Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Judicial Services – Judicial Appointment – Minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat – The petitioners argue that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is arbitrary and unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution – The respondents argue that the selection process is legally valid and in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations – The court concludes that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is permissible and is not in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others – The court also finds that the impugned selection process in the State of Bihar and Gujarat is legally valid and is upheld – The court further concludes that the non-consultation with the Public Service Commission would not render the Gujarat Rules, 2005 (as amended in 2011) void – The writ petitions are dismissed without any order on cost. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(ia) – Divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown – The court recognized irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – This expands the scope of grounds for divorce and provides a more compassionate approach to ending a marriage that has irreparably broken down. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 – Murder of Wife – The court held that the prosecution successfully established the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt – The court pointed out that the incident occurred inside the appellant’s house, and the deceased was found in a pool of blood- The court also noted that the appellant failed to disclose the involvement of any unknown intruders to the police – The court rejected the defence’s argument that the incident was a result of a sudden fight, stating that the appellant took undue advantage and acted in a cruel manner.- The court applied Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, which places the burden of proof on the person who claims to have special knowledge of the facts.The case was based on circumstantial evidence, and the court found the appellant guilty of murder – False Explanation – The appellant’s false explanation regarding the incident was considered an additional incriminating circumstance. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 – Cruelty – Quashing of Chargesheet based on an FIR lodged by the appellant’s wife – The main issue is whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant should be quashed based on the allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty – The appellant argues that the FIR is vague, general, and lacks specific instances of criminal conduct – It is claimed to be a counterblast to a divorce petition and a domestic violence case, with an unexplained delay in filing the FIR indicating malice – The respondent contends that the allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offence and the truthfulness of these allegations should be determined by the trial court – The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, finding them to be an abuse of process and a travesty of justice – The Court reasoned that the allegations were made with an oblique motive and that continuing the proceedings would be unjust – The Court applied the principles from previous cases, emphasizing the need to scrutinize allegations in matrimonial disputes carefully and to prevent misuse of legal provisions – The Court concluded that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should have been exercised by the High Court to quash the proceedings and called for a relook at the relevant legal provisions to address the pragmatic realities of matrimonial disputes. Custody of the minor child – The case involves a custody dispute over a minor child ‘G’ after his mother went missing and was later found deceased – The child’s father and maternal grandmother are contesting custody – Whether the writ of habeas corpus is maintainable in child custody matters? – The High Court erred in entertaining the habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India – The writ of habeas corpus is maintainable in child custody matters only if the detention of the child is illegal and without any authority of law – In child custody matters, the ordinary remedy lies under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act or the Guardians and Wards Act – The High Court should have directed the parties to approach the civil court for a detailed enquiry – The welfare of the child is paramount, and the child’s custody should be decided in accordance with law.
Constitution Service

Judicial Services – Judicial Appointment – Minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat – The petitioners argue that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is arbitrary and unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution – The respondents argue that the selection process is legally valid and in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations – The court concludes that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is permissible and is not in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others – The court also finds that the impugned selection process in the State of Bihar and Gujarat is legally valid and is upheld – The court further concludes that the non-consultation with the Public Service Commission would not render the Gujarat Rules, 2005 (as amended in 2011) void – The writ petitions are dismissed without any order on cost.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
Judicial Services – Judicial Appointment – Minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat – The petitioners argue that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is arbitrary and unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution – The respondents argue that the selection process is legally valid and in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations – The court concludes that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is permissible and is not in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others – The court also finds that the impugned selection process in the State of Bihar and Gujarat is legally valid and is upheld – The court further concludes that the non-consultation with the Public Service Commission would not render the Gujarat Rules, 2005 (as amended in 2011) void – The writ petitions are dismissed without any order on cost.
Constitution Service
Judicial Services – Judicial Appointment – Minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat – The petitioners argue that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is arbitrary and unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution – The respondents argue that the selection process is legally valid and in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations – The court concludes that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is permissible and is not in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others – The court also finds that the impugned selection process in the State of Bihar and Gujarat is legally valid and is upheld – The court further concludes that the non-consultation with the Public Service Commission would not render the Gujarat Rules, 2005 (as amended in 2011) void – The writ petitions are dismissed without any order on cost.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(ia) – Divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown – The court recognized irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – This expands the scope of grounds for divorce and provides a more compassionate approach to ending a marriage that has irreparably broken down.
Matrimonial
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(ia) – Divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown – The court recognized irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – This expands the scope of grounds for divorce and provides a more compassionate approach to ending a marriage that has irreparably broken down.
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 – Murder of Wife – The court held that the prosecution successfully established the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt – The court pointed out that the incident occurred inside the appellant’s house, and the deceased was found in a pool of blood- The court also noted that the appellant failed to disclose the involvement of any unknown intruders to the police – The court rejected the defence’s argument that the incident was a result of a sudden fight, stating that the appellant took undue advantage and acted in a cruel manner.- The court applied Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, which places the burden of proof on the person who claims to have special knowledge of the facts.The case was based on circumstantial evidence, and the court found the appellant guilty of murder – False Explanation – The appellant’s false explanation regarding the incident was considered an additional incriminating circumstance.
I P C
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 – Murder of Wife – The court held that the prosecution successfully established the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt – The court pointed out that the incident occurred inside the appellant’s house, and the deceased was found in a pool of blood- The court also noted that the appellant failed to disclose the involvement of any unknown intruders to the police – The court rejected the defence’s argument that the incident was a result of a sudden fight, stating that the appellant took undue advantage and acted in a cruel manner.- The court applied Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, which places the burden of proof on the person who claims to have special knowledge of the facts.The case was based on circumstantial evidence, and the court found the appellant guilty of murder – False Explanation – The appellant’s false explanation regarding the incident was considered an additional incriminating circumstance.
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 – Cruelty – Quashing of Chargesheet based on an FIR lodged by the appellant’s wife – The main issue is whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant should be quashed based on the allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty – The appellant argues that the FIR is vague, general, and lacks specific instances of criminal conduct – It is claimed to be a counterblast to a divorce petition and a domestic violence case, with an unexplained delay in filing the FIR indicating malice – The respondent contends that the allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offence and the truthfulness of these allegations should be determined by the trial court – The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, finding them to be an abuse of process and a travesty of justice – The Court reasoned that the allegations were made with an oblique motive and that continuing the proceedings would be unjust – The Court applied the principles from previous cases, emphasizing the need to scrutinize allegations in matrimonial disputes carefully and to prevent misuse of legal provisions – The Court concluded that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should have been exercised by the High Court to quash the proceedings and called for a relook at the relevant legal provisions to address the pragmatic realities of matrimonial disputes.
Cr P C
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 – Cruelty – Quashing of Chargesheet based on an FIR lodged by the appellant’s wife – The main issue is whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant should be quashed based on the allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty – The appellant argues that the FIR is vague, general, and lacks specific instances of criminal conduct – It is claimed to be a counterblast to a divorce petition and a domestic violence case, with an unexplained delay in filing the FIR indicating malice – The respondent contends that the allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offence and the truthfulness of these allegations should be determined by the trial court – The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, finding them to be an abuse of process and a travesty of justice – The Court reasoned that the allegations were made with an oblique motive and that continuing the proceedings would be unjust – The Court applied the principles from previous cases, emphasizing the need to scrutinize allegations in matrimonial disputes carefully and to prevent misuse of legal provisions – The Court concluded that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should have been exercised by the High Court to quash the proceedings and called for a relook at the relevant legal provisions to address the pragmatic realities of matrimonial disputes.
Acquittal

Murder–Undue advantage–For the application of Section 300 Exception 4, it is not sufficient to show that there was a sudden quarrel and there was no premeditation. It must further be shown that the offender has not taken undue advantage or acted in cruel or unusual manner. Murder–Sudden fight–To bring a case within Exception 4 all the ingredients mentioned in it must be found.

Apr 6, 2017 sclaw

2007(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 325 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before  The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia Criminal Appeal No. 21 of…

C P C Will & Succession

Remand of case–Reframing of issue–Additional evidence was required to be adduced upon reframing the issue and having regard to the fact that onus of proof was wrongly placed. Will–Question of validity–Could not be ground for remitting the entire suit to Trial Judge upon setting aside the decree of trial Court.

Apr 6, 2017 sclaw

2007(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 303 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 5813 of 2006…

You missed

Constitution Service

Judicial Services – Judicial Appointment – Minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat – The petitioners argue that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is arbitrary and unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution – The respondents argue that the selection process is legally valid and in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations – The court concludes that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is permissible and is not in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others – The court also finds that the impugned selection process in the State of Bihar and Gujarat is legally valid and is upheld – The court further concludes that the non-consultation with the Public Service Commission would not render the Gujarat Rules, 2005 (as amended in 2011) void – The writ petitions are dismissed without any order on cost.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(ia) – Divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown – The court recognized irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – This expands the scope of grounds for divorce and provides a more compassionate approach to ending a marriage that has irreparably broken down.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 – Murder of Wife – The court held that the prosecution successfully established the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt – The court pointed out that the incident occurred inside the appellant’s house, and the deceased was found in a pool of blood- The court also noted that the appellant failed to disclose the involvement of any unknown intruders to the police – The court rejected the defence’s argument that the incident was a result of a sudden fight, stating that the appellant took undue advantage and acted in a cruel manner.- The court applied Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, which places the burden of proof on the person who claims to have special knowledge of the facts.The case was based on circumstantial evidence, and the court found the appellant guilty of murder – False Explanation – The appellant’s false explanation regarding the incident was considered an additional incriminating circumstance.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
Cr P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 – Cruelty – Quashing of Chargesheet based on an FIR lodged by the appellant’s wife – The main issue is whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant should be quashed based on the allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty – The appellant argues that the FIR is vague, general, and lacks specific instances of criminal conduct – It is claimed to be a counterblast to a divorce petition and a domestic violence case, with an unexplained delay in filing the FIR indicating malice – The respondent contends that the allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offence and the truthfulness of these allegations should be determined by the trial court – The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, finding them to be an abuse of process and a travesty of justice – The Court reasoned that the allegations were made with an oblique motive and that continuing the proceedings would be unjust – The Court applied the principles from previous cases, emphasizing the need to scrutinize allegations in matrimonial disputes carefully and to prevent misuse of legal provisions – The Court concluded that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should have been exercised by the High Court to quash the proceedings and called for a relook at the relevant legal provisions to address the pragmatic realities of matrimonial disputes.

May 11, 2024 sclaw