(121) SMT. LAVANYA C AND ANOTHER Vs. VITTAL GURUDAS PAI SINCE DESEASED BY LRS. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Contempt of Court for Violating Undertaking — The appellants, who were defendants in the Trial Court, were held guilty of contempt for violating their undertaking not to alienate a property, subject matter of a suit, given before the Trial Court — The undertaking was made in the context of a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) dispute India Law Library Docid # 2423139
(122) SURESH @ HANUMANT Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI)[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 32 — Dying Declaration — A dying declaration, if found reliable and credible after scrutiny, can be a crucial piece of evidence in establishing the identity of perpetrators in a criminal case, even in the absence of direct corroboration from other evidence. India Law Library Docid # 2423140
(123) TANAJI SHAMRAO KALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Sections 118 to 134 — Reliable eyewitness testimony — Reliable eyewitness testimony, even with minor omissions, can be sufficient to establish the guilt of accused persons in a criminal trial, if the core of their testimony remains unshaken by contradictions or other evidence India Law Library Docid # 2423141
(124) MORTUZA HUSSAIN CHOUDHARY Vs. THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 — Sections 3(1), 3(2), 3(3), 6 and 11 — Preventive Detention — Preventive detention orders must strictly comply with statutory requirements and constitutional norms, including effective communication of grounds of detention in a language the detenu understands. India Law Library Docid # 2423142
(125) PATEL BABUBHAI MANOHARDAS AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 306 and 114 — Abetment of Suicide — To establish abetment to commit suicide under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution must prove a direct or indirect act of instigation or incitement by the accused, proximate to the time of suicide, demonstrating a clear mens rea, which was lacking in this case India Law Library Docid # 2423143
(126) U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. SATYA RAM AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 6H(1) — Entitlement to Salary and Benefits — Jurisdictional error in entertaining claim — The Deputy Labour Commissioner and the High Court erred in entertaining the respondents' claim for salary and benefits from 01.01.2015 to 31.05.2018, without considering India Law Library Docid # 2423217
(127) SHRI KHERESHWAR MAHADEV VA DAUJI MAHARAJ SAMITI, ALIGARH Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaint in certain cases, implying consideration of pending suits — Non-Consideration of Pending Civil Suit by High Court — The High Court erred by not considering the pending civil suit and the order of the Additional District Judge when passing the impugned order — High Courts must consider pending civil suits before passing orders that may impact their outcome. India Law Library Docid # 2423601
(128) RAM KISHORE CHOWDHARY Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 397 and 401 — A revisional court against acquittal must examine the trial court records before dismissing the revision, even if the revision petitioner seeks adjournments — The Supreme Court allowed an appeal against the High Court's dismissal of a revision application against the acquittal of private respondents in a decades-old criminal case — The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by not perusing the trial court records before dismissi India Law Library Docid # 2423661
(129) UNION OF INDIA Vs. J.P.SINGH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 8(3)(a) — An order of the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA for retention of seized property continues during the pendency of proceedings relating to an offence under the PMLA before a court, as per Section 8(3)(a) of the PMLA as it existed between 14th May, 2015 and 18th April, 2018, and this applicability is not contingent on the person affected being named as an accused in the complaint — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of the Union India Law Library Docid # 2423728
(130) S.N. SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 05-03-2025 Service Law — Promotion — Qualifying Service — Ad Hoc Service — Reckoning of Period — The central issue for consideration pertains to whether the period of service rendered by an employee on an ad hoc basis in a promotional post (Scientist 'B') should be counted towards the prescribed qualifying service (three years) for eligibility for promotion to the next higher post (Scientist 'C') India Law Library Docid # 2424002
(131) SIDDHARTH DALMIA AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Right to Life and Medical Facilities — The provision of medical facilities is an essential component of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, and states have a duty to provide medical facilities in furtherance of their constitutional obligations. India Law Library Docid # 2423545
(132) SPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. DR. KULBIR SINGH RANA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Sports Authority of India Executive Cadre (Grade A) Staff Recruitment Rules 2022 — The Supreme Court held that a contractual employee of the Sports Authority of India (SAI), engaged in a post covered under the Sports Authority of India's recruitment rules, is entitled to be considered as an "initial constituent" under the 2022 Rules, thereby gaining regular employee status, if their appointment was made through a selection process but was irregular due to procedural lapses — Moreover, a India Law Library Docid # 2423100
(133) SURESH Vs. STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Dying Declaration — A dying declaration, inconsistent with previous statements and unsubstantiated by corroborative evidence, is insufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 302 IPC, necessitating the grant of benefit of doubt to the accused. India Law Library Docid # 2423101
(134) M.S. NAGABHUSHAN Vs. D.S. NAGARAJA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonor of Cheque — A conviction under Section 138 of the NI Act is not sustainable when the cheque amount includes a security deposit, and the accused is entitled to deduct legitimate claims, rendering the debt not entirely enforceable against him. India Law Library Docid # 2423102
(135) K. S. MEHTA Vs. M/S MORGAN SECURITIES AND CREDITS PVT. LTD.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 and 141 — Non-executive and independent directors of a company cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act without specific allegations demonstrating their direct involvement in the company's affairs at the relevant time. India Law Library Docid # 2423103
(136) SARANGA ANILKUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. BHAVESH DHIRAJLAL SHETH AND ORS.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 27 — Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Sections 94 and 96 — The moratorium under Section 96 of the IBC does not extend to regulatory penalties for non-compliance with consumer protection laws, as these penalties serve a regulatory function and do not constitute “debt” under the IBC. India Law Library Docid # 2423104
(137) MUKESH PRASAD SINGH Vs. THE THEN RAJENDRA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY (NOW DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD CENTRAL AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY) AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Rajendra Agricultural University Statutes, 1976 — Section 35 — Non-exercise of option to opt into the Contributory Provident Fund scheme, as per the University Statute and Office Order, automatically entitles an employee to be included in the General Provident Fund-cum-pension-cum-gratuity scheme. India Law Library Docid # 2423105
(138) C PRABHAKAR RAO AND ANOTHER Vs. SAMA MAHIPAL REDDY AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 04-03-2025 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 9 Rule 13 —Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — A High Court, in revision, cannot set aside an ex-parte decree without considering the merits of the application for setting it aside, when the revision petition only challenges the Trial Court's order refusing to condone the delay in filing the application. India Law Library Docid # 2423106
(139) C. KAMALAKKANNAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE C.B.C.I.D., CHENNAI[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-03-2025 Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 45 — Insufficiency of Evidence — The Supreme Court sets aside the conviction of the appellant due to the prosecution's failure to prove the existence of a disputed postal cover, a crucial piece of evidence in a case involving forgery and conspiracy. India Law Library Docid # 2423038
(140) K. RAMASAMY Vs. R. NALLAMMAL AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-03-2025 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — The Supreme Court sets aside the High Court's order condoning a delay of 1312 days in setting aside an ex-parte decree, finding no satisfactory explanation for the delay India Law Library Docid # 2423039