Search the cases we're tracking — try a natural query like “murder cases in Maharashtra”.
149 cases · page 5 of 8
In the case of Vijayakumar v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court of India upheld the conviction of an individual for criminal intimidation based on threats to circulate a woman's intimate video. As reported on 23 May 2026, the Court ruled that the offense is established even if the device or the recording itself is not recovered.
The sessions court initially sentenced seven individuals to death and two to life imprisonment for the murder of neurologist Dr. SD Subbiah. Following an acquittal of all accused by the Madras High Court in June 2024, the Supreme Court set aside the acquittals on 19 May 2026. The Supreme Court restored the convictions of the seven individuals while modifying their sentencing to life imprisonment, with two others permitted to seek pardon.
The Supreme Court of India upheld the dismissal of police constable Ranjan Kumar, who held simultaneous employment in the Jharkhand and Bihar police forces by using different identities. Ruling that public employment obtained through fraudulent means cannot be sustained, the Court ordered that criminal action be considered against him as reported on 12 May 2026.
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of state amendments to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act on 18 May 2023, permitting bullock cart races in Maharashtra. Following this constitutional bench judgment, the Government of Maharashtra issued formal standard operating procedures to regulate the organization of these races on 8 May 2026.
The Supreme Court petition, Lok Prahari versus Union of India, addressed electoral reforms concerning the unexplained increase in assets of legislators and their associates. The Court previously issued directions regarding the disclosure of income sources. On 24 April 2026, the Supreme Court disposed of a contempt petition after accepting the Union government's explanations for failing to implement the mechanism mandated in the 2018 judgment.
The Supreme Court of India permitted passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, who had been in a vegetative state for 13 years. This ruling marks the first instance of a court-ordered withdrawal of medical treatment in the country, clarifying guidelines for end-of-life care.
Mohammad Arif alias Ashfaq was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in the 2000 Red Fort attack. Following the rejection of his mercy petition by President Droupadi Murmu on 12 June 2024, the Supreme Court of India issued a notice on 21 January 2026 to examine a curative petition challenging the dismissal of his earlier review petition.
The Supreme Court is hearing a Presidential Reference regarding the constitutional timelines for Governors to grant assent to bills passed by state legislatures. The court is examining 14 questions framed by the President of India concerning the role of Governors in the legislative process.
The Supreme Court of India examined whether the failure of a candidate to disclose a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, constitutes a ground for disqualification from an election.
The Supreme Court overturned its own 2017 order that had upheld the death sentence of Vasanta Sampat Dupare, who was convicted for the rape and murder of a four-year-old girl. The court allowed an Article 32 petition challenging the sentence on the grounds of procedural safeguards.
The CBI's prosecution of gangster Chhota Rajan for the 2001 murder of Mumbai hotelier Jaya Shetty. A special court in Mumbai sentenced him to life imprisonment on 30 May 2024; in September 2025 the Supreme Court cancelled the bail the Bombay High Court had granted him while his appeal is pending.
Arun Gawli was convicted by a special MCOCA court on 24 August 2012 for the 2007 murder of Shiv Sena corporator Kamlakar Jamsandekar, and the Bombay High Court upheld this conviction on 10 December 2019. The Supreme Court of India granted bail to Arun Gawli on 28 August 2025, overturning a previous denial of his plea as reported on 20 February 2025.
The Supreme Court originally commuted Mohd Firoz's death penalty in a rape and murder case to a 20-year prison term in a verdict delivered on 19 April 2022. On 23 August 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a fresh judgment regarding Mohd Firoz and others concerning charges under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code related to robbery.
A nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.
On 15 February 2024, the Supreme Court of India unanimously declared the Electoral Bonds Scheme unconstitutional and manifestly arbitrary for violating the voter's right to information. Following this verdict, a plea was filed in the Supreme Court on 5 July 2024 seeking the confiscation of all electoral bond donations previously received by political parties.
The Supreme Court addressed petitions questioning the 1994 Ismail Faruqui judgment, which held that a mosque is not an essential part of the practice of Islam. On 1 July 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a 2:1 split verdict declining to refer the judgment to a larger bench for reconsideration.
In the matter of M/s Balaji Traders vs State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court of India ruled on 5 June 2025 that the actual delivery of property is not a necessary ingredient to constitute the offense of extortion under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. This judgment finalized the legal interpretation regarding the threat of life or injury for extortion purposes.
In Gayatri Balasamy versus ISG Novasoft Technologies, the Supreme Court delivered a judgment on 13 February 2025. In a 4:1 majority verdict, the court clarified that under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the power to modify an arbitral award is limited to correcting clerical, computational, or typographical errors.
The Supreme Court delivered a verdict regarding the constitutional powers of the Governor of Tamil Nadu concerning the assent of legislative bills. The ruling addressed the extent of the Governor's authority in withholding assent to bills passed by the state legislature.
The Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment directing the grant of Permanent Commission to women officers in the Indian Army. The court's ruling addressed gender discrimination in service conditions and career progression within the armed forces.
Looking for a specific case? Describe the event and we'll verify it against trusted sources.
