Supreme Court of India Judgements

47020 Judgements hosted as on 04/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Environment

Environment

Environmental Law — Wildlife Protection and Conservation — Protection of Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and Lesser Florican (LF) — Conflict between conservation goals and green energy generation (solar/wind) — Supreme Court modified earlier blanket prohibition on overhead transmission lines based on Expert Committee recommendations to balance non-negotiable preservation of GIB with sustainable development and India’s international climate change commitments — Importance of domain expert advice in policy matters concerning conservation and infrastructure development affirmed. (Paras 6, 14, 15, 60, 61)

Jan 1, 2026 sclaw

2025 INSC 1472 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M.K. RANJITSINH AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.…

Constitution Environment

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to Life and Healthy Environment — Environmental Degradation: Pollution of Jojari, Bandi, and Luni Rivers in Rajasthan due to untreated industrial effluents and municipal sewage threatens the lives of 2 million people and the ecosystem — This constitutes a gross dereliction of constitutional duty and a direct constitutional injury — The right to a healthy environment, including pollution-free water and air, is an indispensable facet of the right to life under Article 21, reinforced by Articles 48A and 51A(g) — Judicial intervention is warranted when environmental degradation strikes at the foundation of these guarantees. (Paras 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 28)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1341 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH IN RE: 2 MILLION LIVES AT RISK, CONTAMINATION IN JOJARI RIVER, RAJASTHAN ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.…

Environment

Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 — Section 38H(6) — Captive Animal Management and Translocation — Cancellation of Zoo Recognition and Translocation — Controversy surrounding the proposed translocation of deer from A.N. Jha Deer Park (New Delhi) to wildlife sanctuaries in Rajasthan and Delhi on pretext of overcrowding, following cancellation of the Park’s recognition by Central Zoo Authority (CZA) due to persistent non-compliance with zoo management norms. (Paras 1, 5, 7, 17)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1358 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW DELHI NATURE SOCIETY THROUGH VERHAEN KHANNA Vs. DIRECTOR HOTRICULTURE DDA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta,…

Environment

Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — Section 38-V(4)(ii) and proviso to Section 33(a) — Tiger Safaris — prohibition in core or critical tiger habitat areas — permitted only on non-forest land or degraded forest land within the buffer, ensuring it is not part of a tiger corridor — establishment must be in conjunction with a fully operational rescue and rehabilitation centre for tigers.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1325 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IN RE : CORBETT ( Before : B.R.Gavai, CJI, Augustine George Masih and A.S.Chandurkar, JJ. ) I.A. No. 20650 of 2023…

Environment

Environmental Law — Environmental Clearance (EC) — Ex Post Facto Clearance — Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Section 3 — While EC should ordinarily be prior, the EP Act does not entirely prohibit ex post facto EC — Grant of ex post facto clearance is permissible in exceptional circumstances, in strict compliance with rules, upon imposition of heavy penalties, where denial of approval would result in adverse consequences outweighing regularisation, and where project complies with or can be made to comply with environmental norms — Adopting a ‘balanced approach’ is necessary to protect economy and livelihood.

Nov 22, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1326 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CONFEDERATION OF REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS OF INDIA (CREDAI) Vs. VANASHAKTI AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI, Ujjal Bhuyan and…

Environment

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 — Section 16(h) — Limitation period for appeal against Environmental Clearance (EC) — Communication of EC to “any person aggrieved” — The date of commencement of the 30-day limitation period (extendable by 60 days) starts from the earliest date on which the order granting EC is “communicated” to the aggrieved person by any of the duty bearers (MoEF&CC, project proponent, or Pollution Control Boards).

Nov 22, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1331 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

Environment Municipal Laws

Environmental Law — Public Trust Doctrine — MCGM’s mandate to develop recreational spaces providing legal foundation for project — Prior condition of water body suggested degradation, not functional lake — Completed park providing substantial public benefit, including green space and recreational amenities utilized by community — Post facto sanction restricting land use to recreational purposes providing legal safeguard — Delay in filing petition undermining challenge — Direction to maintain park in perpetuity for public use, explore alternative water body, and restore other deteriorated water bodies by MCGM.

Jun 3, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 792 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND OTHERS Vs. PANKAJ BABULAL KOTECHA AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar…

You missed

Education

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw