Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra & Anr (2002) 4 SCC 388 – This landmark case established the concept of curative petitions and the requirements for filing them – We do not think any case has been made out by the appellant for invoking the curative jurisdiction to take relook into the appellants case. Hence, we refrain from entertaining the curative petitions. We do not think any purpose would be served in sending the matter back to the Chamber Judge for instructions in the given circumstances.

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S BRAHMAPUTRA CONCRETE PIPE INDUSTRIES ETC. ETC. — Appellant Vs. THE ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose…

Constitution

Refund of excess price paid over the notified price in e-auction – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of the appellant and directed the respondent to pay the refund amount with interest @ 12% per annum for the relevant periods, within two months, failing which the officers concerned would be personally liable.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. DOMCO SMOKELESS FUELS PVT. LTD — Appellant Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta,…

Constitution

Implement Community Kitchens to combat hunger, malnutrition and starvation in the country – Court has also reiterated that the scope of judicial review in examining policy matters is very limited, and the Courts cannot direct the States to implement a particular policy or scheme on the ground that a better, fairer or wiser alternative is available – The Court has disposed of the writ petition with these observations.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANUN DHAWAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, JJ.…

Constitution Election Laws

Chandigarh Mayor Election: Supreme Court quashed the election result and declared the appellant as the validly elected candidate for the post of Mayor – It also issued a notice to the presiding officer to show cause why criminal proceedings should not be initiated against him under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KULDEEP KUMAR — Appellant Vs. — Respondent U.T. CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., J B Pardiwala and Manoj…

Constitution

Electoral Bond Scheme, the proviso to Section 29C(1) of the Representation of the People Act 1951 (as amended by Section 137 of Finance Act 2017), Section 182(3) of the Companies Act (as amended by Section 154 of the Finance Act 2017), and Section 13A(b) (as amended by Section 11 of Finance Act 2017) are violative of Article 19(1)(a) and unconstitutional

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.,…

Constitution Land Acquisition

In the facts and circumstances noted and more particularly the fact that the appellant still claims to be in possession of the land under acquisition, writ petition preferred by the appellant should have been heard and decided on merits – Matter is remitted to the High Court of Uttarakhand

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH J.N. PURI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (NOW STATE OF UTTARAKHAND) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep…

Constitution Matrimonial

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India is clearly permissible to do ‘complete justice’ to a ’cause or matter’ and this Court can pass an order or decree which a family court, trial court or High Court can pass and when such power is exercised, the question or issue of lack of subject-matter jurisdiction does not arise

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI — Appellant Vs. KUNTAL PRAKASHCHANDRA JOSHI @ KUNTAL VISANJI SHAH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

Constitution Cr P C

Mandatorily mention in a application for grant of bail: 1. Details and copies of order(s) passed in the earlier bail application(s) filed by the petitioner which have been already decided. 2. Details of any bail application(s) filed by the petitioner, which is pending either in any court, below the court in question or the higher court, and if none is pending, a clear statement to that effect has to be made 3. The registry of the court should also annex a pending bail application(s) in the crime case in question -4. It should be the duty of the Investigating Officer/any officer assisting the State Counsel in court to apprise him of the order(s), if any, passed by the court with reference to different bail applications or other proceedings in the same crime case

Jan 21, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUSHA DURUKA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ODISHA — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw