Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Constitution

Constitution

HELD once the legality of closure of the old scheme was undisputed, there was no manner of right inhering with the club, to insist that its claim for any plot had to be considered. If at all, it ought to have applied under subsequent schemes, and waited like other applicants (of that scheme),

May 8, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RITU MAHESHWARI — Appellant Vs. M/S. PROMOTIONAL CLUB — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.…

Constitution

Designating Senior Advocate – HELD clarify the situation and direct that instead of ten marks to be allocated to a counsel who has put in between ten to twenty years of practice, the marks be allocated commensurate with the standing of the person at the Bar, that is to say, one mark each shall be allocated for every year of practice between ten to twenty years.

May 8, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH AMAR VIVEK AGGARWAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit,…

Constitution

Constitution of India – Article 72 – Balwant Singh Rajoana case – HELD in our view, there would be no embargo in considering the matter in the light of the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 04.12.2020. Furthermore, as the order had made it quite clear, the matter could be and had to be considered despite the pendency of the appeal preferred by the co-accused.

May 8, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BALWANT SINGH — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Pamidighantam Sri…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 300-A – Construction/widening of road no doubt would be a public purpose but there being no justification for not paying compensation the action of the respondents would be arbitrary, unreasonable and clearly violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution.

May 1, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KALYANI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE SULTHAN BATHERY MUNICIPALITY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 14, 15(1), 341 and 342 – Promotion – SC/ST Category -An obligation on the part of Parliament, to provide clarity about the kind of protection, regarding the status of such individuals forced to chose one among the newly reorganized states, and ensure that they are not worse off as a result of reorganization –

May 1, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH AKHILESH PRASAD — Appellant Vs. JHARKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and S.…

Constitution

Only 10% of the cadre strength of District Judges be filled up by Limited Departmental Competitive Examination with those candidates who have qualified service of 7 years [(5 years as Civil Judge (Junior Division) and 2 years as Civil Judge (Senior Division) or 10 years qualifying service as Civil Judge(Junior Division).

Apr 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai…

Constitution

There is no application of mind at all by the High Court on merits of the order passed by the Tribunal – It can be seen that the High Court has failed to exercise its jurisdiction vested in it while exercising the powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India – Matter remand to High Court for deciding the writ petition afresh in accordance with law.

Apr 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. MAYAN PAL SINGH VERMA — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

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