Supreme Court of India Judgements

47295 Judgements hosted as on 02/08/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe @ Rs 99/- for 6 months, sclaw@sclaw.in, WA +91 9417245693.

Top Tags

Latest Post

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16. Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist. Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits. Extended Period Of Limitation Under Proviso To Section 11A, Central Excise Act Cannot Be Invoked When Facts Are Known To Department Without Wilful Suppression A. Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 35L — Maintainability of appeal before Supreme Court — Preliminary objection raised by Department that appeal does not come under Section 35L as issue had no relation to rate of duty or valuation — Held, issue raised regarding extended period of limitation on ground of non-inclusion of certain costs in assessable value has an inextricable link with valuation of goods for purposes of assessment — Issue raised in show cause notice fundamentally dealt with valuation of goods — Supreme Court declined to relegate matter to High Court after almost a decade of pendency — Preliminary objection rejected.
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.

Sep 4, 2026 sclaw
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.
Accident
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.
Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased
Accident
Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased
Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.
Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act
Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.
Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.
C P C
Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.
Anticipatory Bail Bail Granted

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Appellant not named in FIR, no raid at his business premises, earlier cases ended in bail, cooperating with investigation, and no misuse of liberty granted — High Court wrongly refused anticipatory bail — Supreme Court sets aside High Court order and makes interim protection absolute.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 215 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOJ KUMAR MUTTA Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal…

State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 — Section 87 — Power to adapt laws — Section 87 of the Reorganisation Act allows for the adaptation and modification of existing laws in successor states for a period of two years to facilitate the application of laws — This provision ensures legislative continuity for local institutions, including Cooperative Societies, until replaced by fresh legislation — The transitional regime provided under Section 87 was relied upon for reconstitution of cooperative societies following the bifurcation of Uttar Pradesh.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 216 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH REGISTRAR CANE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND OTHERS Vs. GURDEEP SINGH NARVAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to Life — Includes Right to Health — State has positive obligation to safeguard health and ensure conditions for meaningful life — Absence of uniform policy for compensation for death/injury after vaccination raises constitutional concerns warranting institutional response – COVID-19 Vaccination — Adverse Events Following Immunisation (AEFI) — Compensation — No-fault compensation framework necessary for serious adverse events arising from mass immunization programs to ensure fair and timely redressal and uphold Article 14.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 218 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RACHANA GANGU AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ…

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302/34, 201 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 103(1)/3(5), 238 — Circumstantial evidence — Conviction based on circumstantial evidence must fulfill stringent conditions — Circumstances must be fully established, consistent only with hypothesis of guilt, conclusive in nature, exclude every possible hypothesis except guilt, and form complete chain of evidence — Prosecution failed to prove incriminating circumstances against accused by cogent and admissible evidence — Conviction set aside.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 217 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH POORANMAL Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14 — Manifest Arbitrariness — Srimati Radhika Sinha Institute and Sachchidanand Sinha Library (Requisition & Management) Act, 2015 — Held, the Act is manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 as it involves complete vesting of property, dissolution of trust, absence of necessity or mismanagement, illusory compensation, and lack of guiding principles — State’s action was excessive, unreasoned and disproportionate to the stated object of better management and development.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 219 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANURAG KRISHNA SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 7 — Demand and acceptance of bribe — Complainant’s testimony regarding demand by accused (A2) on a specific date was clear and corroborated by other witnesses — Pre-trap proceedings were also established — Recovery of marked notes from A2’s person and hand wash turning pink confirmed the trap — Despite inconsistencies in complainant’s testimony regarding earlier demands, the demand on the crucial date was credible — Independent witnesses corroborated the trap, with one identifying A2 and the other recovering the bribe money — Acquittal of A2 set aside, conviction under Section 7 of PC Act restored with modified sentence and fine.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 221 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. BALJEET SINGH ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No………of…

Constitution

”Euthanasia ” Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to life — Includes right to die with dignity — Passive euthanasia and Advance Medical Directives (AMD) are permissible under Article 21 — Active euthanasia is not permissible — Withdrawal or withholding of medical treatment is a constitutional right derived from the dignity, liberty, privacy, and self-determination of an individual — This right extends to incompetent patients as well.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 222 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARISH RANA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Miscellaneous Application No.…

Constitution

Reservation Policy — Other Backward Classes (OBC) — Creamy Layer Exclusion — Interpretation of Office Memorandum (OM) dated 08.09.1993 and Clarificatory Letter dated 14.10.2004 — Salary income exclusion — Hostile discrimination — Held, the clarificatory letter dated 14.10.2004, particularly paragraph 9 thereof, should not be interpreted in isolation or in a manner that overrides the substantive scheme of the 1993 OM — Overemphasis on the 2004 letter making income alone determinative without considering parental status and category of service would defeat the framework of exclusion under the 1993 OM — Determination of creamy layer status solely on income brackets without reference to posts and status parameters in the 1993 OM is unsustainable — Hostile discrimination arises when similarly placed individuals are treated differently without a constitutionally sustainable basis, thereby attracting provisions of Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution — Appeals dismissed

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 230 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. ROHITH NATHAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and R. Mahadevan, JJ. )…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Writ Petition — Delay and Laches — Doctrine of laches is a flexible rule of practice, not a rigid rule of law, to be applied on case-to-case basis based on judicial discretion — It requires balancing the equity of not allowing stale claims against the constitutional duty to enforce fundamental rights — Key considerations include inordinate delay, explanation for delay, and prejudice to third-party rights or settled matters — Unexplained delay is critical; delay attributable to the State’s conduct cannot be used against the petitioner — Claims affecting the public at large or challenging the vires of a statute might warrant a less strict application of laches, especially when addressing historical injustices or transformative constitutionalism — The Court must weigh the need for finality against the need to rectify injustice and has the power to mould relief to minimize disruption while enforcing fundamental rights.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 236 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MIZO CHIEF COUNCIL MIZORAM, THR. PRESIDENT SHRI L. CHINZAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and…

You missed

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition for death of bachelor — Selection of Multiplier — Multiplier to be determined based on age of deceased and not age of dependents/parents — Deceased was 33 years old at the time of accident — Correct multiplier applicable according to standardized matrix in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi is 16 — Argument of insurer that multiplier should correspond to age of parents rejected — MACT and High Court rightly applied multiplier of 16.

Sep 4, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw