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. [
Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 617 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KULSUM NISHA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Bail Declined Narcotics

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) — Section 37 — Grant of bail — Twin conditions under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) must be considered — High Court ignored twin conditions while granting bail in a case involving commercial quantity of narcotics — Impugned order granting bail cannot be sustained.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 618 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. BALRAJ SINGH @ BILLA ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage — When parties have been living separately for an extended period (e.g., over 15 years), all reconciliation efforts have failed, and there is no possibility of reunion due to strained relations, the marriage can be considered to have irretrievably broken down.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 620 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SONAL TALPADA Vs. VEERBHAN SINGH ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No…..of 2026 (Arising…

Constitution

Allotment of Land — Irregularity — Public Interest Litigation — Demolition vs. Regularisation — The court must balance the wrong committed with the current reality and socio-economic consequences — Demolition of a fully operational commercial complex, involving significant investment, employment, and tax revenue, may not serve public interest if financial restitution is possible.

Jun 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 551 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. RAHEJA CORP. PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe,…

Service Matters
Service

All India Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 — Rule 16(2A) — Voluntary Retirement — Acceptance by Central Government — Central Government has the ultimate authority to accept or reject a Voluntary Retirement (VRS) notice — It is not bound by the State Government’s recommendation and must apply its mind to all relevant facts and circumstances — This power is not unconstrained and is guided by DoPT Guidelines, requiring consideration of pending or contemplated disciplinary proceedings that could lead to a major penalty — The Central Government can accept a VRS request even if a major penalty is possible, but this requires a conscious and well-informed decision — Appeals allowed, order of Central Government rejecting VRS set aside, and matter remitted for fresh consideration.

Jun 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 550 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ABDUR RAHMAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Environment

Environment Law — Illegal Sand Mining — Supreme Court’s directions for States to file compliance affidavits — Court expresses displeasure at Rajasthan’s lacklustre response and apathy in implementing directions affecting National Chambal Sanctuary — Rajasthan directed to ensure personal presence of senior officers with compliance reports — Court also directs Madhya Pradesh to address issue of unregistered vehicles.

Jun 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 549 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH “IN RE: ILLEGAL SAND MINING IN THE NATIONAL CHAMBAL SANCTUARY AND THREAT TO ENDANGERED AQUATIC WILDLIFE” ( Before : Vikram Nath…

Labour Cases

Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme, 1991 — Temporary status casual labourer — Entitlement to pensionary benefits — Held, entitled even in the absence of formal regularisation, provided eligibility criteria under Rule 10(1-B) of CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, are fulfilled.

Jun 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 612 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHIKHANI DEVI AND ETC. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Sections 8, 10, 19 — Property of a male Hindu dying intestate — Devolution of property — Heirs taking property as tenants-in-common and not joint tenants — Each heir having a definite and separate share — No presumption of coparcenary property.—-Section 8 — Property inherited by a son from his father — Son takes the property in his individual capacity and not as karta of his own Hindu Undivided Family — Descendants of the heir do not acquire rights in such property by birth.

Jun 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 613 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DARUBAI AND ANOTHER Vs. KAMALABAI AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No…..of…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — List II, Entry 34 — “Betting and gambling” — Whether confined to games of chance — The expression “betting and gambling” in Entry 34 cannot be split to mean that the staking angle alone constitutes “betting” and the chance element alone constitutes “gambling” — Both betting and gambling involve the aspect of staking money on an uncertain outcome — Merely because the risk element is commonly perceived as “taking a chance”, it cannot mean the expression covers only games of chance — The expression is a set composite expression and cannot be rewritten by Courts to read as “betting on gambling” — Such a judicial rewriting would constitute a clear constitutional aberration — State of Bombay v. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala, AIR 1957 SC 699 (RMDC-I) and R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India, AIR 1957 SC 628 (RMDC-II), explained and distinguished.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 594 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS Vs. JUNGLEE GAMES INDIA PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R.…

Constitution

Constitution of India — Articles 246A, 366(12), 366(12A), 265 — Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) — Sections 2(1), 2(31), 2(52), 7, 9, 15 — Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 — Rules 31A, 31B, 31C — Schedule III, Entry 6 — Actionable claims arising from betting and gambling — Constitutional validity of levy of GST — Legislative competence of Parliament — Whether online gaming, fantasy sports and casino transactions involve betting and gambling — Whether actionable claims arise therefrom — Valuation of taxable supply.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 595 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX INTELLIGENCE (HQS) AND OTHERS Vs. GAMESKRAFT TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before :…

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