(1) DHARMRAO SHARANAPPA SHABADI AND OTHERS Vs. SYEDA ARIFA PARVEEN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 50 — Opinion as to relationship, when relevant — Opinion expressed by conduct of person with special knowledge on relationship is relevant — Essentials are court's opinion, expression through conduct, and person having special knowledge — Conduct alone is not proof but an intermediate step to infer opinion — Opinion must be proved by direct evidence — Court needs to weigh India Law Library Docid # 2433556
(2) SWACCH ASSOCIATION, NAGPUR Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Wetlands (Conservation & Management) Rules, 2017 — Rule 2(1)(g) — Definition of 'wetland' — Excludes human-made water bodies/tanks constructed for drinking water, aquaculture, salt production, recreation, and irrigation purposes — Futala Tank, a man-made lake constructed for irrigation and drinking water needs, does not fall within the statutory definition of a wetland. India Law Library Docid # 2433545
(3) S. SANTHANA LAKSHMI AND OTHERS Vs. D. RAJAMMAL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Jurisdiction — Suit for injunction simpliciter — Whether maintainable without a prayer for declaration of title when title is disputed — Where a party asserts title based on a Will but the defendant claims co-ownership and occupancy rights, and possession is admitted to be with the defendant, a suit for injunction simpliciter without a prayer for declaration of title may India Law Library Docid # 2433546
(4) ANILKUMAR @ LAPETU RAMSHAKAL SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Prisoner's Rights — Premature Release — Remission Guidelines — Appellant, a life convict, sought premature release after 20 years. The government ordered release after 24 years based on Category 4(d) of the 2010 guidelines (joint murder with premeditation). Appellant argued he should be released after 22 years under Category India Law Library Docid # 2433547
(5) OFFSHORE INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED Vs. M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 11(6), 12(5) and Seventh Schedule — Appointment of Arbitrator — Clause in contract making MD or his nominee as arbitrator — Clause became bad in law due to amendments in 1996 Act making such persons ineligible — Court has power to appoint independent arbitrator despite ineligibility of nominated arbitrator, for ensuring neutrality and impartiality — India Law Library Docid # 2433548
(6) RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL ETC[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Conviction by High Court reversing Trial Court acquittal — Appeal to Supreme Court — Supreme Court scrutinized ocular evidence and evidence of recovery of weapons — Supreme Court found ocular evidence unreliable due to contradictions and chance witnesses, and recovery of weapons insufficient to establish guilt as blood matching was not done India Law Library Docid # 2433549
(7) K. S. SHIVAPPA Vs. SMT. K. NEELAMMA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 — Section 8(2) and 8(3) — Transfer of minor's immovable property by natural guardian without court permission — Voidable at instance of minor or person claiming under him — Repudiation can be by suit or by unequivocal conduct within prescribed time upon attaining majority — Transferring property themselves after attaining majority is sufficient repudiation. India Law Library Docid # 2433550
(8) JSW STEEL LIMITED ETC. Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ETC[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 3 & 2(1)(u) — Proceeds of crime — Whether unpaid consideration for iron ore can be treated as proceeds of crime — Court should permit statutory process to conclude rather than interfere prematurely, especially when appellate remedy is pending. India Law Library Docid # 2433551
(9) NILESH BABURAO GITTE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — For conviction, circumstances must be fully established, consistent only with guilt of accused, conclusive, exclude every possible hypothesis except for guilt, and form a complete chain of unbroken evidence — In this case, the circumstances failed to meet these stringent tests. India Law Library Docid # 2433552
(10) ZAINUL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 read with Section 149 — Murder and unlawful assembly — Common object — Liability under Section 149 is constructive and does not require proof of overt act by each member if offence is committed in prosecution of common object or members knew it was likely to be committed India Law Library Docid # 2433553
(11) LIFESTYLE EQUITIES C.V. AND ANOTHER Vs. AMAZON TECHNOLOGIES INC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 5(1) and Rule 5(3) — Stay of execution of money decree — High Court granted stay without insisting on deposit of decretal amount — Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the High Court's order. India Law Library Docid # 2433554
(12) M/S. ARISTO PRINTERS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, LUCKNOW, U.P.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-10-2025 Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 — Section 3F(1)(b) — Levy of tax on transfer of property in goods involved in a works contract — Printing of lottery tickets as a works contract — Ink and processing materials held to be goods — Transfer of property in ink and chemicals when mixed and applied to paper — Taxable event is the incorporation of ink into the ticket — Subsequent consumption does not negate India Law Library Docid # 2433555
(13) NAZIM AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 11 — First Information Report (FIR) — Omission of names — Significant omission of names of accused in FIR, despite complainant's familiarity with them, raises serious doubt about subsequent implication and suggests possibility of false implication — In cases based solely on circumstantial evidence, every circumstance must withstand rigorous scrutiny. India Law Library Docid # 2433540
(14) P. RADHAKRISHNAN AND ANOTHER Vs. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Writ Petition — Scope of enquiry — High Court exceeding the scope of writ petition by issuing directions for fixing license fee and conducting an inquiry by the Chief Vigilance Officer, without putting the appellants on notice. Such directions rendered the appellants worse off in their own writ petition, India Law Library Docid # 2433541
(15) VINISHMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14 and 19(1)(g) — Doctrine of Level Playing Field — Tender Conditions — Suppliers based outside the State excluded by a condition requiring past experience of supplying to Chhattisgarh government agencies — Supreme Court held this to be arbitrary and discriminatory, violating the right to equality and freedom of trade — The condition created an artificial barrier, India Law Library Docid # 2433542
(16) VINISHMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-10-2025 Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) — Tender Conditions — Past Performance Restriction — A tender condition restricting bidders to those who supplied goods to the specific State Government in the past three years is arbitrary and discriminatory, violating the principles of equality and freedom of trade. Such a restriction creates an artificial barrier, excludes competent bidders, and curtails fundamental rights without just cause. India Law Library Docid # 2433557
(17) RAM VISHAL PATERIYA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS[MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT] 27-09-2025 M.P. Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees Pension Rules, 1979 — Definition of Permanent Employee & Commencement of Qualifying Service — Employees paid on monthly basis, even if described as daily rated, are considered temporary contingency paid employees and can be considered permanent contingency paid employees for pension purposes upon completing 15 years of service. India Law Library Docid # 2433276
(18) USHA KIRAN KSHATRI AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 26-09-2025 Telangana State Judicial Rules, 2023 — Rule 5(5.1)(a) and Rule 2(k) — Interpretation of "practicing as an Advocate in the High Court" — Rejection of candidature for District Judge post — High Court's dismissal of writ petitions based on interpretation that "High Court" refers solely to the Telangana High Court — India Law Library Docid # 2433214
(19) SHARAD SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LR. Vs. H. D. NARANG AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 26-09-2025 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166, 173 — Motor Vehicle Accident Claim — Quantum of Compensation — Medical Expenses — Insurance company unable to verify medical bills from hospitals in places other than victim's hometown is not a valid contention. Explanation for treatment in other locations due to victim's medical condition (paraplegia and pneumonia) and climatic conditions is accepted. (Para India Law Library Docid # 2433215
(20) KALYANI TRANSCO Vs. M/S BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 26-09-2025 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 62 — Appeal to Supreme Court — Limited to questions of law — Concurrent findings of fact by NCLT and NCLAT ordinarily not to be interfered with — Unless view taken in ignorance of statutory provisions, based on extraneous consideration or ex-facie arbitrary/illegal. India Law Library Docid # 2433216