Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 366, 374(2) — Death Sentence — Appeal against conviction and sentence — High Court partly allowed appeals by acquitting of one charge and confirming conviction and sentences for remaining offences, including death sentence — Supreme Court considered submissions on behalf of accused-appellants and respondent-State — Supreme Court analyzed evidence and found prosecution failed to establish circumstances beyond reasonable doubt — Accordingly, judgments of trial court and High Court set aside, and appeals allowed.
2026 INSC 578 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MEHTAB Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ( Before : Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No(s). 1342-1343…
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 & 141 — Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Part III (Personal Insolvency) — Moratorium Provisions — Criminal Proceedings vs. Civil Liability — Dishonour of cheque is a criminal offence due to specific deeming fiction in Section 138, not merely a civil wrong for debt recovery, even though it arises from a debt — Held, moratorium under IBC Part III does not stay criminal proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act.
2026 INSC 579 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DINESHCHAND SURANA Vs. UCO BANK ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K. V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No….of 2026 (Arising…
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Letter of Intent (LoI) — Appellant’s claim that LoIs were conditional due to clauses concerning pending judicial orders and staff/employee litigation rejected — NCLT and NCLAT found appellant was aware of these issues and discussions in CoC meetings — Appellant’s arguments of conditional LoI were considered an “after-thought” and an attempt to renege from the plan.
2026 INSC 580 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAY DAVE Vs. ANDHRA BANK LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : K. V. Viswanathan and Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ. ) Civil…
Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 2(f) — Manufacture — Two-fold test — For an activity to be considered “manufacture,” it must result in new, distinct goods with a new identity, character, or use (transformation test), and these resultant goods must be marketable — Both tests must be satisfied. –Section 35L(2) — Amendment retrospectivity — Amendment clarifying that taxability or excisability of goods is included in “determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty” is clarificatory and retrospective in nature.
2026 INSC 582 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S ALUPRO BUILDING SYSTEMS PVT. LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BANGALORE-II ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — High Court’s power to quash proceedings is distinct from compounding offences under Section 320 CrPC and can be invoked even for non-compoundable offences — Inherent power to be exercised to secure ends of justice or prevent abuse of process of court — Nature and gravity of offence to be considered — Heinous offences generally not quashed, but cases with overwhelming civil flavour, particularly arising from commercial/financial transactions, may be quashed if parties have settled disputes and conviction is remote, to prevent oppression and injustice.
2026 INSC 588 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIJAY KUMAR KELA AND ANOTHER Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.…
Service Law — Termination of probationer — Regulation 16(3)(a) of Vijaya Bank (Officers’) Regulations, 1982 — Termination simpliciter vs — punitive termination — Termination deemed punitive if based on allegations of misconduct without due process, even if framed as unsatisfactory performance — Bank’s attempt to terminate for misconduct shifted to termination for unsatisfactory performance to bypass inquiry, rendering it unsustainable.
2026 INSC 589 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GENERAL MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA AND OTHERS Vs. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S.…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 & 37 — Scope of Interference — Court’s jurisdiction under Section 34 is narrowly circumscribed and confined to specific grounds enumerated — Court cannot act as an appellate forum to correct factual errors or review merits — Arbitral Tribunal is master of evidence and interpretation of contracts — Interference is not warranted merely because an alternative view is possible, if the tribunal’s conclusion is plausible and can be arrived at by a reasonable person.
2026 INSC 590 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADHYA PRADESH ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. M/S JABALPUR CORRIDOR PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR (…
Arbitration Act, 1940 — Section 21 — Arbitration in suits — Mandatory requirement of court order of reference — For arbitration proceedings to be validly initiated or continued during pendency of a suit, parties must obtain an order of reference from the court under Section 21 — Failure to comply renders the award legally ineffective as a bar to the suit.
2026 INSC 591 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHOK AND OTHERS Vs. PADAM CHAND AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 4 and 6 — Compensation for acquired land — Challenge to compensation awarded by High Court — Supreme Court upholds High Court’s decision based on a previous judgment dealing with the same acquisition and village — Appellant denied further enhancement.
2026 INSC 593 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOPALA AGRI FARMS PVT. LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ( Before : Surya Kant, CJI. and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar…
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) — Section 23 — Applicability to in-service teachers — Sub-section (1) governs eligibility for future appointments (prospective), while the first proviso to sub-section (2) specifically addresses teachers already in service, allowing them time to acquire qualifications — The second proviso, added by the 2017 Amendment Act, further extends this window for teachers appointed or in service as of March 31, 2015 — The legislative intent is to recognize existing appointments while providing a time-bound mechanism for qualification, not to invalidate past appointments retrospectively or impose immediate disqualification
2026 INSC 597 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF U.P. Vs. ANJUMAN ISHAAT-E-TALEEM TRUST AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, JJ. ) Review Petition (Civil)…