(821) BISHWAJIT DEY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 451 and 457 — Vehicles used in drug offenses are subject to potential confiscation, there is no explicit bar on their interim release — In the absence of a specific prohibition in the NDPS Act, courts can invoke the general powers under Sections 451 and 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) to release such vehicles on interim custody (superdari) pending the trial's outcome — This disc India Law Library Docid # 2421413
(822) MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND OTHERS Vs. CENTURY TEXTILES AND INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Bombay Improvement Trust Transfer Act, 1925 — Section 51(2) — City of Bombay Improvement Act, 1898 — Section 32B — The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) appealed a Bombay High Court decision that directed MCGM to convey a plot of land (Block-A) to Century Textiles and Industries Limited — Century Textiles had applied for a 28-year lease under the Poorer Classes Accommodation Scheme (PCAS) in 1918 and was granted a lease for 28 years on Block India Law Library Docid # 2421414
(823) M/S UNICAST ALLOY PVT. LTD. Vs. DISHA - A LIFE SCHOOL AND P.K.D. COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Pollution violations — The court directed the Pollution Control Board to consider subsequent events, including orders from the Appellate Authority and the NGT, when determining environmental compensation for M/S Unicast Alloy Pvt. Ltd. — The court also specified that a show-cause notice must be given to the appellants, allowing them to present all subsequent events, and a hearing must be held before any order is passed — The question of whether the appellants are liable for environmental compens India Law Library Docid # 2421595
(824) THE BAGALKOT TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER Vs. MALLKIARJUN C. CHARANTIMATH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Bagalkot Town Development Authority (Allotment of Industrial Sites) Rules, 1993 — Land Acquisition — The Bagalkot Town Development Authority acquired land from petitioners for a project, compensating them financially but not with alternate land as per their claim and state policy — The High Court initially awarded 1 acre 33 guntas of alternate land, later reduced on appeal — The Supreme Court notes the omission of relevant state rules and the authority's concession on land entitlement — It has g India Law Library Docid # 2421597
(825) ATUL PRAJAPATI Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 311, 406, 420 and 120B — The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to two appellants charged with offences under Sections 311, 406, 420, and 120B, despite the filing of charge sheets and the elimination of custodial interrogation — The appellants argued for both bail and anticipatory bail, citing the filing of charge-sheets and the absence of custodial interrogation — The prosecution argued against bail due to the appellants' multiple criminal cases — The Supr India Law Library Docid # 2421602
(826) ABDUL NASSAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 376 — Supreme Court's reaffirmation of the principles governing circumstantial evidence in criminal trials — The Court held that the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances, conclusively pointing to the guilt of the accused and excluding any hypothesis of innocence — It emphasized meticulous evaluation of evidence, particularly in cases involving heinous crimes like rape and murder, and underscored the importance of fore India Law Library Docid # 2421507
(827) THE STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. HARI KESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7, 13(2) and 19 — High Court should not quash a sanction order and the consequent proceedings, particularly after the trial has commenced and witnesses have been examined, unless a demonstrable failure of justice has occurred — This principle is rooted in Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which dictates that an appellate court should not overturn a Special Judge's order based on errors or irregularities in the sanction unless such error India Law Library Docid # 2421508
(828) RAVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 — There is a civil suit pending between the parties preceding the criminal FIR — The main issue is whether the appellant should be granted anticipatory bail considering he is appearing before the Investigation Officer and there is a pending civil suit between the parties — The appellant’s counsel argued for anticipatory bail, highlighting that the appellant was cooperating with the investigation and that a civil suit was already pendi India Law Library Docid # 2421614
(829) STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. HARI KESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 7 and 13(2) — The State of Punjab appealed a High Court decision quashing a Sanction Order and related corruption proceedings against respondent — The trial had begun with seven witnesses examined when the High Court quashed the order — The main issue was whether the High Court correctly quashed the order after the trial had started — The Supreme Court found that the High Court erred by quashing the order without a finding of failure of justice and f India Law Library Docid # 2421617
(830) ANJALI BHARDWAJ AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Appointment of Chief Information Commissioners (CIC) and Information Commissioners (IC) at the Union level and in various states — The Supreme Court is overseeing the appointment of Central Information Commissioners (CICs) and State Information Commissioners (ICs) across India, addressing delays and vacancies — Key issues include setting timelines for selections, notifying candidate lists, and resolving procedural hurdles like the lack of a Leader of Opposition in Jharkhand — The court directed India Law Library Docid # 2421618
(831) SHASHI BHUSHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 379, 406, 407 and 420 — The Supreme Court has granted leave to appeal — The primary issue is whether accused should be granted anticipatory bail in relation to the aforementioned FIR — The State acknowledged that accused is cooperating with the investigation — The Supreme Court considered the facts and circumstances and granted anticipatory bail to appellant — The court directed that in the event of his arrest, he should be released on bail by the arresting/inve India Law Library Docid # 2421626
(832) INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK Vs. M.A.S. SUBRAMANIAN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 54 — The Supreme Court heard an appeal regarding a property dispute where the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) had ruled that a sale deed was not binding on a company — The NCLAT had determined that the company was in possession of the land through part performance of a contract with the original owner, who had agreed to sell the land to the company in exchange for shares — However, the Supreme Court noted that an agreement for sale does no India Law Library Docid # 2421630
(833) ASHUMAL @ ASHARAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Bail — Medical grounds — The court had previously stated it would not consider the merits of the case, only the medical condition of the petitioner — The petitioner's counsel argued that the 86-year-old petitioner had age-related ailments and had suffered two heart attacks — The State acknowledged the petitioner's health issues but argued that treatment could be provided in prison — The Court granted interim bail to the petitioner until March 31, 2025, citing the petitioner’s health condition an India Law Library Docid # 2421683
(834) M/S. ANS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 — Concession agreement — Supreme Court addressed a case regarding a concession agreement between M/S ANS Infrastructure Private Ltd and the State of Rajasthan for road improvements — Disputes arose, and an arbitrator awarded the appellant Rs. 43.7281 crores — Both parties challenged the award, but the District Court dismissed their petitions — The High Court allowed the State's appeal and dismissed the appellant's cross-appeal — The Supreme Cou India Law Library Docid # 2421636
(835) STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) Vs. VIPIN @ LALLA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363, 366, 376, 342 and 506 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012 — Section 4 — Supreme Court reviewed a case where a man was acquitted of charges including rape and offenses under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — The case was based on the testimony of the prosecutrix (victim), who was a minor — The Trial Court acquitted the accused, citing a delay in filing the FIR, inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's statements, and a India Law Library Docid # 2421646
(836) MANISH AGGARWAL Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 313 — Punjab Courts Act, 1918 — Section 41 — Suit for specific performance — High Court erred in setting aside the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, which had decreed the suit for specific performance in favor of the appellant — The Supreme Court found that the High Court misdirected itself while appreciating its powers under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, which allows for re-appreciation of facts and eviden India Law Library Docid # 2422088
(837) S. JAYALAKSHMI Vs. THE SPECIAL DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-01-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 and 37 — Limitation on Court's Power to Modify Arbitral Awards under — The Court reaffirms its stance in the case of "Project Director, National Highways No. 45 E and 220, National Highways Authority of India vs. M. Hakeem & Another" (2021) 9 SCC 1, that courts do not have the jurisdiction to modify an arbitral award under Sections 34 and 37 India Law Library Docid # 2422158
(838) LALITA Vs. PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-01-2025 Matrimonial Law — Transfer Petition — Supreme Court addressed a transfer petition filed by a wife seeking to move her divorce case from Chirawa, Rajasthan, to Jhajjar, Haryana — The respondent-Husband, did not appear despite repeated calls — The Court allowed the transfer based on the petitioner's claims that she needs to care for her three-year-old child and is unable to effectively defend the proceedings due to the long distance — The Court ordered the transfer of the case from the Additional India Law Library Docid # 2421647
(839) KIRTI SINGH Vs. DHANANJAY LAKSHMIKANT SINGH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-01-2025 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(i-a) — Transfer of Divorce Proceedings — Petitioner sought to transfer her divorce proceedings against husband from Kalyan, Maharashtra, to Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, due to the 1400 km distance causing her inconvenience — Petitioner had also filed multiple transfer petitions to Delhi, which were dismissed by the Supreme Court — The Court granted appellant’s transfer request, citing the interest of justice, and directed the Varanasi Family Court to handle t India Law Library Docid # 2421656
(840) MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs. THE ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-01-2025 Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) appealed to the Supreme Court against a High Court order, but the respondents did not appear — A related SLP challenging a Single Judge's order was also pending, with the respondents also absent — The MCD failed to inform the court about the SLP or the respondents' non-appearance — The Supreme Court found that the respondents were not heard and that both parties mishandled the information about the SLP — It detached the SLP from the disposed cases, allowed th India Law Library Docid # 2421660