights and conditions of prisoners with disabilities, focusing on the effective implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and constitutional guarantees of dignity, equality, and non-discrimination within prison systems.

Apr 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 397 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATHYAN NARAVOOR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Civil)…

Constitution

Subsidy Withdrawal — Authorities cannot withdraw an already granted subsidy or demand its refund without providing specific reasons or demonstrating non-compliance with scheme conditions. Merely finding a facility ‘in closed condition’ during an inspection, without further inquiry or evidence of failure to operate, is insufficient justification for withdrawal.

Apr 19, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 385 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, DEESA Vs. NATIONAL HORTICULTURE BOARD AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ.…

Constitution

Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 — Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Translation and Transmission of Records for Legal Aid Appeals and Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) — The Supreme Court has approved and directed implementation of an SOP to streamline the process of translation, digitization, and filing of records in legal aid cases, with specific timelines and responsibilities for various stakeholders to ensure timely access to justice.

Apr 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 369 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHANKAR MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. ….of…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 22(3)(b) — Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) — Sections 3(1), 8(c), 8(e) — Right to legal representation before Advisory Board — A detenu does not have a right to be represented by a legal practitioner before the Advisory Board — This right only arises if the detaining authority or government uses a legal practitioner, in which case the detenu must also be allowed legal representation — Mere assistance by officials in producing records does not grant this right

Apr 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 371 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRIYANKA SARKARIYA Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ( Before : M. M. Sundresh and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. )…

You missed

State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Section 154 — Transfer of land in contravention of ceiling limit — Not void ipso facto — Capable of ratification — Legality of transfer to be judged by law on date of execution — Sale deed executed on 04.06.1957 — Ceiling limit then was 30 acres, subsequently amended to 12.5 acres retrospectively from 01.07.1952 — Transfer in contravention of Section 154 not void but voidable at instance of Gaon Sabha coupled with liability for ejectment of transferee under Section 163 — No suit filed for ejectment within limitation period.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw
Specific Performance

Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — “Readiness and Willingness” — Relief of specific performance is equitable and discretionary — Plaintiff must specifically aver and prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform obligations — Failure to do so disentitles plaintiff to relief — “Readiness” refers to financial capacity, “Willingness” to conduct and intention — Both cumulatively must be seen — Conduct of plaintiff prior and subsequent to suit, along with attending circumstances, must be considered — Availability of funds must be proved with reference to relevant time, not by documents created much later.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 and 140 — Compensation for death in motor vehicular accident — Negligence — Truck stationed on road at night without warning lights or indicators — Wagon-R car collided from behind — Held, truck driver was negligent in leaving the vehicle unattended on the road without adequate precautionary measures, which was the proximate cause of the accident.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Motor Accident Claims Tribunal — Compensation — Enhancement — High Court enhanced compensation, but calculation of future prospects and omission of certain awarded amounts were infirmities — Supreme Court addressed these infirmities.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw