Supreme Court of India Judgements

47260 Judgements hosted as on 24/05/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: SC/ST

SC/ST

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) — Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) — Essential ingredient — “in any place within public view” — Both sections require the act of insult, intimidation, or abuse to occur in a place visible to the public — This is a mandatory condition for constituting the offence.

May 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 468 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GUNJAN @ GIRIJA KUMARI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V.…

I P C SC/ST

CONVERSION –Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 341, 323, 506 read with Section 34 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Appellant converted to Christianity and worked as a Pastor for ten years — High Court quashed proceedings, holding appellant disentitled to protection under SC/ST Act due to conversion — Supreme Court upheld High Court’s decision — Conversion to a religion other than Hindu, Sikh, or Buddhist results in automatic and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status — Religious conversion bars claim to benefits under SC/ST Act, as it is predicated on Scheduled Caste membership.

Mar 26, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 283 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHINTHADA ANAND Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

SC/ST

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(xi) — Conviction and Requirement of Caste-Based Intention — High Court’s finding that the offence was committed “simply for reason that the complainant was belonging to scheduled caste” held perverse — No statement in court by the victim or PW-2 suggesting that the accused were motivated by the victim’s caste — Finding based on mere observation without evidence is unsustainable. (Para 20)

Dec 9, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1395 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DADU @ ANKUSH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih,…

SC/ST

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) — Section 3(1)(s) — Essential ingredient — Requirement of caste-based abuse occurring “in any place within public view” — Interpretation — For an offence under Section 3(1)(s) to be made out, the place where the utterance is made must be open, enabling the public to witness or hear the abuse — Abuse uttered within the four corners of a house, where public members are not present, does not satisfy the requirement of being “within public view” — Allegation that casteist abuses were hurled inside the complainant’s residence does not meet the statutory requirement — House of the complainant cannot be considered “within public view.” (Paras 9, 10, 11, 13)

Dec 9, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1397 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SOHANVIR @ SOHANVIR DHAMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.…

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…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Constitution Narcotics Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial.

May 24, 2026 sclaw