COURTKUTCHEHRY LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 

COURTKUTCHEHRY LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Sl. No.	TITLE & CITATION	RELEVANT PARAGRAPHS
1.	Yashwant Sinha & Ors. Vs Central Bureau Of Investigation Through Its Director & Anr, (2019) 11 SC CK 0041	PERCEPTION OF INDIVIDUALS CANNOT BE THE BASIS OF A FISHING AND ROVING ENQUIRY. THE PROCESSES HAVE BEEN BROADLY FOLLOWED. THE NEED FOR THE AIRCRAFT IS NOT IN DOUBT, AND THE QUALITY OF THE AIRCRAFT IS NOT IN QUESTION.
2.	Kantaru Rajeevaru Vs Indian Young Lawyers Association Thr. Its General Secretary And Ors., (2019) 11 SC CK 0040	A LARGER BENCH WILL DECIDE WHETHER TRADITIONAL PRACTICES CAN PREVENT ENTRY OF WOMEN AT RELIGIOUS PLACES. TILL SUCH TIME ENTRY OF WOMEN IS PERMITTED AS PREVIOUS VERDICT ON SEPTEMBER 28TH, 2018 WAS NOT OVERTURNED.
3.	Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court Of India  Vs  Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2019) 11 SC CK 0032	THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA IS A PUBLIC AUTHORITY AND FALLS WITHIN THE AMBIT OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY GO HAND-IN-HAND. RTI CANNOT BE USED AS A TOOL OF SURVEILLANCE. JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE HAS TO BE KEPT IN MIND WHILE DEALING WITH TRANSPARENCY.
4.	M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs  Vs  Mahant Suresh Das & Ors, (2019) 11 SC CK 0030	HINDUS WOULD GET THE ENTIRE DISPUTED 2.77 ACRES IN AYODHYA. POSSESSION OF LAND TO REMAIN WITH CENTRE. MUSLIMS WILL GET ALTERNATE FIVE ACRES OF LAND EITHER IN THE SURPLUS 67 ACRES ACQUIRED IN AND AROUND THE DISPUTED STRUCTURE BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OR ANY OTHER "PROMINENT" PLACE. A TRUST WILL BE FORMED IN 3 MONTHS TO BUILD A TEMPLE ON THE DISPUTED LAND.
5.	Manohar Lal Sharma Vs Narendra Damodardas Modi & Ors. (2018) 12 SC CK 0055	ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO ACQUITTAL IN CASE THE INFORMANT AND THE INVESTIGATIVE OFFICER IS THE SAME PERSON.
6.	Babasaheb Maruti Kamble Vs State Of Maharashtra, (2018) 11 SC CK 0040	REASON HAS TO BE GIVEN BEFORE DISMISSING THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS FILED IN THOSE CASES WHERE DEATH SENTENCE HAS ALREADY BEEN GIVEN.
7.	State Of Kerala Vs Rasheed,(2018) 10 SC CK 0079	A BALANCE MUST BE STRUCK BETWEEN THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED, AND THE PREROGATIVE OF THE PROSECUTION TO LEAD EVIDENCE.
8.	Arjun Gopal And Others Vs Union Of India And Others, (2018) 10 SC CK 0055	NO COMPLETE BAN ON BURSTING OF FIRECRACKERS. TIME LIMIT FOR BURSTING CRACKERS FIXED.
9.	Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Represented Through Legal Representatives Vs State Of Karnataka & Ors, (2018) 10 SC CK 0035	SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT A VICTIM CAN FILE AN APPEAL IN THE HIGH COURT AGAINST THE ACQUITTAL WITHOUT SEEKING LEAVE TO APPEAL.
10.	Union Of India & Anr Vs Mohit Mineral Pvt. Ltd,(2018) 10 SC CK 0008	SUPREME COURT UPHELD THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX (COMPENSATION TO STATES) ACT, 2017, AS WELL AS THE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMPENSATION CESS RULES, 2017, AS FRAMED UNDER THE ACT.
11.	Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors Vs State Of Kerala & Ors., (2018) 09 SC CK 0138	WOMEN IS NOT LESSER OR INFERIOR TO MAN. PATRIARCHY OF RELIGION CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO TRUMP OVER FAITH.
12.	Romila Thapar And Ors Vs Union Of India And Ors., (2018) 09 SC CK 0092	ARREST NOT BECAUSE OF DISSENT BUT INVESTIGATIONS INDICATE COMPLICITY OF THE SAID ACCUSED IN THE COMMISSION OF CRIME -BHIMA KOREGAON
13.	Joseph Shine Vs Union Of India, (2018) 09 SC CK 0083	158-YEAR-OLD ADULTERY LAW UNDER SECTION 497 IPC STRUCK DOWN AS IT PROVIDED LEGAL SOVREIGNITY OF ONE SEX OVER ANOTHER. CRIMINALIZING ADULTERY WAS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
14.	M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs Vs Mahant Suresh Das And Others Etc, (2018) 09 SC CK 0088	ISMAIL FARUQUI CASE ATTRACTED RES JUDICATA AND THE OBSERVATIONS MADE THEREIN HAVE TO BE VIEWD IN THE CONTEXT OF LAND ACQUISITION AND IT WAS NO LONGER RELEVANT IN THE AYODHYA TITLE DISPUTE.
15.	Jarnail Singh & Others Vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Others, (2018) 09 SC CK 0069	CLARIFICATION ON NAGRAJ DECISION WAS GIVEN BY SC THAT COLLECTION OF QUANTIFIABLE DATA IS NOT REQUIRED FOR PROVIDING RESERVATION IN PROMOTION FOR SC/ STS
16.	Swapnil Tripathi And Anr Vs Supreme Court Of India & Ors, (2018) 09 SC CK 0137	IN LARGER PUBLIC INTEREST, SC ALLOWS LIVE STREAMING OF SC PROCEEDINGS.
17.	Tehseen Poonawalla Vs Union Of India & Anr, (2018) 09 SC CK 0135	PETITION SEEKING PROBE INTO DEATH OF JUSTICE LOYA DISMISSED.
18.	Lok Prahari, Through Its General Secretary S.N. Shukla Vs Election Commission Of India & Ors, (2018) 09 SC CK 0076	EX-CMS NOT ENTITLED TO GOVERNMENT BUNGALOWS.
19.	Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Vs Union Of India & Anr, (2018) 09 SC CK 0057	MPS AND MLAS CANNOT BE RESTRICTED FROM PRACTISING LAW.
20.	Public Interest Foundation & Ors Vs Union Of India & Anr, (2018) 09 SC CK 0054	CANDIDATES CANNOT BE DISQUALIFIED MERELY BECAUSE CHARGES HAVE BEEN FRAMED AGAINST THEM IN A CRIMINAL CASE.
21.	Achpal @ Ramswaroop & Another Vs State Of Rajasthan, (2018) 09 SC CK 0048	ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO DEFAULT BAIL UNDER SECTION 167(2) OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EVEN IF THE CHARGE SHEET FILED BY POLICE WAS RETURNED BY THE MAGISTRATE FOR TECHNICAL REASONS.
22.	Social Action Forum For Manav Adhikar And Another Vs Union Of India Ministry Of Law And Justice And Others, (2018) 09 SC CK 0024	SC MODIFIED ITS EARLIER DIRECTIONS TO PREVENT MISUSE OF 498A OF IPC.
23.	S. Nambi Narayanan Vs Siby Mathews & Others Etc, (2018) 09 SC CK 0025	RS 50 LAKH COMPENSATION GIVEN TO FORMER ISRO SCIENTIST NAMBI NARAYANAN, ALLEGEDLY THE ARREST OF NAMBI NARAYANAN DELAYED THE DEVELOPMENT OF CRYOGENIC ENGINE. COMMITTEE HEADED BY JUSTICE DK JAIN TO INQUIRE IN TO THE ROLE OF KERALA POLICE OFFICERS
24.	Navtej Singh Johar & Ors Vs Union Of India Thr. Secretary Ministry Of Law And Justice, (2018) 09 SC CK 0136	SECTION 377 OF IPC WAS HELD UNCONSTITUIONAL TO THE EXTENT WHEREIN IT CRIMINALIZES CONSENSUAL ADULT HOMO-SEXUAL ACT AND WAS STRUCK DOWN
25.	Purswani Ashutosh (Minor) Through Dr. Kamlesh Virumal Purswani Vs Union Of India & Ors, (2018) 08 SC CK 0109	MEDICAL ASPIRANT WITH “LOW VISION” TO BE ADMITTED IN MBBS COURSE IN THE CATEGORY OF PERSONS WITH BENCHMARK DISABILITY WHILE HOLDING THAT PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 2016 WHICH CONSIDER LOW VISIBILITY AS A BENCHMARK DISABILITY ARE BINDING ON THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA.
26.	Mohan Lal Vs State Of Punjab, (2018) 08 SC CK 0033	PETITION SEEKING PROBE IN THE RAFALE DEAL DISMISSED
27.	All India Judges Association & Ors Vs Union Of India & Ors, (2018) 08 SC CK 0108	WITH A VIEW TO IMPROVE COURT ADMINISTRATION INCLUDING LOWERING OF PENDENCIES OF CASES, SC DIRECTS APPOINTMENT OF PROFESSIONALLY QUALIFIED COURT MANAGERS IN ALL PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURTS
28.	Commissioner Of Customs (Import), Mumbai  Vs  M/S. Dilip Kumar And Company & Ors, (2018) 07 SC CK 0094	IN A SITUATION WHERE THE TAX EXEMPTION HAS TO BE INTERPRETED, THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT SHOULD GO IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT.
29.	Tehseen S. Poonawalla Vs Union Of India And Others, (2018) 07 SC CK 0044	THE HORRENDOUS ACTS OF MOBOCRACY CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO INUNDATE THE LAW OF THE LAND. DIRECTIONS ISSUED.
30.	Shanti Bhushan Vs Supreme Court Of India Through Its Registrar And Another, (2018) 07 SC CK 0025	SHANTI SUSHANT BHUSHAN'S PETITION WAS DISMISSED AND IT WAS HELD THAT CJI IS THE MASTER OF THE ROSTER.
31.	Government Of Nct Of Delhi Vs Union Of India & Another, (2018) 07 SC CK 0093	LG CANNOT INTERFERE IN EACH AND EVERY DECISION OF THE DELHI GOVERNMENT, AND THAT THE LG IS BOUND BY THE AID AND ADVISE OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF DELHI GOVERNMENT.
32.	Asian Resurfacing Of Road Agency P. Ltd. And Anr Vs Central Bureau Of Investigation, (2018) 04 SC CK 0107	STAY IN CIVIL/CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS NOT TO BE GIVEN BEYOND 6 MONTHS AND ANY FURTHER EXTENSION WILL ONLY BE GIVEN BY A SPEAKING ORDER
33.	Bar Council Of India Vs A.K. Balaji And Ors, (2018) 03 SC CK 0093	SC UPHELD THAT FOREIGN LAW FIRMS/COMPANIES OR FOREIGN LAWYERS CANNOT PRACTICE PROFESSION OF LAW IN INDIA EITHER IN THE LITIGATION OR IN NONLITIGATION SIDE. HOWEVER, IT WAS CLARIFIED THAT THERE WAS NO BAR FOR THE FOREIGN LAW FIRMS OR FOREIGN LAWYERS TO VISIT INDIA ON A “FLY IN AND FLY OUT” BASIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING LEGAL ADVICE.
34.	Common Cause (A Regd. Society Vs Union Of India And Another, (2018) 03 SC CK 0092	SC EXPANDED THE SPECTRUM OF ARTICLE 21 WHICH IS TO INCLUDE WITHIN IT THE RIGHT TO LIVE WITH DIGNITY AS COMPONENT OF RIGHT TO LIFE AND LIBERTY. ALLOWS PASSIVE EUTHANASIA AND LIVING WILL.
35.	Shafin Jahan Vs Asokan K.M. And Others, (2018) 03 SC CK 0091	RIGHT TO CHANGE OF FAITH IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF CHOICE