Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
STATE OF RAJASTHANversusASHARAM @ ASHUMAL
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1156/2023
Decision Date: 17-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC383

SANJIV KHANNA*, M.M. SUNDRESH Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.391 – High Court allowed the application filed by the respondent u/s.391 of Cr.P.C., directing summoning and recording of evidence of one DCP, who wrote a book “Gunning for the Godman:The True story behind Asaram Bapu’s conviction” had recorded a video of the scene of the crime (i.e. Kutiya) on his mobile phone on 21.08.2013, which is the day prior to the drawing of the site maps on 22.08.2013 – It was alleged that the victim was tutored based on the videography of the scene of the crime a day prior to the preparation
PESALA NOOKARAJUversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2304/2023
Decision Date: 16-08-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC734

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the Division Bench of the High Court rightly declined to interfere with the order of preventive detention passed against the appellant detenu by the District Collector in exercise of his powers u/s. Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Dacoits, Drug Off enders, Goondas, Immoral Traffi c Off enders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986. Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot- leggers, Dacoits, Drug Off enders, Goondas, Immoral Traffi c Off enders and Land
S. MURALI SUNDARAMversusJOTHIBAI KANNAN & ORS
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1167/2023
Decision Date: 24-02-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC161

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. XLVII r 1, s.114 – Review of judgment under –Appellant filed writ petition before the High Court against the order of the Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation in respect of the pathway – High Court allowed the writ petition of the a survey report – High Court discarded the survey report – Thereafter, the respondent filed the review petition before the High Court – High Court allowed the review petition after considering the same survey report and set aside its judgment holding the same to be
NABHA POWER LIMITEDversusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2425/2023
Decision Date: 09-10-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC883

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, SUDHANSHU DHULIA, ARAVIND KUMAR HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The dispute, pertaining to recovery of deductions of monthly tariff by the respondent was dealt by the Supreme Court in Nabha Power Limited (NPL) v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) and Anr. (2018) 11 SCC 508 dated 05.10.2017, whether same issue has been raised again. Cost – Imposition of – After Nabha Power Limited (NPL) v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) and Anr. judgment, the respondent fi led various applications before the Supreme Court – Two
INDIAN RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITEDversusM/S NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8460/2022
Decision Date: 17-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC248

M.R. SHAH*, M.M. SUNDRESH Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 – ss. 34, 37 – Appellant- IRCON and the respondent-NBCC entered into an agreement under which NBCC was awarded the work of construction of railway station cum commercial complex – NBCC failed to carry the time stipulated and the work was practically abandoned – IRCON served notice upon the NBCC for termination of the contract relying upon clause 60.1 of the agreement – NBCC invoked the arbitration clause – Arbitral Tribunal rejected the NBCC’s claim for refund of two
INITIATIVES FOR INCLUSION FOUNDATION & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 1224/2017
Decision Date: 19-10-2023
Disposal: Directions issued
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC927

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, DIPANKAR DATTA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Writ petitioner sought directions for implementation of the Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 read with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition 2013. Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 – Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 – Directions issued (under the relevant heads) to ensure the eff ective implementation of the POSH Act,
ANANT THANUR KARMUSEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 13/2023
Decision Date: 24-02-2023
Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC168

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.173(8) –Further Investigation – Transfer of Investigation to CBI –Appellant shared a viral picture of then Cabinet Minister on facebook–As per him, appellant was forcibly took from his residence by up and threatened by the police – FIR lodged by appellant, however, name of the Cabinet Minister not named in FIR – Writ Petition was filed in the High Court seeking transfer of investigation to CBI or to any other agency–During the pendency of the writ petition, the trial Court
RAMISETTY VENKATANNA & ANR.versusNASYAM JAMAL SAHEB & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2717/2023
Decision Date: 28-04-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC458

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Or. VII r. XI (a) and (d) – Rejection of plaint – The respondents-plaintiffs had filed a suit in the year 2014 before the Trial Court seeking declaration of title, permanent injunction and cancellation of various documents – on premise that there was an error in partition deed dated 11.03.1953 and subsequent transactions – The appellant- defendants, filed an application under O. VII r. XI to reject the plaint – Trial Court dismissed the said application – Appellant filed revision application
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusA. B. P. PVT. LTD. & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 986/2011
Decision Date: 12-05-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC525

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, DIPANKAR DATTA Customs Act, 1962– s.25(1)– Exercise of power under – Grant/ withdrawal/amendment of exemption– Judicial review of – Respondent-assessee imported one set of High Speed Cold-Set Web Offset Rotary Printing Machine with minimum speed of 70,000 copies per hour – First Notification which provided for levy of custom duty on the said imported machinery at a concessional rate of 5% – However, the said notification was amended through a fresh notification which shifted the benefit of the concessional rate from the aforesaid imported machinery to High
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHIversusUNION OF INDIA
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2357/2017
Decision Date: 11-05-2023
Disposal: Reference answered
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC517

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, M.R. SHAH, KRISHNA MURARI, HIMA KOHLI, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA Constitution of India: Seventh Schedule – List II, Entry 41 – Art.239AA(3(a)) – NCT Delhi – Control Over Services – Distribution of Power Between Union and State – IAS (Cadre) Rules, 1954 – The Indian Administrative Service (Fixation of r.2(c) – All India Services (Joint Cadre) Rules 1972 – Union Ministry of Home Affairs issued a notification dated 21 May 2015 which provided that the Lieutenant Governor of NCT Delhi shall exercise control over “services”, in addition to “public order”,
BALU SUDAM KHALDE & ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1910/2010
Decision Date: 29-03-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC314

SUDHANSHU DHULIA*, J.B. PARDIWALA Penal Code, 1860: ss. 302 r/w 34 – Prosecution case that verbal altercation between the parties resulting in a fight wherein first informant assaulted on the head and the deceased suffered severe assault and succumbed to his injuries – Appellants convicted u/s 302 r/w 34, imprisonment, however, acquittal of A-2 and A-4 – High Court upheld the order – Interference with – Held: Not called for – Oral evidence of all the three eyewitnesses is consistent and no good reason for the court to disbelieve the ocular version as narrated by the three
ABHISHEKversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1457/2015
Decision Date: 31-08-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC779

ANIRUDDHA BOSE*, SANJAY KUMAR, SARASA VENKATANARAYANA BHATTI HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The question pertains to quashing of the FIR and the Criminal Case pending before the magistrate against the appellants, mother-in-law and two brother-in-laws u/s. 498A IPC and ss. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Penal Code 1860 – s. 498A – Harassment for dowry – In the midst of matrimonial dispute between husband and wife, complaint by wife-daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law and brother-in-laws alleging that they subjected her to mental and physical harassment for dowry – Quashing of criminal proceedings:
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANRversusMANJEET SINGH ANAND & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 360/2023
Decision Date: 20-01-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC64

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 – Subject land acquired in the year 1964, and in the year 1967 the physical possession of the land was taken by drawing panchnama as also compensation by the respondent no. 1 claiming that the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act with respect to the subject land deemed to have lapsed u/s. 24(2) – Allowed by the High Court – Sustainability of – Held: Not sustainable – Respondent no. 1-original writ
SOLARIS CHEM TECH INDUSTRIES LTDversusASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 6609/2023
Decision Date: 10-10-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC916

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.
						 SOLARIS CHEM TECH INDUSTRIES LTD versus ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD & ANR. - [2023] 15 S.C.R. 4632023 INSC 916 D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court was justifi ed in dismissing the Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal on the strength of Clause 11 of the agreements between there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties, justifying the referral to the Chief Engineer under Clause 11. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – ss. 7(1), 2(b) – Valid arbitration agreement – On facts, in terms of Clause 11 of the agreements, any dispute
GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI & ORSversusJAI PAL
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1616/2023
Decision Date: 13-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC218

M.R. SHAH*, MANOJ MISRA Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – It was specific case on behalf of the appellants-Government of NCT Delhi that possession of the land was taken – High Court relying upon Pune Municipal Misrimal Solanki & ors allowed the writ petition preferred by the respondent/original writ petitioner – High Court held that the acquisition proceedings in respect of land in question deemed to have lapsed u/s. 24(2) of 2013 Act on the ground that the compensation has not been paid
STATE OF GUJARATversusDILIPSINH KISHORSINH RAO
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2504/2023
Decision Date: 09-10-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC894

S. RAVINDRA BHAT*, ARAVIND KUMAR HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the High Court was justifi ed in allowing the application for discharge fi led by the accused; and as such whether the order of the sanctioning authority is liable to be set aside and consequently, the charge-sheet fi led by to be quashed. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 397, 227, 401 – Application for discharge – Principles to be considered: Held: The court must proceed on an assumption that the material brought on record by the prosecution is true and evaluate the said material to
ANIL AGARWAL FOUNDATION ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1144/2011
Decision Date: 12-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC361

M.R. SHAH*, KRISHNA MURARI Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – ss. 4(1), 6, 44B – Land Acquisition Rules, 1963 – rr. 3 & 4 – Acquisition Proceedings – Allotment of land – To Private Company – For setting up of University – Undue Favour to Company – Non-compliance of Trust – Violation of – Appellant, a private company at that time, made a representation to the Govt to grant land to set up a University – Necessary steps were taken by the Govt for allotment of land – However, the Law Department opined that the land can be acquired only
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.versusNIRANJAN SINGH & ORS. ETC
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 1347/2023
Decision Date: 24-02-2023
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC167

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Land Acquisition: Land acquisition proceedings – Releasing of acquired land – Large chunk of area acquired for development and utilisation of land as residential and commercial area – Major portion of the land released between the stage award and after the award – Only small plots of land acquired – Writ petition by the land owners challenging the same – Landowners granted liberty to file a representation before the authorities – Representation seeking release of their acquired land on parity with the
NAGARAJ REDDYversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 886/2023
Decision Date: 21-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC269

BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI*, VIKRAM NATH HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Concurrent conviction of the appellant- accused No.1 for off ences punishable u/ss.302, 341 IPC primarily on the basis of evidence of PW-1, an interested witness, if justifi ed. Evidence – Interested witness – Previous enmity – Conviction based witness, without corroboration of such testimony – Legality: Held: PW-1 is an interested witness, being the brother of the deceased – He admitted that there existed previous enmity between the parties wherein the deceased and his wife-PW-3 were injured after a scuffl e between
MAH. ADIWASI THAKUR JAMAT SWARAKSHAN SAMITIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 2502/2022
Decision Date: 24-03-2023
Disposal: Reference answered
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC286

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL*, ABHAY S. OKA, MANOJ MISRA Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De- notified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) – ss. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 – Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes (Regulation of issuance and verification of) Certificate Rules, 2003 – rr. 10, 12 – Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, De-notified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward
MANGILALversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1651/2023
Decision Date: 12-07-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC634

A.S. BOPANNA*, M.M. SUNDRESH Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 – s.52A – Non-compliance of – Held: – In the present case, search warrant under Exhibit P-4 acknowledged the fact that procedure contemplated under the NDPS Act was not followed – Also, one of the witnesses to the while the other turned hostile – Both the witnesses to the arrest memo were not examined – The record also indicates that an order was passed by the trial Judge permitting the prosecution to keep the seized materials within the police station, to be produced at a later point of
JOHN ANTHONISAMY @ JOHNversusSTATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 466/2017
Decision Date: 19-01-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC54

M.R. SHAH*, C.T. RAVIKUMAR Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 r/w s.201 – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Purported extra-judicial confession – Effect – Five accused including appellant (A-1) – Prosecution case that in pursuance of a conspiracy, the accused persons killed the deceased car – PW11 (Sub inspector) closed the case as undetected – However, case was subsequently re-opened and investigation initiated by police witness (PW30) on basis of confessional statement made in letter allegedly written by appellant to PW22 – Trial Court convicted appellant
PAWAN KUMAR CHOURASIAversusSTATE OF BIHAR
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2230/2010
Decision Date: 14-03-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC227

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Criminal Law – Evidence – Extra-Judicial Confession – Conviction based on, when not justified – Appellant was convicted for offences punishable u/s.302 r/w 34 and s.201, IPC based on extra-judicial confession – Held: Case of the prosecution was that the appellant had PW6 including the complainant himself whose son was killed did not support prosecution – PW7 to PW9, the only material prosecution witnesses were not consistent about the place at which the alleged confession was made – Even after the alleged extra-judicial confession of committing
PURUSHOTHAMANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3341/2023
Decision Date: 30-10-2023
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC970

ABHAY S. OKA*, PANKAJ MITHAL HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: When the sentence of accused is suspended on appeal and he is released on bail, whether the High Court can cancel the bail without giving a reasonable opportunity, to the accused of being heard. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 389 – Suspension the appeal; release of appellant on bail - Appeal against conviction by the accused admitted by the High Court – Substantive sentence of the accused suspended and he was enlarged on bail – When appeal called for hearing, the High Court cancelled the bail of the accused, without giving
GADDIPATI DIVIJA & ANR.versusPATHURI SAMRAJYAM & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4206/2011
Decision Date: 18-04-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC385

KRISHNA MURARI*, SANJAY KAROL Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s. 16 – 2018 amendment – Specific Performance – Father of appellants executed an agreement of sale with respondent no. 1-plaintiff, whereby he agreed to sell the suit schedule property measuring Ac. 0.90 cents to respondent no. 1 for a 11,88,000/- out of which respondent no. 1 paid an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- as advance – Under the said agreement, father of appellants agreed to execute the sale deed in favour of respondent no. 1 after demarcating the land and receiving the balance sale consideration within three months
SHANTABAI ANANDA JAGTAP & ANR.versusJAYRAM GANPATI JAGTAP & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 5786/2012
Decision Date: 04-07-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC592

ABHAY S. OKA*, RAJESH BINDAL Employees Compensation Act, 1923: Compensation – Claim for – Death of victim during the course of employment in a road accident while driving jeep owned by the respondent no.1 – Claim for compensation by the legal heirs – Award of compensation by the tribunal, of the vehicle, however, the order not executed – Appellants then filed claim petition before the Commissioner and the same was dismissed on account of delay as well as on merits – High Court upheld the findings on the delay in filing the claim petition, however, no order passed as
THANGJAM ARUNKUMARversusYUMKHAM ERABOT SINGH & ORS.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 4179/2023
Decision Date: 23-08-2023
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2023INSC762

D.Y. CHANDRACHUD*, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA THANGJAM ARUNKUMAR v. YUMKHAM ERABOT SINGH & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos. 4179-4180 of 2023) AUGUST 23, 2023 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI AND PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.] HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Election petition if liable to be dismissed by allowing the Or.7, r.11 application affi davit under the proviso to s.83(1) (c) is not mandatory – It is suffi cient if there is substantial compliance – As the defect is curable, an opportunity may be granted to fi le the necessary affi davit – In the instant case, the election petition contained an affi davit