Supreme Court of India Judgements

46855 Judgements hosted as on 16/09/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 223(d) — Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be charged and tried together — Legislative intent is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, avoid conflicting judgments, and promote judicial economy while ensuring fairness — Segregation without legally recognized grounds like distinct facts, severable evidence, or demonstrated prejudice, is impermissible. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 — Offences relating to cheating and forgery — Anticipatory bail — Rejection challenged — Appellants, public servants at the time, accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents — High Court rejected anticipatory bail — Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s decision Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended) — Challenge to constitutional validity of amendments — Petitioners contended that amendments are ultra vires the Constitution, violating fundamental rights including Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A. Respondents argued for legislative competence and presumption of validity of enactments. Court emphasized that statutes should only be declared unconstitutional if there is a clear, glaring, and undeniable violation of constitutional principles or fundamental rights, or if manifestly arbitrary, and that courts must strive to uphold legislative validity. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act. Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 39(d) and 43 — Equal pay for equal work — Contractual Assistant Professors performing identical duties as regularly appointed or ad-hoc Assistant Professors are entitled to the minimum pay scale of Assistant Professors.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 223(d) — Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be charged and tried together — Legislative intent is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, avoid conflicting judgments, and promote judicial economy while ensuring fairness — Segregation without legally recognized grounds like distinct facts, severable evidence, or demonstrated prejudice, is impermissible.
Cr P C
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 223(d) — Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be charged and tried together — Legislative intent is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, avoid conflicting judgments, and promote judicial economy while ensuring fairness — Segregation without legally recognized grounds like distinct facts, severable evidence, or demonstrated prejudice, is impermissible.
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 — Offences relating to cheating and forgery — Anticipatory bail — Rejection challenged — Appellants, public servants at the time, accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents — High Court rejected anticipatory bail — Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s decision
Anticipatory Bail
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 — Offences relating to cheating and forgery — Anticipatory bail — Rejection challenged — Appellants, public servants at the time, accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents — High Court rejected anticipatory bail — Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s decision
Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended) — Challenge to constitutional validity of amendments — Petitioners contended that amendments are ultra vires the Constitution, violating fundamental rights including Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A. Respondents argued for legislative competence and presumption of validity of enactments. Court emphasized that statutes should only be declared unconstitutional if there is a clear, glaring, and undeniable violation of constitutional principles or fundamental rights, or if manifestly arbitrary, and that courts must strive to uphold legislative validity.
Constitution
Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended) — Challenge to constitutional validity of amendments — Petitioners contended that amendments are ultra vires the Constitution, violating fundamental rights including Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A. Respondents argued for legislative competence and presumption of validity of enactments. Court emphasized that statutes should only be declared unconstitutional if there is a clear, glaring, and undeniable violation of constitutional principles or fundamental rights, or if manifestly arbitrary, and that courts must strive to uphold legislative validity.
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.
Consumer
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125–Maintenance–Proof of Marriage–Under S.125 Cr.P.C, strict proof of marriage is not necessary—Unlike matrimonial proceedings where strict proof of marriage is essential, in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C, such strict standard of proof is not necessary as it is summary in nature meant to prevent vagrancy.

Dec 22, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2954 : 2018 LawHerald.org 1768 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before                                                          Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Banumathi Honble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Criminal Appeal Nos. 2368-2369…

Cr P C

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 and S.304-A—Murder—Alteration of Charge—Death by Negligence—Blast occurred in a factory—7 workers died due to stampede caused by smoke in whole area—Respondent are directors of company involved in day to day functioning—High Court held to have rightly alerted the charges from S.302 IPC to S.304-A IPC

Dec 21, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2952 : 2018 LawHerald.org 1767 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Haul Criminal Appeal…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.451–Superdari–Release of Vehicle-­ Respondent was engaged as a contractor by the National Highway Authority—In the process of the work, as per the direction given by his superior officers, the building was demolished for the purpose of National Highway development-Held; Bank guarantee for the alleged loss need not be insisted for releasing a vehicle involved in the process.   

Dec 21, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2950 : 2018 LawHerald.org 1766   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                                           Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul…

Labour Cases

Service Law—Back Wages—Labour Court in one line simply directed the appellant (employer) to pay full back wages for a long period to the deceased workman while directing his reinstatement in service without considering the factors required to determined before awarding full back wages

Dec 21, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2943 : 2018 LawHerald.org 1764 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Civil Appeal…

I P C

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304 Part-II and S.34-Culpable Homicide-­ Common Intention—Occurrence had taken place at spur of the moment without premeditation—It cannot be said that the appellants had any common intention to kill or knowledge that death was likely to ensue- Therefore, in absence of common intention to kill, each appellant was liable for his own individual acts.

Dec 21, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2940 : 2018 LawHerald.org 1763 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph Criminal Appeal No. 1540…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125–Maintenance–Non-earning Husband-Determination of monthly maintenance amount payable to the wife on the basis of notional minimum income of the husband as per the current minimum wages is untenable-Living standard of the husband, his family and his past conduct must be taken into consideration.

Dec 21, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2933 : 2018 LawHerald.org 1762 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice DipakMisra Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr.…

Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872-Extra Judicial Confession—Law does not require that the evidence of an extra-judicial confession should in all cases be corroborated—The rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated.

Dec 20, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2916 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1758 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Barmmathi Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Criminal Appeal No. 576…

I P C

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.306—Abetment to Suicide—Reduction in Sentence—Appellant (Father-in-law) was harassing the deceased so to bring money from her parents as her husband was not working-­ Deceased has specially attributed the overt act of the appellant pouring kerosene and setting up fire on appellant (father-in-law)– Incident was of the year 1986 and State has not filed appeal against                        acquittal u/s 302 IPC—Conviction upheld—Appellant directed to undergo remaining sentence.

Dec 20, 2018 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 2914 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1618 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Criminal Appeal No(s). 1597…

You missed

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 223(d) — Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be charged and tried together — Legislative intent is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, avoid conflicting judgments, and promote judicial economy while ensuring fairness — Segregation without legally recognized grounds like distinct facts, severable evidence, or demonstrated prejudice, is impermissible.

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 — Offences relating to cheating and forgery — Anticipatory bail — Rejection challenged — Appellants, public servants at the time, accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents — High Court rejected anticipatory bail — Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s decision

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended) — Challenge to constitutional validity of amendments — Petitioners contended that amendments are ultra vires the Constitution, violating fundamental rights including Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A. Respondents argued for legislative competence and presumption of validity of enactments. Court emphasized that statutes should only be declared unconstitutional if there is a clear, glaring, and undeniable violation of constitutional principles or fundamental rights, or if manifestly arbitrary, and that courts must strive to uphold legislative validity.

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw