Issue for Consideration Lending banks/secured creditors, if under an obligation, in terms of the notification dated 29.05.2015 containing the “Framework For Revival And Rehabilitation Of Micro, Small And to identify “incipient stress” in the loan account of the MSMEs prior to classifying the loan account as NPA. Headnotes† Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 – Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Issue for Consideration The primary question that arises for consideration in this case is whether the accident which caused the death of the deceased could be said to have arisen out of and in the course of employment. Also, certain incidental questions also arise for consideration: (i) Does State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act) have retrospective effect so as to cover an accident that has taken place on 22.04.2003 when the Section was enacted on 01.06.2010; (ii) Assuming Section 51E of the ESI Act applies, would the said interpretation enure to the benefit of the appellants
1675 : 2025 INSC 900 Manohar and Others v. The State of Maharashtra & Others (Civil Appeal No. 9870 of 2025) 28 July 2025 [B.R. Gavai,* CJI and Augustine George Masih, J.] Issue for Consideration Whether the impugned judgment passed by the High Court dismissing the First Appeals filed by the – Benefit of, ought to be given to the Appellants – Appellants’ land and other adjoining lands were acquired under the 1961 Act for the establishment of Jintur Industrial Area – LAO awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,800/- per Acre – Appellants sought
Issue for Consideration Whether the bail granted to the appellant-accused on the basis of his undertaking to deposit Rs.25,00,000/- was rightly cancelled by the High Court on his failure to deposit the same. Headnotes† Directions by Supreme Court – Bail – Grant of, on the basis accused – Practice deprecated – Directions issued: Held: High Courts as well as the Trial Courts shall decide the plea for regular bail or anticipatory bail strictly on the merits of the case and shall not exercise their discretion in this regard on any undertaking or any statement
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court declining to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants-accused on the allegations relating to falsification of birth records for securing benefits and selections tournaments. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Private complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate against the appellants-badminton players of national acclaim, their parents and their coach alleging falsification
Issue for Consideration When can amendments to complaints be allowed after cognizance is taken; whether on facts, any prejudice would be caused to the accused-respondents if the amendment to the complaint, as prayed, is allowed. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – – Amendments to complaints post-cognizance – Test of ‘prejudice to the accused’ – Appellant filed complaint u/s.138, NI Act, against the accused-respondents stating that the respondents had purchased Desi Ghee (milk products) but, the cheques issued by them were
Issue for Consideration (a) Whether the exclusion of the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana (or any other State), from the scope of delimitation under the Impugned Notifications and limiting it only to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is arbitrary and violative of Art.14 of the failure of the Union of India to give effect to s.26 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 has frustrated the legitimate expectation of the electorates of these States, thereby giving rise to a justiciable cause of action. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Arts.14,
Issue for Consideration Issue of growing crisis of student suicides in educational institutions; need for a preventive, remedial, and supportive framework for mental health protection and prevention of suicides by students; whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court erred for transfer of the investigation to the CBI in the suspicious death of his 17-year-old daughter, who was undergoing coaching for NEET examination. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.21 – Right to Mental Health – Growing crisis of student suicides – Mental health
1538 : 2025 INSC 892 Satauram Mandavi v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 3179 of 2025) 25 July 2025 [Vikram Nath* and Sandeep Mehta JJ.] Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the retrospective application of the amended provision-s.6 POCSO Act, to the incident Retrospective application of the amended provision-s.6, to the incident took place prior to the amendment – Propriety – Commission of offence by the appellant on 20.05.2019 – Amended provision of s.6 POCSO Act, came into force on 16.08.2019 whereby the minimum sentence enhanced
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court that in cases where a charge-sheet has been issued u/r.14 of the CCS CCA Rules, by authority empowered to inflict minor penalties, then the charge memo has to be approved by the authority (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 – rr.14, 13(2) – Procedure for imposing major penalties – Case relating to the trap case and the case of possessing assets disproportionate to known source of income against the government employee – Disciplinary
Issue for Consideration (i) Whether the High Court in exercise of its power u/s.482 of CrPC or under Art.226/227 of the Constitution is justified in refusing to quash the FIR No.380/2005, u/ss.420, 120-B and 34 of the IPC and the order dated 01.07.2005 passed by the for the registration of the aforesaid FIR; (ii) whether an application u/s.156(3) of the CrPC could have been filed without approaching the police authorities; (iii) whether the order dated 01.07.2005 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate is an order passed without application of mind,
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the appellant, a tax resident of the UAE, has a Permanent Establishment-PE in India u/Art.5(1) of the Indo-UAE Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement-DTAA, and consequently, whether its income derived under the Strategic Oversight in India. Headnotes† Income Tax Act, 1961 – ss. 92F(iii-a), 143(3) – Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (Indo-UAE) – Arts. 4, 5(1), 7 – Strategic Oversight Services Agreement-SOSA – Art. I to V – Permanent Establishment-PE – Appellant company
1756 : 2025 INSC 902 M/s Bengani Food Products Pvt Ltd and Another v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others (Civil Appeal No. 6406 of 2016) 24 July 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI and Augustine George Masih,* J.] Issue for Consideration Whether the repudiation of the insurance claim by the first obligations under Clause 8 thereof. Headnotes† Insurance – Marine Transit Open (Declaration) Insurance Policy – Repudiation of insurance claim of the Appellant- Insured, by the Respondent-Insurer, owing to damage of goods while being in transit at the Shalimar
Issue for Consideration Whether, upon payment of tax and penalty by the appellant within the time stipulated in the notice u/s.129(3), the proper officer is still mandatorily required to pass a final order u/s.129(3), or whether the deeming fiction u/s.129(5) dispenses with such requirement. Tax Act, 2017 – ss.129, 168 – CGST Rules, 2017 – r.142 – IGST Act, 2017 – s.20 – SGST/UTGST Act, 2017 – Circular No.41/15/2018-GST dated 13.04.2018 – A Consignment transported by the appellant was detained by the Mobile Squad for alleged
1744 : 2025 INSC 901 M/s Rimjhim Ispat Limited and Others v. Union of India & Another (Criminal Appeal No. 268 of 2017) 24 July 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI and Augustine George Masih,* J.] Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the legality of having parallel and continuation of adjudication adjudication proceedings and criminal proceedings – Legality – Criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants u/ss.9 and 9AA of the 1944 Act – Discharge application by the appellants on the ground that quashing of the departmental proceedings initiated by the
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the impugned order having merged with this Court’s order in Reddy Veerana’s case, as claimed by R, renders the present appeal which lays a collateral challenge to an order of this Court itself not maintainable; whether the present maintainable, as it seeks to challenge a judicial order which, by its very nature, can never be said to violate Fundamental Rights; whether the appellant can pursue a civil appeal against the impugned order as well as a petition for review of the decision of this Court in which the impugned order
Issue for Consideration Whether a second quashing petition u/s.482 CrPC would be maintainable on the grounds/pleas that were available to be raised even at the time of filing/decision of the first quashing petition. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.193, 406, 418, 420, 423, 468, 469 1973 – s.482 – Complainant preferred criminal complaint no.1828 of 2019 against accused-respondents before the IX Metropolitan Judicial Magistrate for the offences punishable u/ss.193, 406, 418, 420, 423, 468, 469 r/w 34 and 120 of IPC – In the said complaint, summons came to
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the appellant, being a non-executive Director of the company, can be held vicariously liable and prosecuted for the alleged offences committed by the company. Headnotes† Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 – s.34 – Offences by companies – Appellant summoned as an accused in the complaint case in capacity of the Director of the company which was distributor of the drug – Appellant challenged the order passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences under the various provisions of the 1943 Act and
Issue for Consideration Whether the courts below erred in convicting the appellants and sentencing them to life imprisonment for the murder of the deceased relying upon the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2, who were interested witnesses being the son and wife of the Related/Interested witnesses – Reliance upon – When not proper – Appellants, A1 and A2 were convicted u/s.302, IPC and u/s.302 r/w 34, IPC, respectively for the murder of the deceased relying upon the eye-witness accounts of PW-1 and PW-2 (son and wife of the deceased) –
Issue for Consideration Issue arose to determine whether an employee resigning from service citing mental depression, after having served his employer much in excess of the period stipulated to qualify for being entitled to pension, forfeits his right to opt for pension in terms of in the Pension Regulations for all times to come, or, in view of pension being a social welfare measure for employees in the winter years of their life, adopting a beneficial approach is permissible. Headnotes† Service Law – United Bank of India (Employees’) Pension