ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(241) DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Vs. BIBHU PRASAD ACHARYA, ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-11-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 197(1) — Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Sections 65 and 71 — Applicability of Section 197(1) of CrPC to PMLA Proceedings — The Supreme Court held that Section 197(1) of the CrPC, which mandates prior sanction for the prosecution of public servants, applies to proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) — This conclusion was reached based on the interpretation of Sections 65 and 71 of the PMLA, which make the provision
India Law Library Docid # 2419356

(242) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. WING COMMANDER M.S. MANDER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-11-2024
Air Force Act, 1950 — Sections 45, 65 and Section 71 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302, 325, 342 and 149 — The General Court Martial GCM found guilty, but the Armed Forces Tribunal later set aside the conviction — The main issue was whether the respondent's actions led to the wrongful confinement and death of signalman — The appellants argued that the Tribunal did not consider all charges and relied on evidence from multiple witnesses to prove the respondent's guilt — The respondent contend
India Law Library Docid # 2419357

(243) SONU CHOUDARY Vs. STATE OF NCT DELHI [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 325 and 452 — House-trespass — Appellant was convicted for causing injuries with a blade at Restaurant — The main issue was whether the conviction under Section 452 (house-trespass) was justified — The appellant argued that the conviction was based on the solitary evidence of PW-1 and that no case for house trespass was made out — The State supported the conviction, stating that both lower courts had rightly found the appellant guilty — The Supreme Court upheld
India Law Library Docid # 2419442

(244) MANIK PANJABRAO KALMEGH Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BEMBLA PROJECT DIVISION YAVATMAL AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-11-2024
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 4 — Additional compensation — The main issues were the determination of fair compensation for the acquired land, fruit-bearing trees, and a borewell, and whether compensation for these could be awarded in a review application — The appellant argued for cumulative annual increase in land value and compensation for fruit-bearing trees and borewell — The respondents contended that the compensation awarded was fair and that the review application was not the prop
India Law Library Docid # 2419444

(245) IN RE MANOJ TIBREWAL AKASH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 06-11-2024
Unlawful Demolition — Road widening project — The petitioner complained about the unlawful demolition of his ancestral house and shop by the authorities in Maharajganj, Uttar Pradesh, for a road widening project — The main issue was whether the demolition was carried out lawfully and whether due process was followed — The petitioner argued that the demolition was done without proper notice, beyond the extent of alleged encroachment, and without compensation — The State claimed the demolition was
India Law Library Docid # 2419445

(246) MUKUL KUMAR TYAGI Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
U.P. State Power Parishad Operative Employees Cadre Service Regulations, 1995 — Termination — Reinstatement — The applicants were appointed as Technician Grade-II (Electrical) in Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited (UPPCL) but were terminated due to not possessing the required CCC certificate at the time of application — Whether the termination of the applicants who obtained the CCC certificate after the application deadline but before the interview was justified — The applicants argued tha
India Law Library Docid # 2419345

(247) NABHA POWER LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. PUNJAB STATE POWER COROPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Electricity Act, 2003 — Section 86(1)(f) — Mega Power Policy and customs duty exemptions — The main issue was whether the press release on 01.10.2009 constituted a change in law affecting the Mega Power Policy and customs duty exemptions — The petitioner argued that the Cabinet decision on 01.10.2009, announced through a press release, constituted a change in law and should be considered in their bid — The respondent contended that the press release
India Law Library Docid # 2419346

(248) ANJUM KADARI AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIAAND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, was struck down by the Allahabad High Court for violating secularism and Articles 14 and 21A of the Constitution — The constitutionality of the Madarsa Act, its compliance with secularism, and its conflict with the UGC Act — The Act regulates secular activities of Madarsas, ensuring educational standards without violating minority rights — Respondent argues that the Act promotes religious instruction, violating secularism and constitutional pro
India Law Library Docid # 2419347

(249) NOIDA SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY Vs. MANISH AGARWAL AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Sections 31(1) and 60(5) — Approval of Resolution Plan — The case involves the NOIDA Special Economic Zone Authority challenging the approval of a Resolution Plan by the NCLT and NCLAT for R-2, which defaulted on lease payments and had no activity on the leased land since 2003-2004 — The main issues were the approval of the Resolution Plan, the valuation of the Corporate Debtor, and the disbursement of the admitted claim of INR 6.29 Crores to the appellant
India Law Library Docid # 2419349

(250) KARAKKATTU MUHAMMED BASHEER Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 201 — Murder — Circumstantial evidence — The main issue was whether the appellant's conviction based on circumstantial evidence was justified — The appellant argued that the evidence was circumstantial, with no eyewitnesses, and there were gaps in the prosecution's case —The State argued that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to uphold the conviction — The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, finding that the prosecution failed to establish an
India Law Library Docid # 2419350

(251) MISS RUSHI @ RUCHI THAPA, THROUGH HER FATHER, SRI DHAN BAHADUR THAPA Vs. M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Motor Accident Claims — Permanent Disability — Enhancement of Compensation — The appellant, a minor, suffered 75% permanent disability due to a road accident — The adequacy of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) and the Gauhati High Court — The Supreme Court increased the compensation to Rs. 34,07,771, considering factors like loss of future earnings, future medical treatment, and attendant charges — The appeal was allowed
India Law Library Docid # 2419351

(252) SUBRATA CHOUDHURY @ SANTOSH CHOUDHURY AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 173 and 300(1) — Second Complaint — Whether a fresh complaint on the same set of facts is maintainable after the acceptance of a negative Final Report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C — The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, allowing the second complaint to proceed —The Court reasoned that there is no blanket bar on filing a second complaint on the same facts, provided it meets certain
India Law Library Docid # 2419352

(253) PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
Property Rights vs. Public Welfare — The judgment highlights a nuanced approach to property rights, noting that while the state can acquire property for public welfare under specific conditions, such actions must respect constitutional limits and not be arbitrary — This balance aims to protect individual rights while allowing state intervention for equitable social and economic goals.
India Law Library Docid # 2419387

(254) JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-11-2024
High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act 1954 — Eight judges of the Patna High Court challenged a communication from the Department of Justice regarding their provident fund accounts — Whether judges appointed from the district judiciary are entitled to the General Provident Fund available to High Court judges —Petitioners argue that the Financial independence and uniformity in service conditions for all High Court judges, regardless of their source of appointment — Respondent'
India Law Library Docid # 2419443

(255) ANOOP M. AND OTHERS Vs. GIREESHKUMAR T.M. AND OTHERS ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-11-2024
Service Law — Recruitment — Recruitment for Lower Division Clerk (LDC) posts in the Kerala Water Authority, with a dispute over the qualifications required —Whether candidates with higher qualifications like a Diploma in Computer Applications (DCA) should be considered eligible for the LDC posts — The Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) argued that only candidates with the specified certificate in Data Entry and Office Automation should be eligible — Candidates with higher qualifications arg
India Law Library Docid # 2419306

(256) THE MADHYA PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. BAPUNA ALCOBREW PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-11-2024
Electricity Act, 2003 — Section 56(2) — The case involves a dispute over electricity supply agreements and minimum guarantee charges —Whether Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 applies to demands for dues incurred under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, and whether the demand is barred by limitation — The appellants argued that the limitation period under Section 56(2) of the 2003 Act does not apply to liabilities incurred before the Act's enforcement — The respondents
India Law Library Docid # 2419348

(257) NOWHERA SHAIK AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-11-2024
Auction — Refund of Amount to Investors — Appellant proposed to offer three properties for sale to refund investors — The court noted the descriptions of the properties — Naina Towers, Hyderabad, with a fair market value of Rs. 90,09,33,240 and a realizable value of Rs. 81,08,39,916 — The petitioner claimed to own the property and have the original sale deed — Heera Foodex, Ranga Reddy, Telangana, with a fair market value of Rs. 120,64,66,730 and a realizable value of Rs. 109,58,20,057 — The pet
India Law Library Docid # 2421395

(258) RAMRATAN @ RAMSWAROOP AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-10-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 437(3) and 439(1) — Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction when imposing conditions for granting bail — The High Court had granted bail to the appellants, who were charged with offences such as trespass, assault and demolition — The Supreme Court observed that bail conditions should be reasonable and directly related to ensuring the accused’s presence at trial — The Court held that the High Court’s conditions affected the appellants' civil right
India Law Library Docid # 2419098

(259) NEERAJ SUD AND ANOTHER Vs. JASWINDER SINGH (MINOR) AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-10-2024
Consumer Law — Medical Negligence — The case involves a complaint of medical negligence against Doctor and PGI for a surgery performed on a minor's eye condition (PTOSIS), which allegedly worsened post-surgery —Whether Appellant-Doctor and PGI were negligent in performing the surgery and providing treatment, leading to the deterioration of the patient's condition — The complainants argued that the surgery was performed negligently, causing further deterioration of the patient's eye condition an
India Law Library Docid # 2419099

(260) THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. RAMJAN KHAN AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 25-10-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 read 34 — The respondents were accused of murder — The trial court convicted them based on eyewitness testimonies and medical evidence, sentencing them to life imprisonment — The High Court later acquitted them, citing unreliable evidence — Whether the High Court was justified in acquitting the respondents by finding the prosecution's evidence unreliable — The State argued that the trial court's conviction was based on credible eyewitness testimonies and medi
India Law Library Docid # 2419100