ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(781) VIJAY KUMAR DHEER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420,467,468,469,470,471,472 and 120-B — Forgery — Anticipatory Bail application — The appellant had been granted protection from arrest during the investigation of a case related to forgery and other offences, but this protection was not extended after a chargesheet was filed — The High Court rejected the appellant's anticipatory bail application — The Supreme Court, noting that the investigation was complete and a chargesheet had been filed, and that the appell
India Law Library Docid # 2421579

(782) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KRISHNA SAKHARAM BAING AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 149(2) and 170 — Insurance company's right to contest a claim — The High Court had ruled that the Insurance Company was not permitted to raise certain grounds to resist the claim because it had not taken permission under Section 170 of the Act — The Supreme Court, however, citing a previous 3-judge bench decision, held that an insurance company voluntarily impleaded by the claimants can raise all grounds available in law, not just those listed in Section 149(2
India Law Library Docid # 2421580

(783) ONKAR NATH SINGH @ SHERU SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 — Plea of Juvenility — The appellant was convicted and sentenced, but the High Court remanded the case to determine juvenility via a medical board and re-examine the evidence — After remand, the appellant was convicted again — The Supreme Court found the High Court's reliance solely on medical reports for juvenility determination flawed and mandated a full age determination inquiry, including academic records and testimonials — The Court directed
India Law Library Docid # 2421583

(784) M/S UTKAL HIGHWAYS ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Writ Petition — Delay — Supreme Court established that a High Court should not relegate a writ petition to other remedies after a significant delay, particularly when the parties have already exchanged affidavits, and the matter is ripe for final disposal — This is not applicable if there are disputed questions of fact requiring formal evidence — The court clarified that it is not an absolute rule that money claims cannot be adjudicated upon in writ jurisdiction, and the non-payment of admitted
India Law Library Docid # 2421586

(785) AMALENDU MANDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 142 — Divorce — Supreme Court invoked its jurisdiction under Article 142 to dissolve a marriage — The court's decision was based on the fact that the parties had been residing separately since 2012 and there was no possibility of reconciliation, making the marriage irretrievably broken — The court approved a one-time settlement of Rs. 15,00,000/-, with Rs. 10,00,000/- going to the wife and Rs. 5,00,000/- being invested for the benefit of the minor child — Th
India Law Library Docid # 2421588

(786) RAJESH R NAIR Vs. SHIVANANDA NAIK [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — The Supreme Court heard a criminal appeal regarding the dishonouring of two cheques, totalling Rs. 21,00,000, which were issued by the appellant — The appellant's defence was struck off for failing to deposit the amount, leading to a conviction and an order to pay Rs. 21,00,000, with a three-month imprisonment in case of failure to pay — The lower court's order was affirmed in both appeal and revision — The Supreme Court initially directed the app
India Law Library Docid # 2421589

(787) DIKSHA BABANRAO SHIRSAT Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Service Law — Selection — Court should not reject a candidate's application due to a minor procedural issue, especially when the candidate has demonstrated merit and has been working in the position for an extended period — In this specific case, the petitioner was selected for the post of Engineer Class-C but did not have the required non-creamy layer certificate on the date of the interview — Although she obtained the certificate the next day, the lower courts set aside her appointment — The S
India Law Library Docid # 2421593

(788) OM PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA @ BABLOO Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 473 — United Provinces Prisoners' Release on Probation Act, 1938 — Supreme Court considered a petition from a convict who was seeking release under the Act, 1938 — The court found that the provisions of the 1938 Act are more stringent than Section 473 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — The court noted that under the 1938 Act, the State Government must be satisfied that the convict is likely to abstain from crime and lead a pe
India Law Library Docid # 2421533

(789) ATUL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 37 — The court found that the prosecution failed to demonstrate compliance with clause 2.5 of Standing Order No. 1/89, specifically regarding color testing using a drug identification kit — Additionally, there was no evidence that the seized contraband was converted into 10 containers, or that samples were taken from them — Due to this non-compliance, the court ruled that the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act could not be applied t
India Law Library Docid # 2421544

(790) VIJAY PRABHU Vs. S.T. LAJAPATHIE AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Sections 12 and 12(3) — Specific performance of part of a contract — The court held that specific performance of a part of a contract is generally not allowed, except under specific circumstances as outlined in Section 12 — The court determined that the plaintiff was not entitled to relief under Section 12(3) because they were found to be not ready and willing to perform their part of the contract and therefore in default, and because the terms of the contract did not
India Law Library Docid # 2421495

(791) JAI KRISHNA PRASAD YADAV AND OTHERS Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petitions — Contempt Petitions related to non-compliance with a previous order — While it does not explicitly state a ratio decidendi, it does lay out a procedure for resolving the matter — The court directs the authorities to adjudicate the issues through a fact-finding enquiry conducted by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — This decision is based on the court's view that issues of actual working days, salary arrears, and pension cannot
India Law Library Docid # 2421496

(792) PREMSHILA KUER Vs. DR. AMRENDRA NARAYAN YADAV AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petitions — Contempt Petitions related to non-compliance with a previous order — While it does not explicitly state a ratio decidendi, it does lay out a procedure for resolving the matter — The court directs the authorities to adjudicate the issues through a fact-finding enquiry conducted by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — This decision is based on the court's view that issues of actual working days, salary arrears, and pension cannot be decided in contempt proceedings
India Law Library Docid # 2421497

(793) SRI MUNSHI LAL MAHTO AND OTHERS Vs. SRI SUDHIR TRIPATHY AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Proceedings — The Supreme Court determined that the issues regarding the date of birth, pay fixation, and arrears of salary for petitioner No. 4, who was allegedly a minor at the time of his appointment, required adjudication through a fact-finding enquiry by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — The court stated that these matters could not be resolved in contempt proceedings — The court directed the petitioner to submit his claims along with relevant documents to the Unive
India Law Library Docid # 2421498

(794) DINESH KUMAR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. R. K. MAHAJAN AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petition — The Supreme Court dismissed a contempt petition, stating that there was no willful non-compliance with its previous order — The court clarified that the prior order directed the University to consider qualified individuals for vacant positions based on their inter-se seniority, rather than mandating their absorption — The court determined that the J. Sinha Commission’s order did not include a positive direction for the petitioners’ absorption — The court noted that the State
India Law Library Docid # 2421499

(795) MS JAYANI ESTATES PVT LTD AND OTHERS Vs. MS VALLABHA FEEDS PVT. LTD AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Suit for Specific Performance — The petitioners filed a suit for specific performance of a contract to re-transfer land and other reliefs, including a request for an injunction to prevent respondents from transferring the land or creating third-party rights — The trial court declined to grant the injunction, and the High Court upheld this decision — The Supreme Court is now hearing a special leave petition against this decision — The petitioners argue they are entitled to an injunction to preven
India Law Library Docid # 2421601

(796) UNION OF INDIA Vs. MOHD JAVED AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Foreigners Act 1946 — Section 3 — The Supreme Court is reviewing a petition by the Union of India challenging a Delhi High Court decision that quashed a "Leave India Notice" against Nausheen Naz, who holds a valid but expired long-term visa and has applied for citizenship — The High Court found the notice arbitrary and violated natural justice, also protecting her family's right to unity under Article 21 — The Supreme Court is concerned about proceeding ex-parte and has requested the respondents
India Law Library Docid # 2421608

(797) GOPAL SHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petitions — Contempt Petitions related to non-compliance with a previous order — While it does not explicitly state a ratio decidendi, it does lay out a procedure for resolving the matter — The court directs the authorities to adjudicate the issues through a fact-finding enquiry conducted by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — This decision is based on the court's view that issues of actual working days, salary arrears, and pension cannot be decided in contempt proceedings
India Law Library Docid # 2421509

(798) PRASHANT BANDYOPADHYAY AND ANOTHER Vs. SUDHIR TRIPATHI AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petitions — Contempt Petitions related to non-compliance with a previous order — While it does not explicitly state a ratio decidendi, it does lay out a procedure for resolving the matter — The court directs the authorities to adjudicate the issues through a fact-finding enquiry conducted by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — This decision is based on the court's view that issues of actual working days, salary arrears, and pension cannot be decided in contempt proceedings
India Law Library Docid # 2421510

(799) DR. YUGESHWAR YADAV Vs. SANJAY KUMAR AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petitions — Contempt Petitions related to non-compliance with a previous order — While it does not explicitly state a ratio decidendi, it does lay out a procedure for resolving the matter — The court directs the authorities to adjudicate the issues through a fact-finding enquiry conducted by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — This decision is based on the court's view that issues of actual working days, salary arrears, and pension cannot be decided in contempt proceedings
India Law Library Docid # 2421511

(800) ANRAJ DEVI Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-01-2025
Contempt Petitions — Contempt Petitions related to non-compliance with a previous order — While it does not explicitly state a ratio decidendi, it does lay out a procedure for resolving the matter — The court directs the authorities to adjudicate the issues through a fact-finding enquiry conducted by the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University — This decision is based on the court's view that issues of actual working days, salary arrears, and pension cannot be decided in contempt proceedings
India Law Library Docid # 2421512