Search the cases we're tracking — try a natural query like “murder cases in Maharashtra”.
149 cases · page 7 of 8
The Supreme Court upheld the 2016 demonetisation of Rs 500 and Rs 1000 currency notes by a 4:1 majority. The court ruled that the decision-making process was not flawed or unlawful, while a dissenting opinion noted that the exercise was unlawful but could not be reversed.
The Supreme Court held that a person cannot be tried under MCOCA or GUJCOCA if they have ceased to engage in unlawful activities after the respective acts came into force.
The Supreme Court delivered a split verdict regarding the validity of a ban on wearing hijabs in educational institutions in Karnataka. The matter was referred to a larger bench due to the difference of opinion between the two judges.
The Supreme Court upheld the death penalty for a man convicted of kidnapping, raping, and murdering a seven-year-old physically and mentally challenged girl in Rajasthan.
The Supreme Court examined a challenge against construction activities near the Shree Jagannath Temple in Puri. The Court held that the development work undertaken by the Odisha government is necessary in the larger public interest.
The Supreme Court set aside a Bombay High Court judgment that had interpreted 'sexual assault' under the POCSO Act as requiring direct skin-to-skin contact. The apex court clarified that physical contact made with sexual intent is sufficient to constitute an offence under the Act.
The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018, which provided reservation to the Maratha community. The court declared the law unconstitutional, citing the lack of exceptional circumstances to exceed the 50% reservation ceiling established in the 1992 Indra Sawhney judgment.
The Supreme Court reviewed the legal battle concerning the removal of Cyrus Mistry as chairman of Tata Sons. The court ultimately upheld the decision of Tata Sons to sack Mistry, setting aside an earlier NCLAT order.
The Supreme Court upheld the death sentence of Shabnam, a teacher, and her partner Salim for the murder of seven members of her family in 2008 due to a property dispute and family opposition to their marriage.
The Supreme Court delivered a verdict regarding petitions challenging the indefinite public protests at Shaheen Bagh, Delhi, which were held against the Citizenship Amendment Act. The court examined the balance between the right to protest and the right of the public to access common areas.
The Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment confirming that daughters possess equal coparcenary rights in Hindu Undivided Family properties, regardless of whether the father was alive when the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act came into force.
The Allahabad High Court ordered the removal of hoardings displaying personal details of individuals allegedly involved in protests, observing that the police and executive lacked the legal power for such public exhibitions. As reported on 13 March 2020, the Supreme Court heard the Uttar Pradesh government's appeal against this order and observed that no law currently supports the state's action of displaying such personal details.
In this litigation, the Supreme Court of India declared Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code unconstitutional to the extent that it criminalized private consensual sexual acts between adults. The five-judge Constitution Bench ruled on 6 September 2018 that the provision was irrational and arbitrary. As of 15 November 2018, the central government had yet to implement the court's directive to conduct public sensitization programs regarding the decriminalization.
This public interest litigation concerns 1,528 alleged extra-judicial killings by security forces and police in Manipur. In a landmark judgment delivered on 13 July 2016, the Supreme Court of India ordered an investigation into these incidents, ruling that the state cannot use excessive force under the cover of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. As reported on 12 November 2018, this decision continues to serve as the foundational ruling for subsequent petitions regarding alleged extra-judicial executions in the region.
This case concerns the Supreme Court's March 20, 2018, judgment regarding the implementation of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The ruling introduced procedural safeguards that led to public protests and subsequent government review petitions seeking a stay or recall of the decision.
The Supreme Court issued guidelines to address the interference of Khap panchayats in marriages between consenting adults. The court ruled that such self-appointed village bodies cannot prevent adults from exercising their right to choose their partners.
The NGO Common Cause filed a plea seeking to declare the 'right to die with dignity' as part of the fundamental right to life. The Supreme Court legalized passive euthanasia and the execution of living wills under specified conditions.
Six petitioners, including Shayara Bano and Ishrat Jahan, challenged the practice of instant triple talaq in the Supreme Court. The court examined the constitutionality of the practice in a landmark ruling.
In the case of Shyam Narayan Chouksey vs Union of India, the Supreme Court of India issued an interim order in November 2016 mandating that cinema halls play the national anthem before film screenings. As reported on 9 January 2018, the Supreme Court modified this order and ruled that playing the national anthem in cinema halls is no longer mandatory.
The Supreme Court upheld the death sentences of four convicts involved in the 2012 gangrape and murder of a woman in Delhi. The court categorized the incident as a 'rarest of rare' case.
Looking for a specific case? Describe the event and we'll verify it against trusted sources.
