Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on16/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished. Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 11, Explanation IV — Constructive Res Judicata — Application of the principle depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, considering the ambit of earlier proceedings and the nexus of the matter to the controversy — It is founded on public policy to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid parties being vexed twice over for the same litigation — Parties are expected to exercise reasonable diligence and bring forward every point that properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which they might and ought to have brought forward — Negligence, inadvertence, or accident in omitting a part of the case does not exempt from its application. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 165 and 166 — Liability for injuries sustained due to falling tree branch — Injuries caused by falling tree branch while vehicle was stationary under the tree during rain — Held, not an accident “arising out of the use of a motor vehicle” as the motor vehicle did not play an active role. [ Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) — Sections 24, 33(5), 36, 39 — Child-sensitive judicial processes — Mandatory safeguards for child victims — Courts must ensure child-friendly procedures, minimum intrusion, and psychological safety, avoiding re-traumatisation and secondary victimisation in all proceedings concerning children, especially those involving allegations of sexual abuse.
Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
RTI

Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished.
Service
Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished.
Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency.
RTI
Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 11, Explanation IV — Constructive Res Judicata — Application of the principle depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, considering the ambit of earlier proceedings and the nexus of the matter to the controversy — It is founded on public policy to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid parties being vexed twice over for the same litigation — Parties are expected to exercise reasonable diligence and bring forward every point that properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which they might and ought to have brought forward — Negligence, inadvertence, or accident in omitting a part of the case does not exempt from its application.
C P C
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 11, Explanation IV — Constructive Res Judicata — Application of the principle depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, considering the ambit of earlier proceedings and the nexus of the matter to the controversy — It is founded on public policy to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid parties being vexed twice over for the same litigation — Parties are expected to exercise reasonable diligence and bring forward every point that properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which they might and ought to have brought forward — Negligence, inadvertence, or accident in omitting a part of the case does not exempt from its application.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 165 and 166 — Liability for injuries sustained due to falling tree branch — Injuries caused by falling tree branch while vehicle was stationary under the tree during rain — Held, not an accident “arising out of the use of a motor vehicle” as the motor vehicle did not play an active role. [
Accident
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 165 and 166 — Liability for injuries sustained due to falling tree branch — Injuries caused by falling tree branch while vehicle was stationary under the tree during rain — Held, not an accident “arising out of the use of a motor vehicle” as the motor vehicle did not play an active role. [
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 31(1) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Resolution Plan — “Clean Slate” Principle — Effect of Approval — Claims not part of resolution plan stand extinguished — No affirmative relief can be granted for such claims — Division Bench judgment set aside.

Mar 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 268 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UJAAS ENERGY LTD. Vs. WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Environment

Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — Section 2 — Forest land — Deemed forest — Master Plan — Statutory plan prevails over subsequent growth of vegetation — Land earmarked for project under an approved Master Plan, which was not forest land at the time of the plan’s inception, cannot subsequently be declared as forest or deemed forest thereby overriding the Master Plan’s statutory force.

Mar 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 270 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAVEEN SOLANKI AND ANOTHER Vs. RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ.…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009 (BSCA) — Confiscation proceedings against family members of a deceased public servant — Death of the public servant during pendency of appeal — Whether confiscation proceedings can continue against the family members — Held, the BSCA provides for specific circumstances for return of confiscated property, namely, modification/annulment by High Court or acquittal by Special Court — The Act does not provide for abatement of proceedings upon death of the public servant, especially when family members were also put to notice — proceedings against family members cannot be automatically set aside due to the death of the public servant, and appeals should be decided on merits.

Mar 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 272 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH VIGILANCE Vs. SUDHA SINGH ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal…

Service Matters
Service

Gratuity — Withholding of gratuity due to non-vacation of company-allotted accommodation — SAIL Gratuity Rules, 1978, Rule 3.2.1(c) expressly empowers management to withhold gratuity for non-compliance with company rules, including non-vacation of accommodation — No interest payable on gratuity withheld for period of unauthorized occupation — Management is entitled to adjust penal rent accrued for retention beyond permissible period from gratuity amount — Order of March 31, 2017 in Ram Naresh Singh’s case was a concession based on specific facts and not binding precedent, unlike the order of December 15, 2020 in S.L.P — (C) No — 11025 of 2020 which clarified principles of penal rent adjustment

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 263 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE MANAGEMENT OF STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. SHAMBHU PRASAD SINGH AND OTHERS ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and…

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) — Assessment of compensation — Functional disability vs — Physical disability — High Court reduced functional disability from 63% assessed by Medical Board to 30% without providing cogent reasons, constituting an erroneous appreciation of evidence and misapplication of legal principles — Such reduction, without convincing evidence impeaching medical certificates and without assigning adequate reasons, was unjustified — Supreme Court, to do complete justice and avoid further delay, examined functional disability on merits, considering medical and neuropsychological reports indicating severe cognitive impairment, partial blindness, and orthopedic limitations — Held, functional disability for calculating loss of earning capacity should be assessed at 100% given the claimant’s managerial role and the profound impact of injuries on his cognitive and functional abilities — Compensation recalculated accordingly, enhancing the award from Rs — 35,61,000/- to Rs — 97,73,011/-.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 260 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH R. HALLE Vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 221 and 222 — Conviction for offence not charged — High Court rightly reversed the conviction under Section 364 of IPC when the charge was for Section 302 of IPC, as Section 364 is not a minor or cognate offence to Section 302, making conviction without specific charge or notice prejudicial to fair trial

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 256 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. RAM SWAROOP @ BARKAT ( Before : Aravind Kumar and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of “consumer” — Commercial purpose — Deposit of surplus funds by a company in a bank for earning interest does not automatically make it a commercial purpose, but if the deposit is made to leverage credit facilities for augmenting business, it would have a direct nexus with revenue generation/profits — The identity of the purchaser or the value of the transaction is not conclusive, but the dominant intention or purpose behind the transaction is determining.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 264 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANT ROHIDAS LEATHER INDUSTRIES AND CHARMAKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. Vs. VIJAYA BANK ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra,…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 406 and 420 — Criminal breach of trust and cheating — For an offence of cheating under Section 415 IPC, a fraudulent or dishonest intention must exist at the time of making the promise or representation — Mere failure to keep a promise subsequently does not automatically prove dishonest intention from the beginning — Every breach of contract does not amount to cheating, unless there was deception at the inception.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 265 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V. GANESAN Vs. STATE REP BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law — Disciplinary proceedings post-superannuation — Where service regulations permit continuation of disciplinary proceedings initiated before superannuation, they can be concluded thereafter — Punishment of reduction in pay scale can be implemented by computing pension based on the reduced salary.

Mar 21, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 266 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIRINDER PAL SINGH Vs. PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra, JJ. )…

Corporate SEBI

Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 — Section 15Z — Appeal to Supreme Court against SAT order setting aside Adjudicating Officer’s order imposing penalties for violation of SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 and Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 — Held, diversion of funds from preferential issue was in violation of Regulations and detrimental to investors — SAT’s reversal of AO’s order based on shareholder ratification was erroneous — Appeals allowed — Order of Adjudicating Officer restored.

Mar 18, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 245 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs. TERRASCOPE VENTURES LIMITED ETC ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K. V. Viswanathan, JJ.…

You missed

Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
RTI

Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 11, Explanation IV — Constructive Res Judicata — Application of the principle depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, considering the ambit of earlier proceedings and the nexus of the matter to the controversy — It is founded on public policy to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid parties being vexed twice over for the same litigation — Parties are expected to exercise reasonable diligence and bring forward every point that properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which they might and ought to have brought forward — Negligence, inadvertence, or accident in omitting a part of the case does not exempt from its application.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 165 and 166 — Liability for injuries sustained due to falling tree branch — Injuries caused by falling tree branch while vehicle was stationary under the tree during rain — Held, not an accident “arising out of the use of a motor vehicle” as the motor vehicle did not play an active role. [

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw