ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(81) M. SEETHARAMA @ SEETHARAMA GOWDA Vs. THE MANAGER FUTURE GENERAL INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Motor Accident Claims — Compensation — Pain and Suffering — Enhancement — Where the appellant suffered multiple injuries including fractures to the right femur, right clavicle, right tibia and fibula with vascular compromise, leading to a Syme’s amputation (ankle joint, preserving heel pad for weight bearing), the compensation for pain and suffering awarded by the High Court at Rs. 1,20,000/- was
India Law Library Docid # 2425497

(82) GURVEER SINGH ALIAS GARRY Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 34, 120-B — Bail — Enlargement of bail sought by the appellant, the main accused in a murder case — Allegations of premeditated ambush and fatal shooting — Taking into consideration the period already spent in custody and the likely delay in trial due to key eye-witnesses being abroad, the appeal is allowed and the appellant is granted bail subject to conditions.
India Law Library Docid # 2425655

(83) IN RE POLICY STRATEGY FOR GRANT OF BAIL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Criminal Procedure — Bail — Policy and Strategy — Supreme Court addresses the issue of pendency of criminal appeals in High Courts and explores policy strategies for grant of bail — Amicus Curiae appointed to assist the Court — Extensive note submitted highlighting various issues and constructive suggestions.
India Law Library Docid # 2425656

(84) KARAN PATIDAR Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Rejection by High Court — The present appeal arises from the impugned judgment and order dated 16th December, 2024, passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior, wherein the appellant's application for grant of bail was dismissed.
India Law Library Docid # 2425657

(85) ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Denial by High Court — The present appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 28th August, 2024, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, whereby the appellant's application for bail was rejected.
India Law Library Docid # 2425658

(86) GURMEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 154 — Hostile Witnesses — Relevance in Bail Adjudication — A significant factor influencing the grant of bail was the prosecution's own counter affidavit revealing that its first three key witnesses, namely PW-1, PW-2, and PW-3, have been declared hostile during the trial, thereby prima facie weakening the evidentiary foundation of the prosecution case.
India Law Library Docid # 2425659

(87) DASHRATH PATRA Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 08-05-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Murder — Conviction confirmed by High Court — Assault with iron pipe — Insanity defense — Accused’s mental condition at the time of occurrence is a crucial factor.
India Law Library Docid # 2425828

(88) SUNIL KUMAR KHUSHWAHA Vs. KATRAGADDA SATYANARAYANA AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Assessment of Functional Disability — Amputation of Leg — Impact on Vocation (Fruit Seller with Shop) — In determining compensation for permanent disability due to amputation of the right leg from the knee, the functional disability must be assessed in relation to the claimant’s vocation and its impact on earning capacity — Where a claimant, a fruit seller operating from a shop and filing income tax returns, suffers such amputation (physical disability 5
India Law Library Docid # 2425484

(89) KANUBHAI GOKALBHAI BARIYA Vs. JAYDIPSINH GOPALSINH PAREKHIYA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Compensation — Functional Disability vs. Physical Disability — Amputation and Deformity — In determining compensation for permanent disability, the assessment should focus on functional disability rather than merely physical disability — Where a claimant suffers amputation of the right leg below the knee (assessed physical disability 80%) and deformity of the right hand (assessed physical disability 10%), and medical evidence indicates the leg stump is deformed with no
India Law Library Docid # 2425485

(90) P. NALLAMMAL Vs. STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTICORRUPTION POLICE, DINDIGUL, TAMIL NADU[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 109 IPC — Abetment of Offence of Disproportionate Assets by Non-Public Servant (Spouse) — Intentional Aiding — A non-public servant, such as the spouse of a public servant, can be convicted for abetment of the offence of possessing disproportionate assets under Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act read with Section 109 IPC, if evidence demonstrates intentional aiding — Such aiding can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances
India Law Library Docid # 2425486

(91) M/S JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S BANSAL INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 9 & 37(1)(b) — Constitution of India — Article 227 — Appealability of Order Refusing Ex Parte Interim Relief in Section 9 Petition — Jurisdictional Issue Left Open — The Supreme Court, while hearing a challenge to a High Court order passed under Article 227 which granted interim relief against bank guarantee encashment after the Commercial Court had merely issued notice on the Section 9 petition (thereby implicitly refusing ex parte relief), decl
India Law Library Docid # 2425487

(92) TATA STEEL LTD. Vs. RAJ KUMAR BANERJEE AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 61(2) — Limitation for Appeal to NCLAT — Strict Interpretation — Section 61(2) of the IBC prescribes a mandatory limitation period of 30 days for filing an appeal before the NCLAT — The proviso allows the NCLAT to condone a delay for a further period not exceeding 15 days, provided sufficient cause is shown — The total permissible period for filing an appeal is thus strictly limited to 45 days (
India Law Library Docid # 2425488

(93) KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Compensation — Parity between Adjacent Villages — Lands situated in adjacent villages, acquired under a common notification for a common public purpose, possessing similar potential and advantages (like proximity to highways NH-8 and KMP Expressway), must be compensated equitably — Overturning the uniform compensation awarded by the LAC and Reference Court and creating a significant disparity based on isolated sale deeds from different villages, without cogent eviden
India Law Library Docid # 2425489

(94) MAHNOOR FATIMA IMRAN AND OTHERS Vs. M/S VISWESWARA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 — Writ Jurisdiction — Discretionary Relief — Protection against Dispossession — The High Court, in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, should decline to grant relief against dispossession where the writ petitioners fail to establish a prima facie valid title and actual, rightful possession — A mere claim of possession, especially when title is suspect and shrouded in dubious transactions, is insufficient to invoke such
India Law Library Docid # 2425498

(95) SARLA GUPTA AND ANOTHER Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) — Sections 17, 18, 20 & 21 — Right to Copies of Seized Records and Property Documents — An accused from whom records, instruments, or documents of title are seized along with property under Sections 17 or 18 of the PMLA is entitled to receive true copies thereof as a matter of right — This includes records in book form or stored on a computer. For other seized property, the accused is entitled to a copy of the seizure memo and list of
India Law Library Docid # 2425499

(96) RAJUMON T.M. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Armed Forces — Disability Pension — Primary Conditions — Regulation 173, Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 & Appendix II — Disability pension is grantable if a disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is assessed at 20% or above — The determination of attributability or aggravation is governed by Appendix II, which mandates a causal connection and provides for the benefit of reasonable doubt to be given to the claimant, more liberally in field service
India Law Library Docid # 2425500

(97) NADEEM AHMAD Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 307, 323, 324, 427, 447, 504 & 506 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 320 — Constitution of India — Art. 142 — Quashing of criminal proceedings due to settlement — Where appellant (accused) and respondent no.2 (complainant/victim) amicably settled their disputes arising from Case (involving both compoundable offences like Ss. 323, 504, 427, 447, 506 IPC and non-compoundable offences like Ss. 307, 324 IPC) and wished to continue their landlord-tenant relationshi
India Law Library Docid # 2425583

(98) RAMKIRAT MUNILAL GOUD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Criminal Trial — Circumstantial Evidence — Standard of Proof — Conviction based entirely on circumstantial evidence requires prosecution to prove complete and unbreached chain of incriminating circumstances leading solely to hypothesis of accused’s guilt and inconsistent with innocence — Any breach in chain or reasonable doubt mandates acquittal.
India Law Library Docid # 2425738

(99) SIDDHI SANDEEP LADDA Vs. CONSORTIUM OF NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITIES AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Educational Institutions – Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) – Question Paper Framing – Judicial Scrutiny – While courts generally defer to academic expertise, interference is warranted when academic bodies act in a manner detrimental to students’ career aspirations; Callous and casual approach in framing CLAT questions criticized.
India Law Library Docid # 2425827

(100) ANAND SHESHMAN PATEL Vs. THE REGISTRAR NORTH MAHARASHTRA UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 07-05-2025
Caste Certificate — Verification — Delay in decision by Scrutiny Committee — Admission in B.Tech against OBC reserved seat — Caste claim invalidated after completion of course due to delay in verification — Petitioner compelled to approach High Court earlier due to delay, awarded costs for callous attitude of Committee — Whether mark sheets and degree certificate should be released despite invalidation of caste claim
India Law Library Docid # 2425911