Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Top Tags

Latest Post

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Writ jurisdiction — Violation of Fundamental Rights — A writ petition under Article 32 requires a prima facie case of violation or imminent threat of violation of a Fundamental Right, with specific pleadings and prayers for relief. Vague allegations of arbitrariness or violation of natural justice without specific impact on Fundamental Rights are insufficient to maintain the petition. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 — Applicability — Plea of juvenility raised for the first time before the Supreme Court — Permissible at any stage, even after disposal of the case, as held in various judgments of the Supreme Court.-— Determination of Age — Inquiry report confirmed the appellant was a juvenile (16 years, 2 months, 3 days) at the time of the commission of the offence. 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. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Second quashing petition — Maintainability — Not permissible to raise previously available grounds in a subsequent petition to effect a review of an earlier order, violating Section 362 CrPC — Exception is when there has been a change in circumstances. DTAA, India-UAE, Article 5(1) — Permanent Establishment — Definition of “fixed place of business” — The definition of Permanent Establishment requires a fixed place of business through which the business of an enterprise is wholly or partly carried on. The key test is whether the place is “at the disposal” of the enterprise, meaning the enterprise has the right to use the premises to carry on its business. Factors like stability, productivity, and a degree of independence are also considered.
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Writ jurisdiction — Violation of Fundamental Rights — A writ petition under Article 32 requires a prima facie case of violation or imminent threat of violation of a Fundamental Right, with specific pleadings and prayers for relief. Vague allegations of arbitrariness or violation of natural justice without specific impact on Fundamental Rights are insufficient to maintain the petition.
Constitution
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Writ jurisdiction — Violation of Fundamental Rights — A writ petition under Article 32 requires a prima facie case of violation or imminent threat of violation of a Fundamental Right, with specific pleadings and prayers for relief. Vague allegations of arbitrariness or violation of natural justice without specific impact on Fundamental Rights are insufficient to maintain the petition.
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 — Applicability — Plea of juvenility raised for the first time before the Supreme Court — Permissible at any stage, even after disposal of the case, as held in various judgments of the Supreme Court.-— Determination of Age — Inquiry report confirmed the appellant was a juvenile (16 years, 2 months, 3 days) at the time of the commission of the offence.
Juvenile Justice
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 — Applicability — Plea of juvenility raised for the first time before the Supreme Court — Permissible at any stage, even after disposal of the case, as held in various judgments of the Supreme Court.-— Determination of Age — Inquiry report confirmed the appellant was a juvenile (16 years, 2 months, 3 days) at the time of the commission of the offence.
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.
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.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Second quashing petition — Maintainability — Not permissible to raise previously available grounds in a subsequent petition to effect a review of an earlier order, violating Section 362 CrPC — Exception is when there has been a change in circumstances.
Cr P C
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Second quashing petition — Maintainability — Not permissible to raise previously available grounds in a subsequent petition to effect a review of an earlier order, violating Section 362 CrPC — Exception is when there has been a change in circumstances.
Constitution Contempt

Freedom of Speech and Expression — Open Justice — Subjudice Principle — Contempt of Court – Such a direction, being a form of prior restraint, must satisfy twin tests of necessity and proportionality, applicable only in cases of real and substantial risk of prejudice to fairness of trial or proper administration of justice — Courts must be open to public observations, debates, and constructive criticism, even on subjudice matters, as open justice instills faith and checks judicial caprice

May 14, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 656 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC. Vs. ANI MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. )…

Acquittal

Hostile witnesses — Effect — When a large number of witnesses, including eyewitnesses, turn hostile, prosecution case often collapses for want of evidence — While reasons for hostility can be varied (coercion, fear, monetary consideration, etc.), it cannot automatically lead to conviction based on prior S. 161 statements or IO’s testimony about such statements, as these are not substantive evidence — Court’s consternation at collapse of a serious case due to witness hostility cannot be a reason to convict on insufficient or inadmissible evidence, amounting to a moral conviction anathema to criminal jurisprudence.

May 13, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 657 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RENUKA PRASAD Vs. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.…

State Laws

Sales Tax — Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Kerala Act) — Section 5A — Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act) — Section 7A — Purchase Tax — Liability of assessee purchasing goods from dealers exempt from sales tax — Where goods are purchased from dealers who are exempt from payment of sales tax by virtue of notifications or exemptions under the Kerala Act or Tamil Nadu Act, such a purchase is considered a purchase of “goods, the sale or purchase of which is liable to tax” within the meaning of Section 5A of the Kerala Act or Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu Act

May 13, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 661 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH C.T. KOCHOUSEPH Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER ETC. ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna, CJI., Sanjay Kumar and R. Mahadevan, JJ.…

Acquittal Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w S. 13(2) a— Illegal gratification — Demand and Acceptance — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — Where prosecution case regarding demand and acceptance of bribe by public servant (Revenue Inspector) suffered from material contradictions and inconsistencies in evidence of complainant (PW1) and other prosecution witnesses (PW7) Minor discrepancies may not be fatal, but serious contradictions going to root of matter, rendering evidence untrustworthy, are grounds for acquittal.

May 13, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 655 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PARITALA SUDHAKAR Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…..of 2025 [@…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Writ jurisdiction — Violation of Fundamental Rights — A writ petition under Article 32 requires a prima facie case of violation or imminent threat of violation of a Fundamental Right, with specific pleadings and prayers for relief. Vague allegations of arbitrariness or violation of natural justice without specific impact on Fundamental Rights are insufficient to maintain the petition.

Jul 28, 2025 sclaw
Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 — Applicability — Plea of juvenility raised for the first time before the Supreme Court — Permissible at any stage, even after disposal of the case, as held in various judgments of the Supreme Court.-— Determination of Age — Inquiry report confirmed the appellant was a juvenile (16 years, 2 months, 3 days) at the time of the commission of the offence.

Jul 28, 2025 sclaw
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
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Second quashing petition — Maintainability — Not permissible to raise previously available grounds in a subsequent petition to effect a review of an earlier order, violating Section 362 CrPC — Exception is when there has been a change in circumstances.

Jul 28, 2025 sclaw