Defamation — Imputation in Good Faith for Protection of Interests — Exception 9 to S. 499 IPC engrafts the principle of qualified privilege, stating it is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another, provided it is made in good faith for the protection of the interest of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good
2025 INSC 502 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAHED KAMAL AND OTHERS Vs. M/S A. SURTI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER ( Before : K. V. Viswanathan and N.…
ESI – The definition of ‘principal employer’ under Section 2(17) is wide and includes not only the owner or occupier of a factory (or head of department in government establishments) but also the managing agent or any person responsible for the supervision and control of the establishment — Designation is immaterial if the person functions as a managing agent or supervises/controls the establishment
2025 INSC 500 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AJAY RAJ SHETTY Vs. DIRECTOR AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. ….of…
Habitual Offender/Criminal Antecedents — Consideration of Nature of Current Offence — While the criminal antecedents and alleged status of an accused as a habitual offender are extremely relevant factors that ordinarily weigh against the grant of anticipatory bail, the High Court’s discretion in granting such bail may not warrant interference
2025 INSC 501 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANKIT MISHRA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. )…
Murder (Filicide) vs. Suicide — In cases based on circumstantial evidence where the question is whether the death was homicidal (filicide) or suicidal, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances that points exclusively to the guilt of the accused and is inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence
2025 INSC 499 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHASH AGGARWAL Vs. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal…
To attract S. 307 IPC, the crucial element is the intention or knowledge to cause death with which the act is done, irrespective of the nature or severity of the injury actually caused. S. 307 uses the word ‘hurt’, not ‘grievous hurt’ or ‘life-threatening hurt’ — Therefore, an accused cannot be acquitted merely because the injury inflicted was not grievous or dangerous to life, if the evidence establishes that the act was done with the requisite intention or knowledge to cause death
2025 INSC 503 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SHAMSHER SINGH ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 476…
However, the non-service of a S. 21 notice on a person does not, by itself, preclude the arbitral tribunal from impleading that person if they are found to be a party to the arbitration agreement — The primary purpose of S. 21 relates to commencement and time-related aspects, while other functions like informing about claims or potential arbitrators are incidental.
2025 INSC 507 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ADAVYA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S VISHAL STRUCTURALS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra,…
Divergent Opinions — Where there is a divergence of opinion between judges on a Bench regarding the acceptance of an apology tendered by advocates for misconduct and the appropriate consequential orders, the matter should be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.
2025 INSC 509 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH N. ESWARANATHAN Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma,…
Validity of State rule providing for cancellation of Form C declaration — The power to prescribe the form of declaration (Form C) required under Section 8(4) of the CST Act, and the particulars to be contained therein, is conferred upon the Central Government under Section 13(1)(d) — The Central Government exercised this power by framing the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957, which prescribe Form C (Rule 12(1)) but do not contain any provision empowering any authority to cancel such a declaration once issued.
2025 INSC 496 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS Vs. COMBINED TRADERS ( Before : Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Cancellation of Bail — Factors for Consideration — Child Trafficking — Appeals preferred by victims (kith and kin of trafficked children) assailing High Court orders granting bail to accused involved in a large-scale, organized, interstate child trafficking racket — The offences alleged involve kidnapping, buying, and selling of minor children primarily from impoverished backgrounds, punishable under Ss. 363, 311 & 370(5) IPC —High Court’s approach found to be callous, overlooking critical aspects including the organized nature of the crime and the subsequent absconding of several accused post-bail, thereby jeopardizing the trial.
2025 INSC 482 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PINKI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
A buyer’s continuous readiness and willingness to perform their part of an Agreement to Sell, a prerequisite for seeking specific performance, is negated by their conduct of accepting and encashing a substantial portion of the refunded earnest money/advance
2025 INSC 450 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANGITA SINHA Vs. BHAWANA BHARDWAJ AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 4972 of…