Supreme Court of India judgments

The Supreme Court upheld a husband's murder conviction in a dowry death case, ruling that his fabricated defence of epileptic seizure - contradicted by post-mortem evidence of throttling - completed the circumstantial chain under Section 106 Evidence Act and triggered the Section 113-B presumption. The decision reinforces that a false plea on facts within the accused's exclusive knowledge can supply the missing link in dowry death prosecutions.

The Supreme Court admitted an appeal by a UP Police constable candidate rejected by the departmental medical board for alleged squint, despite two independent expert opinions from GSVM Medical College and UHM District Hospital certifying normal vision. The ruling will clarify whether expert medical evidence from reputable institutions can override a departmental board's adverse finding in recruitment.

The Court held that legislative validation cannot cure a recruitment process vitiated by systemic corruption and nepotism once a constitutional court has annulled it, as this would violate separation of powers. The 2022 Karnataka Act attempting to revive the 2011 Gazetted Probationers recruitment was struck down, with directions for fresh recruitment granting age relaxation to untainted candidates.

The Supreme Court cancelled bail for an espionage accused, holding substantial compliance with Article 22(1) and BNSS Section 47 suffices absent demonstrable prejudice, and hyper-technical objections to arrest-ground communication cannot override core bail jurisprudence.

The Supreme Court held that jurisdiction to extend an arbitral mandate under Section 29A lies exclusively with the 'court' defined in Section 2(1)(e), not the Section 11 appointing authority. A party waives its right to a three-member tribunal by twice consenting to a sole arbitrator and participating for 18 months. The IBC moratorium does not bar a corporate debtor from initiating arbitration to recover dues.

The Supreme Court ruled that contractual rights over nominee directors, budget approvals, and project revenues constitute 'participation in policy-making' under IBC Section 5(24)(m)(i), a lower threshold than Section 29A control, rendering debenture holders and trustees related parties ineligible for the CoC. A post-CIRP assignment to bypass this bar was held mala fide.

The Supreme Court set aside consecutive life sentences for murder and rape imposed in a single trial, holding they must run concurrently under the Muthuramalingam Constitution Bench ruling. The court clarified that Section 31 CrPC does not permit consecutive life terms for offences arising from the same incident, and granted the appellant set-off from his 2010 arrest.

The Supreme Court ruled that unpaid excise duty on sugar stock lying in a bonded warehouse cannot be added to taxable income under Sections 43B and 145A where the assessee follows the exclusive accounting method, has not claimed any deduction for such duty, and the goods remain unremoved. The decision clarifies that no tax liability crystallises under excise law until goods are actually cleared from the bonded warehouse, protecting manufacturers from phantom income additions on stock they cannot legally sell.

The Supreme Court ruled that Section 43D(7) UAPA's bail bar for foreign nationals applies only when initial entry was unauthorized, not when a valid visa merely expires. Default bail under Section 43D(2) remains unaffected by Section 43D(7)'s non-obstante clause, and bail cancellation requires supervening circumstances, not re-litigation of the original grant. The ruling shields legally present foreign nationals from automatic UAPA bail denial while preserving the framework for genuine threats.

The Supreme Court awarded ₹6 lakh compensation for six years of wrongful undertrial custody in a kidnapping-murder case, holding that a fundamentally defective investigation - lacking a Section 65B certificate for electronic evidence, a Section 27 statement for recoveries, and relying on unclear CCTV footage - violated the accused's Article 21 rights. The ruling underscores the state's liability when investigative failures deprive a person of liberty.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Registrar's statutory power under Sections 65 and 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act to access society documents for RTI purposes is not contingent on a prior subjective satisfaction to hold an inquiry. This ensures members of cooperative societies can obtain records such as construction agreements and general body minutes through the RTI route without the Registrar first initiating a formal inquiry.

The Supreme Court held that CoC approval of a resolution plan under IBC creates a binding obligation that cannot be withdrawn, even if the corporate debtor's financial position improves. The Court directed the NCLT to expeditiously decide on plan confirmation and competing OTS applications, reinforcing finality of CoC approval and protecting successful resolution applicants.

The Supreme Court ruled that a Gazette notification under the Wakf Act, 1954 creates a presumptive title to wakf property that becomes unchallengeable after the one-year limitation period. This restored a permanent injunction for the Telangana Wakf Board over Mafi Inam lands adjoining the Qutub Shahi Mosque, prevailing over later revenue records and pattadar passbooks.

The Supreme Court held that bail orders ignoring video evidence and failing to record reasons are unsustainable, emphasizing that reasoned decisions are essential to justice. The ruling affects lower courts, mandating detailed reasoning and evidence appreciation in all bail applications.

Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 does not apply to allegations of demanding a bribe unrelated to official functions, meaning prior sanction is not required and clarifying immunity in cases against public servants.

The Supreme Court held that a gift of temple inam land by a temporary trustee is void under Section 41(1) of the TN HRCE Act, 1959 because the Act permits no sanction for such gifts. It directed the government to pay enhanced lease rent of ₹31,000 per month from March 8, 2019, with arrears payable in three months and ₹1 lakh costs within eight weeks.

The Supreme Court held that a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC for a false affidavit under Section 125-A of the Representation of People Act is maintainable without Election Commission sanction under Section 195(1) CrPC. This expands voters’ remedy beyond election petitions.

The Supreme Court held that a person’s conversion from Hinduism to Islam does not automatically carry forward their former Hindu backward-caste status for claiming Muslim reservation benefits under Article 16(4). The ruling clarifies that caste identity is religion-specific and cannot be transferred across faiths, affecting individuals seeking community certificates after conversion.

The Supreme Court held that an Information Utility’s record creates a presumption of default under IBC Section 7, making quantum disputes and profitability irrelevant for admission. This eases CIRP initiation for creditors while raising burden on debtors.

The Supreme Court ruled that a homebuyer can recover only the amount paid from personal savings in a tripartite loan arrangement when the builder defaults, not the bank-disbursed loan. It awarded Rs 1.27 crore (personal funds) with 12% interest plus Rs 15 lakh compensation, while confirming the bank’s Rs 2 lakh service deficiency. This clarifies refund limits for buyers financed via builder-bank-buyer tripartite agreements.

The Supreme Court ruled that limitation for appeals under Section 62 IBC starts from the NCLAT order date, not receipt of the certified copy. A delay in obtaining the copy cannot be excused if the appeal is filed after limitation has commenced, impacting parties challenging NCLAT rulings.

Supreme Court rules that fees for professional courses must be notified before admission and can be changed only for unforeseen expenditure increases, ordering refund of excess fees collected. This ensures student certainty and lets institutions cover genuine cost rises.

The Supreme Court held that an exclusive jurisdiction clause selecting Goa courts fixes the arbitral seat, invalidating the Delhi High Court’s Section 11(6) appointment and clarifying that such clauses override venue provisions for parties and courts.

A belated amendment under Order VI Rule 17 CPC is allowed if due diligence is shown and it does not fundamentally alter the suit, the Supreme Court held. It vacated the trial and Orissa High Court orders, imposed costs, but left property question open.