Supreme Court of India Judgements

46855 Judgements hosted as on 16/09/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

SC Upholds NEET; Says Uniform Exam For Admission In Medical & Dental Courses Does Not Violate Minority Rights . Held that prescribing a uniform examination of NEET for admissions in medical & dental courses did not violate rights of unaided/aided minority institutions under Articles 19(1) (g) & 30 read with 25, 26 & 29(1) of Constitution. D/APRIL 29, 2020.

Apr 29, 2020 sclaw

SC Upholds NEET; Says Uniform Exam For Admission In Medical & Dental Courses Does Not Violate Minority Rights [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 29 April 2020 2:59 PM In a…

Constitution

[Sexual Harassment] HELD “A priori, when inaction or procrastination (intentionally or otherwise) is meted out in response to the attempt of setting the legal machinery in motion, what is put to peril is not just the individual cries for the assistance of law but also the foundational tenets of a society governed by the rule of law, thereby threatening the larger public interests. The denial of timely inquiry and by a competent forum, inevitably results in denial of justice and violation of fundamental right,”

Apr 26, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NISHA PRIYA BHATIA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. )…

Constitution

Kerala Public Service Commission – HELD as to whether the maxims – actus curiae neminem gravabitand lex non cogit ad impossibiliawill come to the aid of the appellants. From the analysis of factual matrix of the case on hand, it becomes evident that there was no complete interdiction of the first Ranked List (RL-I) published on 11.9.2013 until the order of status quo was passed on 3.11.2014 by this Court. It is true that despite the order of status quo, the second Ranked List (RL-II) came to be published on 26.5.2015. According to the respondents, the order of status quo must be construed as only restraining the respondents from giving effect to the first Ranked List (RL-I) in any manner.

Apr 26, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANEESH KUMAR V.S. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

Constitution

SC Upholds The Constitutional Validity Of Rule Empowering RAW To Compulsorily Retire Officers HELD We upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 135 of the RAW (Recruitment, Cadre and Services) Rules, 1975, which gives power to the Central government to voluntary retire RAW Officers whose identity is exposed or compromised.

Apr 26, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NISHA PRIYA BHATIA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. )…

Constitution

CONSTITUTION BENCH :: Uttar Pradesh Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 – Section 16 – Essential Commodities Act, 1955 – Section 3(2)(c) – Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 HELD By virtue of Entries 33 and 34 List III of seventh Schedule, both the Central Government as well as the State Government have the power to fix the price of sugarcane. The Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 which has been issued under Section 16 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 confers power upon the State Government to fix the remunerative/advised price at which sugarcane can be bought or sold which shall always be higher than the minimum price fixed by the Central Government; Section 16 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 is not repugnant to Section 3(2)(c) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Clause 3 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966

Apr 23, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH WEST U.P. SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun…

Constitution

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday held that both the Centre and the State have concurrent powers to fix the prices of sugarcane. At the same time, the price’ fixed by the State Government for sugarcane cannot be lower than the ‘minimum price’ fixed by the centre, the Court added. Also, it is open to the States to fix the price higher than the price fixed by the Centre.

Apr 22, 2020 sclaw

State & Centre Have Concurrent Power To Fix Sugarcane Prices; No Conflict If State’s Price Is Higher Than Centre’s ‘Minimum Price’ : SC [Read Judgment] Live Law News Network 22…

Constitution

100% ST Reservations For Teacher Posts In Scheduled Areas Unconstitutional: SC Constitution Bench HELD interpreted the judgement prospectively and not “retrospectively” and held that the existing appointments made in excess of the 50 per cent reservation shall survive but shall cease to be effective in the future, thereby providing a relief to those who had already been appointed basis the saif government order.

Apr 22, 2020 sclaw

100% ST Reservations For Teacher Posts In Scheduled Areas Unconstitutional: SC Constitution Bench [Read Judgment] Mehal Jain And Sanya Talwar 22 April 2020 1:58 PM The Supreme Court on Wednesday…

You missed

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 223(d) — Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be charged and tried together — Legislative intent is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, avoid conflicting judgments, and promote judicial economy while ensuring fairness — Segregation without legally recognized grounds like distinct facts, severable evidence, or demonstrated prejudice, is impermissible.

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 — Offences relating to cheating and forgery — Anticipatory bail — Rejection challenged — Appellants, public servants at the time, accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents — High Court rejected anticipatory bail — Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s decision

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended) — Challenge to constitutional validity of amendments — Petitioners contended that amendments are ultra vires the Constitution, violating fundamental rights including Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A. Respondents argued for legislative competence and presumption of validity of enactments. Court emphasized that statutes should only be declared unconstitutional if there is a clear, glaring, and undeniable violation of constitutional principles or fundamental rights, or if manifestly arbitrary, and that courts must strive to uphold legislative validity.

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw