Issue for Consideration 1) Whether the State can insist that a teacher seeking appointment in a minority educational institution must qualify the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET); If so, whether providing such a qualification would affect any of the rights of the minority institutions of India; and 2) Whether teachers appointed much prior to issuance of Notification dated 29th July, 2011 by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) u/s.23(1) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) read with the newly inserted proviso
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was correct in allowing the pre-arrest bail to respondent-accused u/s.438 Cr.PC in respect of alleged commission of offenses punishable u/ss.118(1), 115(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 324(4), 76, 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya u/ss.3(1)(o), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.438 – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – ss.118 (1), 115(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3),
Issue for Consideration Conviction of the appellant u/s.302, IPC based on the statement/ dying declaration (Exh. P-34) of the deceased, if ought to be set aside. Headnotes† Evidence – Dying declaration – When cannot be relied upon – Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 – of injured victim’s statement (Exh.P 34) – Victim died, s.302 was added to the case – Appellant along with co-accused persons was arrested – Trial court acquitted the co-accused persons however, the appellant was convicted u/s.302 – Conviction affirmed by High
362 : 2025 INSC 1058 The State of Telangana & Ors. Etc. v. Kalluri Naga Narasimha Abhiram & Ors. Etc. (Civil Appeal No(s). 11217-11269 of 2025) 01 September 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI and K. Vinod Chandran,* J.] Issue for Consideration Whether the wisdom of the legislature in defining a can be interfered with and expanded by the High Court u/Art.226. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Arts.371D, 245, 246 – Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulations of Admissions) Order, 1974 – Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions)
Issue for Consideration Allegation against the respondent nos.1 and 2 that they raped a minor girl. It is admitted that they never committed the acts together and always acted separately. In light of the controversy involved in the instant case, the two question arise for consideration: i) in a grave error in acquitting the respondent nos.1 and 2 by holding that the prosecution failed to discharge its evidentiary burden as the evidence led by the prosecution was full of inconsistencies and contradictions; ii) whether the High Court erred in its finding that the trial was carried
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the order passed by the National Green Tribunal imposing a compensation of ₹18 crores on the appellant for alleged environmental violations; and whether the tribunal adhered to fair procedure while conducting Act, 2010 – s.19 – Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 – ss.21, 22 – Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Environmental degradation – Environmental compensation – Power of the Control Board to take samples of effluents and
Issue for Consideration I) Whether the impugned documents, i.e., Agreement to Sell, General Power of Attorney, Receipt of Consideration and the registered Will, allegedly entered into by K, father of the appellant/ defendant no.1 and respondent no.1/plaintiff in favour of the plaintiff would suit property; II) Whether the plaintiff can claim any benefit u/s.53A of TP Act, which deals with Part Performance. Headnotes† Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.54 – Succession Act, 1925 – s.63 – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.68 – Respondent no.1/plaintiff
Issue for Consideration Issue arose for consideration whether the disciplinary authority took into consideration the past conduct of the respondent while passing the dismissal order. Headnotes† Service law – Dismissal from service – Unauthorized absence – Respondent and then transferred to the Commando Force – Respondent dismissed from the service on account of unauthorized absence – Respondent remained absent from duty for 68 days, 180 days, 20 days, and lastly for 37 days, for which the departmental enquiry was initiated, and was dismissed
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the order of conviction u/s.498-A IPC and consequential sentence imposed on the appellant-mother-in-law can be sustained on the basis of the material evidence. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.498-A – Husband or relative of husband of a Dowry demand – Case of the complainant-father that his daughter was found dead inside the matrimonial home, and the accused persons- father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the daughter were present in the house; that the daughter had committed suicide by hanging herself; that
Issue for Consideration Whether the premises of Visakhapatnam Steel Plant where appellant’s vehicles are exclusively used for handling and storage operations, constitute a ‘public place’ under the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1963; whether such vehicles are liable thereof or entitled to exemption therefrom. Headnotes† Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1963 – s.3 – Interpretation – Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1963 – r.12A – Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 – s.2(34) – ‘public
Issue for Consideration Himachal Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (Commission) rejected the appellant’s petition for payment of arrears at an enhanced tariff for the electricity supplied by it to the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited the appellant’s appeal in part and inter alia held that the tariff for its 3 MW hydel power plant under the PPA dated 30.03.2000 required no redetermination but, the tariff for its additional 1.90 MW hydel power plant required to be redetermined as per the Himachal Pradesh Electricity
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the delivery of the true/xerox copy of the Arbitral Award duly signed by the Arbitrator to an authorised representative of the State would constitute delivery upon the respondent in accordance with s.31(5) of the 1996 Act. Headnotes† Arbitration – ss.31(5), 2(1) (h) – Form and contents of arbitral award – Delivery of signed copy to each party – Delivery of the true/xerox copy of the Arbitral Award duly signed by the Arbitrator to Assistant Engineer-authorised representative of the State on 12.11.2013 –
Issue for Consideration Whether continuation of the prosecution initiated by the revenue u/s.276C(1), Income Tax Act, 1961 against the appellant after passing an order by the Settlement Commission, would amount to abuse of process of Court; of the present case, the High Court was justified to dismiss the quashing petition filed by the appellant, and if not, what relief can be granted. Headnotes† Income Tax Act, 1961 – ss.276C(1), 245H(1) proviso to, 245D(4), 245I – Search conducted at the residence of the
Issue for Consideration Challenge to the judgment of the High Court whereby the appeals filed by the appellants herein were dismissed against the judgment of the trial court convicting them for offences u/ss.25A and 29, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Headnotes† Act, 1985 – ss.25A, 29, 35, 54, 9A – Punishment for contravention of orders made u/s.9A – Punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order 2013 – Case of prosecution that when
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in rejecting the quashing petition filed by the appellants-Officers of the Bank challenging the order passed by the Magistrate issuing process against them for the offences punishable u/ss.500 and 501, Penal Code, 1860. Headnotes† Penal 501 – Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – s.32, 13(2), (4) – Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 – r.8 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Loan accounts of respondent
Issue for Consideration Leakage of question paper of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Mains Examination conducted by the Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC), on 26th and 27th August, 2022, led to the present reference by the Hon’ble President of India under Constitution of India, for inquiry and report as to whether Respondent (Ms. Mepung Tadar Bage) ought to be removed as member of APPSC on grounds of misbehaviour. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art. 317(1) – Leakage of question paper of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Mains
Issue for Consideration Whether Order XXX Rule 10 CPC in any manner debar a suit filed against the proprietor. Headnotes† Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. XXX, R.10 and Or. VII, R.11 – Appellant filed a suit for eviction – Defendant no.1 was Aditya Motors (the lessee), of PDP – An application was filed by appellant u/Or. VI, R.17 CPC seeking amendment of plaint – One of the amendments sought was that the lessee-defendant no.1 be deleted and, in its place, PDP be substituted as representative of the lessee – Amendment was allowed – After
Issue for Consideration The accused-appellants were convicted for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction preferred by the accused-appellants. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.376(2)(g), 201 and that they raped and murdered a minor girl – Trial Court convicted the accused-appellants for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860 – Accused no.1 was sentenced rigorous life imprisonment u/s.376(2)(g) of IPC; seven years rigorous
Issue for Consideration Whether conviction of appellant for the offences punishable u/s.8 of the Goa Children’s Act, 2003 is sustainable; whether the appellant deserves to be given benefit under provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Headnotes† Goa Children’s Act, 2003 ss.323, 352, 504 – Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 – An FIR came to be lodged against the appellant for the offences punishable u/ss.323, 352 and 504 of the IPC and u/s.8 of the Act of 2003 – Appellant was convicted and sentenced by the President, Children’s Court –
Issue for Consideration Present appeal assails the correctness of the judgment of the High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant-EARC and further directing that the amount deposited, vide be transmitted to the account of the respondent no.1 herein; priority of first charge amongst the EPFO and the secured creditors in view of s.11(2) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Headnotes† Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions