ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(641) 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

(642) 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

(643) 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

(644) 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

(645) 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

(646) 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

(647) 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

(648) 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

(649) 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

(650) 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

(651) RAJ RANI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 323, 406, 498A, 417, 201, and 34 — The Supreme Court addressed a case where the appellants were accused of offenses under Sections 323, 406, 498A, 417, 201, and 34 — The key issue was whether the appellants' counsel had offered to deposit Rs. 5 lakhs each as a condition for anticipatory bail in the High Court — The appellants' counsel argued that no such instruction had been given, as they were not able to comply with such a deposit — The Supreme Court noted tha
India Law Library Docid # 2421629

(652) AJAY AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 10-01-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 – Scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. vs. Discharge Application — The High Court erred in dismissing the appellant's petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. without considering its merits, merely stating that the appellant could raise the issues in a discharge application — The Supreme Court clarified that the scope of a discharge application is limited, as it cannot consider documents not part of the charge sheet — Therefore, the High Court should h
India Law Library Docid # 2422214

(653) SADASHIV DHONDIRAM PATIL Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 106 — Extra-Judicial Confession and Burden of Proof — An extra-judicial confession must be scrutinized with care, and mere presence of motive is insufficient for conviction; prosecution must establish foundational facts before invoking Section 106 to shift burden to the accused.
India Law Library Docid # 2422638

(654) GOVERDHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 304 Part I — Murder — Appeal against conviction — Appellants were initially convicted of murder but the charge was later modified to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC — The court upheld this modification, citing the lack of clear motive, premeditation, and definitive intent to kill, despite the fatal injuries inflicted — The judgment considered the credibility of the sole eyewitness, the timing of the FIR, and the ove
India Law Library Docid # 2421479

(655) RAMESH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Criminal Law — Cross-complaints arising from the same incident should ideally be tried by the same court — The court noted that the two trials arising from the two FIRs should have ideally been tried by the same judge or court for a better appreciation of the evidence and consistency in the decisions — Although the trials proceeded separately, they were, in reality, cross-cases related to the same incident, stemming from a clash between two family groups on the same day.
India Law Library Docid # 2421480

(656) INSPECTOR, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, KOTTAYAM Vs. MATHEW K CHERIAN AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Railways Act, 1989 — Section 143 — Statutory provisions can apply to new situations not initially envisioned by the legislature — The court ruled that a law can be applied to new facts and situations, even if those situations did not exist at the time of the law’s enactment, as long as the language of the law is broad enough to encompass them — The court stated that the law should not be limited to the meaning at the time of enactment but should be interpreted to include new developments.
India Law Library Docid # 2421481

(657) STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER Vs. R.K. PANDEY AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 11 and 34 — Validity of ex-parte arbitration awards — State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against a High Court order regarding the retirement age of respondent, a former employee of a hospital that was taken over by the State Government — The case revolved around the validity and enforceable ex-parte arbitration awards obtained by respondent against the State Government, based on the disputed existence of an arbitration agreement — The State argued t
India Law Library Docid # 2421482

(658) MAMTA KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 306 —Abetment of Suicide — The appellant sought anticipatory bail after the High Court rejected her plea — The State of Punjab acknowledged her participation in the investigation and stated no further custodial interrogation was needed — The Supreme Court granted her anticipatory bail, considering the State of Punjab's submission that she cooperated with the investigation — The decision was based on the recognition that custodial interrogation was no longer neces
India Law Library Docid # 2421483

(659) THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Vs. PAM DEVELOPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 80 — High Court's order to allow the Respondent's application to amend the plaint and dispense with the requirement of a notice under Section 80 was valid — The court determined that the subsequent debarment orders and events formed a continuous cause of action originating from a memo issued on 08.03.2016 — This meant that the amendment did not alter the original nature of the civil suit — Additionally, because the cause of action was continuous, the ap
India Law Library Docid # 2421486

(660) THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. BATTEGOWDA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 09-01-2025
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 341, 324, 307 and 34 — On 18.09.1999, a land dispute caused an altercation between the complainant (PW1) and the accused, who were relatives — Accused No. 3 severely stabbed the complainant, while Accused No. 2 attacked the complainant’s son with a chopper — The trial court convicted all three under Sections 326 and 341 IPC, but the High Court acquitted Accused No. 1 and reduced Accused No. 2’s conviction to Section 324 IPC — The Supreme Court ruled that Section
India Law Library Docid # 2421744