Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on12/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corruption

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) — Demand and Acceptance of Bribe — Ingredients for establishing guilt of public servant under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) include proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, which are sine qua non — While acceptance of bribe was admitted, the proof of demand was the crucial aspect in this case.

Apr 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 365 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF KERALA Vs. K.A. ABDUL RASHEED ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 13(1)(d) — Disproportionate Assets — Chargesheet splitting — Allegations of acquiring disproportionate assets and tribal lands misuse — Two separate chargesheets filed from the same FIR, R.C — Case No 04(A)/2010-AHD-R(B) and R.C — Case No 04(A)/2010-AHD-R(C) — Overlapping allegations in both cases — Plea of double jeopardy raised — Supreme Court noted overlapping allegations and previous conviction with suspended sentence, inclined to grant bail in the present case as well.

Apr 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 357 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANOSH EKKA Vs. STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009 (BSCA) — Confiscation proceedings against family members of a deceased public servant — Death of the public servant during pendency of appeal — Whether confiscation proceedings can continue against the family members — Held, the BSCA provides for specific circumstances for return of confiscated property, namely, modification/annulment by High Court or acquittal by Special Court — The Act does not provide for abatement of proceedings upon death of the public servant, especially when family members were also put to notice — proceedings against family members cannot be automatically set aside due to the death of the public servant, and appeals should be decided on merits.

Mar 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 272 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH VIGILANCE Vs. SUDHA SINGH ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7 — Demand and acceptance of bribe — Complainant’s testimony regarding demand by accused (A2) on a specific date was clear and corroborated by other witnesses — Pre-trap proceedings were also established — Recovery of marked notes from A2’s person and hand wash turning pink confirmed the trap — Despite inconsistencies in complainant’s testimony regarding earlier demands, the demand on the crucial date was credible — Independent witnesses corroborated the trap, with one identifying A2 and the other recovering the bribe money — Acquittal of A2 set aside, conviction under Section 7 of PC Act restored with modified sentence and fine.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 221 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. BALJEET SINGH ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No………of…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) — Sections 7 and 13(2) — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Supreme Court upheld the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and High Court regarding the guilt of the appellant based on ocular evidence and corroboration from independent witnesses — No error found in appreciating the evidence or in rejecting the defence submissions regarding motive, contradictions, and the trustworthiness of witnesses — Appeal dismissed concerning conviction.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJ BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 1105 of 2013…

Corruption

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) — Sections 2(y), 2(ze) — Appointment under reserved quota — Management Trainee recruitment by Coal India Limited (CIL) — Denial of appointment based on initial finding of unfitness and recruitment process expiry — Appellant suffering from disability above the benchmark (57%) based on subsequent AIIMS medical report — Expiry of recruitment panel cannot nullify appellant’s right to employment when initial denial was wrongful and due to the employer’s failure to account for “multiple disability” in the notification — Held, appellant is eligible for appointment; appropriate relief moulded using extraordinary powers. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 23, 29, 30, 31, 37)

Jan 18, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 53 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUJATA BORA Vs. COAL INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B.Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 120…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) — Section 18A — PC Act read with Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 102 — Seizure vs. Attachment/Confiscation of Property — Whether power of police officer to freeze accounts under Section 102 CrPC is co-existent or mutually exclusive with the machinery for attachment under Section 18A PC Act — Held, the powers are separate, distinct, and co-existent, not mutually exclusive. (Paras 2, 8, 11)

Dec 13, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1413 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. ANIL KUMAR DEY ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. ) Criminal…

Anticipatory Bail Corruption

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Bail — Anticipatory Bail — Supreme Court granted leave to appeal against High Court’s rejection of bail in anticipation of arrest — Custodial interrogation not required — Appellant may be admitted to bail in anticipation of arrest upon arrest, subject to terms and conditions fixed by the trial court — Appellant directed not to dissuade witnesses from disclosing facts to authorities.

Oct 12, 2025 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH KUMAR PRASAD Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.4371 of…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) read with Section 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Demand and acceptance of bribe — Essential to prove demand and acceptance by public servant — Mere acceptance of illegal gratification without demand is not an offence — Prosecution must prove foundational facts through oral or documentary evidence — Presumption under Section 20 is mandatory and subject to rebuttal; presumption of fact is discretionary — High Court erred in reversing acquittal based on inferences and conjectures, ignoring glaring contradictions in prosecution evidence.

Jul 20, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 868 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M SAMBASIVA RAO Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

You missed

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — Auction Sale — Compliance with Rule 9 — Mandatory Nature — Payment of Balance 75% Beyond 15-Day Period — No Written Agreement for Extension — Sale Set Aside — Article 142 — Redemption Opportunity Granted to Legal Heirs of Deceased Guarantor.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Third Judge under S. 392 CrPC cannot disturb unanimous Division Bench findings; reference confined to disagreed accused only.–Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 392 — Third Judge — Power to give independent opinion — Options available — When an appeal is heard by a Division Bench and the Judges are divided in opinion, the appeal is laid before a third Judge under S. 392 — The third Judge is not confined to choosing between the two views expressed by the Division Bench Judges — The third Judge may: (i) agree with either of the two opinions expressed; (ii) form an independent view at divergence with both opinions; or (iii) where warranted, receive additional evidence under S. 391 before forming an opinion — The opinion of the third Judge governs and the judgment follows therefrom.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw
Constitution Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226(1) — Territorial jurisdiction — Writ petition by CAPF personnel — Delhi High Court — Jurisdiction based on situs of respondent’s office —The Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction under Art. 226(1) of the Constitution to entertain a writ petition preferred by any enrolled member of the Border Security Force or any Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) who is aggrieved by an administrative order of termination of service, by reason of the situs of the offices of the Union of India and the Director General of the concerned CAPF in New Delhi — and this jurisdictional competence subsists notwithstanding that the impugned order of termination was issued from a place outside the territorial limits of the Delhi High Court and that no part of the cause of action arose within such limits — The Union of India and the Director General, BSF are necessary parties to such a writ petition by virtue of Ss. 4 and 5 of the BSF Act and the requirement under R. 22(4) of the BSF Rules that every order of dismissal/removal be reported to the Director General; there is, moreover, a presumption that official acts have been regularly performed.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 168 — Compensation — Death of homemaker — New head of ‘Loss of Domestic Care’ — Basis and quantum — The conventional method of computing compensation upon the death of a homemaker suffers from an inherent disadvantage — Notional income, as assigned by earlier decisions, fails to capture the economic, emotional and managerial contributions that a homemaker makes to the household and to nation-building at large — In recognition of the multifarious yet unquantified roles of a homemaker — (i) contribution towards smooth functioning of the household; (ii) loss of maternal support to children; and (iii) loss of spousal/parental support — a composite sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month shall be added under the head ‘Loss of Domestic Care’ — This sum shall serve as the stand-in monthly income where the homemaker has no conventional monetary income — It shall be revised cumulatively by 10% every three years — Where the homemaker is part of the paid workforce, this head shall be in addition to the proved monthly income.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw