ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(941) DALIP KUMAR @ DALLI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363, 366-A, 366, 368, 376 and 149 — Abduction and Sexual assault — Medical and witness testimony — Prosecution failed to provide adequate evidence to substantiate the charges of abduction and abduction with intent to commit illicit intercourse — The court found that the testimonies, particularly the prosecutrix's own account of voluntarily accompanying the appellant, lacked the necessary elements to prove forced abduction — Additionally, the absence of crucial w
India Law Library Docid # 2422215

(942) DEEN DAYAL TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 — Brutal murder of wife and four minor daughters — The facts revealed that the appellant was found inside the locked house with a blood-stained axe, and the bodies of his family members were discovered in pools of blood — The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including witness testimonies, recovery of weapons, and postmortem reports, which indicated that the victims died from multiple incised wounds caused by sharp-edged weapons — The issue before the
India Law Library Docid # 2422056

(943) SEETABEN LAGHDHIRBHAI Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 363, 366 and 376 — Acquittal — The Court acquitted the appellant of all charges, overturning her convictions — It found no evidence that she abetted rape, as there was no proof of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid — Similarly, the court ruled she did not harbor an offender, as there was no reliable evidence she knew of the crime — The victim's contradictory testimony further weakened the case — The decision applies only to the appellant and does not af
India Law Library Docid # 2422164

(944) PADAM CHAND JAIN Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-01-2025
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Section 45 — Bail — The twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA cannot override constitutional safeguards under Article 21 of the Constitution — Prolonged pre-trial detention is not justified, especially in cases with extensive documentary evidence already seized and numerous witnesses to be examined — The court may grant bail if the accused is not a flight risk, the main evidence is documentary and secured, and the accused has already been release
India Law Library Docid # 2422693

(945) ASHOK ANANDRAO AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ETC.[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025
Matrimonial Law — Settlement —The appellants sought the dissolution of marriage based on a settlement agreement dated 06.04.2024, under which Rs. 12,00,000 had already been paid — The Supreme Court considered the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage and the settlement terms, exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage — The Court also quashed criminal proceedings and disposed of the appeals, treating the settlement as an undertaking to the Court
India Law Library Docid # 2421813

(946) DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025
Jharkhand Superior Judicial Services (Recruitment, Appointment and Condition of Service) Rule, 2001 — Rules 4 and 5 — Suitability vs. Comparative Merit — The court has emphasized that for promotions based on merit-cum-seniority (specifically the 65% quota for promotion), the suitability of each candidate should be tested on their own merits, and a comparative assessment is not appropriate — This means that if a candidate meets the minimum suitability criteria, they should not be denied promotion
India Law Library Docid # 2421643

(947) CUDDALORE POWERGEN CORPORATION LTD. Vs. M/S. CHEMPLAST CUDDALORE VINYLS LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 2 Rule 2 — Cause of Action — The phrase "cause of action" is defined as the facts that give a party the right to judicial interference — It includes every fact which, if traversed, the plaintiff must prove to obtain a judgment — The cause of action does not depend on the defense or the relief claimed but refers to the grounds on which the plaintiff asks the court to arrive at a conclusion in their favor.
India Law Library Docid # 2421644

(948) RAJEEB KALITA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21, 32, 47 and 48A — A writ petition under Article 32 sought toilet facilities in all Indian courts for all genders and disabilities, arguing it's essential for dignity under Article 21 — The Supreme Court agreed, citing Article 47 and 48A, and international laws — It found the lack of facilities violated fundamental rights and ordered High Courts and State Governments to construct and maintain separate, accessible toilets, forming committees to oversee impl
India Law Library Docid # 2421645

(949) RAVI KANT AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025
Election Commission of India 2016 instructions — The court declined to address the petitioners' specific requests, such as halting construction, removing statues, ordering a CBI investigation, or seeking compensation from the BSP and Chief Minister, as the Election Commission of India (ECI) had already addressed the core issues
India Law Library Docid # 2422162

(950) SHASHI BALA @ SHASHI BALA SINGH Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-01-2025
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Sections 44 and 45 — Bail for Women under the PMLA — A woman accused under the PMLA is exempt from satisfying the stringent twin conditions for bail under Section 45(1)(ii) of the Act, pursuant to the first proviso to Section 45(1) — Instead, her bail application shall be treated as one under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. or Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (BNSS), with the first proviso to Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. (or Section 480 of the BNSS) applying, all
India Law Library Docid # 2422692

(951) RANJEET SINGH @ RANJEET ETC. Vs. STATE OF BIHAR [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 — Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27 — The appellant was convicted by a trial court and his appeal was dismissed by the High Court — The Supreme Court had previously granted bail to two co-appellants in the case, and, based on the principle of parity and the fact that Appellant has been in jail for thirteen years, has granted bail to appellant as well — The bail is subject to conditions imposed by the Sessions Court, and the appellant must appear
India Law Library Docid # 2421651

(952) MOHD. TARIK Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 294, 323, 326, 307 and 506 — Appellant accused under Sections 294, 323, 506, and 34 IPC, with charges later amended to include Section 326 IPC, sought bail under Section 483 BNSS after initial denial by the High Court of Chhattisgarh — The Sessions Judge referred the matter to clarify the applicability of Section 307 IPC —Appellant has been in jail since July 9, 2024, with 24 witnesses listed — The Supreme Court, considering his prolonged incarceration, the unce
India Law Library Docid # 2421655

(953) MY PREFERRED TRANSFORMATION & HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S FARIDABAD IMPLEMENTS PVT. LTD. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
General Clauses Act, 1897 — Section 10 — Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 4 — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34(3) — Section 4 of the Limitation Act applies to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, but only to the extent that it benefits a party when the 3-month limitation period expires on a court holiday — The benefit of Section 4 is not available when the 30-day condonable period expires on a court holiday — Additionally, Section 10 of the General Clauses Act
India Law Library Docid # 2421487

(954) Dr. SHARMAD Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958 — Rules 10 and 28 — Applicability of — The court clarifies that Rule 10(ab) of Part II of the KS and SSR is not applicable to appointments on promotion in the Administrative and Teaching Cadres of the Medical Education Services — The court reasons that G.O. dated 07th April, 2008 is a special rule that supersedes general rules like the KS and SSR and that it was issued when the general rules were already in place — Additionally, Rule 10(ab)
India Law Library Docid # 2421488

(955) RINA KUMARI @ RINA DEVI @ REENA Vs. DINESH KUMAR MAHTO @ DINESH KUMAR MAHATO AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125(4) — Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 9 — Restitution Decree Does Not Automatically Disqualify Maintenance — The court establishes that a decree for restitution of conjugal rights does not automatically disqualify a wife from receiving maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. — The mere existence of such a decree, and the wife's non-compliance, is not sufficient to trigger the disqualification under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C.
India Law Library Docid # 2421489

(956) NBCC (INDIA) LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 — Sections 8, 17 and 18 — Section 18 is not restricted to registered suppliers — The court determines that the phrase "any party to a dispute" in Section 18 of the MSMED Act is not limited to a "supplier" who has filed a memorandum under Section 8 — The court emphasizes that the legislative intent of Section 18 is to provide a remedy for dispute resolution that is open to any party, regardless of registration
India Law Library Docid # 2421490

(957) C.V.L. SATYAKUMAR (SINCE DEAD) REP. BY LRS Vs. R. NAGENDRA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Suit for Specific Performance of a Contract — Supreme Court in this case, addressed a petition for specific performance of a contract, where the original plaintiff sought to enforce an agreement of sale from 1992 — The trial court initially granted a decree for specific performance, but the High Court reversed this decision — The Supreme Court noted that the defendant had admitted to the agreement of sale and receipt of earnest money, but disputed the nature of possession — The High Court's deci
India Law Library Docid # 2421568

(958) SAIKUL @ SAKIL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 201 — Murder — Bail — Appellant has been in jail for over two years with 22 of 36 witnesses examined — He has no prior criminal record — The Supreme Court, considering his long incarceration, the number of witnesses tested, and the circumstantial nature of the evidence, granted him bail on conditions set by the Trial Court, allowing the appeal and disposing of related applications.
India Law Library Docid # 2421661

(959) RAJESH RAI Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 — Appellant, held under PMLA for 19 months without a framed charge, faces 31 prosecution witnesses and over 130 documents — The Supreme Court, referencing previous cases, granted him bail citing prolonged custody and the volume of evidence — The appeal was allowed, directing his immediate release on bail with set conditions until trial disposal, and disposing of related applications.
India Law Library Docid # 2421662

(960) SUDESH KUMAR @ SHESHA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 15 and 22 — Bail — 20 months in jail and having been a proclaimed offender — The High Court denied his bail, but the Supreme Court granted it, noting his prolonged detention and a co-accused's bail — Conditions include full trial cooperation and potential bail revocation for misconduct — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and ordered his release on bail with specified conditions.
India Law Library Docid # 2421668