Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
NAIM AHAMEDversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 257/2023
Decision Date: 30-01-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC85

AJAY RASTOGI*, BELA M. TRIVEDI Penal Code, 1860 – ss.375, 376 – Conviction u/s.376, when not justified – Plea of the respondents was that the prosecutrix gave her consent for sexual relationship under the misconception of fact, as the accused had given a false promise to marry her but subsequently he did not was no consent in the eye of law and the case fell under the Clause- Secondly of s.375 – Held: In the present case, the prosecutrix who herself was a married woman having three children, could not be said to have acted under the alleged false promise given by the appellant- accused or under
SAP LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusINCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 6, BANGALORE
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8463/2022
Decision Date: 19-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC394

M.R. SHAH*, M.M. SUNDRESH Income Tax Act, 1961 : ss. 92, 92A to 92CA, 92D, 92E, 92F and 260 A – Transfer pricing matters – Arm length price, determination of – Arm length price, determined by the tribunal – Thereafter, determination of the arm’s length price by the of powers u/s. 260A – Permissibility of - Held: There cannot be any absolute proposition of law that in all cases where the tribunal has determined the arm’s length price the same is final and cannot be the subject matter of scrutiny by the High Court in an appeal u/s 260A –
B V SESHAIAHversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 284/2023
Decision Date: 01-02-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC93

KRISHNA MURARI*, V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – s.138 – Conviction of the Appellants – Revision filed before High Court – Meanwhile, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to settle the dispute, in terms thereof Respondent No.2 was bound to file a compromise Court, however he failed to do so – Revision dismissed by High Court, conviction of the Appellants confirmed – On appeal, held: This is a very clear case of the parties entering into an agreement and compounding the offence to save themselves from the process of litigation –
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTORversusRAJESH KUMAR AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1615/2023
Decision Date: 13-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC216

M.R. SHAH*, MANOJ MISRA Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 : s. 24(2) – Land acquisition when deemed to have lapsed – Writ petitioner’s case that possession of the agricultural land has been taken – Writ petition by the declaration that acquisition proceedings pertaining to subject land is deemed to have lapsed in view of s.24(2) – High Court relying upon Pune Municipal Corporation’s case and on the ground that compensation has not been paid or tendered allowed the writ petition –
COX AND KINGS LTD.versusSAP INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR.
Case No.: ARBITRATION PETITION No. 38/2020
Decision Date: 06-12-2023
Disposal: Unknown
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC1051

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, HRISHIKESH ROY*, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issues for consideration: The primary issue for consideration of the present Constitution Bench of Five Judges was determination of the validity of the ‘Group of companies doctrine’ in and its applicability to proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Earlier, the Group of Companies doctrine had been adopted and applied in Indian arbitration jurisprudence in Chloro Controls case, where a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court had read the said doctrine Decision Date : 06-12-2023 | Case No : ARBITRATION PETITION No. 38/2020  | Direction Issue : Referred questions of law answered  |  Bench : 5 JudgesCited In
JYOTIRMAY RAYversusTHE FIELD GENERAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6611/2015
Decision Date: 06-11-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC979

J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the denial of employer’s contribution of Provident Fund and non-payment of gratuity to the employee-appellant because of the order of compulsory retirement, as directed by the impugned order, is Retirement benefi ts – Payment of Provident Fund (employer’s contribution) and gratuity – Forfeiture of – Writ petition by Sr. Manager compulsorily retired, challenging denial of the benefi t of leave encashment, provident fund (employer’s contribution), gratuity
MANISH SISODIAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3352/2023
Decision Date: 30-10-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC956

SANJIV KHANNA*, SARASA VENKATANARAYANA BHATTI HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The two appeals are fi led by the appellant- former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi seeking bail in the prosecutions arising from a case registered by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Penal Code, 1860; and enforcement the Directorate of Enforcement, under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – s.45 – Requirement for grant of bail under: Held: Referring to s.45 of the PML Act, in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary it was held that provision does not require
SANJAY DUBEYversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1466/2023
Decision Date: 11-05-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC519

KRISHNA MURARI*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Constitution of India – Articles 226, 227 – Power of High Court to issue additional directions/orders in bail pleas – FIR was filed against accused u/ss.376, 506, IPC; POCSO Act, SCST Act and IT Act –FSL Report was forwarded to the appellant- Inspectorwith a note that guidelines be undertaken however, the DNA examination was not carried out – In the meantime, the accused filed his bail plea – High Courtcalled for the case-diary, but the FSL Report was not included therewith – Appellant was found guilty of dereliction of dutyand direction
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMGS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 944/2023
Decision Date: 17-02-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC135

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KAROL Right to far compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – S.24(2) – High Court allowed the writ petition and declared that the acquisition with respect to the land to have lapsed by virtue of s.24(2) of the 2013 Act –Before the Supreme Court, the appellant-DDA contended that the original writ petitioner before the High Court was the subsequent purchaser, who admittedly purchased the property after the acquisition proceedings commenced and award was
AMEENA BEGUMversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2706/2023
Decision Date: 04-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC788

SURYA KANT*, DIPANKAR DATTA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: An order of detention dated 24.03.2023 was passed by the Commissioner of Police against appellant’s husband. Whether the alleged acts of commission for which the Detenu has been kept under detention are prejudicial to ‘public order’ and whether factors weighed in the mind of the detaining authority leading to the conclusion that the Detenu is a habitual off ender and for prevention of further crimes by him, he ought to be detained. Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Off enders, Goondas, Immoral
ANSAR AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1168/2023
Decision Date: 18-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC725

English हिन्दी - Hindiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi 




 Disclaimer 


 
								 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments. 
						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.
						 ANSAR AHMAD versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. - [2023] 4 S.C.R. 5772023 INSC 725 SURYA KANT, J.B. PARDIWALA Bail – Bail applications filed by two respondents herein in a case crime u/ss.147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 120-B and 34 IPC and ss. 3 & 4 of Explosive Substances Act before the High Court was granted – It was alleged that appellant’s son was killed in a contract killing – one of the respondents was allegedly present at the spot at the time of occurrence, the other respondent was a part of the conspiracy hatched to eliminate victim-deceased – On appeal, held: The offences were serious in nature and the respondents were allegedly involved in a contract
M/S MATHOSRI MANIKBAI KOTHARI COLLEGE OF VISUAL ARTSversusTHE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4188/2013
Decision Date: 12-10-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC909

HIMA KOHLI*, RAJESH BINDAL HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Clubbing of two Institutions run by the same Society for the purpose of coverage under the EPF Act. The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 – Coverage under the EPF Act Institutes run by the same Society – Society ran two institutions including the appellant, in the same campus – One had 8 employees and the other had 18 – Report of the Enforcement Offi cer that there being total 26 employees working in both the Institutes, managed by the same
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusSHIV RAJ & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2934/2023
Decision Date: 19-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC396

M.R. SHAH*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – High Court relying on the decision of Supreme Court in Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors. reported as [2014] 1 SCR 783 w.r.t the land in question is deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) – On appeal, held: Decision in Pune Municipal Corporation case relied upon by the High Court while passing the impugned judgment has been overruled by the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, KANPURversusM/S. A. R. POLYMERS PVT. LTD. ETC.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 9569/2019
Decision Date: 21-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC268

KRISHNA MURARI*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA Central Excise Act, 1944 – s.4(A) – Interpretation of – Goods sold by the respondent if eligible to claim tax benefits within the purview of the notification u/s.4(A) – Held: While the goods in the impugned sale were notified u/s.4(A) by way of an r.3(b) of the 2011 Rules exempts the sale to institutional consumers from its purview – In the present case, the purchasers are military and paramilitary institutions, who purchase the goods in bulk from the respondent, and then further distribute it to their employees – Thus,
NARENDRASINH KESHUBHAI ZALAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1179/2012
Decision Date: 16-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC241

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, VIKRAM NATH, SANJAY KAROL Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302/34 – Arms Act, 1959 – ss. 25(1) A, 27(2) – Acquittal of accused – Appellant was accused of having committed the murder of the victim-deceased by shooting at him while he was sitting on a Nala with PW-3 – FIR charge-sheet was filed and the appellant was put on trial – Trial Court convicted the appellant on the testimony of the sole eye-witness (PW-3) and such conviction was upheld by the High Court – On appeal, held: In the case of a sole eye witness, the witness has to be reliable,
MALIK MAZHAR SULTAN & ANRversusU P PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS IN THE MATTER OF: STATE OF HARYANA
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1867/2006
Decision Date: 26-09-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC860

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The State of Haryana sought a direction that it should be permitted to conduct the entire selection process of recruiting judicial offi Service Commission and the order dated 12.02.2009 should be modifi ed to facilitate this exercise. Judicial Service – Selection process – State Government sought selection process of recruiting judicial offi cers to be done through the Public Service Commission – State Decision Date : 26-09-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL No. 1867/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed  | Direction Issue : IA No. 53466 of 2022. IA dismissed.   |  Bench : 3 Judges
MAKKELLA NAGAIAHversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 429/2022
Decision Date: 05-09-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC800

English हिन्दी - Hindi नेपाली - Nepaliਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabiతెలుగు - Telugu 




 Disclaimer 


 
								 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments. 
						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.
						 MAKKELLA NAGAIAH versus THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - [2023] 12 S.C.R. 2502023 INSC 800 BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, SANJAY KUMAR HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Claim of petitioner for juvenility after conviction u/s. 302 r/w. s.34 IPC. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 – Petitioner and other co-accused convicted u/s. 302 r/w. s.34 IPC imprisonment for life – High Court upheld the conviction and sentence – SLP also dismissed – Petitioner claimed juvenility – The Sessions Judge was directed to conduct an enquiry and to submit the report: Held: The Additional Sessions Judge submitted the report after
SMT. SHIRAMABAI W/O PUNDALIK BHAVE AND OTHERSversusTHE CAPTAIN, RECORD OFFICER FOR O.I.C. RECORDS, SENA CORPS ABHILEKH, GAYA, BIHAR STATE AND ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5262/2023
Decision Date: 18-08-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC744

HIMA KOHLI*, RAJESH BINDAL HEADNOTES Issue for consideration : Whether the order passed by the High Court denying the appellants-mother and her children, the entitlement to payable on the demise of her husband-military personnel is sustainable, where the military personnel contracted a marriage with the appellant and two children born from their relationship, during subsistence of his marriage with the legally wedded wife but, subsequently a decree of divorce was
VIRENDRASINGversusTHE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1715/2023
Decision Date: 17-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC372

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, ARAVIND KUMAR Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 : ss. 16(1)(i), 40 – Disqualification – Appellant elected as a member of the Zilla Parishad – Petition by respondent no.3 u/ss. 40 and 16(1)(i) claiming appellant’s disqualification that the appellant had misused his elected post for gaining undue personal financial benefit whereby in E-tender floated for the project, work order was issued in favour of the appellant’s son – Application allowed by Divisional Commissioner – Writ petition thereagainst dismissed
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusNARENDRA KUMAR JAIN & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 3340/2023
Decision Date: 04-05-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC501

M.R. SHAH*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – High Court declared that the land in question deemed to have lapsed u/s. 24(2) of the 2013 Act – It was the case on behalf possession of the land was taken over and the original writ petitioners are not the recorded owners, they were subsequent purchasers – However, High Court allowed the writ petition relying on the case of Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Manav Dharma Trust – On appeal, held: The decision in
XversusM/S SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PVT. LTD. & ORS.
Case No.: MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 2157/2023
Decision Date: 16-10-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC919

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Petition under Article 32 fi led for directions to the respondents to permit a medical termination of the Petitioner’s ongoing pregnancy. Relief sought, if can be granted; and jurisdiction under which this Court is adjudicating this case. Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 – ss.3(2B), 5 – According to the Petitioner, she did not discover that she was pregnant until after twenty weeks of the pregnancy had elapsed because she had lactational amenorrhea Decision Date : 16-10-2023 | Case No : MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 2157/2023 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off  | Direction Issue : Petition and application disposed of  |  Bench : 3 Judges
DASANGLU PULversusLUPALUM KRI
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 3710/2023
Decision Date: 19-10-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC930

A.S. BOPANNA*, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HEADNOTES Issues for consideration: Whether the indication made by the appellant-returned candidate in Form-26, as ‘not applicable’ in the column relating to ‘spouse’, in the facts of the present case would amount to non-disclosure of the properties owned by her spouse; and to a defect of substantial character requiring rejection of the nomination papers of a successful candidate after the election as having materially aff ected the result. Representation of the People Act, 1951 – s.100(1)(d)(iv) – Appellant- returned candidate and her late husband who
NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.versusSUBHASH CHANDER KHATRI & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1987/2023
Decision Date: 10-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC339

English ગુજરાતી - Gujaratiहिन्दी - Hindiमराठी - Marathi नेपाली - Nepaliਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabiతెలుగు - Telugu 




 Disclaimer 


 
								 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments. 
						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.
						 NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS. versus SUBHASH CHANDER KHATRI & ORS. - [2023] 2 S.C.R. 7882023 INSC 339 M.R. SHAH, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s.24(2) – Land acquisition, when deemed to have lapsed – Writ petition by the private respondent-writ petitioner proceedings pertaining to subject land is deemed to have lapsed in view of s.24(2) – Department’s case that the possession of the subject land was taken over and used by the Department prior to 2013 and the compensation was not paid – High Court held the acquisition is
JITENDRA KUMAR RODEversusUNION OF INDIA
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1269/2023
Decision Date: 24-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC419

KRISHNA MURARI*, SANJAY KAROL Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974: s. 385 – Procedure for hearing appeals not dismissed summarily – Conviction and sentence of the appellant-Assistant Commercial Manager, Northern Railway u/s. 7 of PC Act by the trial court – In appeal before the High Court though the record record of the matter before trial court has been lost and is not traceable and the documents sent as reconstructed documents do not constitute the relevant trial court record, the High Court upheld the conviction despite going into the merits – Legality of – Held : Accused, in appeal,