Search the cases we're tracking — try a natural query like “murder cases in Maharashtra”.
149 cases · page 4 of 8
In Criminal Appeal No. 3081 of 2026, the Supreme Court convicted an appellant for producing a forged Bhu Adhikar Rin Pustika to secure bail. On 13 August 2026, the Court reduced the appellant's sentence to the period already undergone, stating that sentencing must be guided by proportionality rather than retribution.
The Supreme Court refused to restore a conviction under IPC Section 302 (murder) in a case involving serious assault. The victim provided a detailed blow-by-blow account describing 22 injuries, including grievous ones, which raised serious doubts regarding the conviction in the Court's assessment.
In October 2024, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which grants citizenship to certain individuals under the Assam Accord. As of 10 August 2026, the Supreme Court has issued notices to the Union Government and the State of Assam regarding petitions that seek the issuance of identity cards to individuals listed in the National Register of Citizens.
In August 2024, the Supreme Court of India upheld the power of states to sub-classify Scheduled Castes to promote substantive equality. As of 07 August 2026, the Supreme Court is hearing petitions regarding the extension of the creamy layer principle to SC/ST reservations, with the Union Government arguing that such decisions are matters of parliamentary policy.
The Supreme Court delivered a unanimous judgment on 11 May 2023 concerning the 2022 Maharashtra political crisis and the split within the Shiv Sena party. While the Court initially refused to interfere with the Shinde government's formation, it subsequently clarified on 5 August 2026 that a legislative majority does not grant lawmakers the authority to defy their political party's directives.
The Supreme Court dismissed a review petition on 3 August 2026, upholding its earlier ruling that cleared BJP leaders Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma of hate speech charges. The court confirmed that the speeches in question did not disclose a cognisable offence or incite communal violence. This decision follows a challenge to a June 2022 Delhi High Court judgment that had refused to direct the registration of an FIR against the leaders.
The Madras High Court directed the management of the temple in Thirupparankundram to facilitate the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at the stone pillar known as the Deepathoon. On 5 June 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision rejecting action against state officials regarding the dispute. As reported on 3 August 2026, the Supreme Court subsequently declined to stay the High Court order while issuing notice on the Tamil Nadu government’s challenge.
A Supreme Court judgment delivered in May 2026 in the Prajwala case, described as a significant victory for anti-human trafficking advocates. The case relates to human trafficking and forced labour practices in India.
The Supreme Court dismissed the EPFO's special leave petition on 3 April 2019, upholding a Kerala High Court verdict that favored higher pension calculations for employees. On 30 July 2026, the Kerala High Court further granted relief to pre-2014 retirees, confirming their eligibility for higher pension calculations based on contributions made on salaries exceeding the statutory wage limit.
The Supreme Court ruled on 19 May 2026 that the right to feed or protect stray dogs is inseparable from the responsibility for public safety, emphasizing potential tortious liability for dog bites. Following this judgment, the Delhi High Court initiated a suo motu public interest litigation on 22 July 2026 to monitor compliance with the Supreme Court's directions regarding stray dog management. Authorities subsequently began construction of a large-capacity shelter in Dwarka for aggressive stray dogs, as reported on 28 July 2026.
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, which introduced a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections in a 3:2 verdict on 7 November 2022. While hearing ongoing challenges to the policy, the Supreme Court observed on 28 July 2026 that the Rs 8 lakh annual income threshold for eligibility appears prima facie reasonable.
In the matter of Rutvij Bhagat Singh Wakhare v. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court ruled on 24 July 2026 that the transfer of defrauded funds to an accused's account does not automatically imply that multiple FIRs constitute a single transaction. This follows a judgment on 8 December 2025, where the Court set aside a High Court order that had quashed a separate fraud case based on a private compromise, emphasizing that economic offences affect society at large.
The Supreme Court of India examined the legality of converting residential units into independent apartments in Chandigarh. In a judgment delivered on 24 July 2026, the Court upheld the Chandigarh Administration's February 2023 notification that restricted such conversions in the city.
The Supreme Court of India issued a verdict on 13 November 2024 prohibiting authorities from demolishing properties solely because an individual is accused of a crime and established pan-India guidelines for such actions. In a subsequent development regarding the State of Uttar Pradesh vs Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others case, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind President Maulana Arshad Madani formally opposed a demolition order issued by the Rampur Development Authority concerning Jauhar University as reported on 18 July 2026.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court declared the religious character of the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque complex as a Saraswati temple. The decision has been challenged by the Muslim side in the Supreme Court, while Hindu parties have filed caveats to ensure they are heard during the proceedings.
H.D. Revanna faced criminal charges following an FIR registered on April 28, 2024, on a complaint by a survivor of sexual harassment. The Karnataka High Court discharged him of charges under Section 354 IPC, prompting the Karnataka government to challenge the order in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by the Gujarat Pollution Control Board, upholding a November 2025 National Green Tribunal order that absolved a property owner of liability for environmental violations committed by a tenant. The tenant had operated an unlicensed dye manufacturing facility that discharged harmful effluents. The Supreme Court concluded on 8 June 2026 that a landlord cannot be held accountable for a tenant's environmental breaches.
In an appeal by Gunjan Girija Kumari and others, the Supreme Court ruled on 11 May 2026 that casteist abuses uttered inside a private residential house, away from public view, do not constitute an offence under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act. Following this determination, the Court quashed the criminal proceedings that had been previously dismissed by the Delhi High Court on 22 August 2024.
In the case of A. John Kennedy vs State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court issued a judgment on 29 May 2026 regarding the Agasthyamalai ecological landscape. The court ordered the time-bound removal of all encroachments from protected areas, including the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, and mandated the closure of resorts within the region.
Amazon challenged a deal between Future Group and Reliance Retail, leading the Supreme Court to uphold an emergency arbitrator's award halting the transaction on 6 August 2021. As reported on 27 May 2026, the Supreme Court subsequently set aside a Competition Commission of India order that had revoked deal approval and imposed a 202 crore rupee penalty on Amazon.
Looking for a specific case? Describe the event and we'll verify it against trusted sources.
