ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
   Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

     AI Submission Generator [on behalf of Appellant/Respondent]  

Latest Cases

(601) STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. NAGESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Appreciation of Evidence — Minor Discrepancies & Time Lag — Minor discrepancies, inconsistencies, or memory lapses in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, especially the complainant and shadow witness, are natural and likely to occur when witnesses depose after a considerable lapse of time (10 years in this case) from the date of the incident — Such minor variations, which do not go to the root of the matter or shake the basic version of the prosecution case regarding d
India Law Library Docid # 2424731

(602) S.C. GARG Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Criminal Procedure — Res Judicata in Criminal Proceedings — Applicability The principle of res judicata is applicable to criminal proceedings — A finding on a specific factual issue reached by a competent criminal court in a prior proceeding (rejection of a defence in a Section 138 NI Act case) is binding on the same parties in subsequent criminal proceedings where the same factual issue arises (Section 420 IPC prosecution based on the very defence rejected earlier) — A party cannot initiate a
India Law Library Docid # 2424732

(603) SATISH CHANDER SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Constitution of India — Article 32 — Maintainability — Challenge to Supreme Court Judgment — A writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is not maintainable for the purpose of assailing the correctness or validity of a final judgment rendered by the Supreme Court, including judgments passed in appeals arising out of Special Leave Petitions under Article 136 — Such judgments cannot be challenged directly or collaterally through fresh writ proceedings under Article 32.
India Law Library Docid # 2424733

(604) SUSHILA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 4 — Quashing of Complaint and Summoning Order — Matrimonial Dispute — Allegations against Husband’s Relatives — Abuse of Process — Where a complaint under S. 498A IPC and S. 4 DPA is filed against the relatives of the husband (mother, brothers, sister-in-law, sister) years after the dissolution of marriage by an ex-parte divorce decree, and the allegations against
India Law Library Docid # 2424799

(605) HAZRAT SAATPEER SAYED BABA DARGAH Vs. NASHIK MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Judicial Administration & Procedure — Listing of Cases — Urgent Matters — High Courts — Where serious allegations are made, supported by counsel's statement assuming responsibility, that a High Court repeatedly refused to list an urgent writ petition challenging an imminent demolition notice despite daily efforts since filing, the Supreme Court may take extraordinary measures
India Law Library Docid # 2424802

(606) KAMAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of Proceedings — S. 498-A IPC — Matrimonial Disputes — When exercising power under S. 482 CrPC in matrimonial disputes involving S. 498-A IPC allegations, especially when levelled long after marriage and soon after divorce proceedings are initiated by one party, the Court must be circumspect — It should examine if allegations, particularly against relatives, are
India Law Library Docid # 2424804

(607) MRS. VARSHATAI W/O. SH. SANJAY BAGADE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUDICIARY, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI AND ORS. ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022 — Section 3 — Official Language — Use of Additional Language — The prescription of Marathi as the official language for Local Authorities under Section 3 of the 2022 Act does not operate as a prohibition against the use of any other language, such as Urdu (a language included in the VIII Schedule of the Constitution), in addition to Marathi on signboards of a Municipal Council, particularly for the purpose of effective communication wi
India Law Library Docid # 2424694

(608) NIKHILA DIVYANG MEHTA AND ANOTHER Vs. HITESH P. SANGHVI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order VII Rule 11(d) — Rejection of Plaint — Bar of Limitation — For the purpose of deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11(d), the court is obligated to consider the averments made in the plaint alone — Where, from a plain reading of the plaint averments, the suit appears to be barred by the law of limitation, the plaint is liable to be rejected — No requirement exists to allow parties to lead evidence on limitation when the bar is apparent ex-facie from
India Law Library Docid # 2424695

(609) CRYOGAS EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. INOX INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order VII Rule 11(a) & (d) — Rejection of Plaint — Mixed Question of Law and Fact — Copyright Act, 1957 & Designs Act, 2000 — The determination of whether an ‘artistic work’ (under Copyright Act, S. 2(c)) falls within the definition of a ‘design’ (under Designs Act, S. 2(d)) and whether copyright protection ceases under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act due to industrial application involves mixed questions of law and fact, requiring a detailed examination beyond th
India Law Library Docid # 2424696

(610) RAJENDHIRAN Vs. MUTHAIAMMAL @ MUTHAYEE AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Scope of Second Appeal — Interference with Concurrent Findings of Fact — The High Court, in exercising jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC, cannot overturn concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court by relying on evidence (such as sale deeds and a mortgage deed pertaining to different properties) which is insufficient and irrelevant for establishing the fact in issue (oral partition of the suit property) — Such
India Law Library Docid # 2424770

(611) JUSTICE V.S. DAVE PRESIDENT, THE ASSOCIATION OF RETD. JUDGES OF SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURTS Vs. KUSUMJIT SIDHU AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Service Law — Retired High Court Judges — Reimbursement of Expenses (Medical etc.) — Responsibility of State Government — Clarification of Prior Order — Where a High Court Judge is appointed in one High Court but retires from another High Court due to transfer, the responsibility for reimbursement of expenses (as directed by court orders) lies either with the State Government where the seat of the High Court in which the retired Judge was first appointed is situated, or with the State Government
India Law Library Docid # 2425058

(612) REKHA SHARMA Vs. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14, 16, 32 — Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Recruitment — Judicial Services — Reservation (Horizontal - PwBD; Vertical - EWS/ST) — Minimum Qualifying Marks vs. Cut-off — Adjustment of Candidates — In recruitment processes involving both vertical and horizontal reservations (like for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities - PwBD), the non-selection of a PwBD candidate who has secured the prescribed minimum qualifying marks but falls below the P
India Law Library Docid # 2425060

(613) PINKI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Cancellation of Bail — Factors for Consideration — Child Trafficking — Appeals preferred by victims (kith and kin of trafficked children) assailing High Court orders granting bail to accused involved in a large-scale, organized, interstate child trafficking racket — The offences alleged involve kidnapping, buying, and selling of minor children primarily from impoverished backgrounds, punishable under Ss. 363, 311 & 370(5) IPC — High Court granted b
India Law Library Docid # 2424657

(614) RAJENDHIRAN Vs. MUTHAIAMMAL @ MUTHAYEE AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Scope of Second Appeal — Interference with Concurrent Findings of Fact — The High Court, in exercising jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC, cannot overturn concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court by relying on evidence (such as sale deeds and a mortgage deed pertaining to different properties) which is insufficient and irrelevant for establishing the fact in issue (oral partition of the suit property) — Such
India Law Library Docid # 2424800

(615) JHARKHAND URJA UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. XX R. 1 (as amended by Commercial Courts Act, 2015) & Limitation Act, 1963 — S. 5 & Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — S. 13(1-A) — Commencement of Limitation for Appeal — Duty to Issue Copy vs. Litigant Diligence — The provision in Or. XX R. 1 CPC, requiring a Commercial Court/Division/Appellate Division to pronounce judgment within 90 days of conclusion of arguments and issue copies thereof to parties (through electronic mail or otherwise), is directory and not mand
India Law Library Docid # 2425137

(616) SURESH KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. M/S. HALDIA STEELS LIMITED AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-04-2025
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 173(8) — Further Investigation — Abuse of Process — Belated and Frivolous Complaints — Directing further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC into a complaint that is filed after gross, undue, and unexplained delay, and where the admitted allegations do not disclose the necessary ingredients of any cognizable offence, amounts to an abuse of the process of law — This is especially
India Law Library Docid # 2425406

(617) PRABHJOT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-04-2025
Punjab Civil Services (Reservation of Posts for Women) Rules, 2020 — Reservation for Women — Horizontal Reservation — Implementation via advertisement — Where an advertisement was issued subsequent to the notification of the 2020 Rules providing 33% horizontal reservation for women, and specified certain posts (like DSP ‘SC Sports’) as reserved for women (‘SC Sports (Women)’), this reservation specification within the advertisement, implementing the mandate of the 2020 Rules, is valid for that r
India Law Library Docid # 2424442

(618) R. NAGARAJ (DEAD) THROUGH LRs. AND ANOTHER Vs. RAJMANI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 100 — Second Appeal — Scope and Power of High Court — A second appeal lies only if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law, which it must formulate precisely (S. 100(1), (3), (4)) — The High Court’s jurisdiction is confined to deciding the substantial question(s) of law so formulated (or any other substantial question after recording reasons under the proviso to S. 100(5)) — The High Court should adjudicate the formula
India Law Library Docid # 2424443

(619) NEHA ENTERPRISES Vs. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-04-2025
Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 — Sections 7(c), 13(1) & 13(7) — Input Tax Credit (ITC) — Entitlement — Sales exempt under S. 7(c) — Where a dealer makes sales to manufacturer-exporters against Form-E, which are exempt from tax under S. 7(c) pursuant to notifications (dated 24.02.2010 and 25.03.2010), the dealer is not entitled to claim ITC on the purchase tax paid on such goods — The specific prohibition contained in S. 13(7)(i) explicitly disallows ITC facility in respect of purchases
India Law Library Docid # 2424444

(620) SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE Vs. ADITYA SARDA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Nature and Scope — Power to grant anticipatory bail under S. 438 is an extraordinary power to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases, not as a matter of routine — Its object is to protect individuals from harassment or humiliation, but this must be balanced against the larger societal interest in maintaining law and order and ensuring
India Law Library Docid # 2424445