Haryana School Education Act, 1995, Section 22 — Civil Court Jurisdiction — Ouster of jurisdiction by statute must be express or implied — Section 22 only ousts jurisdiction where Government or its officers have power to adjudicate — Recovery of fees by a school is not a power conferred on Government/authorities — Civil court jurisdiction not ousted in matters of reasonable fee recovery.
2025 INSC 925 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH APEEJAY SCHOOL Vs. DHRITI DUGGAL AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI., K. Vinod Chandran and N. V. Anjaria, JJ.…
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — Allegations in FIR were vague, general, and filed one year after admitted separation of the parties — No specific instances of cruelty were mentioned — Criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Court can quash FIR if allegations, taken at face value, do not constitute any offence — Vague and general allegations of marital discord, without specific instances, do not prima facie constitute an offence under Section 498A IPC.
2025 INSC 926 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ANURAG VIJAYKUMAR GOEL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI., K. Vinod Chandran and N. V.…
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 376(2), 450 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Sexual assault on a minor — Evidence of prosecutrix — Conviction can be based solely on the prosecutrix’s testimony if it inspires confidence — Corroboration of testimony of prosecutrix is not a requirement of law, but a guidance of prudence — Minor contractions or small discrepancies should not be a ground for throwing out the evidence of the prosecutrix.
2025 INSC 929 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEPAK KUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. …..of…
State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 — Section 29 — Liability of Financial Corporation taking possession of industrial unit for dues — Corporation acts as a trustee, liable only to the extent of funds in its hands after settling its dues, not personally liable. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 80 — Notice to Government or public officer — Mandatory requirement before instituting suit — Failure to issue notice or obtain leave renders suit not maintainable and decree a nullity, even if impleaded later.
2025 INSC 928 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ODISHA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION Vs. VIGYAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS ( Before : J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. )…
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 62; Section 14(1)(d) — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order directing return of property — NCLT had directed return of property based on CoC decision that property not required by corporate debtor — NCLAT set aside NCLT order invoking Section 14(1)(d) barring recovery of property during CIRP — Supreme Court held that Section 14(1)(d) not applicable as CoC and Resolution Professional initiated the process for returning property due to financial burden of rentals, and not a simple recovery by owner — Commercial wisdom of CoC regarding non-retention of property given primacy — NCLAT order set aside, NCLT order restored.
2025 INSC 931 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SINCERE SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. CHANDRAKANT KHEMKA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.…
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 10 — Specific performance of contract — Plaintiff must prove existence of a valid agreement of sale, breach by defendant, and plaintiff’s readiness and willingness to perform — Defendant admitted signatures but pleaded misuse of blank papers and no agreement of sale — Plaintiff failed to examine witnesses to the agreement to sell and rent deed — Plaintiff’s evidence was self-serving — Failure to produce crucial evidence supporting the agreement rendered plaintiff’s case unsustainable.
2025 INSC 924 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARISH KUMAR Vs. AMAR NATH AND ANOTHER (BOTH DEAD AND REPRESENTED THROUGH LR.) ( Before : Ahsanuddin Amanullah and S.V.N. Bhatti,…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 307, 436 — Murder, Attempt to murder, Mischief by fire or explosive substance — Appreciation of evidence — High Court reversed trial court’s conviction, finding prosecution failed to prove charges beyond doubt — Supreme Court found High Court erred in treating case as purely circumstantial and misappreciating evidence — Supreme Court held evidence, including eyewitness testimony, spot punchanama, and post-mortem reports, supported prosecution’s case of explosion, fire, burn injuries, and deaths — High Court’s assumption that no remains of bomb were found was erroneous, as explosive substance causing fire was sufficient — Supreme Court also disagreed with High Court’s view that parents would not leave children during fire, citing principle of varying human reactions under stress — Supreme Court restored trial court’s conviction for respondents Nilu Ganjhu and Mahboob Ansari
2025 INSC 942 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF BIHAR NOW JHARKHAND Vs. NILU GANJHU @ NILKANT RAM GANJHU AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and…
POCSO Act, 2012 and Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Offences under — Suspension of sentence — High Court’s refusal to suspend sentence was based on general gravity of offence and complicity of appellant, without applying correct principles for suspension of fixed-term sentences, leading to setting aside of order and remand for fresh consideration.
2025 INSC 944 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AASIF @ PASHA Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal…
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) — Sections 3/4(2), 42 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376(3) — Appeal against suspension of sentence by High Court — Supreme Court held High Court was not justified. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389 — Suspension of Sentence — Scope of — High Court while considering suspension of sentence must adhere to parameters laid down in law — Prima facie satisfaction about chances of acquittal is necessary, not reappreciation of evidence or picking loopholes.
2025 INSC 935 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAMNALAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and K. V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…of…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — Conviction on circumstantial evidence requires a chain of events to be fully established, consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt, conclusive in nature, excluding all other hypotheses, and leaving no reasonable ground for innocence.
2025 INSC 936 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAIL KUMARI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : B.R.Gavai, CJI. and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2189…