Daily Supreme Court reporting that explains what the Court held, why it matters, and where each judgment sits in Indian law.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar held the right to walk integral to Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, with footpaths a correlative enforceable duty.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and V. Mohana restores a 2005 flat-delay complaint, ruling that an arbitration clause cannot displace consumer forum jurisdiction once a complaint is admitted.
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court upheld a direction to redo the TNPSC Motor Vehicle Inspector selection, ruling no vested right arises from placement in an intermediate select list.
A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar restores candidates excluded over workshop approval gaps, directing TNPSC to complete selection from a wider eligible pool.
A division bench held the Madhya Pradesh SPE is not an intelligence and security organisation, voiding the 2011 RTI exemption notification and upholding disclosure of sanction records.
A Supreme Court division bench held that Rule 23(1) of Haryana's 2019 Rules suspends only financial assistance during criminal proceedings, not compassionate appointment, and set aside the High Court order.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma holds that forum non conveniens rarely applies where writ jurisdiction is grounded in the situs of the respondent's office under Article 226(1).
A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Atul S. Chandurkar held that Article 329(b) bars writ relief against nomination rejection, leaving an election petition as the only remedy.
A division bench held that a plaintiff who challenged only specific sale deeds was not barred from later asserting his larger, undisputed title from the 1960 deed.
A division bench held that the absence of mandatory officials under Rule 3 was a curable, severable defect, directing the cooperative society to reconvene and reconsider the appointments.
A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan set aside a non-speaking MHA letter, held heinousness alone cannot bar remission, and ordered Rohit Chaturvedi's premature release.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh set aside the dismissal of an MSEDCL clerk as disproportionate while leaving the misconduct finding intact and ordering subsistence allowance.
A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi holds that the Registrar General cannot suo-motu initiate disciplinary proceedings against a judicial officer without the Chief Justice's authority.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi holds that ignoring a court notice in mutation proceedings bars a later probate revocation application as time-barred.
A Division Bench acquits a husband convicted solely for not speaking to his wife by phone for thirteen days, holding the prosecution failed to produce call records to support the charge.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh held that a falling tree branch is not an MVA accident, yet invoked Article 142 to enhance compensation to Rs 25 lakh.
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that multi-expert psychological panels cannot be imposed on child victims in custody proceedings, laying down nineteen guidelines for trauma-informed adjudication.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh directs Rs. 30,000 per month as a minimum stand-in income for deceased homemakers, rejecting decades of conservative notional income calculations.
A Division Bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta set aside a 2010 auction sale, holding that the balance 75% bid amount was paid beyond the mandatory 15-day period without any written extension agreement.
A Division Bench invoked Article 142 to quash a ten-year POCSO sentence after the victim married the convict and received Rs 10 lakh compensation, expressly barring the order from being treated as precedent.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma holds that the doctrine of forum non conveniens rarely applies where writ jurisdiction is traceable to Article 226(1).
A Division Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih set aside a 2010 auction sale, holding that late payment of the 75% balance without a written extension agreement vitiated the sale.
A Division Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh dismissed a father's appeal against a DNA test order, holding that Amar Pradhan's right to know his biological parentage outweighed the privacy claim.
