Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 405 and 406 — Criminal Breach of Trust — Entrustment — Refundable security deposit paid under Joint Development Agreement (JDA) — Held, mere payment of refundable security deposit as consideration for GPA does not amount to “entrustment” of property — FIR and chargesheet silent on manner of misappropriation/conversion — Bald, omnibus allegation of dishonest retention, unsupported by cogent material, insufficient to sustain charge under S. 405 — Mere non-refund of money does not constitute criminal breach of trust.
2026 INSC 772 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH G. SAMINATHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and…
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Maintainability of writ petition — Disputed questions of fact — Effect of long pendency — Where a writ petition seeking compensation had remained pending for over a decade and a half before being dismissed on the ground of “disputed questions of fact,” relegating the claimant to a fresh remedy before the Civil Court after such efflux of time would render the claimant remediless — On this short ground alone, interference with the impugned judgment was warranted, particularly where the underlying facts of the incident stood undisputed and unchallenged throughout.
2026 INSC 774 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NISHA Vs. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SANGRUR AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(s).…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125(4) — Application of principles to facts — Remand — Trial Court erred in holding that the adultery issue could only be decided at final adjudication, rendering the statutory scheme otiose; since photographic/electronic evidence of adultery was placed on record requiring evaluation, the Trial Court was directed to decide the S. 125(4) application on merits, with interim maintenance continuing till such decision — matter remanded.
2026 INSC 778 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIMANSHU CHORDIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 20 — Specific performance — Discretionary and equitable relief — Clean hands — Grant of specific performance is discretionary, not automatic even where a valid contract subsists; a plaintiff must approach the Court with clean hands. Where the plaintiff’s spouse lodged a criminal complaint seeking recovery of the advance paid, alleging the vendor fraudulently suppressed a subsisting injunction, while simultaneously maintaining a civil suit for specific performance, such conduct amounts to blowing “hot and cold” and disentitles the plaintiff to equitable relief.
2026 INSC 776 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V.N.A.S. CHANDRAN Vs. S. VENILA AND OTHERS ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 299 — Absence of order — Effect on conviction — Where no order under S. 299 was ever passed at the stage the co-accused was tried (case having been split due to abscondence), the earlier deposition of a witness (since deceased) could not be relied upon to convict the accused apprehended and tried years later; identification by surviving eyewitnesses being doubtful and other witnesses having turned hostile, conviction based on such uncorroborated prior testimony unsustainable — appellant acquitted.
2026 INSC 775 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHENDRA SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : J. B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Hindu female’s property devolves equally on husband and daughter separately; gift of undivided coparcenary share needs no co-owner’s consent. A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 15(1)(a) — Devolution of Female Intestate’s Property — Properties of a Hindu female dying intestate devolve, in the absence of sons/daughters’ issue predeceasing her, upon her husband and daughter in equal shares under Section 15(1)(a); such undivided share in the husband’s hands does not partake the character of coparcenary property.
2026 INSC 757 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MARAGADHAM Vs. PERIYARAJA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 12190 of 2025…
Armed Forces — Air Force Order No. 33/2017 — Prior Permission for Civil Post — Mandatory Nature — Requirement of seeking prior permission before applying for a civil post, and subsequent grant of NOC, held mandatory and not merely procedural/directory, since AFO 33/2017 has necessary nexus with regulating premature discharge of Airmen and its object of maintaining operational preparedness of the Air Force.
2026 INSC 758 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAKHAT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Deficiency of Service — Maintenance Contractor’s Liability — Elevator Malfunction — Comprehensive maintenance contractor, being both manufacturer and repair contractor with exclusive technical knowledge of safety interlocks and brake mechanisms, held principally deficient in service for failing to act on its own identified remedy (voltage stabiliser) despite repeated notice of persistent malfunction over several months preceding fatal accident.
2026 INSC 756 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S OTIS ELEVATOR CO. (INDIA) LTD. Vs. RASHMI HANDA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ.…
Public Service Commission consultation before extending officiating appointment is directory not mandatory; ad-hoc service counts towards seniority computation. A. Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005 — Rule 24(4) — Uttaranchal Public Service Commission (Limitations of Functions) Regulations, 2003 — Regulation 5(a) — Nature of Requirement — Requirement of consulting Commission before continuation of officiating appointment beyond one year held directory, not mandatory, applying the classic test of statutory construction; non-compliance does not invalidate the appointment where treating it as void would cause serious inconvenience to persons with no control over the defaulting authority.
2026 INSC 759 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. JAGDISH CHANDRA KANDPAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. )…
Reinstated judicial officer entitled to Selection/Super Time Scale despite missing ACRs; employer cannot benefit from its own wrongful discharge. A. Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 — Rules 49, 50 — Full Court Resolution dated 15.01.2011 — Selection Scale/Super Time Scale — Application on facts — Applying the valid ACRs for 2013 and 2014 (Parts I & II) — all rated “Very Good”/”Good” with integrity certified — the Judicial Officer, having completed five years’ notional service considering reinstatement with continuity, was held entitled to Selection Scale with effect from 16.07.2018 and, upon three years therein, Super Time Scale with effect from 16.07.2021, aligned with the dates of eligibility applied to junior officers.
2026 INSC 762 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN Vs. ABHAY JAIN ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ. ) Miscellaneous Application…








