Search cases

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India — Forest Conservation Case

The Supreme Court established the Central Empowered Committee in 2002 to monitor forest conservation compliance and advise the court on forest laws. As reported on 14 September 2026, the court permitted Oil India to challenge the rejection of a drilling permit within a national park, as the company alleges that authorities misapplied the court's 26 April 2023 judgment concerning mining prohibitions in protected areas.

Central Bureau of Investigation vs Sajjan Kumar — 1984 Anti-Sikh riots case

Former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Delhi High Court for his role in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. His appeal against this conviction was pending before the Supreme Court as of 23 April 2026. Sajjan Kumar died at the age of 80 at Safdarjung Hospital on 13 September 2026 while serving his sentence.

Arvind Kumar v. State of UP — SC/ST Act investigation and relief fund management case

A case involving allegations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, with disputes over relief disbursement to victims. The Allahabad High Court directed a state-wide probe into repeated claims and misuse of relief funds, which was subsequently set aside by the Supreme Court for lack of reasoning in the order.

State of Karnataka v Prathik Parasrampuria — Election black money case

In a judgment delivered on 18 August 2026, the Supreme Court established nationwide guidelines to curb the influence of black money in elections, following proceedings regarding the 2014 Bellary Lok Sabha bye-election. The Court mandated that the withdrawal of election-related cases requires High Court approval, imposed a one-year deadline for investigations, and directed the Election Commission of India and governments to submit compliance reports by 18 November 2026.

Supreme Court ruling on eligibility for judicial service examinations

The Supreme Court of India has reduced the mandatory legal practice requirement for entry-level judicial service examinations from three years to one year. This modification, clarified on 22 August 2026, applies to candidates affected by notifications issued between 20 May 2025 and 31 March 2027. Under the judgment reported on 4 September 2026, the court additionally introduced a requirement for candidates to complete a one-year training period at a judicial academy and a one-year law clerkship.

Supreme Court case — Quashing of FIR and chargesheet under IPC 406, 420, 109, 34

On 4 September 2026, the Supreme Court quashed an FIR and chargesheet against the accused involving sections 406, 420, 109, and 34 of the IPC. The Court held that a failure to return a refundable security deposit does not constitute criminal breach of trust or cheating without evidence of dishonest intent from the inception of the transaction.

State vs Sukesh Chandrashekhar — Impersonating Supreme Court Judge

A Delhi Court convicted Sukesh Chandrashekhar for impersonating a Supreme Court judge to pressure a judicial officer into granting him bail. Following his sentencing to eight years of rigorous imprisonment on 4 September 2026, Chandrashekhar moved the Delhi High Court to challenge the conviction and request the expungement of derogatory remarks. A hearing regarding the maintainability of his plea is scheduled for 3 November 2026.

Reena vs The Managing Director, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation — MACT negligence and criminal acquittal case

In this motor accident claim, the Supreme Court ruled on 4 September 2026 that an acquittal in criminal proceedings does not determine outcomes in Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cases due to differing standards of proof. The Court set aside a Karnataka High Court order that had attributed 50% contributory negligence to a deceased driver based on a bus driver's criminal acquittal.

Juvenile tried by regular criminal court — Conviction merits case

The Supreme Court ruled on 4 September 2026 that a conviction on merits recorded against a juvenile by a regular criminal court does not need to be set aside. While the conviction stands, the court clarified that the adult sentence imposed by the regular criminal court cannot be legally enforced.

State vs Six persons — Bihar 2001 indiscriminate firing case

Six persons accused of indiscriminate firing to kill a man in broad daylight in 2001 were acquitted by the Supreme Court after more than a decade of appellate proceedings. One accused had served a life sentence awarded by the trial court and upheld by the Patna High Court in 2015. The Supreme Court concluded that no proper investigation had taken place and quashed the case.

Vyakti Vikas Kendra India v. Manoj Misra (Dead) & Ors. — Polluter Pays Principle and Environmental Damage

The Supreme Court set aside an NGT order against Art of Living in a Yamuna floodplain matter. The Court held that the Polluter Pays Principle cannot be invoked absent a demonstrable link to environmental damage. The Court found that contemporaneous material showed the site was already damaged before it was handed over to the appellant.

State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ajmal Beg — Dowry death and cruelty case

A case involving dowry death and cruelty against a married woman under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. The Supreme Court's judgment dated 15 December 2025 restored a trial court's conviction of the accused, and subsequently issued 10-point nationwide directions to expedite trials in similar cases.

Marine Cargo Annual Turnover Policy — Insurer liability case

In the case of New India Assurance Company Limited vs. M/s Louis Dreyfus Commodities India Pvt Ltd, the Supreme Court ruled on 18 August 2026 that an insurer is not liable for losses exceeding the sum insured under a Marine Cargo Annual Turnover Policy without advance premium payment. The Court affirmed that Section 64VB of the Insurance Act prohibits insurers from assuming risks based on informal promises or before receiving the requisite premium.

In re: Post Facto Environmental Clearances

On 19 August 2026, the Supreme Court struck down the 2021 Office Memorandum that allowed for ex-post-facto environmental clearances, ruling that prior environmental approval is the mandatory rule. The Court affirmed on 25 August 2026 that the Union of India may exercise statutory authority under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, to implement time-bound amnesty schemes for environmental clearances, provided these schemes are enacted through statutory notifications rather than administrative orders.

Supreme Court ruling on SC/ST Act applicability in private spaces

The Supreme Court of India ruled that caste-based insults made within a private space or closed room do not constitute an offense under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court clarified that such actions only qualify as an offense if committed within public view, as established in the judgment delivered as reported on 22 August 2026.

Supreme Court — Dowry death case with acquittal of husband and 17 in-laws

In a judgment delivered on 13 July 2026, the Supreme Court acquitted a husband and 16 family members in a 26-year-old dowry death case originating from April 2000 in Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh. The Court overturned the convictions after finding that the deceased did not accuse her husband of cruelty during her five-day hospitalization, and it criticized the mechanical prosecution of all accused family members.

Applicability of Section 498A IPC to live-in relationships

The Supreme Court of India has clarified that the legal protections against cruelty afforded under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, extend to individuals in live-in relationships. This ruling addresses the scope of domestic cruelty laws beyond formal marriages.

In re: Electrocution Liability Case

The Supreme Court ruled on 13 August 2026 that electricity authorities are subject to strict, rather than absolute, liability for electrocution injuries and deaths. Furthermore, as reported on 14 August 2026, the Court held that writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are not maintainable when cases involve disputed questions of fact, requiring petitioners to seek alternative legal remedies.

State vs Unknown accused — Narcotics vehicle interception case

The Supreme Court addressed the procedural requirements under Section 42 of the NDPS Act in circumstances requiring immediate interception of moving vehicles carrying narcotics. The Court held that substantial compliance with statutory requirements is sufficient in such urgent situations.

State vs Twenty Persons — Murder case acquittal upheld

In the case of Nirmala Bai Devidas Chavhan versus State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal of twenty individuals in a murder case on 4 August 2026. The Court determined that the prosecution's case was fatally undermined by unsealed forensic recoveries and identical, stereotyped eyewitness testimonies that suggested the witnesses were tutored.