100 Important Supreme Court Judgments- Part 3 [51 to 75]

Part 1 can be read here. Part 2 can be read here. Part 4 can be read here.51. If Right To Speedy Trial Is Violated, Constitutional Courts Can Grant Bail Despite Statutory Restrictions : Supreme Court In UAPA CaseCase Title – Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari v. State of Uttar Pradesh., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 486In a significant judgment granting bail to an undertrial prisoner facing charges under the Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act, 1967(UAPA), the Supreme Court held that a constitutional court can grant bail despite statutory restrictions if it finds that the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution has been infringed.Also from the judgment - UAPA | 'Watali' Judgment Not A Precedent to Deny Bail To Undertrial In Long Custody With No End In Sight Of Trial: Supreme Court52. NI Act | Large Number Of Cheque Bounce Cases Serious Concern, Courts Must Encourage Compounding If Parties Are Willing: Supreme CourtCase Title – M/s. New Win Export & Anr. v. A. Subramaniam., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 490The Supreme Court recently reiterated that the purpose of making cheque bounce an offence was to ensure reliability of cheques, and compensatory aspect of remedy under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has priority over the punitive aspect in such cases.A bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed that courts should encourage settlement in cheque dishonour cases.53. Proceedings For Cheque Dishonour U/s. 138 NI Act Do Not Constitute Continuing Cause Of Action To Initiate Arbitration: Supreme CourtCase Title – Elfit Arabia & Anr v. Concept Hotel BARONS Limited & Ors., Arbitration Petition (Civil) No. 15 of 2023The Supreme Court recently observed that initiation of proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for cheque dishonour does not constitute continuing cause of action for initiating arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).54. Prior Executive Decision Doesn't Bar Legislature From Taking Contrary View : Supreme CourtCase Details: M/S REWA TOLLWAY P. LTD. Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS., 2024 LiveLaw (SC 495The Supreme Court observed that a person cannot claim any enforceable legal right based on an executive action that is later modified by the state legislature in the larger public interest.In essence, the Court stated that neither a right to legitimate expectation nor promissory estoppel can be asserted based on executive actions that the legislature subsequently changes in the public interest.55. Bail Order Shouldn't Be Normally Stayed During Pendency Of Application To Cancel Bail : Supreme CourtCase Title – Parvinder Singh Khurana v. Directorate of Enforcement., SLP(Crl) No. 8007-8010/2024In an important judgment, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 23) held that bail orders should not be normally stayed. Setting aside an order of the Delhi High Court which stayed the bail granted in a money laundering case, the Court stated that bail orders can be stayed only in exceptional circumstances.56. Supreme Court Refuses To Cancel NEET-UG 2024, Says There's No Material To Show Systemic BreachCase Details: VANSHIKA YADAV Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. W.P.(C) No. 335/2024 And Other Connected Matters.The Supreme Court refused to cancel the NEET-UG 2024 exam on the ground of paper leak and malpractices. The Court stated that there was no material to indicate that the leak was systemic affecting the sanctity of the entire exam.57. Time-Barred Civil Contempt Petitions Can't Be Entertained Mechanically Accepting Bogey Of 'Continuing Wrong': Supreme CourtCase Title: S. Tirupathi Rao vs M. Lingamaiah & Ors., SLP (Civil) Nos.19748-19749 of 2022The Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta has interpreted Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and held that the action for contempt should be brought within a year, and not beyond, from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.58. Insolvency Resolution Of Corporate Guarantor Won't Bar Creditor From Filing CIRP Against Corporate Debtor For Balance Debt : Supreme CourtCase Title: BRS Ventures Investments Ltd. Versus SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd. & Anr.In a notable decision relating to the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code of 2016, the Supreme Court held when that the insolvency resolution of a corporate guarantor will not prevent the creditor from initiating another insolvency process against the corporate debtor for the balance debt.59. States' Power To Tax Mining Rights & Mineral-Bearing Lands Not Limited By MMDR Act; Royalty Not Tax: Supreme Court Holds By 8 :1Case Details : Mineral Area Development v. M/S Steel Authority Of India & Ors (CA N0. 4056/1999)., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 512The Supreme Court 9-judge constitution bench today held by an 8:1 majority that States have the power to levy tax on mineral rights and that the Union law - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 - do not limit such power of the...

100 Important Supreme Court Judgments- Part 3 [51 to 75]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags