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 — Section 14, Section 238 — Telecom laws — Spectrum — Nature of — Can spectrum, even if treated as an asset in corporate debtor’s books, be subjected to proceedings under IBC? — Held, No. Spectrum is a natural resource, the right to use which is granted by the Government under a licence, not ownership. The IBC cannot override the specific statutory regime governing telecommunications law.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 153 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.…

Constitution

. Cricket Association Rules — Applicability of Supreme Court Judgments — A district cricket association’s rules and bye-laws are not necessarily required to be identical to those of the national cricket governing body (BCCI) based on previous Supreme Court judgments, as the specific rulings in those cases did not mandate such precise conformity for district associations.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 154 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION Vs. ANNA NAGAR CRICKET CLUB AND ANOTHER ETC. ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law — Regularisation of Services — Casual Workers — Supreme Court held that casual workers who were similarly situated to those whose services had been regularised in previous judgments, should also have their services regularised. The Court noted that the work performed was perennial and fundamental to the functioning of the department, and that excluding these workers amounted to discrimination.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 156 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

Bail Declined

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Absconding accused — General rule is that an absconder is not entitled to anticipatory bail, exception being when court is prima facie satisfied that no case is made out against the accused after perusing FIR, case diary, and other materials — Accused absconded for almost six and a half years, threatened victim, had criminal antecedents, and was not traceable — Acquittal of co-accused does not automatically entitle absconding accused to anticipatory bail, as prosecution is not expected to adduce evidence against absconding accused during trial of co-accused — Granting anticipatory bail to an absconding accused sets a bad precedent

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 157 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BALMUKUND SINGH GAUTAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Vijay Bishnoi, JJ. ) Criminal…

Constitution

Essential Commodities Act, 1955 — Sections 3, 7 — Cement Control Order, 1967 — Maharashtra Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973 — Decontrol of cement price and distribution from March 1, 1989 — Conviction for offences relating to cement contravention after decontrol — Unsustainable in law — Prosecution fundamentally unsustainable due to absence of operative control order on relevant date.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 152 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOJ Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 1630…

Constitution

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MARYAMAA JOSH AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).113/2026…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 197 — Sanction for prosecution — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 217 — Delay in granting sanction — High Court’s direction for deemed sanction if authority fails to decide within one month — Supreme Court notes that the earlier judgment in Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs. Manmohan Singh (2012) 3 SCC 64 does not support the concept of deemed sanction, and a Coordinate Bench had also rejected such an argument in Suneeti Toteja Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 433). Supreme Court finds it appropriate to refer the matter to a larger Bench due to persistent complaints of lethargy or apathy in granting sanction. The High Court’s direction on deemed sanction is stayed until further orders

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE Vs. M.MUNEER AHAMED AND ANOTHER ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

Bail Granted

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Dismissal of High Court application — Supreme Court intervention — Appellant aggrieved by denial of anticipatory bail by High Court — Supreme Court granted leave, set aside High Court order, and directed bail upon arrest, subject to appellant cooperating with investigation within legal limits.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINAY KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…of 2026 (Arising…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 306 and 309 — Abetment of suicide and attempt to commit suicide — Suicide pact — Mutual encouragement and reciprocal commitment to die together — Survivor’s participation acts as a direct catalyst for the deceased’s actions — Psychological assurance or instigation, if intentional and directly related to the commission of offence, constitutes abetment — Each participant’s resolve to commit suicide is reinforced and strengthened due to the other’s participation — Suicide in a pact is conditional upon mutual participation — Assisting in ending life is a crime against the state.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 160 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GUDIPALLI SIDDHARTHA REDDY Vs. STATE C.B.I. ( Before : Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2012…

Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 8 — Conduct of accused leading to discovery of facts — Even if statements leading to discovery are not admissible under Section 27 due to lack of custody, they can be admitted under Section 8 as conduct, serving as a link in the chain of evidence, but cannot alone result in conviction.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 162 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ROHIT JANGDE Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.689…

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