Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
VASHIST NARAYAN KUMARversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1/2024
Decision Date: 02-01-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC2

J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN Issue for Consideration Whether an error committed in the application form, which was uploaded is a material error or a trivial error and was the State justified in declaring the appellant as having failed on account of the same. Headnotes Service Law – Recruitment – form – Final result reflected failed – Appellant applied for the post of Police Constable – He cleared the written exam and the Physical Eligibility Test – However, the final result reflected him as failed – The only reason was that the application form 

Summary: Englishঅসমীয়া - Assameseहिन्दी - Hindiमराठी - Marathiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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.VASHIST NARAYAN KUMARversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.-[2024] 1 S.C.R. 12024 INSC 2Coram : J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHANIssue for Consideration Whether an error committed in the application form, which was uploaded is a material error or a trivial error and was the State justified in declaring the appellant as having failed on account of the same. Headnotes Service Law – Recruitment – form – Final result reflected failed – Appellant applied for the post of Police Constable – He cleared the written exam and the Physical Eligibility Test – However, the final result reflected him as failed – The only reason was that the application form
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusG ATHIPATHI AND OTHERS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 14100/2024
Decision Date: 09-12-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC943

SUDHANSHU DHULIA*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the criteria for promotion to the post of Deputy General Manager in the appellant-authority; and whether the respondent has to be treated as a fresh entrant with the benefit of his past service on deputation or he has to be treated as from the date he was selected. Headnotes† Service law – Promotion – Counting of deputation service period for promotion – Respondent repatriated to parent department after his deputation in appellant-authority for 6 years – Respondent re-joined the appellant on 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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 HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusG ATHIPATHI AND OTHERS-[2024] 12 S.C.R. 5202024 INSC 943Coram : SUDHANSHU DHULIA*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAHIssue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the criteria for promotion to the post of Deputy General Manager in the appellant-authority; and whether the respondent has to be treated as a fresh entrant with the benefit of his past service on deputation or he has to be treated as from the date he was selected. Headnotes† Service law – Promotion – Counting of deputation service period for promotion – Respondent repatriated to parent department after his deputation in appellant-authority for 6 years – Respondent re-joined the appellant on
MD. RAHIM ALI @ ABDUR RAHIMversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 7332/2024
Decision Date: 11-07-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC511

VIKRAM NATH*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Issue for Consideration The Foreigners Tribunal, Nalbari declared the appellant to be a foreigner on the grounds that he failed to discharge his burden under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Headnotes† Foreigners Act, 1946 – s.9 – Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964 – Act, 1982 – The case against the appellant was initiated in the year 2004 alleging that the appellant illegally migrated to India after 25.03.1971 from Village Dorijahangirpur, Police Station – Torail, District Mymansingh, Bangladesh and was living in Village Kasimpur, Police 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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.MD. RAHIM ALI @ ABDUR RAHIMversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.-[2024] 7 S.C.R. 23292024 INSC 511Coram : VIKRAM NATH*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAHIssue for Consideration The Foreigners Tribunal, Nalbari declared the appellant to be a foreigner on the grounds that he failed to discharge his burden under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Headnotes† Foreigners Act, 1946 – s.9 – Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964 – Act, 1982 – The case against the appellant was initiated in the year 2004 alleging that the appellant illegally migrated to India after 25.03.1971 from Village Dorijahangirpur, Police Station – Torail, District Mymansingh, Bangladesh and was living in Village Kasimpur, Police
RAMA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2623/2014
Decision Date: 03-10-2024
Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC755

SANJIV KHANNA*, SANJAY KUMAR, R MAHADEVAN Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of the trial court and acquitting the respondents of the charges punishable under Sections 302, 307, 333, 355 and 379, all read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, and Section 27 of the Arms – ss.302, 307, read with s.34 – Murder of an MLA and his bodyguard – Respondents convicted by Trial Court – Conviction reversed by High Court – Challenge to: Held: In view of the evidence and materials on record, charges against A-4 and A-8 under Section 302 read Flip viewPDF

Summary: RAMA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS-[2024] 10 S.C.R. 13132024 INSC 755Coram : SANJIV KHANNA*, SANJAY KUMAR, R MAHADEVANIssue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of the trial court and acquitting the respondents of the charges punishable under Sections 302, 307, 333, 355 and 379, all read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, and Section 27 of the Arms – ss.302, 307, read with s.34 – Murder of an MLA and his bodyguard – Respondents convicted by Trial Court – Conviction reversed by High Court – Challenge to: Held: In view of the evidence and materials on record, charges against A-4 and A-8 under Section 302 readFlip viewPDF
BINA BASAK & ORS.versusSRI BIPUL KANTI BASAK & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5525/2016
Decision Date: 21-03-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC279

VIKRAM NATH*, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in disallowing the right to title and possession of the family members in the suit property that was allotted by the government as part of rehabilitation programme to the displaced/migrant family as a unit during partition Scheme – Object of, Explained Held: The rehabilitation programmes are introduced by the Government with the sole aim of re-establishment of the displaced/ migrant families and not for the benefit of any individual – As a part of such welfare policies, the property is recorded 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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.BINA BASAK & ORS.versusSRI BIPUL KANTI BASAK & ORS.-[2024] 3 S.C.R. 12812024 INSC 279Coram : VIKRAM NATH*, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMAIssue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in disallowing the right to title and possession of the family members in the suit property that was allotted by the government as part of rehabilitation programme to the displaced/migrant family as a unit during partition Scheme – Object of, Explained Held: The rehabilitation programmes are introduced by the Government with the sole aim of re-establishment of the displaced/ migrant families and not for the benefit of any individual – As a part of such welfare policies, the property is recorded
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELAPURversusJINDAL DRUGS LTD.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1121/2016
Decision Date: 30-04-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC354

ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYAN Issue for Consideration The issue for consideration is whether an activity of re-labelling of goods i.e. cocoa butter and cocoa powder, by affixing additional labels on both the sides of the packs containing goods, amounts to “manufacture” in terms of Note 3 to Chapter 18 of the Act, 1985, for availing the CENVAT Credit and rebate on the duty paid while exporting the said goods. Headnotes Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 – Note 3 to Chapter 18 – Cocoa and Cocoa preparations – Whether re-labelling amounts to ‘manufacture’ as per Section 2(f) of 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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.COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELAPURversusJINDAL DRUGS LTD.-[2024] 5 S.C.R. 2712024 INSC 354Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYANIssue for Consideration The issue for consideration is whether an activity of re-labelling of goods i.e. cocoa butter and cocoa powder, by affixing additional labels on both the sides of the packs containing goods, amounts to “manufacture” in terms of Note 3 to Chapter 18 of the Act, 1985, for availing the CENVAT Credit and rebate on the duty paid while exporting the said goods. Headnotes Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 – Note 3 to Chapter 18 – Cocoa and Cocoa preparations – Whether re-labelling amounts to ‘manufacture’ as per Section 2(f) of
APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1694/2024
Decision Date: 19-03-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC223

A.S. BOPANNA*, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA Issue for Consideration Whether the use of expletives and profane language in the titles and content of the episodes of the web-series ‘College Romance’ constitutes an offence of publication and transmission of obscene and sexually explicit content u/ss.67 Information Technology Act, 2000. Headnotes Information Technology Act, 2000 – ss.67, 67A – Penal Code, 1860 – s.292 – “obscenity” – Test for – Complaint filed that Season 1, Episode 5 of the web-series ‘College Romance’, titled 

Summary: Englishहिन्दी - Hindiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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.APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.-[2024] 3 S.C.R. 11472024 INSC 223Coram : A.S. BOPANNA*, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHAIssue for Consideration Whether the use of expletives and profane language in the titles and content of the episodes of the web-series ‘College Romance’ constitutes an offence of publication and transmission of obscene and sexually explicit content u/ss.67 Information Technology Act, 2000. Headnotes Information Technology Act, 2000 – ss.67, 67A – Penal Code, 1860 – s.292 – “obscenity” – Test for – Complaint filed that Season 1, Episode 5 of the web-series ‘College Romance’, titled
MAITREYEE CHAKRABORTYversusTHE TRIPURA UNIVERSITY & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 9730/2024
Decision Date: 22-08-2024
Disposal: Case Allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC616

J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHAN Issue for Consideration An offer of appointment was made offering the Appellant the post of Assistant Professor in Law (UR) against lien vacancy. Whether the Respondent-University was justified in resolving on 13.12.2018 at the 32nd Meeting in Agenda No.18/32/2018, that the Appellant was not to the post was to be re-advertised. Headnotes† Service Law – Lien Vacancy – Appointment not confirmed – Appellant was expecting her regularization since there was nothing adverse in her performance – In the 32nd Meeting of the Executive Council held on 13.12.2018, 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						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.MAITREYEE CHAKRABORTYversusTHE TRIPURA UNIVERSITY & ORS.-[2024] 8 S.C.R. 8542024 INSC 616Coram : J.K. MAHESHWARI*, K.V. VISWANATHANIssue for Consideration An offer of appointment was made offering the Appellant the post of Assistant Professor in Law (UR) against lien vacancy. Whether the Respondent-University was justified in resolving on 13.12.2018 at the 32nd Meeting in Agenda No.18/32/2018, that the Appellant was not to the post was to be re-advertised. Headnotes† Service Law – Lien Vacancy – Appointment not confirmed – Appellant was expecting her regularization since there was nothing adverse in her performance – In the 32nd Meeting of the Executive Council held on 13.12.2018,