Supreme Court of India Judgements

47260 Judgements hosted as on 24/05/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds. Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304-A — Causing death by negligence — Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 134(b) and Section 187 — Duty of driver in case of accident and injury to a person and Punishment for offences relating to accident — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Driver convicted under Section 304-A IPC and Sections 134(b) and 187 MVA — High Court partly allowed revision, setting aside conviction for Section 279 IPC but maintaining conviction for Section 304-A IPC.
Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.
Constitution
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice.
Cr P C
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds.
C P C
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds.
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial.
Constitution Narcotics Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial.
Education

Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 14, 16 and 226 – Education – Admission – Eligibility – Prospectus – Whether a State Government employee lent on deputation [at the request of the State Government employee on health ground] to a department of Central Government can be considered as a serving Central Government employee within the meaning of eligibility clause

May 7, 2017 sclaw

  (1998) 9 AD 187 : AIR 1999 SC 227 : (1998) 8 JT 274 : (1998) 6 SCALE 375 : (1999) 1 SCC 126 : (1998) 3 SCR 271…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 311 – Summoning of witness – Closure of prosecution evidence – Order passed merely on ground that public prosecutor has not prayed for adjournment or for examination of other witnesses – No notice issued to Police Station Officer-in-charge – Order cannot be said to be proper – Witnesses can be summoned under Section 311 in spite of said order.

May 7, 2017 sclaw

  AIR 2002 SC 270 : (2002) CriLJ 568 : (2002) 1 Crimes 197 : (2001) 10 JT 111 : (2001) 8 SCALE 320 : (2002) 1 SCC 655 :…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section – 4(1), 23(1) – Stamp Act – Section – 48 – Enhancement of the compensation – The High Court by the impugned judgment dated 22nd August, 1989 made in R.F.A. No52/89 and batch uniformly enhanced the market value to Rs. 12,000/- per bigha – Court has considered the entire gamut of the operation of the relevant provisions of Stamps Act and held that the fixation by the Government of the amount under Stamp Act for fiscal purpose bears no relevance to determine the market value

May 7, 2017 sclaw

(1995) 4 SCALE 726 : (1995) 5 SCC 310 : (1995) 2 SCR 572 Supp SUPREME COURT OF INDIA PAINDER SINGH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI)…

Service Matters
Service

Appellant, a professor in Physics was appointed as Vice-Chancellor of Mysore University – Immediately another order passed rescinding earlier order as he had been facing a criminal case – This order had been passed immediately and much before the date on which appointment could become effective – There was no necessity to give him an opportunity

May 6, 2017 sclaw

  AIR 1999 SC 849 : (1998) 8 JT 344 : (1998) 6 SCALE 378 : (1999) 1 SCC 422 : (1999) SCC(L&S) 229 : (1998) 3 SCR 165 Supp…

Corporate

A lawyer, no doubt has a duty towards his client to do his best in his interest but within the parameters of law – He at the same time is equally responsible to assist the court fairly on the exact and latest position of law to his knowledge – His right to debate in the court is no licence to sidetrack the issue and mislead or pressurise the court to act in a particular manner – If he does so, it amounts of his misconduct attracting the wrath of disciplinary provisions of the Advocates Act.

May 6, 2017 sclaw

  AIR 2001 SC 457 : (2000) 3 JT 505 Supp : (2000) 8 SCALE 76 : (2001) 2 SCC 221 : (2000) 5 SCR 345 Supp : (2001) 1…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 364-A – Abduction – Conveyance of demand of ransom – Abduction of victim, a college student – Accused persons told him that they will ask his father to pay a huge amount for his release – Victim managed to escape and informed villagers – Accused arrested on the spot – Demand of ransom has already been made by conveying it to victim

May 6, 2017 sclaw

  (2004) CriLJ 4645 : (2004) 8 JT 72 : (2004) 7 SCALE 671 : (2004) 8 SCC 95 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA MALLESHI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA…

Acquittal Cr P C

There are no cogent materials upon which the subjective satisfaction of the detaining Authority that the detenu was likely to be released on bail was arrived at; and there was a delay of 6 days in forwarding representation to the Central government – All the procedural requirements of Article 22 are mandatory in character and even if one of the procedural requirements is not complied with, the order of detention would be rendered illegal

May 6, 2017 sclaw

  (2010) 10 JT 456(1) : (2010) 10 SCALE 248 : (2010) 9 SCC 618 : (2010) 10 UJ 5119 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SMT. PEBAM NINGOL MIKOI DEVI —…

Bail Granted

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 439 – Constitution of India – Article 21 – Bail – Cancellation – Accused cannot be granted bail only on the ground that he was in custody for seven months – Individual liberty is restricted by larger social interest and its deprivation must have due sanction of law.

May 6, 2017 sclaw

(2012) CriLJ 4670 : (2012) 4 JCC 2909 : (2012) 9 JT 155 : (2013) 1 RCR(Criminal) 277 : (2012) 9 SCALE 165 : (2012) 9 SCC 446 SUPREME COURT…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Constitution Narcotics Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial.

May 24, 2026 sclaw