Judges

Supreme Court settles the necessity of proving demand and acceptance of bribe for offences under Prevention of Corruption Act: Dileepbhai Nanubhai Sanghani vs. State of Gujarat (27 February 2025)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 482, Judges, K. Vinod Chandran, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 20, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Sections 7 and 13, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 27 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 280 Judges: Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran Is proof of demand and acceptance of a bribe a must for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a case involving a former Gujarat […]

Supreme Court settles the necessity of proving demand and acceptance of bribe for offences under Prevention of Corruption Act: Dileepbhai Nanubhai Sanghani vs. State of Gujarat (27 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Power of Attorney and Agreement to Sell in property transfer: M.S. Ananthamurthy vs. J. Manjula (2025) INSC 273 (27 February 2025)

/ Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 201, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 202, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, R. Mahadevan, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 17, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 54

Date of the Judgment: 27 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 273 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can a General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder transfer property after the death of the original owner? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a recent case involving conflicting claims to a property in

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Power of Attorney and Agreement to Sell in property transfer: M.S. Ananthamurthy vs. J. Manjula (2025) INSC 273 (27 February 2025) Read Post »

MSRTC Workers’ Wage Revision: Supreme Court Upholds Industrial Court Order in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation vs. Subhash S/O Laxmanrao Bramhe (27 February 2025)

/ Judges, K. Vinod Chandran, Labour Law, Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, Settlements, Sudhanshu Dhulia, Unfair Labour Practices

Date of the Judgment: 27 February 2025 Judges: Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. and K. Vinod Chandran, J. Can a state transport corporation revise the pay scales of its workers based on a retrospective interpretation of prior settlements and court orders? The Supreme Court of India addressed this issue in a recent case involving the Maharashtra State

MSRTC Workers’ Wage Revision: Supreme Court Upholds Industrial Court Order in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation vs. Subhash S/O Laxmanrao Bramhe (27 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows appeal against acquittal in a murder case, remitting it to High Court: Manoj Rameshla vs. Mahesh Prakash (2025) INSC 282 (27 February 2025)

/ Criminal Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 372, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 378, Indian Penal Code, 1860, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, R. Mahadevan

Date of the Judgment: 27 February 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 282 Judges: Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice R. Mahadevan In a case concerning a husband accused of murdering his wife, the Supreme Court addressed the critical issue of how High Courts should handle appeals against acquittals, particularly concerning the parameters for granting leave to appeal under

Supreme Court allows appeal against acquittal in a murder case, remitting it to High Court: Manoj Rameshla vs. Mahesh Prakash (2025) INSC 282 (27 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of writ petition challenging the decision of Ethics Committee: Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Bihar Legislative Council (2025) INSC 264 (25 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 212(1), Constitutional Law with Article 32, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 151A, Surya Kant

Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 264 Judges: Surya Kant, J., Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, J. Can a legislative body’s decision to expel a member be challenged in court? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Bihar Legislative Council. The court

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of writ petition challenging the decision of Ethics Committee: Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Bihar Legislative Council (2025) INSC 264 (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the scope of bona fide need for eviction under tenancy laws: Kanhaiya Lal Arya vs. Md. Ehshan (2025)

/ Bona Fide Need, Eviction, Judges, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, Pankaj Mithal, Tenancy Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: February 25, 2025 Judges: Pankaj Mithal, J., Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, J. Can a landlord evict a tenant based on the ‘bona fide need’ to establish a business for unemployed sons? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in the case of Kanhaiya Lal Arya vs. Md. Ehshan & Ors.,

Supreme Court settles the scope of bona fide need for eviction under tenancy laws: Kanhaiya Lal Arya vs. Md. Ehshan (2025) Read Post »

Life Insurance Claims: Supreme Court clarifies “material suppression” in insurance policies: Maha Veer Sharma vs. Exide Life Insurance Company Limited (2025) INSC 268 (25 February 2025)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Insurance Law, Judges, Life Insurance, Material Suppression, Satish Chandra Sharma

Date of the Judgment: February 25, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 268 Judges: B.V. Nagarathna, J., Satish Chandra Sharma, J. Can an insurance company deny a claim if the policyholder didn’t disclose all their existing insurance policies? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a case involving Exide Life Insurance Company Limited. The

Life Insurance Claims: Supreme Court clarifies “material suppression” in insurance policies: Maha Veer Sharma vs. Exide Life Insurance Company Limited (2025) INSC 268 (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction in bank fraud case, emphasizing the need for conclusive evidence: Hiralal Babulal Soni vs. State of Maharashtra (25 February 2025)

/ B.R. Gavai, Evidence Act, Evidence Act with Section 106, Evidence Act with Section 114, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 411, Judges, K.V. Viswanathan, Offences Against Property, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 266 Judges: B.R. Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra, K.V. Viswanathan The Supreme Court of India recently addressed a case involving a large-scale fraud committed through fake Telegraphic Transfers (TTs) at a Vijaya Bank branch in Maharashtra. The central question was whether the accused, Nandkumar Babulal Soni,

Supreme Court overturns conviction in bank fraud case, emphasizing the need for conclusive evidence: Hiralal Babulal Soni vs. State of Maharashtra (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles pension eligibility after regularization of service with extraordinary leave: Jaya Bhattacharya vs. The State of West Bengal (2025) INSC 270 (25 February 2025)

/ B.R. Gavai, Extraordinary Leave, Judges, Pension, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, Regularization of Service, Rule 175, West Bengal Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, Rule 176, West Bengal Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, Rule 28A, West Bengal Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, Service Law, West Bengal Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971

Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 270 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. Can an employee be denied pensionary benefits after their services have been regularized by granting extraordinary leave? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Jaya Bhattacharya vs. The State of

Supreme Court settles pension eligibility after regularization of service with extraordinary leave: Jaya Bhattacharya vs. The State of West Bengal (2025) INSC 270 (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the necessity of sanction under Section 197 CrPC for public servants: Suneeti Toteja vs. State of U.P. (2025) INSC 267 (25 February 2025)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 197, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 354, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 506, Judges, Satish Chandra Sharma

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 267 Judges: B. V. Nagarathna, J., Satish Chandra Sharma, J. When can a public servant be prosecuted without prior government sanction? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in Suneeti Toteja vs. State of U.P., a case concerning the application of Section

Supreme Court clarifies the necessity of sanction under Section 197 CrPC for public servants: Suneeti Toteja vs. State of U.P. (2025) INSC 267 (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies procurement policy for MSMEs: Lifecare Innovations vs. Union of India (25 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Judges, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 with Section 11, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Sandeep Mehta

Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 269 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Sandeep Mehta, J. Can the government’s procurement policy for Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) be enforced, and what are the obligations of government bodies in promoting these enterprises? The Supreme Court of India addressed these critical questions in

Supreme Court clarifies procurement policy for MSMEs: Lifecare Innovations vs. Union of India (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles land reservation issues under MRTP Act: Nirmati Developers vs. State of Maharashtra (2025) INSC 265 (25 February 2025)

/ J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 126, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 49, R. Mahadevan, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

Date of the Judgment: 25th February, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 265 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can a prolonged delay in acquiring reserved land lead to the lapse of its reservation, allowing the owner to utilize it? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in a case involving Nirmati Developers and the State

Supreme Court settles land reservation issues under MRTP Act: Nirmati Developers vs. State of Maharashtra (2025) INSC 265 (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Scroll to Top