Supreme Court of India Judgements

46820 Judgements hosted as on 28/07/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: SC/ST

Cr P C SC/ST

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of proceedings — High Court quashed proceedings under SC/ST Act, 1989, against respondents — Appellant contended High Court erred in exercising jurisdiction, overlooking evidence, and conducting roving inquiry — Court held High Court’s scope under Section 482 is limited to determining if allegations disclose a cognizable offence, and it should not engage in detailed evidence evaluation at pre-trial stage — However, if allegations are baseless, motivated by personal vendetta, or lack requisite ingredients for an offence, High Court can quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process.

Jul 28, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 886 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KONDE NAGESHWAR RAO Vs. A. SRIRAMA CHANDRA MURTY AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI. and Augustine George Masih, J.…

SC/ST

Offence under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC-ST Act to be made out, the act of insult or intimidation must occur in a place “within public view,” and if the incident occurs in a private space without public witnesses, it does not satisfy the requirements of the Act. Consequently, the court can quash the proceedings if the allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence under the SC-ST Act.

Feb 4, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 132 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KARUPPUDAYAR Vs. STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LALGUDI TRICHY AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Augustine…

SC/ST

Offence under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC-ST Act to be made out, the act of insult or intimidation must occur in a place “within public view,” and if the incident occurs in a private space without public witnesses, it does not satisfy the requirements of the Act. Consequently, the court can quash the proceedings if the allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence under the SC-ST Act.

Feb 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 132 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KARUPPUDAYAR Vs. STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LALGUDI TRICHY AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Augustine…

SC/ST

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 4(2) – The Olympic Riding and Equestrian Academy (OREA) is facing disputes over allegations of caste-based discrimination and other complaints filed against trainees and administrators – The main issue is whether the complaints filed under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, were substantiated and whether FIRs should be registered – The appellants argued that the complaints were not made in public view and lacked specific details, thus not constituting offenses under the Act of 1989 – The respondent claimed that the complaints were ignored by the police and not investigated as mandated by the Act of 1989 – The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeal, upholding the Metropolitan Magistrate’s order that dismissed the application for FIR registration under the Act of 1989 – The court found the allegations vague, did not specify the offenses, and were not made in public view – The impugned judgment of the High Court directing the registration of an FIR was set aside

Jul 4, 2024 sclaw

(2024) INSC 437 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRITI AGARWALLA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF GNCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.…

Acquittal SC/ST

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 4(2) – The Olympic Riding and Equestrian Academy (OREA) is facing disputes over allegations of caste-based discrimination and other complaints filed against trainees and administrators – The main issue is whether the complaints filed under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, were substantiated and whether FIRs should be registered – The appellants argued that the complaints were not made in public view and lacked specific details, thus not constituting offenses under the Act of 1989 – The respondent claimed that the complaints were ignored by the police and not investigated as mandated by the Act of 1989 – The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeal, upholding the Metropolitan Magistrate’s order that dismissed the application for FIR registration under the Act of 1989 – The court found the allegations vague, did not specify the offenses, and were not made in public view – The impugned judgment of the High Court directing the registration of an FIR was set aside.

May 27, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 437 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRITI AGARWALLA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF GNCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.…

Acquittal I P C SC/ST

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 306 – Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 3(2)(v) – Abetment of suicide – Necessary ingredients – This court ruled that the charge under the SC/ST Act was unwarranted because the prosecution did not allege that the offence under the IPC was committed based on the deceased’s caste – The court also found that the allegations in the suicide note were not sufficient to establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC – Appeal Allowed.

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRABHAT KUMAR MISHRA @ PRABHAT MISHRA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep…

Acquittal SC/ST

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 3(1)(xi) – The Court held that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had assaulted the victim with the intention of dishonouring or outraging her modesty, as required under Section 3(1)(xi) SC/ST Act – The Court also held that the prosecution had failed to establish that the accused belonged to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DASHRATH SAHU — Appellant Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal…

You missed

Education

Education Law — Admissions — Eligibility Criteria — Prospectus issued by University — Amendments and Addendums — Appellant admitted to postgraduate program based on provisional admission — Completed course and received degree — University withdrew degree based on initial ineligibility — Court held that due to confusion and uncertainty caused by frequent changes in eligibility criteria, the benefit should go to the appellant, especially since she had completed the course with good marks.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Matrimonial

Transfer Petition — Jurisdiction — Courts — Petition seeking transfer of matrimonial and criminal cases from one state to another filed by both parties, wife seeking transfer of divorce case from Delhi to UP, husband seeking transfer of criminal cases from UP to Delhi. Parties have also filed special leave petitions against High Court orders. Supreme Court has the power to transfer cases.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 34, 120B — Murder — Appeal against conviction and sentence for murder — Key eyewitness evidence of the deceased’s son and wife — Distance allegedly covered on bicycle within thirty minutes questioned — Improbability of covering 16 kilometers in that timeframe raised substantial doubt about their presence at the crime scene — Absence of corroboration from other witnesses, who turned hostile and suggested multiple assailants, further weakens the prosecution’s case — Post-mortem report indicating numerous injuries, consistent with multiple attackers — Deceased’s history as a habitual drunkard and criminal suggests potential enmity with various individuals — Conviction based solely on questionable eyewitness testimony not sustainable when reasonable doubt exists about accused’s presence and involvement — Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Service

Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 13(2) and Rule 14, Appendix 3 — Disciplinary proceedings for major penalties — Initiation of by authority competent to impose minor penalties — Permissible — Rule 13(2) allows a disciplinary authority competent to impose minor penalties to institute proceedings for major penalties, even if not competent to impose major penalties itself. – Charge Sheet — Validity of issuance by General Manager (Telecommunications) for major penalties — Held valid as the General Manager is competent to impose minor penalties and Rule 13(2) permits initiation of proceedings for major penalties by such an authority.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw