⚖
Loading…
Loading…
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
741–760 · Page 38 of 500
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 350 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 32
Does the decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [2013] 14 SCR 713 create an absolute rule that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted in every case before the registration of an FIR.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 35 · [2025] 2 S.C.R. 1
Whether the prosecution has proved by leading clinching and convincing circumstantial evidence that the accused had committed forcible and violent sexual assault on the child victim and, thereafter, strangled and killed her.
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
741–760 · Page 38 of 500
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 350 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 32
Does the decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [2013] 14 SCR 713 create an absolute rule that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted in every case before the registration of an FIR.
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 35 · [2025] 2 S.C.R. 1
Whether the prosecution has proved by leading clinching and convincing circumstantial evidence that the accused had committed forcible and violent sexual assault on the child victim and, thereafter, strangled and killed her.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 349 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 71
The High Court dismissed the appellant’s criminal revision application and refused to the quash the order of the Trial Court rejecting the appellant’s discharge application in a case for offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 348 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 469
Matter pertains to the applicability of the doctrine of “clean hands and non-suppression of material facts” to the writ petition filed by the respondent seeking substantially the same relief without disclosing the material fact of the dismissal of earlier petition; the correctness of the impugned order passed by the High Court entertaining the said writ petition; and as regards the right of the Residents’ Assembly to be part of any committee or council constituted by the Governing Board of the appellant Foundation.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 347 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 516
Matter pertains to the correctness of judgment passed by the National Green Tribunal giving directions to the appellant-Foundation as regards the construction of roads in Auroville Township.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 346 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 41
Whether the High Court was justified in relying upon P. Mohan Raj case which held that the immunity granted by the moratorium order issued under Section 14, IBC can only be obtained by a Corporate Debtor and not by a natural person such as the present appellant, while dismissing the s.482 application filed by the appellant for quashing of proceedings initiated u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Supreme Court of India3 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 345 · [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1683
Preliminary notification u/s.17(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 was issued on 20.03.1999 proposing to acquire 4 acres and 15 guntas of land from the respondents/ their ancestors-in-interest. The entire transaction with regard to acquisition and voluntary surrender of land under the Bangalore Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989 [the original Incentive Rules of 1989] as well as possession and also notification under Section 19(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 and under Section 9 of the Act stood completed muc
Supreme Court of India1 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 34 · [2025] 1 S.C.R. 446
According to the Range Forest Officer, the appellants (director and office bearers of the company) had illegally uprooted trees with JCB, destroyed them, and violated the section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900. The question that arises for consideration is whether vicarious liability that can be attached to any of the directors or any office bearers of the company.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 338 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 502
Issue arose as to whether the High Court was correct in dismissing the revision application filed by the appellants assailing the order of the trial court dismissing their discharge applications u/s.227 CrPC.
Supreme Court of India7 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 337 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 779
Appellant-DDA executed an agreement to lease in respect of a plot in favour of M/s Mehta Constructions, which executed a registered sale deed cum Assignment in favour of second respondent. The second respondent went into liquidation, and the plot was sold to first respondent in the auction in liquidation proceedings. The auction sale was confirmed by a Single Judge and Division Bench of the High Court, hence, the present appeal by DDA.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 335 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 490
Whether the conviction of the appellant ought to have been recorded under the IPC or whether the provisions of the Special law, i.e., Section 42A of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, would prevail thereby, vitiating the sentence awarded to the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) (f) and 376(2)(i) of IPC.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 334 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 598
Whether the High Court was justified in its interference with the decision made by the Government to cancel the select list; Whether the decision of the appellants to cancel the select list was either vulnerable on application of the doctrine of Wednesbury unreasonableness or suspect applying the doctrine of proportionality and, therefore, liable to invalidation; Whether the decision of the appellants to cancel the select list infringed the legal rights of the respondents for which a writ petition u/Art.226 of the Constitution could be maintained.
Supreme Court of India5 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 332 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 11
Allegation of disparity in the counting of votes in the election for position of ‘Gram Pradhan’. Whether the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, was justified in ordering a recount of the votes cast.
Supreme Court of India20 Feb 2025Full text
2025 INSC 331 · [2025] 2 S.C.R. 1806
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused u/ss.376 and 452 IPC.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 330 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 638
(i) Whether the High Court was right in exercising its revisional jurisdiction for the purpose of setting aside the order of the Trial Court rejecting the second application preferred by the respondent no.2 u/s.319 of the CrPC; (ii) Whether the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the Trial Court to give effect to the order passed by the High Court directing it to reconsider the application u/s.319 of CrPC would relate back and replace its earlier order dated 19.07.2010 rejecting the s.319 application; (iii) Whether the Trial Court could have entertained an application filed u/s.319 of the CrPC af
Supreme Court of India2 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 33 · [2025] 1 S.C.R. 515
Whether the option exercised by Directorate of Health Services (DHS) employees to join Directorate of Medical Education (DME) pursuant to a policy decision of the State of Kerala ought to be considered as an option for absorption or a request for transfer under proviso to Rule 27(a) of Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958 and in that situation, the inter-se seniority of such employees in the DME shall be reckoned from which date.
Supreme Court of India5 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 329 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 540
Whether the courts below committed any error in upholding the objections raised by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein against execution of the decree on the claim of being in possession of the suit property in their capacity as cultivating tenants; Whether the respondent nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to the protection of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants’ Protection Act, 1955 and could the Executing Court have decided the question of validity of the decree on this ground.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 328 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 714
Issue arose whether a complaint filed u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, can be ordered to be transferred from one court to the other having territorial jurisdiction to try the offence in exercise of powers u/s.406 CrPC on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction of the court in which the complaint is filed; and whether the expression “that for the ends of justice, this Court can transfer any criminal case or appeal to any place” in s.406 CrPC embraces in itself the lack of territorial jurisdiction of the court to try the offence u/s.138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Supreme Court of India5 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 327 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 419
The wife of the detenu; detained under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act) is challenging the order of detention.
Supreme Court of India4 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 325 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 450
Whether the High Court was correct in setting aside the order of the Trial Court holding the appellants not guilty of wilful disobedience of their undertaking given to the Court.
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 349 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 71
The High Court dismissed the appellant’s criminal revision application and refused to the quash the order of the Trial Court rejecting the appellant’s discharge application in a case for offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 348 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 469
Matter pertains to the applicability of the doctrine of “clean hands and non-suppression of material facts” to the writ petition filed by the respondent seeking substantially the same relief without disclosing the material fact of the dismissal of earlier petition; the correctness of the impugned order passed by the High Court entertaining the said writ petition; and as regards the right of the Residents’ Assembly to be part of any committee or council constituted by the Governing Board of the appellant Foundation.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 347 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 516
Matter pertains to the correctness of judgment passed by the National Green Tribunal giving directions to the appellant-Foundation as regards the construction of roads in Auroville Township.
Supreme Court of India16 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 346 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 41
Whether the High Court was justified in relying upon P. Mohan Raj case which held that the immunity granted by the moratorium order issued under Section 14, IBC can only be obtained by a Corporate Debtor and not by a natural person such as the present appellant, while dismissing the s.482 application filed by the appellant for quashing of proceedings initiated u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Supreme Court of India3 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 345 · [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1683
Preliminary notification u/s.17(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 was issued on 20.03.1999 proposing to acquire 4 acres and 15 guntas of land from the respondents/ their ancestors-in-interest. The entire transaction with regard to acquisition and voluntary surrender of land under the Bangalore Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989 [the original Incentive Rules of 1989] as well as possession and also notification under Section 19(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 and under Section 9 of the Act stood completed muc
Supreme Court of India1 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 34 · [2025] 1 S.C.R. 446
According to the Range Forest Officer, the appellants (director and office bearers of the company) had illegally uprooted trees with JCB, destroyed them, and violated the section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900. The question that arises for consideration is whether vicarious liability that can be attached to any of the directors or any office bearers of the company.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 338 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 502
Issue arose as to whether the High Court was correct in dismissing the revision application filed by the appellants assailing the order of the trial court dismissing their discharge applications u/s.227 CrPC.
Supreme Court of India7 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 337 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 779
Appellant-DDA executed an agreement to lease in respect of a plot in favour of M/s Mehta Constructions, which executed a registered sale deed cum Assignment in favour of second respondent. The second respondent went into liquidation, and the plot was sold to first respondent in the auction in liquidation proceedings. The auction sale was confirmed by a Single Judge and Division Bench of the High Court, hence, the present appeal by DDA.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 335 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 490
Whether the conviction of the appellant ought to have been recorded under the IPC or whether the provisions of the Special law, i.e., Section 42A of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, would prevail thereby, vitiating the sentence awarded to the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) (f) and 376(2)(i) of IPC.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 334 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 598
Whether the High Court was justified in its interference with the decision made by the Government to cancel the select list; Whether the decision of the appellants to cancel the select list was either vulnerable on application of the doctrine of Wednesbury unreasonableness or suspect applying the doctrine of proportionality and, therefore, liable to invalidation; Whether the decision of the appellants to cancel the select list infringed the legal rights of the respondents for which a writ petition u/Art.226 of the Constitution could be maintained.
Supreme Court of India5 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 332 · [2025] 4 S.C.R. 11
Allegation of disparity in the counting of votes in the election for position of ‘Gram Pradhan’. Whether the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, was justified in ordering a recount of the votes cast.
Supreme Court of India20 Feb 2025Full text
2025 INSC 331 · [2025] 2 S.C.R. 1806
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused u/ss.376 and 452 IPC.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 330 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 638
(i) Whether the High Court was right in exercising its revisional jurisdiction for the purpose of setting aside the order of the Trial Court rejecting the second application preferred by the respondent no.2 u/s.319 of the CrPC; (ii) Whether the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the Trial Court to give effect to the order passed by the High Court directing it to reconsider the application u/s.319 of CrPC would relate back and replace its earlier order dated 19.07.2010 rejecting the s.319 application; (iii) Whether the Trial Court could have entertained an application filed u/s.319 of the CrPC af
Supreme Court of India2 Jan 2025Full text
2025 INSC 33 · [2025] 1 S.C.R. 515
Whether the option exercised by Directorate of Health Services (DHS) employees to join Directorate of Medical Education (DME) pursuant to a policy decision of the State of Kerala ought to be considered as an option for absorption or a request for transfer under proviso to Rule 27(a) of Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958 and in that situation, the inter-se seniority of such employees in the DME shall be reckoned from which date.
Supreme Court of India5 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 329 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 540
Whether the courts below committed any error in upholding the objections raised by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein against execution of the decree on the claim of being in possession of the suit property in their capacity as cultivating tenants; Whether the respondent nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to the protection of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants’ Protection Act, 1955 and could the Executing Court have decided the question of validity of the decree on this ground.
Supreme Court of India6 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 328 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 714
Issue arose whether a complaint filed u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, can be ordered to be transferred from one court to the other having territorial jurisdiction to try the offence in exercise of powers u/s.406 CrPC on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction of the court in which the complaint is filed; and whether the expression “that for the ends of justice, this Court can transfer any criminal case or appeal to any place” in s.406 CrPC embraces in itself the lack of territorial jurisdiction of the court to try the offence u/s.138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Supreme Court of India5 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 327 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 419
The wife of the detenu; detained under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act) is challenging the order of detention.
Supreme Court of India4 Mar 2025Full text
2025 INSC 325 · [2025] 3 S.C.R. 450
Whether the High Court was correct in setting aside the order of the Trial Court holding the appellants not guilty of wilful disobedience of their undertaking given to the Court.
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis