ive
Latest Cases

(1) ABHISHEK KUMAR SINGH Vs. G. PATTANAIK AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-06-2021
Civil Contempt - Contempt action ought to proceed only in respect of established wilful disobedience of the order of the Court - In exercising contempt jurisdiction, the primary concern must be whether the acts of commission or omission can be said to be contumacious conduct of the party who is alleged to have committed default in complying with the directions given in the judgment and order of the Court - Further, the Court ought not to take upon itself power to decide the original proceedings

(2) JIGYA YADAV (MINOR) (THROUGH GUARDIAN/FATHER HARI SINGH Vs. C.B.S.E. (CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION) AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-06-2021
Correction - First is where the incumbent wants "correction" in the certificate issued by the CBSE to be made consistent with the particulars mentioned in the school records - There is no reason for the CBSE to turn down such request or attach any precondition except reasonable period of limitation and keeping in mind the period for which the CBSE has to maintain its record under the extant regulations. While doing so, it can certainly insist for compliance of other conditions by the incumbent,

(3) VINOD DUA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-06-2021
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 482 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 124A, 268, 501 and 505 - Sedition - Critical remarks against Central government - Quashing of FIR - A citizen has a right to criticize or comment upon the measures undertaken by the Government and its functionaries, so long as he does not incite people to violence against the Government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder - It is only when the words or expressions have pernicio

(4) IN RE: DISTRIBUTION OF ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES DURING PANDEMIC[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 31-05-2021
The data on the percentage of population that has been vaccinated (with one dose and both doses), as against eligible persons in the first three phases of the vaccination drive. This shall include data pertaining to the percentage of rural population as well as the percentage of urban population so vaccinated

(5) GURMEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-05-2021
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 304-B and 498A - Offences under Section 498-A and Section 304-B, IPC are distinct in nature - Although cruelty is a common thread existing in both the offences, however the ingredients of each offence are distinct and must be proved separately by the prosecution - If a case is made out, there can be a conviction under both the sections

(6) SATBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-05-2021
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 304-B - Dowry death - Deceased committed suicide by setting herself ablaze just after one year of her marriage and that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty and harassment on account of bringing less dowry by both the accused - Section 304B(1) defines 'dowry death' of a woman - It provides that 'dowry death' is where death of a woman is caused by burning or bodily injuries or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances, within seven years of m

(7) NATHU SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 28-05-2021
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 438 and 438(1) - Rejection of anticipatory Bail - An application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. is rejected is found in the proviso to Section 438(1), Cr.P.C., which specifically provides that once an application is rejected, or the Court seized with the matter refuses to issue an interim order, it is open to the police to arrest the applicant

(8) SUNIL KUMAR @ SUDHIR KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-05-2021
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 376(1), 366 and 363 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 31(1) - Kidnapping and rape - Multiple punishments of imprisonment - Whether the sentences would run concurrently or consecutively? - Held, It is legally obligatory upon the Court of first instance, while awarding multiple punishments of imprisonment, to specify in clear terms as to whether the sentences would run concurrently or consecutively.

(9) LALIT KUMAR JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (S)[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 21-05-2021
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 31 - Approval of a resolution plan does not ipso facto discharge a personal guarantor (of a corporate debtor) of her or his liabilities under the contract of guarantee - Release or discharge of a principal borrower from the debt owed by it to its creditor, by an involuntary process, i.e. by operation of law, or due to liquidation or insolvency proceeding, does not absolve the surety/guarantor of his or her liability, which arises out of an independe

(10) KANUMURI RAGHURAMA KRISHNAM RAJU Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-05-2021
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 124A - Sedition - Custodial torture - Medical examination - Petitioner shall forthwith be taken to the Army Hospital Secunderabad, Telangana for medical examination - Petitioner be medically examined in the presence of a Judicial Officer, who may be nominated by the Chief Justice of the Telangana High Court - Medical examination of the petitioner shall be conducted by the medical board of three doctors of the hospital to be constituted by the head of the Army Hos

(11) IN RE : PROBLEMS AND MISERIES OF MIGRANT LABOURERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-05-2021
Problems and Miseries of Migrant Labourers - Directions issued : Dry ration to migrant workers in National Capital Region under Atma Nirbhar Bharat Scheme or any other scheme be provided by the Union of India, NCT of Delhi, State of U.P. and State of Haryana utilising the Public Distribution System prevalent in each State with effect from May, 2021. While providing dry ration the authorities of the States shall not insist on an identity card for those migrant labourers who do not possess for the

(12) INDIA RESURGENCE ARC PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. M/S. AMIT METALIKS LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-05-2021
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 30(4) - Approval of resolution plan - Such amendment to sub-section (4) of Section 30 only amplified the considerations for the Committee of Creditors while exercising its commercial wisdom so as to take an informed decision in regard to the viability and feasibility of resolution plan, with fairness of distribution amongst similarly situated creditors; and the business decision taken in exercise of the commercial wisdom of CoC does not call for int

(13) UTTAR PRADESH POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. CG POWER AND INDUSTRIAL SOLUTIONS LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-05-2021
Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 3(2) - Levy and assessment of cess - Audit objection of CAG - If cess were leviable under the Cess Act, it would be necessary for the concerned authorities to undertake the exercise of assessment and levy of cess under the Cess Act of 1996 as amended, before the same could be realized from a contractor - High Court found that in the absence of any order for levy and assessment under the Cess Act of 1996 recover

(14) GAUTAM NAVLAKHA Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-05-2021
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 167(2) - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 120B 153A, 505(1B) and 34 - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18B, 20, 38 and 40 - National Security Act, 1980 - Section 5 - Default bail - Appellant included the 34-day period of house arrest while computing the period for filing charge-sheet - House-arrest period was declared to unlawful custody by High Court - It is an indispensable requirement to claim the benefit of

(15) RAHUL SHARMA AND ANOTHER Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2021
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 166 and 140 - Compensation - Deceased was self­employed and was 37 years old - Annual income of the deceased was Rs. 2,55,349 - After deducting personal and living expenses and adding future prospects, the annual income is determined at Rs. 2,38,326 - Multiplier of 15 is appropriate, considering the age of the deceased - Accordingly, the total loss of dependency, is calculated to be Rs. 35,74,890/­ Not find any reason to interfere with any other heads as dete

(16) MANGALA WAMAN KARANDIKAR (D) THROUGH LRS.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2021
Evidence Act, 1872 - Proviso 6 of Section 92 - Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement - When a document is a straightforward one and presents no difficulty in construing it, the proviso does not apply

(17) SANJAY KUMAR RAI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2021
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Sections 239 and 397(2) - Discharge application - Orders framing charges or refusing discharge are neither interlocutory nor final in nature and are therefore not affected by the bar of Section 397 (2) of CrPC. - It is well settled that the trial court while considering the discharge application is not to act as a mere post office - The Court has to sift through the evidence in order to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to try the suspect - The

(18) ACHHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2021
Criminal Law - Prosecution to examine witness - It is not necessary for the prosecution to multiply witnesses after witnesses on the same point; it is the quality rather than the quantity of the evidence that matters

(19) JAYAMMA AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2021
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302 - Murder - Dying declaration - Victim with 80% burn injuries was apparently not in a situation to talk or give statement - Son of deceased himself has stated that his mother committed suicide - There is no other evidence led by the prosecution to connect the appellants with the crime - Appellants acquitted.

(20) MALLAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2021
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 302 - Murder - Acquittal - Conviction on the basis of witness statements in respect to watching the accused running away - That would have been too thin piece of evidence to convict someone under Section 302 of the Code, applying the principle of res gestae.07-05-2021