Manoj Misra

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Pecuniary Jurisdiction in Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Rutu Mi Hir Panchal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (29 April 2025)

/ Article 14, Constitution of India, Article 32, Constitution of India, Constitution of India, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Section 34, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Section 47, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Section 58, Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 29 April 2025 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. Does basing the jurisdiction of consumer courts on the value of goods and services purchased, rather than the compensation claimed, violate the Constitution? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question, examining the constitutional validity of key sections […]

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Pecuniary Jurisdiction in Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Rutu Mi Hir Panchal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (29 April 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court refers questions on Section 17A of PC Act and Section 156(3) of CrPC to Larger Bench: B.S. Yeddyurappa vs A. Alam Pasha (21 April 2025)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 156(3), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Manoj Misra, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 17A, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 19

Date of the Judgment: 21 April 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 515 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J. and Manoj Misra, J. When can a magistrate order a police investigation into corruption allegations against a public servant? The Supreme Court of India recently grappled with this question, specifically addressing the interplay between Section 17A of the Prevention of

Supreme Court refers questions on Section 17A of PC Act and Section 156(3) of CrPC to Larger Bench: B.S. Yeddyurappa vs A. Alam Pasha (21 April 2025) Read Post »

“Ex-Servicemen” Defined: Supreme Court Includes Military Nursing Service in Punjab Civil Services Recruitment (2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 309, Ex-Servicemen Benefits, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Service Law

“`html Date of the Judgment: April 16, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 494 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. and Manoj Misra, J. The Supreme Court of India addressed the question of whether the recruitment advertisement issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC), which provided reservation for “ex-servicemen,” includes personnel from the Indian Military Nursing Service

“Ex-Servicemen” Defined: Supreme Court Includes Military Nursing Service in Punjab Civil Services Recruitment (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles eligibility criteria for primary teacher appointments: Soumen Paul vs. Shrabani Nayek (2025) INSC 451 (April 04, 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016, West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016 with Rule 6(2)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: April 04, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 451 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. Can candidates whose Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) results were delayed due to extraordinary circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, be considered eligible for primary teacher appointments? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical

Supreme Court settles eligibility criteria for primary teacher appointments: Soumen Paul vs. Shrabani Nayek (2025) INSC 451 (April 04, 2025) Read Post »

Burden of Proof in Homicidal Death Cases: Supreme Court clarifies application of Section 106 of the Evidence Act in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Balveer Singh (24th February 2025)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 174, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 313, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 118, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Manoj Misra

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 24th February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 261 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., Manoj Misra, J. What happens when a death occurs within the confines of a home, and suspicion falls on a family member? The Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh, addressed

Burden of Proof in Homicidal Death Cases: Supreme Court clarifies application of Section 106 of the Evidence Act in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Balveer Singh (24th February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Public-Private Partnership in Formula 4 Racing: Racing Promotions Private Limited vs. Dr. Harish & Ors. (20 February 2025)

/ Contract Law, Judges, Judicial Review, Manoj Misra, Memorandum of Understanding, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Policy Decision, Public-Private Partnership, Scope of Judicial Review

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2025 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. Can a High Court interfere with the specific terms of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) once it acknowledges that holding a sports event is a policy matter? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case

Supreme Court Upholds Public-Private Partnership in Formula 4 Racing: Racing Promotions Private Limited vs. Dr. Harish & Ors. (20 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of High Court’s intervention in personal insolvency proceedings under IBC: Bank of Baroda vs. Farooq Ali Khan (20 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) with Section 100, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) with Section 95, Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 253 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. Can a High Court interfere with personal insolvency proceedings initiated under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) by claiming a waiver of liability? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of High Court’s intervention in personal insolvency proceedings under IBC: Bank of Baroda vs. Farooq Ali Khan (20 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Equivalency of Diploma in Electrical and Electronics Engineering for Junior Engineer Post: Sajid Khan vs. L Rahmath Ullah (20 February 2025)

/ Equivalence of Qualifications, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Recruitment Rules, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: February 20, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 251 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. When can an employer’s decision regarding qualification equivalency be challenged? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a recent case concerning recruitment for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) in the Union

Supreme Court Clarifies Equivalency of Diploma in Electrical and Electronics Engineering for Junior Engineer Post: Sajid Khan vs. L Rahmath Ullah (20 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns dacoity conviction due to weak evidence: Vinod @ Nasmulla vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2025) INSC 220

/ Arms Act, 1959, Arms Act, 1959 with Section 25, Evidence Act, 1872, Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 9, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 395, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 397, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Date of the Judgment: February 14, 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 220 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. and Manoj Misra, J. In a recent criminal appeal, the Supreme Court of India addressed the critical issue of evidentiary standards in dacoity cases. The central question was whether the conviction of an accused could be sustained based on

Supreme Court overturns dacoity conviction due to weak evidence: Vinod @ Nasmulla vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2025) INSC 220 Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits accused in robbery case due to doubtful arrest and unreliable identification: Wahid vs. State (2025) INSC 145 (4 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 392, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 397, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 4 February 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 145 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. Were the arrests of the accused in a robbery case lawful, and was the identification of the accused reliable enough to uphold their conviction? The Supreme Court of India addressed these critical questions in a

Supreme Court acquits accused in robbery case due to doubtful arrest and unreliable identification: Wahid vs. State (2025) INSC 145 (4 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Appeal on Delay Condonation: Surendra G. Shankar vs. Esque Finamark Pvt. Ltd. (2025) INSC 102

/ Appellate Procedure, Condonation of Delay, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 5, Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Real Estate Law, Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)

Date of the Judgment: January 22, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 102 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. and Manoj Misra, J. Can a High Court dismiss an appeal solely on the basis of delay without considering the merits of the case? The Supreme Court recently addressed this question in a case concerning the rejection of a

Supreme Court Allows Appeal on Delay Condonation: Surendra G. Shankar vs. Esque Finamark Pvt. Ltd. (2025) INSC 102 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal Based on Weak Circumstantial Evidence: State of Punjab vs. Kewal Krishan (21 June 2023)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Law, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Judges, Manoj Misra, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Murder Case: State of Punjab vs. Kewal Krishan (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in reversing the trial court’s conviction based on circumstantial evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: State of Punjab vs. Kewal Krishan Judgment Date: 21 June 2023 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 21

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal Based on Weak Circumstantial Evidence: State of Punjab vs. Kewal Krishan (21 June 2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top