Supreme Court of India Judgements

47295 Judgements hosted as on 02/08/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe @ Rs 99/- for 6 months, sclaw@sclaw.in, WA +91 9417245693.

Category: Constitution

Constitution

Impugned judgment of the High Court modified to the extent that the respondents be paid interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum and not 15 per cent from the date mentioned in the impugned judgment of the High Court–In the event, the amount, is not paid by the State within six months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to it by the respondents, the State shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum as directed by the High Court.   

Nov 13, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 225 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aftab Alam Civil Appeal Nos. 2547 and 2548…

Constitution

Detention–Seizure–Appellant was detained for about 15 hours at the airport–Appellant traveled by air from Hyderabad to Chennai and carried Rs. 65 lakhs- suspicion was created in the mind of the officers on account of appellant carrying an unusually large sum of money in cash–After investigation and verification, nothing found to be amiss or irregular–Investigating Department expressed regret for the inconvenience–However, Premature disclosures or ‘leakage’ to the media in a pending investigation, condemned.

Nov 12, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 213 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran The Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan Civil Appeal No. 7914 of 2009…

Constitution

Cannot be said that Article 21 been infringed in the matter–Petitioner not rendered remedy-less merely by denial of interim relief–Case not “the rarest of rare” so as to permit the petitioner to bypass the normal procedure of filing appeal against the order of the Single Judge–SC decline to  interfere with the order passed by  the  Single Judge of   the Delhi  High Court–Court  can grant   the relief   in cases:  where manifest injustice has been done:  or where there is manifest illegality or manifest want of jurisdiction.                   

Nov 11, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 196 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar Special Leave Petition No. 32840…

Constitution

Rent–Enhancement of –Enhanced rent was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable as matter purely contractual and the appellants voluntarily entered into the lease/licence with the respondents–Appellants not entitled to seek redress under Article 226 of the Constitution for any breach of the covenants contained in the lease agreements.

Nov 11, 2018 sclaw

2010(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 190 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar Civil Appeal No. 5158 Of…

Constitution

Forest Land—Unauthorized Construction—Construction was allowed on forest land (Aravalli Hills near Faridabad, Haryana) unauthorizedly by town planning authorities in blatant violation of notification declaring the area as Forest Land—State directed to demolish all the constructions—Developer to pay the investors the invested amount with interest and cost of construction thereon Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900–Unauthorized Construction-Construction was allowed on forest land (Aravalli Hills near Faridabad, Haryana) unauthorizedly by competent authorities and construction was raised in blatant violation of notification dated 10th August 1992 and subsequent order of court prohibiting any kind of construction—Area was declared forest land since 1980 much before said notification—In fact, building plans and sanction plans were approved by concerned authorities—It has caused great irreversible damage to environment and ecology of the area—Badkal lake has dried up and there is water scarcity in the areas—Following directions issued regarding constructions and land sold after date of notification as follows: (i) Developer would refund full amount to land purchaser along with 18% interest p.a. payable entirely by developer; (ii) State of Haryana to demolish all the illegal and unauthorized constructions before 31st December 2018; (iii) Developer and Town Planning Department to bear equally the cost of constructions which are ordered to be demolished—Amount quantified at Rs. 50 lakhs to be paid by 31th Dec 2018; (iv) If anyone who’s construction is demolished and is not satisfied with amount of Rs. 50 lakhs they can claim more by way of civil suit; (v) According to developer they have invested Rs. 50 crores in developing a housing complex—Developer directed to deposit 10% of said amount for rehabilitation of damaged area—Haryana Development & Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, S.23.

Nov 8, 2018 sclaw

2018(3) Law Herald (SC) 2422 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1518 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta W.P. (C)No. 4677…

Constitution

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Real Estate Project—Home Buyers—However, keeping in view the change of legal status of home buyers and facts and circumstances of the case, while exercising the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution directions issued to start the process under code afresh.

Oct 24, 2018 sclaw

2018(3) Law Herald (SC) 2162 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1440   SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CHITRA SHARMA — Appellant  Vs.  UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : Dipak Misra, CJI.,…

Constitution

Tender Bid—Judicial Review—High Court could not ordinarily interfere with the judgment of the expert consultant on the issues of technical qualifications of a bidder.

Oct 21, 2018 sclaw

2018(3) Law Herald (SC) 2098 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1437 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before                                   Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Gogol                                Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi Hon’ble Mr.…

You missed

Environment

Environment Law — Environmental Clearance — Prior clearance — Mandatory character — Prior environmental clearance under EIA Notification, 2006 is mandatory, being founded on the precautionary principle and couched in imperative terms — Word “prior” and the graded four-stage screening, scoping, public consultation and appraisal process render an anterior assessment the sine qua non of the clearance regime — Decriminalisation of contraventions under Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 does not alter this mandatory character.

Aug 2, 2026 sclaw
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Cr P C

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 415 — Appeal — Maintainability — Conviction recorded for first time by appellate court reversing acquittal — An appeal under Section 374 CrPC (Section 415 BNSS) is not maintainable against a judgment of conviction recorded by a Sessions Court while exercising appellate jurisdiction and reversing an order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court — No such second appeal is contemplated under CrPC or BNSS — The only remedy available is revision under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC (Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS)

Aug 2, 2026 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 44B — “Carriage” of passengers — Meaning and scope of — Cruise operations by non-resident shipping entity — Held, the word “carriage” under Section 44B cannot be restrictively construed to mean movement only from Port A to Port B. A round-trip cruise voyage, where passengers have the option to disembark at intermediate ports without compulsion to return to the originating port, constitutes carriage of passengers within the meaning of Section 44B. Provision of incidental on-board entertainment and hospitality does not alter the essential character of the activity as carriage of passengers.

Aug 2, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Scope of inquiry — Mini-trial impermissible — At the stage of considering quashing of an FIR, the Court’s inquiry is confined to whether the allegations, taken at face value, prima facie disclose commission of a cognizable offence — Court cannot conduct a “mini-trial” by sifting evidence, assessing probabilities, or evaluating witness credibility — High Court exceeding these limits by examining trap proceedings, absence of personal recovery, and departmental enquiry findings, held impermissible.

Aug 2, 2026 sclaw