ive
Latest Cases

(1) BIHAR STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ANOTHER HIMAL KUMARI AND ANOTHER ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-07-2024
Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014 — Rules 5 and 11 — The Supreme Court has dismissed appeals challenging the validity of a judgment by the Patna High Court, which allowed a candidate to be considered for appointment as a City Manager in Bihar — The candidate had scored to meet up the minimum qualifying marks of 32% — The court found that the minimum qualifying marks were only for the written test and not for the overall selection process — The court also r
India Law Library Docid # 1604281

(2) KIRAN JYOT MAINI Vs. ANISH PRAMOD PATEL [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498A, 323 and 504 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3 and 4 — Dissolution of Marriage — Irretrievable breakdown — Parties having been living separately for nine years — The Supreme Court has dissolved the marriage between appellant and respondent, citing irretrievable breakdown of the marriage — The court ordered the respondent-husband to pay a one-time settlement of Rs. 2 Crores to the appellant-wife to cover all her maintenance expenses and necessary re
India Law Library Docid # 1604280

(3) M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1995 — Paragraph 13 — Recovery of overcharged amount of drugs — Demand made by the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) to recover an overcharged amount for a Cloxacillin-based drug formulation called Roscilox — The Court found that the appellant's admission of purchasing the drug directly from the manufacturer made it liable under Paragraph 13 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1995 (DPCO) — The Court also rejected the appellant's claim that it was only
India Law Library Docid # 1604270

(4) SHAILENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 321 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 — Withdrawal of prosecution — The Supreme Court has set aside the withdrawal of prosecution of an accused in a double murder case, who was elected as a Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) in Uttar Pradesh — The court observed that political power should not be leveraged to secure the withdrawal of prosecution of an accused person named in the charge sheet after thorough investigatio
India Law Library Docid # 1604271

(5) AMRO DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. JULFI RAM (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 23 Rule Rule 3 — Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 52 — Doctrine of lis pendens — Dispute over land ownership between the appellants and the respondents — The case involved a dispute over land ownership between the appellants (tenants) and the respondents (landowners) — The respondents filed a suit in 1979, which was initially dismissed by the Trial Court but later decreed in their favor by the first Appellate Court — During the appeal, the appella
India Law Library Docid # 1604272

(6) BABA NATARAJAN PRASAD Vs. M. REVATHI [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 494 — Bigamy — The appellant accused his wife (first accused) of committing bigamy by marrying the second accused while their marriage was still valid — The trial court convicted the first and second accused, but the High Court later acquitted them — Whether the High Court was right in not restoring the sentence imposed by the trial court and whether the sentence was too lenient — The Supreme Court modified the sentence to six months of simple imprisonment and re
India Law Library Docid # 1604273

(7) STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Vs. M/S PUNJAB SPINTEX LTD. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 — Section 23 — Punjab Rural Development Act, 1987 — Section 5 — Exemption from Market fees under the 2003 Industrial Policy of Punjab does not include exemption from Rural Development fees — The court held that the two fees are distinct and collected under two different statutes with different purposes — The court also noted that the 2003 Policy does not specifically exempt Rural Development fees, and therefore, any assumption that the exemption from
India Law Library Docid # 1604274

(8) M/S OMSAIRAM STEELS & ALLOYS PVT. LTD. Vs. DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, BBSR AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
E-auction — Typographical error — e-auction for a manganese and iron ore block submitted a bid of 140.10% instead of its intended bid of 104.10% due to a typographical error — The court allowed the company's appeal and ordered a fresh e-auction for the block — The company was also ordered to pay Rs 3 crore ($400,000) to the state as compensation for the delay caused by its error.
India Law Library Docid # 1604275

(9) BALASAHEB KESHAWRAO BHAPKAR AND OTHERS Vs. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Companies Act, 1956 — Section 209A — Securities Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 — Section 11AA — Illegal mobilization of funds — Auction and refund process of assets of companies involved in illegal mobilization of funds — The Supreme Court constituted a High-Powered Sale Committee (HPSC) to auction the immovable assets of ‘S’, which were attached by the SEBI for illegal mobilization of funds — The HPSC, chaired by a former Supreme Court judge, will identify the number of investors, determine
India Law Library Docid # 1604276

(10) STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER Vs. VIRENDRA BAHADUR KATHERIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Educational (Sub Deputy Inspector of Schools) Service Rules, 1992 — Grant of higher pay scales to Sub-Deputy Inspectors of Schools (SDI)/Assistant Basic Shiksha Adhikaris (ABSA) and Deputy Basic Shiksha Adhikaris (DBSA) in Uttar Pradesh — The court found that the High Court's judgment was based on a misunderstanding of a previous Supreme Court order — The court approved a 2011 government order that granted the revised pay scales to the officials, but clarified that the
India Law Library Docid # 1604277

(11) DR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR VICHAR MANCH BIHAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 341 — Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1991 — The Supreme Court has quashed the Bihar government's 2015 resolution that sought to merge the "Tanti-Tantwa" caste with the "Pan-Sawasi" caste in the Scheduled Castes list — The court ruled that the state government had no authority or power to alter the list of Scheduled Castes notified under Article 341 of the Constitut
India Law Library Docid # 1604278

(12) RAM PRAKASH CHADHA Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-07-2024
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 227 — Discharge — The appellant, had filed an application under Section 227 of the Cr.PC seeking discharge in a case related to the custodial death of cashier/accountant — The court found that there was no sufficient ground for proceeding against the appellant based on the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith — The court clarified that its observations were made only in relation to the appellant and not the other accused in the c
India Law Library Docid # 1604279

(13) ARVIND KEJRIWAL Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 12-07-2024
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 19 — Interim bail — Whether the "need and necessity to arrest" is a separate ground to challenge the order of arrest passed under Section 19(1) of the Act (PMLA) to a larger bench — The court also questioned whether the "need and necessity to arrest" refers to the satisfaction of formal parameters to arrest and take a person into custody or if it relates to other personal grounds and reasons regarding the necessity to arrest a person in the fact
India Law Library Docid # 1604262

(14) MD. RAHIM ALI @ ABDUR RAHIM Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 11-07-2024
Foreigners Act, 1946 — Section 9 — Burden of proof — A person who is suspected of being a foreigner and whose case is referred to a Foreigners Tribunal (FT) under the Foreigners Act, 1946, must be given an opportunity to prove that they are not a foreigner — The burden of proof is initially on the state to establish a prima facie case that the person is a foreigner — If the state succeeds in doing so, the burden of proof shifts to the person to prove that they are an Indian citizen — The court m
India Law Library Docid # 1604261

(15) THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-07-2024
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 131 — Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 — Section 6 — The State of West Bengal filed a suit against the Union of India, challenging the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)'s authority to register cases in West Bengal after withdrawing consent under Section 6 of the DSPE Act — The main issue is the maintainability of the suit, which focuses on whether the CBI can continue to register and investigate cases without the state's consent — The State
India Law Library Docid # 1604252

(16) YOGESH GOYANKA Vs. GOVIND AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-07-2024
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 1 Rule 10(2) — Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 52 — The appeal concerns the impleadment of a transferee pendente lite, who purchased land during ongoing litigation, despite being aware of it — Whether the transferee can be impleaded in the underlying suit, given the doctrine of lis pendens — The appellant argues for impleadment to protect his interests, alleging possible collusion between the original parties — The respondents contend that the ap
India Law Library Docid # 1604253

(17) PYDI RAMANA @ RAMULU Vs. DAVARASETY MANMADHA RAO [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-07-2024
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16 — Readiness and willingness to perform the contract — The appellant challenged the legality of a judgment that partially allowed a second appeal, confirming the appellate court's order for specific performance and directing the respondent-plaintiff to pay additional sale consideration — The appellant argued that the trial court correctly rejected specific performance, claiming the plaintiff failed to prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform the
India Law Library Docid # 1604254

(18) SHANMUGASEKAR Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-07-2024
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 294(b) and 302 — Appeal against conviction — The conflict arose over unpaid electricity bills, leading to a fatal altercation involving several family members — The main issue was whether the appellant intended to kill the deceased during the altercation, and if the appellant's actions fell under the exceptions of Section 300 of the IPC — The appellant argued there was no intention to kill, and the incident occurred in the heat of passion during a sudden fight —
India Law Library Docid # 1604255

(19) NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. HARNAND SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-07-2024
Land Acqusition Act, 1894 — Sections 28 — Determination of fair and just compensation — The case involves appeals by NOIDA and landowners against various orders enhancing compensation for land acquired under the Act, 1894 — The court considered whether compensation should be enhanced, the maintainability of miscellaneous applications, and the applicability of Section 28A of the 1894 Act — NOIDA argued against the enhancement based on an erroneous precedent, while landowners sought parity with hi
India Law Library Docid # 1604256

(20) NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. DARSHAN LAL BOHRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-07-2024
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 5A — Maintainability of challenge against acquisition proceedings — The court held that only those landowners who have filed objections under Section 5A of the 1894 Act have the right to challenge the acquisition proceedings — Those who have not filed objections or have accepted compensation without protest cannot challenge the acquisition proceedings.

B. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 4 — Locus standi of subsequent purchasers — The court held that s
India Law Library Docid # 1604257