Issue for Consideration Whether the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) are included in Organized Group-A Service (OGAS); all benefits available to OGAS, if available to the CAPFs. Headnotes† Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) – CRPF, BSF, SSB, ITBP and CISF, collectively known as Service (OGAS) – All benefits available to OGAS, if available to the CAPFs – Grievances of the appellants- officers belonging to different CAPFs were non-recognition as OGAS, non-grant of Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU) and service stagnation because of lateral entry by
Issue for Consideration Typographical error in paragraphs 27 and 29 of the judgment and order dated 20.05.2025. Headnotes† Judgment/Orders – Typographical error – Direction issued to carry out correction. List of Keywords Judgments; Orders; Typographical error. Case Arising From No. 603 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 13.05.2022 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in CRLR No. 82 of 2022 With Criminal Appeal No. 2569 of 2025 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: Ms. Amita Singh Kalkal, Devvrat Pradhan. Advs. for the Respondents: Vikas Bansal,
1007 : 2025 INSC 771 Peter Augustine v. K.V. Xavier and Others (Civil Appeal No. 7160 of 2024) 23 May 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI* and Augustine George Masih, J.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether High Court was justified in remitting the matter back to the trial court on the second for de-novo disposal – Correctness: Held: High Court remitted the matter back to the trial court only on the ground that there was no proper identification of the subject land by the Court Commissioner – Appeal could have been very well decided on the basis of the interpretation of
Issue for Consideration What is the scope of s.11 of the SARFAESI Act, in other words, what is the meaning of the expression “any dispute relating to securitisation or reconstruction or non-payment of any amount due including interest” occurring in s.11 of the SARFAESI Act; what is the “arises amongst any of the parties, namely, the bank or financial institution or asset reconstruction company or qualified buyer” used in s.11 r/w s.2 of the SARFAESI Act; what is the underlying object behind prescribing arbitration for the adjudication of disputes between a
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards sentencing the accused; about the rehabilitation of the victim and her child; and about adopting measures for adolescent well being and child protection. Headnotes† Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.6 – Penal accused – Rehabilitation of the victim and her child – Measures for adolescent well being and child protection – On facts, girl aged fourteen years victim under the POCSO Act – Victim married the accused and had a child with him – Acquittal of the accused for the
Issue for Consideration Challenge to the Demand Notices issued to the Appellants demanding 10% of the total bid amount to be deposited with the concerned District Mineral Foundation(s) (DMF). Headnotes† Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – ss.9B, 14, 15, 15A (Concession) Rules, 1963 – rr.21, 23(3), 54, 68 – District Mineral Foundation Trust Rules, 2017 – r.10(2) – Appellant was a successful bidder for mining of minor mineral i.e., sand and was allotted a tender – Demand Notice was issued calling upon the Appellant to
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in upholding the conviction of the appellants/accused no. 1 to 11 for offences punishable u/ss.302 and 307 r/w. s.149 of the Penal Code, 1860 and the other offences; whether, in the instant case, the trial Court precedent before examining a minor witness; whether the trial Court satisfied itself that minor witness understood the importance of the oath. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 307 r/w.149 – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1992 – s.3 –
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the applications filed u/s.482 Cr.PC by appellant for quashing the proceedings arising out of FIR u/s.2 and 3 of U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, and the non-bailable warrants respectively. Headnotes† Uttar Pradesh Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 – s.2(b) – Gang – Gang chart – FIR-Subject FIR alleging that the appellant, alongwith one DD, constituted an organized gang in terms of s.2(b) with the appellant
Issue for Consideration The Division Bench of the High Court held that appellant was not entitled to the benefit of maternity leave. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.21 – Maternity Leave – Appellant is stated to have two children from the first wedlock – First Due to conceivement from her second marriage, appellant applied for grant of maternity leave to the authorities for the period from 17.08.2021 to 13.05.2022 – The third respondent vide order dated 28.08.2021 rejected the prayer of the appellant that as per Fundamental Rule (FR) 101(a)
1480 : 2025 INSC 754 In Re: Zudpi Jungle Lands [(I.A. No. 12465 of 2019 with I.A. No. 98194 of 2019, I.A. No. 127871 of 2020, I.A. No. 127874 of 2020, I.A. No. 44062 of 2025, I.A. No. 66986 and 74569 of 2025) In (Writ Petition (C) No. 202 of 1995)] In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of Issue pertains to the status of Zudpi Jungle or Zudpi Forest in the six districts of State of Maharashtra; and whether the recommendations made by the CEC in its 2025 Report should be accepted or not. Headnotes† Forest Act, 1927 – Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 –
Issue for Consideration Whether the Circular No. 35/2010-Cus. Dt. 17.09.2010 for the purposes of claim of custom duty drawbacks for merchant exporters, have retrospective or prospective effect. Headnotes† Custom Tariff Act, 1975 – Chapter 23 – Central Excise Rules, 2002 Dt. 17.09.2010 – The High Court held that the subject Circular was to be made effective from 20.09.2010, it was prospective in nature: Held: Having regard to the Circular dt. 17.09.2010 vis-à-vis the previous Notifications, no new right or benefit came to be created, but the
Issue for Consideration The questions for consideration were: 1) Whether appellants- assessees, engaged in broadcasting of signals etc. through television channels to subscribers of those channels, were liable to pay entertainment tax under provisions of respective to Entry 62 – List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and also liable to pay service tax under provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended from time to time as a provider of a taxable service namely broadcasting service within the scope and ambit of Entry 97–List I;
Issue for Consideration Whether the appellant was wrongly discharged from service as a Civil Judge on the ground of non-disclosure of past government service as a Teacher and having obtained LL.B. and B.Ed degree simultaneously, and LL.M. degree as a regular student while as a teacher. Headnotes† Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 – rr.14, 44-46 – Appellant was discharged from service as a Civil Judge on the ground of non-disclosure of past government service as a Teacher – Sustainability: Held: Non-disclosure of past government
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in quashing the complaint insofar as respondent no.2-director of the company on the ground that necessary averments to invoke the vicarious liability against the respondent no.2 u/s.141 NI Act were lacking. Headnotes† – ss.141, 138 – Offence by companies – Vicarious liability – Necessary averments – Accused no.1 company along with respondent no.2 and other two directors approached the appellant-complainant for grant of credit facility for the working capital requirements –
Issue for Consideration Whether the two letters could have been looked at or relied upon by the Special Court for exercising its jurisdiction u/s.239, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – – Material to be relied upon – FIR registered by CBI, charges filed u/ss.120B r/w. 420, 468, 471, IPC and s.13(2) r/w 13(1)(d), PC Act alleging that the accused conspired to purchase cotton at lower prices, hoarded these cotton stocks and resold it to Cotton Corporation of India
Issue for Consideration Whether the Air Force School, Bamrauli, in District Allahabad, is a ‘state or authority’ within the meaning of Art.12 of the Constitution of India; whether it would be amenable to writ jurisdiction u/Art.226 of the Constitution – Arts.12, 226 – Writ petitions filed by the appellants-teachers alleging wrong-doings w.r.t actions taken against them by the respondent-Air Force School – Division Bench of the High Court held that the said School is not a ‘State’ within the meaning of Art.12
Issue for Consideration Whether appellant can be convicted only on the basis of evidence on ‘last seen together’. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 201 – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Last seen theory – Victim-deceased along with PW-1, the appellant/accused and the deceased went to cashew field – The appellant and the deceased did not return for long time, however, PW-1 and PW-2 returned to the village – On the next day, PW-3 (father of deceased) went to the riverside in search of his son and found his dead body
1449 : 2025 INSC 748 In Re: Performance Appraisal Reports of the Officers of the Indian Forest Service [(I.A. No. 172422 of 2024 with I.A. No(s). 172425, 172427, 172429, 179359, 290215, 290217 of 2024 and I.A. No(s). 105862, 105864 and 105865 of 2025) In (Writ Petition (C) No. 202 of 1995)] In Unit) ... Applicant 21 May 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI* and Augustine George Masih, J.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose as to whether the officers in the Indian Administrative Service-IAS would be a “reporting authority”, “reviewing authority” and “accepting
Issue for Consideration Appointment, reappointment, tenure and qualifications of the President and Members of the State Commission and District Commission; importance of consumerism; and whether grievance redressal mechanism provided to a consumer, is adequate or Is one of the most integral aspects of human life. [Para 2] Consumerism – Essence of Consumerism in the Constitution: Held: Rights of a consumer are not merely constitutional or statutory guarantees, but are in fact, natural, and therefore, inalienable – The fact that the society,
Issue for Consideration Whether the disciplinary proceedings including the charge sheet against the appellant ought to be quashed and set aside; whether the action of the respondent-Bank was mala fide and arbitrary in serving the charge sheet without receiving the first stage advice by the Central Officer Employees’ (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1976 – Regulation 19 – Consultation with Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) – Respondent-Bank served charge sheet upon the appellant without waiting for the CVC’s advice – Appellant sought quashing of