ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
    Free Artificial Intelligence Drafting  

    Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

   AI Submission Generator   

Latest Cases

(541) VINEET JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Principles for Grant — Economic Offences — Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — S. 132(1)(c), (f), (h) — In cases involving offences under specific statutes like the CGST Act, 2017, where the maximum sentence is limited (5 years), the case is triable by a Magistrate, the prosecution relies primarily on documentary evidence, a charge-sheet has been filed, the accused has undergone significant pre-trial detention (almost 7 months), and
India Law Library Docid # 2425289

(542) RAVISH SINGH RANA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376 — Rape — Promise to Marry — Long-Term Live-in Relationship — Presumption of Consent — In a long-drawn live-in relationship spanning over two years, where adult parties cohabit under one roof, a presumption of valid consent for initiating and maintaining the physical relationship arises — The mere allegation that the relationship was entered into based on a promise of marriage, without more, may be unworthy of acceptance, especially when there is no assertion that t
India Law Library Docid # 2425407

(543) AADITYA KHAITAN @ ADITYA KHAITAN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Test for Interference — The power under Section 482 Cr.PC to quash an FIR is exercisable when the allegations made in the complaint/FIR, taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused — The examination is of the complaint as a whole, without delving into the merits, assessing reliability, or conducting a meticulous analysis of the material —
India Law Library Docid # 2425107

(544) K. P. TAMILMARAN Vs. THE STATE BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 154 — Hostile Witness — Evidentiary Value — The evidence of a witness permitted to be cross-examined under Section 154 by the party calling him (often termed ‘hostile’) cannot be discarded altogether as a matter of law — It remains admissible evidence forming part of the record — It is for the Court, exercising prudence and caution, to consider the testimony as a whole, along with other evidence, and determine its credibility and the extent to which it can be relied
India Law Library Docid # 2425108

(545) GBJ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. SRIHARAN SRIPATHMANATHAN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Insolvency and Banking Law — SARFAESI Act, 2002 — Auction Sale — Intervention by Courts — Maximizing Asset Value — Where a successful auction purchaser under SARFAESI challenges a High Court order that entertained a higher offer from a third party post-auction acceptance, the Supreme Court, in exercise of its inherent power during the Special Leave Petition proceedings, may invite fresh bids from the original auction purchaser and the third party to ensure maximization of the value of the secure
India Law Library Docid # 2425192

(546) M/S OSWAL PETROCHEMICALS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI - II[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Central Excise Rules, 1944 — Rule 56(2) & 56(4) — Principles of Natural Justice — Re-classification — Test Reports — Where re-classification of goods leading to a higher duty demand is proposed based on chemical test reports, principles of natural justice and the mandate of Rule 56(2) require that copies of such test reports, forming the sub-stratum of the demand, must be furnished to the assessee — Merely providing a gist of the test results, especially within show-cause notices, constitutes a
India Law Library Docid # 2425131

(547) CHUNNI BAI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 299, 300, 302, 304 — Murder vs. Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder — Mens Rea — Intention/Knowledge — All ‘murder’ under Section 300 IPC is ‘culpable homicide’ under Section 299 IPC, but the converse is not true — The critical distinction lies in the degree of mens rea (intention or knowledge). A conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC requires proof beyond reasonable doubt of: (i) intention to cause death; or (ii) intention to cause bodily injury lik
India Law Library Docid # 2425132

(548) CONSOLIDATED CONSTRUCTION CONSORTIUM LIMITED Vs. SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY PARKS OF INDIA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 & 37 — Scope of Judicial Review — Arbitral Award — Plausible View — The jurisdiction of a court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act to set aside an arbitral award is highly restrictive and confined strictly to the grounds enumerated therein (sub-sections (2) and (2A)) — The court cannot act as an appellate body, re-appraise evidence, or substitute its own view for that of the arbitrator merely because a different interpretation or conclusion is p
India Law Library Docid # 2425133

(549) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KAMLESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 167 — Claimants’ election of remedy between M.V. Act and Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 — Double benefit — Person entitled to claim under M.V. Act and also Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 can claim compensation only under either, not both, preserving right of election.
India Law Library Docid # 2425914

(550) OKHLA ENCLAVE PLOT HOLDERS WEL. ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-04-2025
Allotment — General Category Allottees — Eligibility Criteria — Multiple Plots within Family — The Court modified its earlier order dated 03.10.2019 concerning eligibility criteria — Accepting the Special Committee's prior observation (in its procedural order dated 04.10.2018) that the restriction limiting eligibility to one plot per family should not disentitle persons who paid the full sale consideration at market rates, the Court permitted those General Category allottees, previously found in
India Law Library Docid # 2425093

(551) THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND OTHERS Vs. SURESH MATHEW AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-04-2025
Government Contracts & Tenders — Judicial Review — Scope of Interference: The power of judicial review in matters relating to government tenders and contracts is circumscribed — Courts should exercise restraint and interfere only if the process adopted or decision made by the authority is vitiated by mala fides, intended to favour someone, or is so arbitrary and irrational that no responsible authority acting reasonably and in accordance with relevant law could have reached it, or if public inte
India Law Library Docid # 2425094

(552) CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. SURENDRA PATWA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-04-2025
Banking Law — RBI Master Directions on Frauds — Administrative Action vs. Criminal Proceedings — An administrative action taken by banks under the RBI’s Master Directions (dated 01.07.2016) to classify a borrower’s account as fraudulent stands on a different footing from criminal proceedings (like registration of FIR and subsequent investigation by CBI/Police) initiated based on the detection of fraudulent activity — The former falls within the regulatory domain of the RBI and banks, while the l
India Law Library Docid # 2425095

(553) RAJAT GAERA Vs. TARUN RAWAT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-04-2025
Practice and Procedure — Expeditious Disposal — Stay of Trial Proceedings by High Court — Landlord-Tenant Disputes — Where the High Court has stayed the trial or original proceedings in cases, particularly those pending between landlord and tenant, such cases must be heard expeditiously — A stay of the trial inevitably leads to delay in the conclusion of the trial and the entire proceedings thereafter — High Courts should endeavor to dispose of those cases where trial has been stayed by
India Law Library Docid # 2425103

(554) SHAKUNTLA DEVI Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 306 — Abetment of Suicide — Ingredients — Course of Conduct — Proximate Cause — To establish the offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed an active act or illegal omission which instigated the deceased or intentionally aided the deceased in committing suicide — A continuous course of conduct involving mental and physical torture, cruelty, and harassment (in this case, related to
India Law Library Docid # 2425134

(555) M/S SRI VENKATESWARA CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-04-2025
Tender Law — Interpretation of Conditions — Income Tax Return — “Previous Financial Year” — Due Date for Filing — Section 44AB, Income Tax Act, 1961 — Where a tender notice requires submission of the Income Tax Return (ITR) for the “previous financial year” and the bid submission deadline falls before the statutory due date for filing the ITR for the immediately preceding financial year (especially for assesses subject to tax audit under Section 44AB of the IT Act, 1961, considering applicable e
India Law Library Docid # 2425135

(556) STANDARD CHARTERED BANK Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Inherent power of High Court — Quashing of FIR — Abuse of process — Quashing of criminal proceedings on grounds that continuation would be a gross abuse of process of law, particularly when allegations are patently absurd, inherently improbable, or lack material particulars — Civil dispute with clear findings in favor of appellants in multiple court proceedings, including by the Supreme Court, prior to filing of criminal complaint — Criminal complain
India Law Library Docid # 2426442

(557) MURLIDHAR AGGARWAL (D.) THR. HIS LR. ATUL KUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. MAHENDRA PRATAP KAKAN (D.) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-04-2025
Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 — Section 21(1)(a) — Bona Fide Requirement — Assessment by Authorities — Appellate Review — The finding on bona fide requirement of the landlord under Section 21(1)(a) arrived at by the Prescribed Authority after analysing evidence regarding the landlord’s income, financial status, family needs, and lack of alternative business requires cogent and convincing reasons for reversal by the Appellate Authority — The Ap
India Law Library Docid # 2425055

(558) THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND OTHERS Vs. S. LALITHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-04-2025
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 — Sections 19, 20 & 21 — Limitation — Exhaustion of Remedies — Effect of Representation — (i) Section 21 prescribes a limitation period of one year for approaching the Tribunal, reckoned from the date of the final order rejecting a statutory remedy (like appeal/revision) or from the expiry of six months after making such statutory representation if no order is passed.
India Law Library Docid # 2425056

(559) ASIM MALLIK Vs. THE STATE OF ODISHA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-04-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(ii)(C) Commercial Quantity — Special Leave Petition — Bail — Grant by Supreme Court — Considerations — Period of Incarceration — In a Special Leave Petition concerning bail for an offence involving commercial quantity under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, where the petitioner had initially been granted interim bail by the High Court, the Supreme Court may grant regular bail considering the significant period of incarcerat
India Law Library Docid # 2425057

(560) M/S CHITHRA WOODS MANORS WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs. SHAJI AUGUSTINE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-04-2025
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 2(b) — Civil Contempt — Wilful Disobedience — Failure to comply with a specific monetary direction passed by the Supreme Court (directing payment of arrears of use and occupation charges in instalments), despite seeking and obtaining time or benefit under related court orders (like status quo), constitutes wilful disobedience amounting to civil contempt, especially when the contemnor continues to enjoy the property and its benefits without making payments o
India Law Library Docid # 2425096