ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(141) THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PRISON AND ANOTHER Vs. VENKATESAN @ SENU @ SRINIVASAN @ BASKARAN @ RADIO @ PRAKASAM[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 374(2), 428, 482 — Inherent Powers vs. Specific Remedy — Finality of Orders — The High Court ought not to entertain a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking set-off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. when: (i) the specific relief of set-off was considered and rejected by the trial/convicting court; (ii) the said rejection attained finality as it was not challenged via the available statutory remedy of appeal against conviction under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C.; and
India Law Library Docid # 2424915

(142) CHELLAMMAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 — Section 4 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 360, 361 — Mandatory Duty of Court to Consider Probation — Where an accused is convicted of an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and the conditions specified in Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (regarding the circumstances of the case, nature of the offence, and character of the offender making it expedient to release on probation) are attracted, a mandatory duty
India Law Library Docid # 2424916

(143) CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. RAMESH CHANDER DIWAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 197 —Penal Code, 1860 — Section 21, Twelfth (a) — Protection of Sanction — Public Servant on Deputation — A public servant, appointed by the State Government and holding a civil post, who is subsequently sent on deputation to serve in another organization (such as a Municipal Corporation) on a temporary basis, continues to be a ‘public servant’ within the meaning of Section 21, Twelfth (a) of the IPC and remains covered under the protective umbrella of Sec
India Law Library Docid # 2424917

(144) NIDHI BHARGAVA AND OTHERS Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Assessment of Compensation — Loss of Dependency — Income Tax Returns (ITR) — Relevance and Admissibility — In determining the income of a deceased for calculating compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Income Tax Return (ITR) pertaining to the Financial Year immediately preceding the date of the accident is a legally admissible and reliable statutory document — The relevance of such an ITR stems from the income period it covers (the relevant
India Law Library Docid # 2424918

(145) N. VIJAY KUMAR Vs. VISHWANATH RAO N.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 118(a) & 139 — Presumptions and Rebuttal — Standard of Proof — Sections 118(a) and 139 of the NI Act mandate statutory presumptions that a negotiable instrument was made for consideration and that a cheque was issued for the discharge of a debt or liability, once execution is admitted or proved — These presumptions are rebuttable — The onus lies on the accused to raise a probable defence sufficient to create doubt about the existence of the considerati
India Law Library Docid # 2424919

(146) REJI KUMAR ALIAS REJI Vs. STATE OF KERALA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 376, 201 — Circumstantial Evidence — Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt — Conviction for multiple murders (wife and four children) and rape (minor daughter) upheld where the prosecution established a complete and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence, including motive (illicit relationship, suspicion of wife's infidelity), last seen testimony, incriminating conduct of the accused (giving false explanations, planned actions after the crime), and conclusive medical
India Law Library Docid # 2424920

(147) MD. FIROZ AHMAD KHALID Vs. THE STATE OF MANIPUR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Wakf Act, 1995 — Section 14(1)(b)(iii) read with Explanation II — Membership of Waqf Board — Muslim Member of Bar Council — Cessation of Membership — Interpretation — The eligibility of a Muslim Member of a State Bar Council to be elected as a Member of the State Waqf Board under Section 14(1)(b)(iii) of the Wakf Act, 1995, is contingent upon their holding the position in the Bar Council — This membership in the Bar Council acts as the requisite qualification — Upon ceasing to be a Member of the
India Law Library Docid # 2424921

(148) ANGADI CHANDRANNA Vs. SHANKAR AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Sections 100 & 103 — Second Appeal — Scope of Interference — Substantial Question of Law vs. Finding of Fact — The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 CPC is confined to entertaining appeals involving a substantial question of law, which must be precisely framed — Re-appreciation of evidence or interference with findings of fact recorded by the first appellate court (the final court of fact) is impermissible, unless such findings are shown to be perverse
India Law Library Docid # 2424923

(149) BARLA RAM REDDY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 23(1) — Market Value — Determination Principles — Sale Exemplars — Market value for land acquisition must be determined as on the date of the Section 4 notification, representing the price a willing, informed buyer would pay to a willing, informed seller in an open market transaction, considering the land’s condition and potentiality — Comparable sale instances are the primary guide, provided they satisfy requirements of being genuine, proximate in time and l
India Law Library Docid # 2424924

(150) AEJAZ AHMAD SHEIKH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 313 — Examination of Accused — Failure to Put Incriminating Evidence (Dying Declarations) — Prejudice — Curability and Delay — The failure of the trial court to put material incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence, specifically dying declarations (whether formally recorded or orally made to witnesses), to the accused during their examination under Section 313 CrPC is a serious irregularity This omission denies the accused an opportunity to e
India Law Library Docid # 2424925

(151) THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KAMINENI HOSPITALS Vs. PEDDI NARAYANA SWAMI AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Consumer Law — Medical Negligence — Concurrent Findings — Scope of Appeal — Where both the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), based on appreciation of evidence and medical records, have returned concurrent findings holding a hospital and its doctor medically negligent, the Supreme Court will generally affirm such findings unless they are shown to be perverse, based on no evidence, or contrary to established legal principl
India Law Library Docid # 2424926

(152) DALBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. KRISAM PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 8 — Arbitrability of Disputes — Scope of Judicial Review Post-Amendments (2015 & 2019) — Kompetenz-Kompetenz — Following the legislative amendments of 2015 and 2019, the scope of judicial scrutiny under Section 8 of the Act at the referral stage is extremely limited — The court’s role is primarily to conduct a prima facie review to ascertain the existence of a valid arbitration agreement — Issues relating to the arbitrability of the dispute are, a
India Law Library Docid # 2425084

(153) HARYANA AGRO-INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. Vs. M/S. DEVI DAYAL SACHIN KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 & 37 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Contract Act, 1872 — Arbitration Claim — Bar of Limitation.

Arbitration proceedings initiated significantly beyond the limitation period prescribed both within the governing agreement and under the general law of limitation are liable to be rejected as time-barred — An arbitral award dismissing a claim on the ground of limitation, where the delay is undisputed and substantial is generally not liable to be interf
India Law Library Docid # 2425085

(154) HABEEN ALIAS HABIN ALIAS HABIB Vs. STATE OF HARYANA[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 483 [(as invoked in the order)] — Regular Bail — Factors for Grant — Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 / IPC S. 120-B. - In exercising jurisdiction invoked under Section 483 BNSS for grant of regular bail concerning offences under the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 (Sections 3/13(1), 8/13(3)) and Section 120-B IPC, the Court considered the cumulative effect of several factors: (i) the period of c
India Law Library Docid # 2425086

(155) RAHAMATHULLA Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Constitution of India — Articles 32, 142, 20(2) — Multiple FIRs/Prosecutions arising from Single Speech — Clubbing and Transfer — Where multiple FIRs are registered in different jurisdictions arising out of the very same alleged hate speech/incident, allowing multiple trials and prosecutions would lead to serious anomalies, potential conflicting decisions, and multiplicity of proceedings, which is not expedient in the interest of justice — In such cases, invoking powers under Article 32 read wit
India Law Library Docid # 2425196

(156) M/S J N REAL ESTATE Vs. SHAILENDRA PRADHAN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 1 Rule 10(2) — Impleadment in Specific Performance Suit — Necessary and Proper Party — A party is considered necessary if no effective decree can be passed in their absence — A party is proper if, though not necessary, their presence enables the court to completely, effectively, and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit — A court has the discretion under O1 R10(2) to implead a person found to be a
India Law Library Docid # 2425290

(157) JAMMU AND KASHMIR NATIONAL PANTHERS PARTY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 22-04-2025
Jammu and Kashmir Grant of Permit for Resettlement in (or Permanent Return to) the State Act, 1982 — Implementation — Non-Notification of Authority — Stay Order: The Jammu and Kashmir Grant of Permit for Resettlement in (or Permanent Return to) the State Act, 1982, despite being enacted in October 1982, was never effectively brought
India Law Library Docid # 2425292

(158) ECOSAFE INFRAPROJECTS LLP, THROUGH ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER MR. SAMANVAY PARASHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 (RMMCR 2017) — Rules 9(1) proviso, 16(3), 21(6) — E-auction Notice — Period of Lease — Commencement Date — Environmental Clearance (EC) — Alleged Ambiguity — An e-auction notice clause specifying the period of a mining lease for mineral bajri (river sand) as five years commencing from the date of registration of the lease deed is not vague, ambiguous, or uncertain — This clause is perfectly aligned with the statutory scheme under RMMCR 2017, specifi
India Law Library Docid # 2425384

(159) NAGAD NARAYAN AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Administrative Law — Principles of Natural Justice — Bias — Nemo Judex in Causa Sua (No one should be a judge in his own cause) — Appellate Authority — Distinction between ‘Post’ and ‘Person’ — Multi-member Body — The principle of nemo judex in causa sua, which prohibits a person from acting as a judge in a matter where they have an interest or have previously acted in a different capacity, applies to the individual decision-maker, not merely the post held — Where rules designate the
India Law Library Docid # 2425385

(160) STATE Vs. JAVED KHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 378 — Appeal Against Acquittal — Scope of Interference — Principles — An appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 CrPC, must adhere to established principles: (i) acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence; (ii) evidence must be comprehensively reappreciated; (iii) if two views are possible, the one favoring the accused should ordinarily prevail; (iv) if the trial court’s view is legally plausible, mere p
India Law Library Docid # 2425386