ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(661) MADHUSHREE DATTA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 323, 504, 506, 509, and 511 — The appellants, employees of a company, were accused of harassing a former employee, leading to her termination — The High Court refused to quash the chargesheet, but the Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, holding that the allegations did not meet the ingredients of the offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 509, and 511 IPC.
India Law Library Docid # 2421970

(662) HARSHIT HARISH JAIN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-01-2025
Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 — Section 48(1) — Refund of stamp duty — The appellants sought a refund of stamp duty paid for a property transaction that was later cancelled — The High Court dismissed their claim, holding that the amended six-month limitation period applied — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the unamended two-year limitation period applied, and the appellants were entitled to a refund.
India Law Library Docid # 2421971

(663) T. RAJAMONI S/O THASON DEAD THROUGH LRS. Vs. THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-01-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166A — Compensation — Customization of the Multiplier Method — The Court establishes that while the multiplier method is a recognized approach for calculating future loss of income in motor accident claims, it must be applied with consideration for the unique facts and circumstances of each case — Arbitrary use of a fixed multiplier without regard to the individual's employability, age, and other relevant factors is not permissible.
India Law Library Docid # 2422046

(664) S. SHOBHA Vs. MUTHOOT FINANCE LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-01-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 12 and 226 — Writ Petition — Writ petition is not maintainable against a private finance company like Muthoot Finance Ltd. because it is not considered a "State" under Article 12, nor does it perform a public function — The court determined that Muthoot Finance Ltd.'s operations are primarily in the private law domain, with duties to its account holders and borrowers, rather than the public at large — The fact that the company is regulated by the Reserve Ba
India Law Library Docid # 2422057

(665) SADHANA TOMAR AND OTHERS Vs. ASHOK KUSHWAHA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 24-01-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Minimum Wages Act, 1948 — Assessment of Deceased's Income for Compensation — In the absence of concrete evidence, the court can rely on the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, to determine a reasonable monthly income for an unskilled worker (here, Rs. 6,500/- per month) —Annual income calculated accordingly (here, Rs. 78,000/-).
India Law Library Docid # 2423372

(666) Y.S NATARAJA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 23-01-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Solitary Eye-Witness Testimony — A conviction can be based on the evidence of a single eye-witness if that evidence is found to be true, trustworthy, and reliable — The evidence of a solitary eye-witness can be categorized as wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, or neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable — If the evidence falls into the third category (neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable), the court must seek corroboration in material
India Law Library Docid # 2422260

(667) THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. RAGHUVIR SINGH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 23-01-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Solitary Eye-Witness Testimony — A conviction can be based on the evidence of a single eye-witness if that evidence is found to be true, trustworthy, and reliable — The evidence of a solitary eye-witness can be categorized as wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, or neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable — If the evidence falls into the third category (neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable), the court must seek
India Law Library Docid # 2422261

(668) MANISH YADAV Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376, 323, 504 and 506 — Rape based on a promise of marriage — Consent — Voluntary Consent in Physical Relationships Between Adults — The Supreme Court held that where two adults engage in a physical relationship based on mutual affection and trust, the consent is considered voluntary, even if one party later breaches a promise of marriage
India Law Library Docid # 2422643

(669) M/S TAMIL NADU CEMENTS CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 — Section 18 — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited (TANCEM) challenging an order by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) under the MSMED Act, which directed TANCEM to pay dues to M/s Unicon Engineers — TANCEM argued that the MSEFC's order was contrary to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (A&C Act) and sought relief through a writ petition — The issues cent
India Law Library Docid # 2421891

(670) HARJINDER SINGH @ KALA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Circumstantial Evidence — The court reiterates the five golden principles (Panchsheel) for appreciating evidence in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing that the circumstances must be fully established, consistent with the accused's guilt, conclusive, and exclude every other possible hypothesis — A complete chain of evidence must exist to rule out any reasonable conclusion consistent with the accused's inno
India Law Library Docid # 2422296

(671) SURENDRA G. SHANKAR AND ANOTHER Vs. ESQUE FINAMARK PVT. LTD AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — The appellants, allottees in a real estate project, filed complaints with RERA for possession of flats — RERA dismissed the complaints, and the Appellate Tribunal rejected their appeals as time-barred — The High Court also dismissed their appeals, refusing to condone the delay and commenting on the merits — The issues were whether the delay should be condoned and if the High Court erred in commenting on the merits — The appellants argued
India Law Library Docid # 2421922

(672) RUHI AGRAWAL AND ANOTHER Vs. NIMISH S. AGRAWAL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Custody and visitation — Appellant and Respondent married in 2007 and separated in 2016, have been in a custody dispute over their daughter, who has lived with mother since the separation — The father sought joint custody or expanded visitation, while the mother raised safety concerns due to alleged abusive behavior — The Family Court granted sole custody to the mother with limited visitation for the father — The High Court expanded visitation rights, including more frequent visits, shared vacat
India Law Library Docid # 2421924

(673) BABAN SHANKAR DAPHAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 34 — Murder — Wife, daughter, and son as eyewitnesses — The accused included his nephews and a brother's son, amid longstanding family tensions — The Trial Court acquitted all accused, but the High Court convicted some, relying on the eyewitness testimonies — The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, ruling that the Trial Court erred by focusing on minor inconsistencies and ignoring the overall credibility of the witnesses
India Law Library Docid # 2421925

(674) STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER Vs. UDAY PRATAP SINGH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Farmers Protest — The Supreme Court noted the positive developments in the ongoing talks between the farmers and the government, including the acceptance of medical aid by the farmer leader and the resumption of talks — The Court kept the contempt proceedings in abeyance and directed the parties to continue negotiations, emphasizing the need for a fair resolution.
India Law Library Docid # 2421929

(675) MOHAMMED SHEREEF Vs. STATE OF KERALA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 364 — Murder — Bail — The Supreme Court granted bail to the appellants, who had been convicted under Sections 302 and 364 of the IPC, considering the long period of incarceration (over 10 years) and the expedited hearing of their criminal appeals — The Court emphasized that the appellants should be released on bail pending the disposal of their appeals.
India Law Library Docid # 2421931

(676) PARTEEK ARORA @ PARTEEK JUNEJA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Criminal Law — Anticipatory bail — Court determined that the petitioner was attempting to circumvent procedural law by filing a special leave petition after twice failing to secure anticipatory bail from the High Court — The court noted that after the High Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail, the petitioner withdrew their second bail petition — Subsequently, when the High Court directed the police to provide a status report on the case, the petitioner filed the present special leav
India Law Library Docid # 2421932

(677) RISHI KUMAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Bail — Recall of — Misrepresentation — Supreme Court recalled the bail granted to the accused after finding that the bail was obtained through misrepresentation — The Court noted that the accused was present at the scene of the crime, contrary to his earlier claims, and directed his arrest — The Court clarified that this observation would not affect the ongoing trial.
India Law Library Docid # 2421941

(678) MOHD. TAHIR HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Interim Bail for Election Campaigning — Court held that interim bail cannot be granted solely for the purpose of allowing an accused to campaign or canvass for elections — The right to campaign is neither a fundamental right nor a statutory right, and granting interim bail for such purposes would open a "Pandora's box" of litigation, especially given the frequency of elections in India.
India Law Library Docid # 2421923

(679) THAMMARAYA AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 201 and 34 — Murder — Acquittal — Three accused were tried for murder allegedly after accused-‘M’ had an illicit affair with deceased’s wife — ‘M’ claimed to be a victim of dacoity but later confessed to the murder — Whether the circumstantial evidence and disclosure statements were sufficient to convict the accused beyond reasonable doubt — The prosecution argued that the motive, last seen circumstances, and recoveries linked the accused to the crime — The
India Law Library Docid # 2422047

(680) MANISH KUMAR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 295A — Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs — Employees of South Eastern Coalfields were charged under Section 295A IPC for shifting a Sati Mandir as per a High Court order in a PIL — The issue was whether the FIR should be quashed and if the employees had the malicious intent required under Section 295A — The employees argued they were following court orders and not inte
India Law Library Docid # 2422053