Supreme court
Supreme Court Daily Round-Up : July 27, 2026
Links to the reports of July 27'Peaceful Protests Constitutionally Protected, Mere Agitation Can't Justify Lathi-Charge': CJI Surya Kant In Pleas Over Jantar Mantar Police ActionRajya Sabha MP Manoj Jha Moves Supreme Court Over Bihar Police Firing On NEET Protesters, Seeks FIRs Against Errant OfficersSurendra Gadling Bail Plea: Kapil Sibal Asks Supreme Court To List Matter Before Another...
IBC Moratorium Against Company Doesn't Bar Consumer Complaints Against Promoters, Directors : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 27) observed that an operation of a moratorium under the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against a residential project development company would not be a ground to reject the consumer complaints against its promoters/directors. “In the present case, Respondent No.1 alone is the corporate debtor against whom the CIRP has been initiated. No independent moratorium or independent protection operates in favour of Respondent Nos. 2 to 7. In the absence of any...
S. 38 BNSS | Advocate Of Accused Cannot Remain Present Throughout Police Interrogation : Supreme Court
Clarifying the scope of Section 38 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Supreme Court on Monday (July 27) held that the provision entitles an arrested person to meet an advocate of choice during interrogation but does not contemplate continuous physical presence throughout the interrogation. “A plain reading of the provision makes it clear that the right guaranteed thereunder is the right to meet an advocate of choice during interrogation. It does not, by any means, contemplate the...
LiveLaw Supreme Court Half-Yearly Digest 2026 - ARREST & BAIL
Addition of Graver Offences — Procedure for Arrest — Where an accused is already on bail and new, more serious, cognizable, and non-bailable offences are added, the accused does not automatically lose their liberty but the court must apply its mind afresh. In such cases – i. The accused may surrender and apply for bail for the newly added offences; ii. The investigating agency must...
Art. 311(2) | Confirmed Public Servant Can't Be Terminated Over Alleged Illegal Appointment Without Inquiry: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has ruled that a public servant whose service is confirmed cannot be terminated from the office merely because there was an alleged illegality in appointment. The Court said that a termination without holding a departmental inquiry would be violative of Article 311(2) of the Constitution. “Confirmation in service is not a mere administrative formality but it confers upon an employee a substantive status carrying with it enhanced security of tenure and the protection of...
Know The Law | Factors To Be Considered While Sentencing A Convict? Supreme Court Explains
The Supreme Court laid down the set of principles which must necessarily guide the decision on sentencing. A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih laid down the following aspects which must be considered while deciding on sentencing: “(a) Be in accordance with the nature and gravity of the crime; (b) Adequately protect the interest of the society; (c) Take...
When Alteration Of Cheque Is Patently Clear, Further Evidence Not Necessary : Supreme Court Sets Aside S.138NI Act Conviction
The Supreme Court has set aside a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act), after finding that the cheque had been visibly and materially altered from Rs 10,000 to Rs. 1,10,000.A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva allowed the appeal filed by the accused, holding that the High Court and the Trial Court have erred in calling...
Non-Mentioning Of Specific POCSO Provision Wasn't Material : Supreme Court Affirms Conviction
The Supreme Court has held that the failure of a trial court or a High Court to specifically mention sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act while convicting an accused did not vitiate the conviction or sentence, as the facts of the case clearly attract that provision..A bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree...
TRAI's Direction To Comply With Regulations Is Not 'Adjudication' : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Friday (July 24) held that a direction of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to comply with the provisions of the Act cannot be termed as 'adjudication' under the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997. “A direction to obey a regulation operates upon the regulated entity in the discharge of TRAI's regulatory function under Section 11(1)(b) read...
Supreme Court Monthly Round-Up: June, 2026
Judgments'Cost Of Demolition Catastrophic' : Supreme Court Rules Against Demolition Of Navi Mumbai Mall, Allows Regularisation On Cost PaymentCase: K. Raheja Corp. Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 575The Supreme Court held that demolition of a shopping mall and hotel built on a plot allotted through an irregular process would be against...