Supreme court
'Don't Eat Up Court's Time To Show Off Skills' : Supreme Court Cautions Lawyers For Arguing Against Settled Precedents
The Supreme Court on Thursday (April 9) cautioned lawyers against consuming the Court's valuable time by arguing cases that contradict settled legal positions solely to showcase their argumentative skills. “As the courts are bound by the law of precedent and to follow the law laid down in the binding judgment of the Constitution Bench, the lawyers are also expected to respect...
Stranger Affected By Interim Order Entitled To Impleadment In Writ Proceedings : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has observed that a stranger to the proceedings, not being a party to the original Writ proceedings, cannot be denied impleadment if the order passed in the proceedings has a direct bearing on the stranger. “In writ proceedings, where the Court is called upon to interpret the scope and operation of an interim order already passed by it, a person who is shown to be...
'Abandonment Of Service Not Voluntary Retirement', Supreme Court Denies Pensionary Benefits To SBI Clerk
The Supreme Court has held that an employee who abandons service shortly before retirement cannot seek pensionary benefits by claiming it to be a voluntary retirement. “…we have noticed that the present case is not of voluntary retirement, rather of voluntary abandonment of the services, wherein from 24.01.1998 to 11.12.1998, the appellant, without informing and availing leave,...
Motor Accident Claim | Insurance Company Impleaded As Party Can Raise All Grounds, Contest Quantum Of Compensation : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently allowed an Insurance Company's plea against a Bombay High Court decision preventing it from raising submissions on the quantum of motor accident claim compensation.The Court observed that when an Insurance Company is impleaded as a party-respondent to a motor accident claim compensation case, it has a right to contest the claim on all available grounds. That is,...
'Matrimonial Battle Of Mahabharata', Supreme Court Dissolves 10-Year Estranged Marriage, Quashes 80+ Cases Between Couple
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 8) dissolved a marriage between a couple who were living apart for the last 10 years, and have filed over 80 cases against each other, their relatives and counsel, in what it described as bringing an end to the “matrimonial battle of Mahabharata”. A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta strongly criticized the conduct of...
Supreme Court Daily Round-Up : April 8, 2026
Links to today's reports :Gurugram Child Rape Case : Max Hospital Doctor Gives Explanation To Supreme Court, Denies Changing Medical OpinionSupreme Court Directs Sealing Of 44 Unauthorised Properties In Meerut, Pulls Up Officer For Defying Demolition OrdersSabarimala Reference | Never Understood What Transformative Constitutionalism Is : Solicitor General Questions 'Constitutional...
When Sentences Of Imprisonment For Multiple Offences Run Concurrently, Fine Also Run Concurrent : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 8) observed that where sentences imposed for different offences are directed to run concurrently, a fine cannot be imposed separately for each offence.The Court held that fine imposed separately as part of the punishment of two offences would be liable to be treated concurrent along with the sentences of imprisonment.“Section 53, IPC also includes fine...
S. 27 Evidence Act | Recovery Of Weapon Meaningless Without Proof Linking It To Crime : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has set aside the murder conviction, after finding that the prosecution's recovery of evidence based on the accused's disclosure statements under Section 27 of the Evidence Act was riddled with inconsistencies, hostile witnesses, and a lack of forensic linkage. A bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Vipul M Pancholi observed that mere recovery of the...
CCS Pension Rules | Gratuity Can Be Withheld During Pendency Of Criminal Or Disciplinary Proceedings Against Employee : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has observed that an employer is entitled to withhold the payment of gratuity to an employee against whom a judicial or disciplinary proceeding is pending. A bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi dismissed an appeal filed by an ex-Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation Clerk, whose gratuity was withheld by the transport corporation because...
