Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ROUND UPS
JOB UPDATES BOOK REVIEWS EVENTS CORNER LAWYERS & LAW FIRMS CARTOONS SC JUDGMENTS लाइव
लॉ हिंदी ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT
Home / Top Stories / Supreme Court Annual...
TOP STORIES
SHARE THIS -
As the end of year 2021 is nearing, LiveLaw brings to you an yearly Round-up of
Supreme Court judgments. This yearly digest includes 766 orders and judgments,
Due to the bulky size of the digest, it is being published in three parts. Part 1 covered
citations from 1 to 250. Part two will cover citations from 250 to 500 and part three
will cover citations from 500 to 766. Part 3 is to be published. Part 1 can be read here.
Also Read - 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76
-100]
251. Supreme Court Constitutes National Task Force To Formulate Methodology For
dearth of oxygen supply amid the second Covid wave. The Task Force which will be at
liberty to draw upon the human resources of the Union Government for consultation
and information and may also constitute one or more sub-groups on specialised areas
Also Read: Supreme Court Directs Audit Of Medical Oxygen Supplied To States/UTs
To Ensure Accountability
252. Dying Declaration Can Be Sole Basis For Conviction Only When Court Is
Also Read - All India Family Law Digest 2021 : Judgments Of Supreme Court & High
Courts
A Bench of CJI NV Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose reiterated that a
Court must be satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary, and only then
could it be the sole basis for conviction without corroboration. The court noted the
following factors (i) interpolation in the dying declaration (ii) contradiction in the
statements of prosecution witnesses regarding injuries on the palm, (iii) the victim
with 80% injuries was apparently not in a situation to talk or give statement, (iv) PW-2,
son of the deceased himself has stated that his mother committed suicide as she
could not bear that her another son had been sent to jail, (v) there being no
corroborative evidence to the statement , and (vi) there is no other evidence led by the
prosecution to connect the appellants with the crime except the statement.
[Case: Rahul Sharma & Anr. v. National Insurance Company Ltd & Ors.; Citation: LL
2021 SC 252]
A Bench comprising of CJI NV Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose
reiterated that addition of 40% income must be given towards future prospects while
computing motor accident compensation if the deceased was self-employed and was
254. Mere Language Problem Of A Party Not A Ground To Transfer A Case U/s 406
[Case: Rajkumar Sabu v. Sabu Trade Private Limited; Citation: LL 2021 SC 253]
A Bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose held that a criminal case cannot be transferred
under Section 406 CrPC merely because the party does not understand the language
of the Court which has jurisdiction to hear the case. The court observed thus while
dismissing a transfer petition filed by one Rajkumar Sabu, against whom a criminal
case is pending in Salem Court, that he is not being able to understand Tamil
255. Will Habeas Corpus Petition Lie Against Remand Order? Supreme Court
Answers
A bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph observed that a Habeas Corpus
passed in an absolutely mechanical manner. The court noted that in Manubhai Ratilal
Patel v. State of Gujarat (2013) 1 SCC 314, it was held that a writ of habeas corpus is
custody by the competent court by an order which prima facie does not appear to be
Also Read: Courts Can Order House Arrest U/s 167 CrPC In Appropriate Cases:
Supreme Court
Also Read: Supreme Court Dismisses Gautam Navlakha's Plea For Default Bail In
Also Read: Remand Power U/s 167 CrPC Can Also Be Exercised By Courts Superior To
256. Existence Of Arbitration Clause Does Not Debar Court From Entertaining A Writ
[Case: Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. v. CG Power And Industrial
A Bench of Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and Indira Banerjee observed that the
existence of an arbitration clause does not debar the court from entertaining a writ
petition. It reiterated that relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be
"It is well settled that availability of an alternative remedy does not prohibit the High
Court from entertaining a writ petition in an appropriate case. The High Court may
or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or (iv) the vires of an Act is under
257. Provide Dry Ration, Open Community Kitchens For Migrant Workers Stranded In
A Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah directed the Central Government
and Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, States of Haryana and Uttar
Pradesh to provide dry ration to migrant workers in National Capital Region. While
doing so, the States shall not insist on an identity card for those migrant labourers
who do not possess for the time being and on self-declaration made by the stranded
258. IBC - Approval Of Resolution Plan Does Not By Itself Discharge Liabilities Of
[Case: Lalit Kumar Jain v. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India; Citation: LL
2021 SC 257]
A Bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat held that the
approval of a resolution plan does not ipso facto discharge a personal guarantor of a
corporate debtor. The release or discharge of a principal borrower from the debt owed
her liability, which arises out of an independent contract, the Court observed in the
judgment in which it upheld the provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
of Creditors of Essar Steel (I) Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta, and observed that the
sanction of a resolution plan and finality imparted to it by Section 31 does not per se
operate as a discharge of the guarantor's liability. It said that an involuntary act of the
principal debtor leading to loss of security, would not absolve a guarantor of its
liability.
Also Read: Supreme Court Upholds IBC Provisions Applicable To Personal Guarantors
Of Corporate Debtors
Stating that High Courts should avoid passing orders that are not capable of being
implemented, a Bench of Justices Vineet Saran and BR Gavai noted, "…we are of the
opinion that the High Court should normally consider the possibility of the
implementation of the directions given by it, and such directions which are incapable
Also Read: 'High Court Should Avoid Passing Orders Which Are Difficult To
Implement': Supreme Court Stays Allahabad HC Directions For Improving Health Care
Request To Direct All HCs To List Covid Cases Before Chief Justice-led Benches
260. States/UTs Should Provide Dry Ration, Community Kitchens For Stranded
[Case: In Re: Problems and Miseries of Migrant Workers; Citation: LL 2021 SC 259]
A Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah directed for dry ration to be
distributed to migrant workers stranded throughout the country under Atma Nirbhar
Scheme or any other scheme found suitable by the States/Centre. Directions were
given to the States to file Affidavits indicating the mechanism by which dry ration
would be distributed to those who do not possess a ration card, and that it is for the
261. Section 313 CrPC Examination Not A Mere Procedural Formality; Trial Court
Has To Question Accused Fairly With Care And Caution: Supreme Court
A bench comprising CJI NV Ramana and Justice Aniruddha Bose expressed its
Procedure in a very casual and cursory manner. The bench observed that the
262. High Courts Can Grant Protection To Accused While Dismissing Anticipatory
A bench comprising of CJI Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose
observed that a High Court, while dismissing anticipatory bail applications, can issue
protective orders only when there are exceptional circumstances.
263. Phrase "Soon Before" Section 304B IPC Cannot Mean 'Immediately Before':
A Bench of CJI NV Ramana and Justice Aniruddha Bose observed that the phrase
"soon before" as appearing in Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code cannot be
"proximate and live link" between the dowry death and cruelty or harassment for
dowry demand by the husband or his relatives. It also observed that Section 304B, IPC
accidental.
264. 'Digital Divide Will Have Serious Implications On Right To Equality & Health':
LL 2021 SC 263]
Bhatt flagged the digital divide afflicting the accessibility to the CoWIN portal by
stating that it could have serious implications on right to equality and right to health. It
observed, "A vaccination policy exclusively relying on a digital portal for vaccinating a
significant population of this country between the ages of 18-44 years would be
unable to meet its target of universal immunization owing to such a digital divide. It is
the marginalized sections of the society who would bear the brunt of this accessibility
barrier."
Also Read: How Rs 35000 Crores Budget Allocation Spent For Vaccines? Why Can't It
Also Read: Centre's Policy Of Paid Vaccination For 18-44 Years Prima Facie Arbitrary
& Irrational : Supreme Court
265. 'Name Is An Intrinsic Element Of Identity': Supreme Court Issues Guidelines For
guidelines for the Central Board of Secondary Education to process the applications
for correction or change in the certificates issued by it. The Court also directed CBSE
it.
disobedience of the Court order. ""In exercising contempt jurisdiction, the primary
observed.
A bench of Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran while quashing the FIR against senior
journalist Vinod Dua for sedition observed, "Every Journalist will be entitled to
protection in terms of Kedar Nath Singh , as every prosecution under Sections 124A
and 505 of the IPC must be in strict conformity with the scope and ambit of said
Sections as explained in, and completely in tune with the law laid down in Kedar Nath
Singh." In the case of Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar(1962), the Supreme Court
had read down Section 124A IPC and held that the application of the provision should
268. Trial Courts Have To Clearly Specify Whether Sentences Would Run
[Case: Sunil Kumar @ Sudhir Kumar v. State Of Uttar Pradesh; Citation: LL 2021 SC
267]
that the Trial Courts, while awarding multiple punishments of imprisonment, have to
consecutively. Any omission to carry out this obligation causes unnecessary and
avoidable prejudice to the parties, the Court opined. It further reiterated that the
omission to state whether the sentences awarded to the accused would run
concurrently or would run consecutively essentially operates against the accused
2021 SC 268]
A bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose in the suo moto
case initiated by the Court to deal with the problems of children affected by COVID
270. Secured Creditor Can't Challenge Resolution Plan Insisting That Higher Amount
[Case: India Resurgence ARC Pvt Ltd v. Amit Metaliks Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC 269]
A division bench comprising Justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari held that
a dissenting secured creditor cannot challenge a resolution plan approved under the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code(IBC) with an argument that higher amount should
have been paid to it on the basis of the security interest held by it over the corporate
debtor. It observed that it is against the scheme of IBC to hold that a secured creditor
271. CAG Report Can't Be Basis For Recovery Of Cess Without Statutory
A division bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and Indira Banerjee held that there
cannot be a recovery of cess solely on the basis of the report of the Comptroller and
judgment of Allahabad High Court which had quashed the orders issued by the Uttar
[Case: Union of India v. Raj Grow Impex LLP; Citation: LL 2021 SC 271]
A bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari held that peas
and pulses, which were imported in violation of the notifications of the Central
Government and the Director General of Foreign Trade issued under the Foreign Trade
(Development and Regulation) Act, are liable to absolute confiscation under Section
125 of the Customs Act as "prohibited goods". The Court granted a relaxation by
allowing re-export of the goods on payment of the necessary redemption fine and
273. Kidnapping For Ransom - Necessary To Prove Threat To Cause Death Or Harm
A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhuhsan and R Subhash Reddy held that merely
proving the kidnap of a person is not sufficient for conviction for the offence of
'kidnapping for ransom' under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code. It must also be
proved that there was threat to cause death or harm to the kidnapped person or the
kidnapper, by his conduct, which gave rise to a reasonable apprehension that such
Court
A Division bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy held
that persons with physical disabilities have right to reservation in promotions also. It
held so while dismissing an appeal filed by the State of Kerala against a judgment of
the Kerala High Court (State of Kerala v. Leesamma Joseph). Further, the Apex Court
within 3 months.
275. States Must Implement 'One Nation, One Ration Card' Scheme By July 31; Run
[Case: Re: Problems and Miseries of Migrant Labourers ; Citation: LL 2021 SC 274]
A Division bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah directed that all
states must implement the "one nation, one ration card" scheme - which enables
migrant workers to avail ration benefits from any part of the country - by July 31. It
also passed a slew of other directions for the benefit and welfare of migrant workers.
The Central government was directed to develop a portal in consultation with the
labourers/migrant workers.
A Bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari held that the
Tamil Nadu State legislature had legislative competence to enact Tamil Nadu Land
Acquisition Laws (Revival of Operation, Amendment and Validation) Act, 2019 and it is
not inconsistent with Article 254 of the Constitution of India. It observed, "We hold the
2019 Act to be a legitimate legislative exercise and find it to be consistent with and
within the four corners of Article 254 of the Constitution of India and also of the High
Court judgment."
277. Limitation Act Provisions Will Apply To Arbitration Proceedings Initiated Under
[Case: M/s. Silpi Industries v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation; Citation: LL
2021 SC 276]
A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy held that the
Section 18(3) of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006
(MSMED Act). It also observed that counter-claim is maintainable before the statutory
A Bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah held that Section 12 of
the Disaster Management Act casts a statutory obligation on the part of the National
victims of a national disaster. Such minimum relief will also include 'ex-gratia
assistance' as per Section 12(iii) of the Act. Further, it observed, "No country or state
circumstances and facts. Therefore, we don't think it is proper to direct the Union to
pay a particular amount. This is to be fixed by the government. Ultimately, the
279. CA Exams -No RTPCR Needed For Opt-Out; Student Can Opt-Out For COVID
Bose directed the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to give "opt-out"
COVID-related difficulties for herself or her family members, on the basis of a medical
certificate issued by a registered medical practitioner. The Court also did away with
the ICAI's requirement of producing RT-PCR certificate for seeking "opt-out" option.
280. Accident By Rash Driving 26 Years Ago: Bus Driver Sentenced To Rs.2000 Fine
A Bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, Vineet Saran and MR Shah sentenced
a bus driver accused of causing accident by rash driving 26 years ago to a fine of Rs.
2000. "The conviction of appellant is affirmed, however, looking to the facts and
circumstances of the present case specially the fact that 26 years have elapsed from
the incident, we are inclined to substitute the sentence of six months imprisonment
under Section 279 and 338 into fine. Six months sentence under Section 279 and 338
IPC are substituted by fine of Rs.1000/- each whereas sentence of fine under Section
337 IPC is maintained", the Bench observed.
281. Bar Under Order XXIII Rule 3A Attracted If Compromise On The Basis Of Which
A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy held that the Bar
under Rule 3A shall be attracted if compromise on the basis of which decree was
passed was void or voidable. It observed that only remedy available to a party to a
consent decree to avoid such consent decree is to approach the court which recorded
282. Dismissal Of An Earlier Section 482 CPC Petition Does Not Bar Filing Of
Dismissal of an earlier Section 482 CrPC petition does not bar filing of subsequent
petition under Section 482, in case the facts so justify, the Supreme Court reiterated
while dismissing a writ petition filed by an IAS Officer. The Bench comprising Justice
UU Lalit and Justices Indira Banerjee and Ajay Rastogi observed that it sees no
reason to entertain the petition under Article 32. "The petitioner, if so advised, can
always file appropriate applications under the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking
quashing of the individual criminal cases or complaints", the bench further opined.
283. Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Is Not A Sine Qua Non For
Conviction
not a sine qua non, the Supreme Court observed while upholding a conviction of a
such contradictions are not material contradictions, the evidence of such witnesses
284. Filing Of Caveat By Itself Does Not Entitle Caveators To Be Treated As A Party
To The Proceeding
The Supreme Court observed that filing of Caveat by itself does not entitle caveators
However, the Association had not filed any application for impleadment or intervention
before the High Court, but they were heard in the case.
[Case: Anakha K. v. The Admission And Fee Regulatory Committee For Medical
claim equities is deplorable, the Supreme Court observed while disposing of a special
leave petition filed by a student. The bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao
and S. Ravindra Bhat, however, noted that the procedure that was contemplated for
filling up the NRI seats through on-line counselling has not been followed by the
Management. The Management should not have permitted the students to attend
classes after the judgment of the High Court, especially, when there is no order
The Court cannot be unmindful of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Supreme
Court observed while refusing to disturb the admission to the students for the B.Tech
(Engineering) degree course for academic session 2020-21 on the basis of the marks
Chandrachud, R. Subhash Reddy and S. Ravindra Bhatt observed, "The Court cannot
be unmindful of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. The number of students who
actually could appear for the entrance examination is a small proportion of the total
number of seats available in the State. To displace such a body of students who have
already been admitted would not be in the interests of justice. Hence, in exercise of
our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution, we are of the view that for the
current year, the admission which has been granted by the institutions to 592 students
under direct entry and 243 students under lateral entry to the B.Tech degree courses
should not be disturbed. We are passing this direction having regard to the
overwhelming hardship which has been faced during the course of the Covid-19
pandemic"
287. Trial Courts Cannot Order Denial Of Remission To Convicts While Imposing Life
Imprisonment
The Supreme Court reiterated that Trial Courts cannot, while imposing life
imprisonment, order denial of remission to the convicts. "In view of the Constitution
Bench judgment, the sentence denial remission for a period of 20 years is therefore
unsustainable. The High Court failed to consider this aspect of the matter. We,
therefore, allow the appeal only to the extent that the part of the sentence for denial of
remission before expiry of 20 years is set aside. The conviction of the appellant under
Sections 396 is not interfered with", the bench comprising Justices Navin Sinha and
288. 'He Has Already Undergone More Than Half Of The Sentence Which Could Be
2021 SC 287]
The Supreme Court granted bail to an under trial in a corruption case on the ground
that he has already undergone more than half of the sentence which could be
awarded to him if convicted. The Bench comprising Justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh
Maheshwari observed, "considering the facts and circumstances of this case and
keeping in view that the petitioner has already undergone more than half of the
sentence which could be awarded if convicted, and in view of the order dated
of bail."
289. 'Delhi Can Ill-Afford Another Riots; Role Of Facebook Must Be Looked Into':
[Case: Ajit Mohan & Others v. Legislative Assembly, National Capital Territory of
The Supreme Court refused to quash the summons issued to Facebook India
Managing Director Ajit Mohan by the Peace and Harmony committee of the Delhi
Bench comprising of Justice S.K. Kaul, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice
Hrishikesh Roy held that the Delhi Assembly's enquiry cannot encroach into
"prohibited domains" of law and order and criminal prosecution, as they are subjects
under the domain of the Union Government. Therefore, the Court held that any
representative of the petitioner can deny answering any question by the committee if
Also Read: Facebook Can't Disrupt India's 'Unity In Diversity' Claiming Ignorance Or
290. 'Judges Must Not Behave Like Emperors': Supreme Court Strongly Condemns
[Case: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma; Citation: LL 2021 SC 289]
The Supreme Court reiterated that public officers should not be called to court
Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta observed while disapproving the practice in certain
High Courts to call officers at the drop of a hat and to exert direct or indirect pressure.
The Bench was considering an appeal against Allahabad High Court judgment as it
noticed that the High Court summoned the Secretary, Medical Health in the Court.
291. CB Judgment Which Held Delay Beyond 45 Days In Filing Written Statement
The Supreme Court reiterated that the Constitution Bench judgment in New India
(2020) 5 SCC 757, which held that the delay beyond the period of 30+15 day (45 days)
in filing the written statement cannot be condoned by the National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission operates only prospectively. The Bench comprising Justice
Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari observed, "In our view, since the application for
condonation of delay was filed prior to the judgment of the Constitution Bench, which
was delivered on 04.03.2020, the said application for condonation of delay ought to
have been considered on merits and should not have been dismissed on the basis of
the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of New India Assurance Company
Limited (supra) because the said judgment was to operate prospectively and the
written statement as well as the application for condonation of delay had been filed
much prior to the said judgment."
292. Grant Of Benefits Of Higher Pay Scale To Central/State Govt Employees Stand
[Case: Punjab State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd. v. Balbir Kumar
The Supreme Court observed that the grant of benefits of higher pay scale to the
Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta allowed the appeal filed by Punjab State Co-operative
Milk Producers Federation Ltd. against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab &
Haryana which held that the Federation is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of
the Constitution of India and that the employees are therefore entitled to pay scale
equivalent to their counterparts in the State of Punjab from 1.1.1986, though the
cannot be imposed at the stage of bail. In the instant case, the accused was granted
bail by the High Court with a condition requiring them to deposit Rs.2.00 lakh each as
compensation to the victims. The Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and
Hemant Gupta observed, "we may hasten to add that we are not saying that no
monetary condition can be imposed for grant of bail. We say so as there are cases of
deposited and disbursed as if that grant has to take place as a condition of the person
being enlarged on bail."
The Supreme Court has observed that a compromise decree in respect of land which
is not the subject-matter of suit but is part of the settlement between the family
members does not require compulsory registration. The Bench comprising Justices
Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta observed that a compromise decree entered
into between the parties in respect of land which was not the subject matter of the
suit is valid and a legal settlement. The issue in appeal was whether a compromise
decree in respect of land which is not the subject-matter of suit but is part of the
295. Honour Killing: Supreme Court Cancels Bail Granted To Man Accused Of
[Case: Mamta Nair v. State of Rajasthan and others; Citation: LL 2021 SC 294]
The Supreme Court set aside an order of the Rajasthan High Court which granted bail
by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana set aside the High Court's order observing that
the same was not sustainable and asked the accused Mukesh Choudhury to
surrender. The trial court was directed to complete the trial within a period of one
week. The Supreme Court also noted that the examination of 17 out of 47 witnesses
were complete.
[Case: Franklin Templeton Trustee Services Private Limited v. Amruta Garg; Citation:
LL 2021 SC 295]
A bench comprising Justices S Abdul Nazeer and Sanjiv Khanna observed that when
the trustees decide to wind up a scheme by majority, they are required to seek consent
of the majority of the unit holders, present and voting, under Regulation 18(15)(c) of
the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996. The
that the even though the "opinion" of the trustees would stand, the consent of the unit
Templeton Case
Also Read: SEBI Has Power To Regulate Winding-Up Of Mutual Fund Schemes To
Protect Investors : Supreme Court
297. Tribunals Reforms Ordinance: Supreme Court Strikes Down Provisions Fixing
The Supreme Court by 2 :1 majority set aside the provisions in the Tribunals Reforms
Ordinance 2021 which fixed the term of members of various tribunals as four years.
The majority comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and S Ravindra Bhat held that
this term violated the express direction given in the earlier judgments in Rojer Mathew
and Madras Bar Association cases that the term of tribunal members should be 5
years. Accordingly, the bench set aside those provisions. Justice Hemant Gupta
dissented saying that a law cannot be struck down merely for the reason of being
contrary to judgments.
Supreme Court Strikes Down Minimum Age Limit Of 50 Years For Appointment As
Tribunal Members
Also Read: 'Law Can't Be Struck Down Merely For Being Contrary To Court's
Also Read: Judicial Independence Can Be Sustained Only When Incumbents Are
Also Read: Fill Up Vacancies In Tribunals Without Delay: Supreme Court Directs Centre
[Case: New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and others v. BD Singhal and
directed that retrospective effect from September 2002 should be given to the
September 2012 to enhance the retirement age of its employees from 58 to 60.
Allowing an appeal filed by the NOIDA against the judgment, a bench comprising
Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah observed that the High Court trenched upon a
299. Right To Summon Document Has To Be Exercised When Trial Is In Progress And
The Supreme Court observed that the right to summon document(s) has to be
exercised when the trial is in progress and not when the trial is completed. A Bench
summon document(s), indeed, is available but that has to be exercised when the trial
is in progress and not when the trial is completed, including after the statement of
accused under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code had been recorded. The
300. Violation Of Retrenchment Conditions U/s 25F Industrial Disputes Act Would
[Case: Madhya Bharat Gramin Bank v. Panchamlal Yadav; Citation: LL 2021 SC 299]
The Supreme Court observed that the violation of Section 25F of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, [Retrenchment conditions] would not automatically entail in the
reinstatement with full back wages. The Bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara
Rao and Aniruddha Bose observed, "the respondent is not entitled for reinstatement in
view of the law settled by this Court. The judgments relied upon by Mr. Kapur are clear
to the effect that violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, would
not automatically entail in the reinstatement with full back wages. The relief to be
granted depends on the facts of individual cases." The Bench however directed the
bank to pay a compensation of Rs. 5 Lakhs to him.
301. Religious Sentiments Subservient To Right To Health & Life: Case Against
Kanwar Yatra
The Supreme Court has observed that religious sentiments are subservient to the
fundamental right to life and health while adjudicating in the suo motu case taken
against the decision of the Uttar Pradesh government to allow the Kanwar Yatra
pilgrimage amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The Bench comprising Justices RF Nariman
and BR Gavai observed that the State of Uttar Pradesh cannot go ahead with the
Kanwar Yatra, especially so when the Union Government has taken a stand against
302. Ex-Parte Decree Against Minor Not Represented By A Duly Appointed Guardian
A Nullity
301]
The Supreme Court has upheld a judgment of the Madras High Court which held that
an ex-parte decree passed against a minor not represented by a guardian who is duly
Ramasubramanian was considering an appeal filed against the High Court judgment,
which had set aside the ex-parte decree passed against a minor on the ground that he
failure to appoint guardian ipso facto will result in prejudice to the minor and it need
303. Supreme Court Permits 5 Civil Service Aspirants Who Cleared Mains But Were
[Case: Deepak Yadav &Ors v. UPSC &Ors; Vaidehi Gupta v. UPSC &Ors; Citation: LL
2021 SC 302]
In an extraordinary move, the Supreme Court has allowed five civil service candidates
who cleared the UPSC civil service main examinations held this year, but were
disqualified for submitting the degree certificates after the cut-off date, to appear for
the interview. A bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna passed
this direction as a "special case" considering the fact that the candidates missed the
last date as their universities declared their results late due to the COVID-19
pandemic.
304. Accused Cannot Be Discharged U/s 306 IPC While Confirming Charge U/s 304B
IPC
303]
The Supreme Court has observed that an accused cannot be discharged for an
offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code while confirming the charge under
Section 304B IPC. A Bench comprising Justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari
observed, "having heard learned counsel parties, considering the totality of the
circumstances and keeping in view the suicide notes as well as the statements of
witnesses, we are of the opinion that the accused ought not to have been discharged
of the offence under Section 306 IPC, especially when the charges under Section 304B
IPC and other related sections had already been framed and confirmed."
305. Relief To Doctor Who Could Not Secure Admission To PG Course Because He
[Case: Dr. Rohit Kumar v. Secretary, Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi; Citation: LL 2021
SC 304]
"It would be a travesty of justice to deny relief to the Doctor, who had to make a
personal sacrifice in the larger public interest, to serve the cause of humanity", the
Supreme Court has observed while directing PGI Chandigarh to grant admission to a
Doctor who could not join the post graduate course as he was denied study leave in
view of the COVID-19 pandemic in Delhi. The bench comprising Justice Indira
Banerjee and Justice V. Ramasubramanian clarified that the policy decision not to
grant Study Leave to doctors for a certain length of time, in apprehension of a rise in
COVID-19 cases, to ensure the availability of as many doctors, as possible for duty, is
India.
Also Read: Policy Not To Grant Study Leave To Govt. Doctors In View Of Covid19
306. Protection Of Sanction U/s 197 CrPC Not Available For Public Servants
[Case: Noorulla Khan v. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board; Citation: LL 2021 SC
305]
The Supreme Court has observed that protection of sanction under Section 197 of
Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and Ajay Rastogi, referring to previous judgments in V.C.
Chinnappa Goudar v. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board and Karnataka State
Pollution Control Board v. B. Heera Naik observed, "If the violation of the provisions of
the Water Act was at the hands of a Department, subject to the satisfaction of the
requirements under Section 48 of the Water Act, "the Head of the Department" would
the protection under Section 197 of the Code would not be available and the matter
ought to be considered de hors such protection."
The Supreme Court has observed that the Constitution Bench judgment in Indore
Development Authority case will not affect the power of the Government of Haryana
under Section 101A of the RFCTLARR Act, to denotify the land acquired under the old
Land Acqusition Act for stated reasons in public interest. The bench comprising
Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna observed that denotification can be done
only if the State Government is fully satisfied that the land has become unviable or
non-essential for the purpose of development and in particular for reason for which it
was so acquired.
308. Supreme Court Disapproves Practice Of Delayed Filing Of Review Petition After
Judges Retire
The Supreme Court has disapproved the practise of delayed filing of review petitions
after waiting for judges to retire. "Such practice must be firmly disapproved to
preserve the institutional sanctity of the decision making of this Court", the bench
review petitions filed against the judgment in Goa Foundation v. Sesa Sterlite Limited.
309. Supreme Court Sets Aside Allahabad High Court's Blanket Ban On DJ Services
In Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court has set aside the 2019 order of the Allahabad High Court
imposing a blanket ban on the use of DJ services in the state of Uttar Pradesh. A
Division Bench of Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari clarified that
music/DJ can be played only in accordance with law and after obtaining the requisite
license/permission from the concerned authorities. The Court observed that since
there were neither pleadings nor any prayer with regard to the playing of music or DJ
in public place, the direction of the High Court with regard to the noise generated by
310. Section 482 CrPC: Interim Protection Order Can Be Passed In Exceptional
The Supreme Court observed that the High Courts can pass interim protection order in
Section 482 CrPC petitions in exceptional cases by giving brief reasons. What is
tendency of the courts to pass blanket, cryptic, laconic, nonspeaking orders reading
"no coercive steps shall be adopted", the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee
[Case: In Re Alarming News Report About Kanwar Yatra In UP; Citation: LL 2021 SC
310]
The Supreme Court slammed the decision taken by the State of Kerala to give
relaxations in the COVID19 lockdown norms for three days on account of Bakrid. A
Bench comprising Justices RF Nariman and BR Gavai observed, "the relaxation for
one day to Category D areas was wholly uncalled for. In these circumstances, we
direct the state of Kerala to give heed to Article 21 of the Constitution read with Article
144 of the Constitution and follow our directions given in the UP case."
312. Section 34 Arbitration Act Gives No Power To Modify Arbitral Award; Appellate
The Supreme Court held that a Court, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, cannot modify an award. "If one were to include the power to modify
an award in Section 34, one would be crossing the Lakshman Rekha", Justices RF
313. Supreme Court Strikes Down 97th Constitutional Amendment To The Extent It
[Case: Union of India v. Rajendra Shah and others; Citation: LL 2021 SC 312]
The Supreme Court upheld a 2013 judgment of the Gujarat High Court which struck
down the provisions of the Constitution(97th Amendment) Act 2011 to the extent it
The bench unanimously held that the 97th Constitutional Amendment required
ratification by at least one-half of the state legislatures as per Article 368(2) of the
Constitution, since it dealt with a entry which was an exclusive state subject (co-
operative societies).
Also Read: States Have Exclusive Legislative Power In Cooperative Societies' Matter
Also Read: Once Substantive Provisions Of Part IXB Are Held Unconstitutional,
Dissent
Also Read: Supreme Court Sheds Light On The Contours Of Ministry Of Cooperation
314. Motor Vehicles Act - Third Party Insurance Deemed To Be Transferred Along
The Supreme Court has held that when a transport corporation hires a motor vehicle
for use from its registered owner, the third-party insurance coverage will also be
deemed to be transferred along with the vehicle. The person who is having the
effective control and command of the vehicle will be regarded as the 'owner'.
Therefore, along with the vehicle it must be deemed that the existing insurance policy
also remains transferred for the period of hire, the division bench of Justices S. Abdul
315. Court Cannot Grant Liberty To Amend Plaint While Rejecting It Under Order VII
The Supreme Court held that while rejecting a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of Code
of Civil Procedure, the Court cannot grant liberty to the plaintiff to amend the plaint.
The proviso to Rule 11 covers the cases falling within the ambit of clauses (b) and (c)
and has no application to a rejection of a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d), the Bench
Purchaser Of Flat
[Case: Laureate Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. v. Charanjeet Singh; Citation: LL 2021 SC 315]
The Supreme Court held that there is no per se bar to grant relief of interest on refund
to a subsequent purchaser of flat. The bench comprising Justices Uday Umesh Lalit,
Hemant Gupta and S. Ravindra Bhat observed, "it cannot be said that a subsequent
purchaser who steps into the shoes of an original allottee of a housing project in
which the builder has not honoured its commitment to deliver the flat within a
stipulated time, cannot expect any even reasonable time, for the performance of the
builder's obligation." The three judge Bench also observed that per se bar to the relief
of interest on refund, enunciated by the decision in HUDA v. Raje Ram which was
applied in Wing Commander Arifur Rahman Khan and Anr. v. DLF Southern Homes
[Case: State of Andhra Pradesh v. Chekka Guru Murali Mohan; Citation: LL 2021 SC
316]
In a blow to Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy, the Supreme Court
has dismissed the state's SLPs against the quashing of criminal cases filed in
Bench of Justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari was hearing the SLPs at the
instance of the AP state government against the January 19 judgment of the Single
Judge of the AP High Court observing that private sale transactions cannot be
criminalized and that the concept of the offence of "insider trading", which is
essentially an offence in the field of stock market relating to selling and buying the
securities and bonds, cannot be applied to the offences under Indian Penal Code and
cannot be read into Section 420, IPC or into any provisions in the scheme of IPC.
Also Read: Amaravati Land Scam Case:Supreme Court Allows Andhra Govt To
318. Trial Judges Work Amidst Appalling Conditions; Colonial Mindset Towards
The colonial mindset which pervades the treatment meted out to the district judiciary
must change, the Supreme Court observed in a judgment passed on July 22. The
Bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Hrishikesh Roy noted that the Trial
judges work amidst appalling conditions and thus observed, "lack of infrastructure,
inadequate protection, examples of judges being made targets when they stand up for
what is right and sadly, a subservience to the administration of the High Court for
Also Read: "We Cannot Have Two Parallel Legal Systems, One For Rich And Powerful
And The Other For Common Man": SC Pulls Up MP Govt. For Protecting Murder
Accused
319. Sanction U/S 197 CrPC Required To Prosecute Public Servants If Alleged Act
The Supreme Court has observed that sanction from competent authorities under
the alleged act committed is directly concerned with the official duty. The Bench
comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta opined that the yardstick
to be followed is to form a prima facie view whether the act of omission for which the
accused was charged had a reasonable connection with the discharge of his duties.
The case against the accused was that he had conspired with his superiors who
320. Production Of Injury Report Is Not A Sine Qua Non For Establishing Offence
Under Section 323 IPC Booth Capturing & Bogus Voting Affects Rule Of Law &
The Supreme Court has observed that production of injury report is not a sine qua non
for establishing the case for the offence under Section 323 Indian Penal Code. The
Bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah observed, "it may be that
there might not be any serious injuries and/or visible injuries, the hospital might not
have issued the injury report. However, production of an injury report for the offence
under Section 323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing the case for the offence
under Section 323 IPC. Section 323 IPC is a punishable section for voluntarily causing
hurt."
Also Read: Booth Capturing & Bogus Voting Affects Rule Of Law & Democracy; Should
Offence
[Case: Prakash Gupta v. Securities and Exchange Board of India; Citation: LL 2021 SC
320]
The Supreme Court has observed that the power of compounding must be expressly
conferred by the statute which creates the offence. The bench of Justices DY
Chandrachud and MR Shah observed that in respect of offences which lie outside the
Indian Penal Code, compounding may be permitted only if the statute which creates
the offence contains an express provision for compounding before such an offence
can be made compoundable. This is because Section 320 CrPC provides for the
Also Read: "Due Deference Must Be Given To SEBI's Opinion": Supreme Issues Court
Guidelines For Compounding Offences Under Section 24A SEBI Act
The Supreme Court quashed a charge sheet filed against DMK leader and Rajya Sabha
Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose observed, "a careful reading of the speech does
not show that there is any attempt made by the appellant to promote or attempt to
promote enmity, hatred or ill will against the members of Scheduled Caste and
Dues
The Supreme Court has rejected the pleas of telecom companies seeking
Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazeer and MR Shah pronounced the order dismissing the
applications filed by Vodafone Idea, Bharti Airtel and Tata Teleservices. The bench had
observed that reassessment was prohibited in view of an earlier order passed on July
20 last year.
324. Student Becomes Bedridden Due To School's Negligence During Tour: Supreme
[Case: Akshatha v. Secretary BNM Education Institution & Ors; Citation: LL 2021 SC
323]
Redressal Commission in case of a student taken ill during a school tour and was
consequentially bed ridden due to School's negligence, the Supreme Court has
restored the compensation amount of Rs.88,73,798 awarded to her by the State
Commission. A Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Sinha and Justice Subhash
Reddy issued the direction in an appeal filed by the complainant being aggrieved by
325. Ocular Evidence Is The Best Evidence Unless There Are Reasons To Doubt It
324]
Ocular evidence is considered the best evidence unless there are reasons to doubt it,
the Supreme Court has observed while setting aside an order of High Court that
acquitted an accused in a murder case. The Bench comprising Justices Navin Sinha
and R. Subhash Reddy observed that the ocular evidence may be disbelieved only
when there is a gross contradiction between medical evidence and oral evidence, and
the medical evidence makes the ocular testimony improbable and rules out all
possibility of ocular evidence being true. In this case, the High Court had reversed the
Trial Court order convicting the accused on the ground that the evidence of the eye-
witnesses is inconsistent with the medical evidence, regarding the nature of injuries
326. Letter Of Intent Is Not A Binding Contract Unless Such An Intention Is Evident
[Case: South Eastern Coalfields Ltd v. S. Kumar's Associates AKM (JV); Citation: LL
2021 SC 325]
A Letter of Intent (LOI) is not a binding contract unless such an intention is evident
from its terms, the Supreme Court observed while dismissing an appeal filed by South
and unambiguous as LOI normally indicates a party's intention to enter into a contract
[Case: Imran Jalal @ Bilal Ahmed v. State Of Karnataka; Citation: LL 2021 SC 326]
The Supreme Court has observed that a court cannot stipulate that other sentences
would begin after expiration of life sentence awarded to convict. The bench
comprising Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and Ajay Rastogi observed "in the instant case,
the appellant was awarded life sentence on three counts and sentence of 10 years
each on five counts, out of which it was only the sentence in respect of the offence
punishable under Section 5(b) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, which was
subject matter of the last part of the directions in paragraph 9 of the order of
sentence. "
328. Umadevi' Judgment Doesn't Absolve Duty To Comply With Earlier SC Judgment
Directing Regularization
The Supreme Court has observed that the judgment in Umadevi case does not
absolve the Anand Agricultural University of its duty to comply with the direction in an
earlier judgment. "Eligible daily wagers in accordance with the scheme have been
Aniruddha Bose observed while dismissing the appeal filed by Anand Agriculture
University.
329. Legislative Privileges & Immunities Not Gateways To Claim Exemption From
While refusing to allow the withdrawal of criminal prosecution against six LDF
members in the Kerala assembly ruckus case of 2015, the Supreme Court made
The State of Kerala and the accused persons had raised an argument that the criminal
prosecution was not sustainable against the members for acts committed in the floor
of the assembly as they are protected by legislative privileges under Article 194 of the
Also Read: What Is The Larger Public Interest In Withdrawing Prosecution?' Supreme
330. Arbitration Award Which Ignores Vital Evidence Or Rewrites The Contract Is
[Case: PSA Sical Terminals Pvt. Ltd. v. Board Of Trustees Of V.O. Chidambranar Port
The Supreme Court observed that an arbitration award which ignores vital evidence in
arriving at its decision or rewrites a contract is liable to be set aside under Section 34
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act on the ground of patent illegality. The Bench
evidence at all or an award which ignores vital evidence in arriving at its decision
156(3) CrPC
[Case: M/s Supreme Bhiwandi Wada Manor Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. State of
The Supreme Court has reiterated that there is no requirement of examining the
before a Judicial Magistrate orders police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC.
Holding so, the Supreme Court set aside an order passed by the Bombay High Court
which had granted anticipatory bail on the ground that order of magistrate to direct
registration of FIR under Sec 156(3) CrPC was given without examining the
332. High Court Must Give Brief Reasons In Order Disposing Application Seeking
The Supreme Court has reiterated that brief reasons must be given in an order
disposing an application for leave to appeal under Section 378 ofthe Code of Criminal
Procedure 1973 against an order of acquittal. Merely observing that the order of the
trial Judge has taken a possible view without an application of mind to the evidence
and the findings is not consistent with the duty which is cast upon the High Court
while determining whether leave should be granted to appeal against an order of
333. No Discussion Or Analysis: Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Granting Bail
To Murder Accused
observed while setting aside a High Court order granting bail to murder accused. The
where an earlier application for bail has been rejected, there is a higher burden on the
appellate court to furnish specific reasons as to why the bail should be granted.
334. Lender Who Advanced Interest Free Loans To Corporate Body Is Also A
[Case: Orator Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. Samtex Desinz Pvt. Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC
333]
The Supreme Court has observed that a lender who advanced interest free loans to
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. "There is no discernible reason, why a term
loan to meet the financial requirements of a Corporate Debtor for its operation, which
obviously has the commercial effect of borrowing, should be excluded from the
purview of a financial debt", the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V.
Ramasubramanian observed.
335. Senior, Even Though Less Meritorious, Shall Have Priority: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has reiterated that seniority-cum-merit means that given the
minimum necessary merit requisite for efficiency of administration, the senior though
the less meritorious shall have priority. Referring to facts of this case, the bench said
promotion as Leading Fireman based on selection. "Other things being equal between
competing candidates, seniority is to be given due weightage. But it does not mean
336. Benefit Of 'Krishna Sradha' Judgment Can Be Availed Only If NEET Candidate
The Supreme Court has observed that the benefit of S. Krishna Sradha v. State of
Andhra Pradesh judgment can be availed only if the NEET candidate approached the
Court without delay. In Krishna Sradha, the Supreme Court has observed that, in
candidates to MBBS Course even after cut-off date. One crucial condition is that the
student has to approach the Court at the earliest and without any delay, the bench
337. Possible Apprehension Of Breach Of 'Law And Order ' Cannot Be A Ground For
Preventive Detention
person under Preventive Detention Laws. It opined that mere contravention of law
such as indulging in cheating or criminal breach of trust certainly affects 'law and
order' but before it can be said to affect 'public order', it must affect the community or
the public at large. "A Preventive Detention Order can only be passed if his activities
adversely affect or are likely to adversely affect the maintenance of public order", the
bench observed while quashing a detention order passed against a person under
338. Entity Which Misuses Status Under Section 12AA Income Tax Act Not Entitled
To Retain It
An entity which is misusing the status conferred upon it by Section 12AA of the
Income Tax Act is not entitled to retain and enjoy said status, the Supreme Court
bench comprising Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and Ajay Rastogi observed while
upholding the cancellation of a registration of Trust. Section 12AA of the Income Tax
Act deals with the procedure for the registration of a charitable trust, which is entitled
to tax benefits.
The Supreme Court observed that judges should avoid unnecessary remarks on the
conduct of the counsel which may have no bearing on the adjudication of the dispute
before the Court. The bench comprising Justices RF Nariman and Hrishikesh Roy
observed thus while ordering expunction of certain remarks made against a lawyer by
[Case: Rajinder Goel v. High Court of Punjab & Haryana; Citation: LL 2021 SC 339]
Officer in Haryana. In this case, the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against a
judicial officer after preliminary enquiry against him revealed that there were "heavy
and in view of the record indicating that there were multiple transactions showing
deposits and withdrawals of substantial amounts of money, it cannot be said that the
Full Court was not justified in taking the view that it did. We do not find any reason to
take a different view in the matter.", the bench comprising Justices Uday Umesh Lalit
and Ajay Rastogi observed.
341. Second Appeal, After Its Admission With Formulation Of Substantial Question
A second appeal, after its admission with formulation of substantial question of law,
cannot be disposed of summarily, the Supreme Court has observed. The bench of
Justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari observed that once a second appeal is
admitted, on the High Court being satisfied that a substantial question of law is
involved in the case and with formulation of that question, the appeal is required to be
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, the Supreme Court has reiterated. The bench of
Justices L. Nagaswera Rao and Aniruddha Bose observed that, in order to bring a
case within Section 306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of
the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide
must have played an active role by an act of instigating or by doing a certain act to
343. Accused's Burden To Prove His Defence Taken U/s 313 CrPC Is Not Beyond All
Reasonable Doubts
The Supreme Court has observed that the burden of proof on an accused in support
of the defence taken under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure is not beyond
all reasonable doubt as it lies on the prosecution to prove the charge. The accused
has merely to create a doubt and it is for the prosecution then to establish beyond
reasonable doubt that no benefit can flow from the same to the accused, the bench of
Justices Navin Sinha and R. Subhash Reddy said while acquitting a woman accused
344. Writ Jurisdiction Not For Deciding 'Hotly Disputed Questions Of Facts'
The Supreme Court has reiterated that a High Court cannot invoke its writ jurisdiction
to adjudicate 'hotly disputed questions of facts'. It is not for the High Court to make a
comparative assessment of conflicting technical reports and decide which one is
345. Quashing Of FIR: Detailed Enquiry On Merits Not Warranted U/s 482 CrPC
The Supreme Court has reiterated that a detailed enquiry into the merits of the
allegations is not warranted while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Shah observed that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, the High Court ought not to be scrutinizing the material in the
manner in which the trial court would do in the course of the criminal trial after
evidence is adduced.
346. Governor Can Exercise Pardon Power Even If Prisoner Has Not Undergone 14
Years Imprisonment
The Supreme Court has observed that the power of Governor under Article 161 of the
under Section 433-A of the Criminal Procedure Code. Even if the prisoner has not
or commute the sentence of any person, the bench comprising Justices Hemant
347. State Cannot Plead Financial Burden To Deny Salary For Legally Serving Doctors
[Case: North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma and others;
burden to deny salary to legally serving doctors. Allowing such an excuse raised by
the state would amount to violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14(right to
equality) , 21(right to life) and 23 (right against bonded labour) of the Constitution.
"The State cannot be allowed plead financial burden to deny salary for the legally
serving doctors. Otherwise it would violate their rights under Articles 14, 21 and 23 of
348. Witness Cannot Be Prosecuted For Perjury U/s 193 IPC For Mere Inconsistency
In His Statements
The Supreme Court has observed that a witness cannot be prosecuted for perjury
under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code merely because he made inconsistent
statements before the Court. The bench led by CJI NV Ramana observed that the
Mere reference to inconsistent statements alone is not sufficient to take action unless
a definite finding is given that they are irreconcilable; one is opposed to the other so
as to make one of them deliberately false, the bench also comprising Justices AS
349. Suit For Eviction Maintainable Before Wakf Tribunal If Tenant Disputes That
[Case: Telangana State Wakf Board v. Mohamed Muzafar; Citation: LL 2021 SC 348]
The Supreme Court has observed that a suit for eviction is maintainable before a Wakf
Tribunal if the tenant disputed that the property is not a wakf. This is because the
the facts and circumstance in each case will have to be ken note in the background of
the legal frame work contained in the Wakf Act to determine jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court has observed that a judgment and/or decree for money in favour
would give rise to a fresh cause of action for the Financial Creditor, to initiate
proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency
Tribunal, or any other Tribunal or Court, and in such cases Insolvency Resolution
Process can be initiated, within three years from the date of the judgment and/or
decree or within three years from the date of issuance of the Certificate of Recovery, if
the dues of the Corporate Debtor to the Financial Debtor, or any part thereof remained
observed that an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
would not be barred by limitation, on the ground that it had been filed beyond a period
of three years from the date of declaration of the loan account of the Corporate
Debtor as NPA, if there were an acknowledgement of the debt by the Corporate Debtor
before expiry of the period of limitation of three years. In such a case, the period of
limitation would get extended by a further period of three years, the court observed.
CrPC Not Required At The Stage Of Cogizance But Trial Can't Be Commenced
Without It
350]
The Supreme Court has observed that the trial of the criminal case against an Indian
citizen for offences committed outside India cannot commence without sanction of
the Central Government under Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But
such previous sanction is not required at the stage of cognizance, the bench
Once the fact of last seen is established, an adverse inference can be drawn against
company of the deceased, the Supreme Court has reiterated. The bench comprising
CJI NV Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose was disposing a criminal
353. 'Harsh': Supreme Court Reduces Condition Imposed On Public Interest Litigant
[Case: Arvind Tukaram Shinde v. State of Maharashtra & Ors; Citation: LL 2021 SC
352]
The Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Bombay High Court, requiring a PIL-
Petitioner to deposit Rs. 10 lakh as security to proceed in the matter. "We understand
that the impugned order of the High Court was intended to subserve the interest of
ensuring that a public project should not be stalled by filing of frivolous PILs. However,
Shah observed.
354. "A Quarter Of A Century Has Passed": Supreme Court Directs Expeditious Trial
[Case: Jimmy Dora Sukhia v. Roshani Farukh Chinoy; Citation: LL 2021 SC 353]
"A quarter of a century has passed in determining whether the licenser is entitled to
seek occupation of the portion occupied by her son!", the Supreme Court observed
while directing a Court in Pune to expedite the trial of a partition suit which is pending
for 26 years. "We can hardly envisage a situation where for 26 years, a suit is pending
at the first stage, and we have to decide the appeal and the second appeals which
would arise thereafter.", the bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and
355. Order XLI Rule 22 CPC- Cross Objection Not Necessary To Challenge Adverse
Findings
The Supreme Court has observed that a party in whose favour a court has decreed the
suit can challenge an adverse finding before the appellate court without a cross
objection. "It is not necessary that a challenge to the adverse findings of the lower
Article 136 of the Constitution if it involves a question of law which does not require
356. Magistrate Not Required To Record Statement Of Public Servant Who Filed
The Supreme Court has observed that a Magistrate is not required to record
statement of a public servant who filed the complaint in discharge of his official duty
before issuing summons to the accused resides outside the territorial jurisdiction. In
this case, the Inspecting Officer filed complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, against
a company, its managing director and others alleging offence of 'misbranding' under
Sections 3(k)(i), 17, 18, 33, 29 of the Insecticides Act. One of the contentions raised by
the appellant-accused was that the Magistrate has taken cognizance without
conducting inquiry and ordering investigation and thus not followed the procedure
357. Not Much Scope For Considering 'Territorial Jurisdiction' Issue In A Transfer
The Supreme Court has observed that there is not much scope of going into the
the Code of Civil Procedure. This point is required to be urged before the Court in
which the suit is pending, Justice Aniruddha Bose observed while dismissing a
transfer petition. In this case, the petitioner is a defendant in a suit instituted in the
LL 2021 SC 357]
The Supreme Court has ruled in favour of e-commerce giant Amazon in its dispute
with Future Retail Limited(FRL) over the latter's merger deal with Reliance group. The
top court held that that Emergency Award passed by Singapore arbitrator stalling FRL-
Reliance deal is enforceable in Indian law. "It is wholly incorrect to say that Section
17(1) of the Act would exclude an Emergency Arbitrator's orders", the Court said in the
declare that full party autonomy is given by the Arbitration Act to have a dispute
interim relief to the parties. Such orders are referable to and are made under Section
The Supreme Court has observed that mens rea as intent is not required in a case of
Doctor by the complainant in support of his case made out in the complaint.
360. Motor Accident Compensation: Pranay Sethi Judgment Doesn't Limit Operation
The Supreme Court has observed that the judgment in Pranay Sethi does not limit
affords better or greater benefit, such statutory instrument must be allowed to operate
Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and Ajay Rastogi observed. The Court dismissed an
the claim in respect of an accident which resulted in the death of one Jairam Shukla.
361. Kirpan' Part Of Religious Belief ; Fact That It Can Be Used As Weapon Does Not
"The fact that kirpan carried by members of a specific community as part of religious
belief can also be used as a weapon of offence, does not ipso facto make it a weapon
of offence", the Supreme Court has observed while acquitting an accused of murder
charge.
Referring to evidence on record, the bench comprising Justices Navin Sinha and R.
Subhash Reddy observed that there is no evidence that the appellant was aware that
the co-accused was a carrying a kirpan and intended to use it for assault.
condition precedent for hearing revision petition under Section 397 of the Criminal
Procedure Code.In this case, the accused was convicted for the offence under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, was sentenced to fine in the sum of
Rs.6,00,000/-. It was also stipulated that the stipulation that in the event of default in
payment of fine, she would undergo simple imprisonment for six months. An amount
of Section 357 Cr.P.C. and the balance amount was to be remitted to the State.
363. 'Illegal Selection Process': Supreme Court Directs Kerala University To Appoint
The Supreme Court has directed Kerala University to appoint a candidate who was
process held 14 years ago. The bench of Justices KM Joseph and S. Ravindra Bhat
clarified that Bindu TV, the candidate will not be entitled to arrears of salary. Instead
she will be entitled to notional fixation and fitment in her grade from the date of such
The Supreme Court has observed that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the
Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act. An
undertaking given by a party should be seen in the context in which it was made and
(i) the benefits that accrued to the undertaking party; and (ii) the detriment/injury
suffered by the counter party, the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V.
Ramasubramanian observed.
365. Res Judicata Is Not A Ground To Reject A Plaint Under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC
[Case: Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat; Citation: LL 2021 SC 364]
The Supreme Court has observed that the Res Judicata cannot be a ground for
rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. "Since
issues and decision in the 'previous suit', such a plea will be beyond the scope of
Order 7 Rule 11 (d), where only the statements in the plaint will have to be perused.",
The Supreme Court expressed exasperation at the delay on the part of the Union
Government in filling up the mounting vacancies of judges in High Courts across the
country. The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy
observed that the "recalcitrant attitude" of the Government in not appointing High
Court judges even years after the Supreme Court collegium has cleared the
367. Relatives Not Dependent On Claimant Will Constitute A Separate Family Unit For
claimant will constitute a separate family unit for the purposes of compensation and
rehabilitation. "The principle which can be deduced is that relatives who are not
dependent on the claimant will constitute a separate family unit for the purposes of
brother and nephews of the respondent cannot be taken as the basis of determining
whether the holding of the respondent was in excess of the threshold of two acres.
Such affidavits create no interest in the land particularly when the persons who
executed them do not fall within the ambit of the phrase 'family'", the Bench
appeal.
directed that the political parties must publish the criminal antecedents, in any, of the
Nariman and BR Gavai modified the direction in its February 13, 2020 judgment in that
regard. The court has also directed the Election Commission of India to create a
regarding their criminal antecedents, so that at one stroke, each voter gets such
Also Read: Supreme Court Imposes Fine On 8 Political Parties For Violating Directions
To Publish Criminal Antecedents Of Candidates In Bihar Polls
The Supreme Court has observed that there is no residual equity based jurisdiction in
the Adjudicating Authority or the Appellate Authority while dealing with the resolution
and MR Shah reiterated that these authorities can not enter into the commercial
wisdom underlying the approval granted by the CoC to the resolution plan.
Arbitration Award
[Case: Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt. Ltd. v. Integrated Sales Service Ltd; Citation: LL
2021 SC 369]
The Supreme Court has observed that perversity of an award is not a ground to refuse
Act, after 2015 amendment. The Court held that the ground of "patent illegality" is only
available to set aside domestic arbitration awards made under Part 1 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act and will not apply to international commercial awards.
"The ground of "patent illegality appearing on the face of the award" is an independent
ground of challenge which applies only to awards made under Part I which do not
involve international commercial arbitrations.", the bench comprising Justices RF
371. Application For Initiating CIRP Has To Be Rejected If A Dispute Truly Exists In
[Case: Kay Bouvet Engineering Ltd. v. Overseas Infrastructure Alliance (India) Private
The Supreme Court has observed that adjudicating authority has to reject an
Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, if a dispute truly exists in fact and is not
observed that, at this stage, the authority is not required to be satisfied as to whether
the defence is likely to succeed or not and it cannot go into the merits of the dispute.
372. Section 106 Evidence Act- 'Failure To Explain' Can Only Be An Additional Link To
The Supreme Court has observed that the failure of the accused to explain can only be
circumstances in the chain are not established, such failure to explain cannot be the
sole basis to convict the accused, the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and
AS Bopanna observed.
The right to shelter does not mean right to government accommodation, the Supreme
Court observed while setting aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court order allowing a
retired Intelligence Bureau Officer to retain Government accommodation. The court
observed that government accommodation is meant for serving officers and officials
and not to the retirees as a benevolence and distribution of largesse. The bench of
Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna added that compassion howsoever genuine
does not give a right to a retired person from continuing to occupy a government
accommodation.
Retrospectively
2021 SC 373]
A retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be
changes the law as it earlier stood, the Supreme Court has observed while holding
that Explanation 3C to Section 43B(d) of the Income Tax Act is 'clarificatory' and does
not add a new condition retrospectively. The bench of Justices RF Nariman and BR
Gavai observed that Explanation 3C was introduced to curb the misuse of the
provisions of Section 43B by not actually paying interest, but converting such interest
375. There Cannot Be Repeated Test Identification Parades Till Accused Is Identified
The Supreme Court observed that there cannot be repeated Test Identification
Parades till such time that the prosecution is successful in obtaining identification of
the accused. The bench of Justices Navin Sinha and R. Subhash Reddy observed that
mere identification in the test identification parade cannot form the substantive basis
for conviction unless there are other facts and circumstances corroborating the
identification. It reiterated that a test identification parade under Section 9 of the
corroborative evidence.
376. Delay In Pronouncing Judgment By Itself Is Not A Ground For Setting It Aside
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna
observed that a delay in pronouncing the judgment by itself is not a ground of setting
it aside. In this case, the appellant challenged the High Court judgment on the ground
that it delivered the judgment after one and a half year of the judgment being
377. Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services Rules 2017 Has No Retrospective
Operation
[Case: Anand Kumar Tiwari v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh; Citation: LL 2021 SC
376]
The Supreme Court has observed that Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services
The roster shall be prepared and maintained only after the commencement of
operation of the Rules, the bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose
observed. After the introduction of the 2017 Rules, seniority inter-se direct recruits and
promotees shall be determined on the basis of Roster, the court added. The bench
further observed that the delay in the decision taken by the High Court to bring the
seniority rule in accord with the directions given by this Court in All India Judges'
Association (supra) on the ground of pendency of SLP before this Court is not
justified.
378. 'SLP Cannot Lie Against Only A Review Order': Supreme Court Raps Petitioner
[Case: Anita Devi and Anr v. Sanjay Kumar and Ors; Citation: LL 2021 SC 377]
Emphasizing the fact that an SLP could not lie against only a review order, the
Supreme Court today rapped the petitioner for approaching the Court by way of a
review application with a delay of 56 years and 6 days.The Division Bench of Justice
SK Kaul and Justice Hrishikesh Roy while hearing a plea against the order passed by
the Patna High Court on March 29, 2019, remarked that, "We find the present
proceeding filed before this Court as also before the High Court is an abuse of
The Supreme Court has observed that 2010 amendment of Payment of Gratuity Act
1972 is not retrospective. As per the 2010 amendment, the upper-limit of amount of
gratuity payable as per Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 was increased
as Rupees 10 lakhs from Rupees 3.5 lakhs. The bench comprising Justices Hemant
Gupta and AS Bopanna observed that the benefit of higher gratuity is one-time
available to the employees only after the commencement of the Amending Act.
380. Improper To Quash FIR U/s 482 CrPC When There Are Serious Triable
under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code when there are serious triable
of quashing of proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, the Bench
of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah reiterated while setting aside a High Court
judgment.
Day Arbitrary: Supreme Asks Govt To Consider All Eligible Persons Regardless Of
Application
[Case: Beche Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.; Citation: LL 2021 SC 380]
A bench of Justices Navin Sinha and Krishna Murari on May 4 told the state of UP to
not deem as ineligible for consideration for premature release those life convicts who
have not specifically applied for the relief, and obligated the state government to
conduct periodical assessments to identify those who are so entitled. "We cannot
approve the policy that those who do not specifically apply for remission would fall in
the restricted category and would be ineligible for consideration", the Court said.
The Supreme Court has observed that the intention of parties has to be looked into to
Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna was interpreting Section 58 of the
Transfer of Property Act which defines Mortgage by conditional sale. The proviso to
this section states that no such transaction shall be deemed to be a mortgage, unless
the condition is embodied in the document which effects or purports to effect the
sale.
383. Motor Accident Claim Petition Does Not Abate On Death Of Injured Claimant
The Supreme Court has observed that a motor accident claim petition does not abate
even after the death of the injured claimant. A Bench comprising Justices Navin Sinha
and R. Subhash Reddy ruled that the right to sue survive to his heirs and legal
representatives in so far as loss to the estate is concerned. The Court added that the
Doctor's fee, etc. including income and future prospects which would have caused
reasonable accretion to the estate but for the sudden expenditure which had to be
met from and depleted the estate of the injured, subsequently deceased.
384. He Fought A Long & Arduous Battle Against The Might Of The State': Supreme
The Supreme Court refused to interfere with an order of the Delhi High Court judgment
Chandrachud and MR Shah observed that the mason had been pursuing his claim
right from 1997 before the Tribunal and he was entitled to temporary status on the
accused. If the accused does not appear through counsel appointed by him/her, the
Court is obliged to proceed with the hearing of the case only after appointing an
amicus curiae, the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna stated.
[Case: HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mukesh Kumar; Citation: LL 2021 SC
385]
The Supreme Court has observed that while determining compensation under the
Motor Vehicle Act, a court cannot direct the continued maintenance by Insurance
Company of a prosthetic limb for the injured claimant. The process of determination
and the determination must take place at one go, the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan
judgment, the Supreme Court observed that mere over-ruling of the principles by a
subsequent judgment will not dilute the binding effect of the decision on inter-parties.
"Mere over-ruling of the principles, on which the earlier judgment was passed, by a
subsequent judgment of higher forum will not have the effect of uprooting the final
adjudication between the parties and set it at naught.", the bench of Justices S. Abdul
SARFAESI Proceedings
[Case: Hemaraj Ratnakar Salian v. HDFC Bank Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC 387]
protection of the Rent Act against SARFAESI proceedings. A tenant whose term has
expired but has not vacated is called a "tenant at sufferance.‟. In the absence of a
possession of the secured asset for more than the period prescribed under the
provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, the bench of Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and
[Case: Lachhmi Narain Singh (D) v. Sarjug Singh (Dead); Citation: LL 2021 SC 388]
The Supreme Court has observed that genuineness of property transaction cannot be
doubted merely because thumb impression was affixed instead of signature. The
bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Krishna Murari also observed that every
person has a unique thumb impression and thus 'forgery of thumb impressions is
nearly impossible'.
Ownership
The Supreme Court has observed that the right of equity of redemption is subsidiary
an owner, who has stepped into the shoes of the mortgagor, after the purchase from
the mortgagor but before filing a suit for foreclosure is entitled to redeem the property
in terms of Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act", the bench of Justices Hemant
[Case: Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences v. Srikeerti Pingle; Citation:
LL 2021 SC 390]
The Supreme Court has observed that prior knowledge - both theoretical and practical,
to get admission to MBBS Course. The bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao
and S. Ravindra Bhat observed that equivalence in qualification is not merely at the
level of a 10+2 requirement, but MCI regulation requires equivalence in 'standard and
392. Personal Liberty- Merely Because An Arrest Can Be Made Lawfully, It Does Not
Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that
arrest must be made, the Supreme Court has recently observed. The bench of
Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy observed that personal liberty is an
393. B.Ed In Biological Science Eligible Qualification For HSA(Natural Science) Post
[Case: Praveen Kumar CP v. Kerala Public Service Commission; Citation: LL 2021 SC
392]
The Supreme Court has held that candidates with B.ED degree in 'Biological Science'
are eligible to apply to the post of High School Assistant (Natural Sciences) in
Justice Aniruddha Bose set aside the judgments of the Kerala High Court which held
that B.Ed degree in 'Biological Science' was not a qualification for High School
394. Investigation Buried The Truth Fathom Deep: Supreme Court Acquits All
Investigation in this case was carried out not with the intention of unearthing the truth,
but for burying the same fathom deep, the Supreme Court has remarked while
acquitting all the accused in a murder case of 2008. Overruling the conviction, the
the High Court proceeded on a wrong premise that there was scientific evidence to
point to the guilt of the accused, merely because as pe FSL Report, the knife and lathis
said to have been seized by the police, contained stains of human blood.
The Supreme Court has observed that a consumer complaint against a common
carrier is not maintainable if prior notice under Section 6 of Carriers Act, 1865, is not
served on it. Notice is required to be served prior to initiation of proceedings and not
the proceedings itself, the bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna held.
No sympathies can be shown to students who have entered through backdoor, the
Supreme Court observed while dismissing review petitions filed by some medical
students. The bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari
observed that the medical admissions conducted through the private counselling is
illegal.
[Case: Dumya Alias Lakhan Alias Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra; Citation: LL 2021
SC 396]
The Supreme Court has observed that the default sentences imposed on a convict
cannot be directed to run concurrently. A bench of Justices UU Lalit and Ajay Rastogi
noted that in Sharad Hiru Kilambe v. State of Maharashtra & Ors, it was held that the
default sentence cannot be directed to run concurrently. It was further noted that in
Sharad Hiru, the court had observed that the default sentence given to the concerned
accused of three years each on three counts was found to be excessive.
398. Reservation Category Person Can't Claim Quota Benefits Simultaneously In Two
Successor States
The Supreme Court has held that a person who is entitled to the benefit of reservation
in either of the State of Bihar or State of Jharkhand will not be entitled to claim benefit
of reservation simultaneously in both the successor States. Allowing such
simultaneous claim will defeat the mandate of Articles 341(1) and 342(1) of the
Constitution, the Court observed. A division bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and
Ajay Rastogi further held that those who are members of the reserved category and
are resident of the successor State of Bihar, while participating in open selection in
participate in general category without claiming the benefit of reservation and vice-
versa. Accordingly, the Bench set aside a judgment of the Jhakrhand High Court.
399. Scope And Ambit Of Powers Of Court Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court
Summarizes Principles
The Supreme Court summarized the scope and ambit of the powers of the Court
under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even in a case where the stage
of giving opportunity to the complainant to file a protest petition urging upon the trial
Court to summon other persons as well as who were named in the FIR but not
implicated in the charge-sheet has gone, in that case also, the court is still not
powerless by virtue of Section 319 CrPC, the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and
MR Shah observed.
Access full report to read the list of principles enlisted by the Court
400. Economic Criterion Cannot Be The Sole Basis For Identifying 'Creamy Layer'
[Case: Pichra Warg Kalyan Mahasabha Haryana v. State of Haryana; Citation: LL 2021
SC 399]
The Supreme Court has observed that economic criterion cannot be the sole basis for
criteria for exclusion of 'creamy layer' within the backward classes. "..the State of
Haryana has sought to determine 'creamy layer' from backward classes solely on the
basis of economic criterion and has committed a grave error in doing so. On this
ground alone, the notification dated 17.08.2016 requires to be set aside", the Court
observed.
401. EPF Pension Case : Supreme Court Larger Bench To Decide If There Is Cut-Off
[Case: The Employees Provident Fund Organization and others v. Sunil Kumar B and
The Supreme Court has referred to a larger bench the appeals filed by the Employees
Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) and the Union of India challenging the judgments
of Kerala, Delhi and Rajasthan High Courts which quashed the Employee's Pension
(Amendment) Scheme, 2014. A division bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and Ajay
Rastogi said that the principal questions that arise for consideration are : 1. Whether
there would be a cut-off date under paragraph 11(3) of the Employees' Pension
Scheme and 2. Whether the decision in R.C. Gupta v. Regional Provident Fund
Commissioner (2016) would be the governing principle on the basis of which all these
Also Read: EPF Pension Case : High Courts Assumed Exercise Of Option Wasn't
Necessary For Pension Above Upper Limit, EPFO Argues In Supreme Court
Also Read: EPF Pension Case: Supreme Court To Consider If Reference To Larger
402. How To Exercise The Discretionary Power For Granting Bail? Principles
and MR Shah set aside a bail granted by the High Court to a murder accused. "We are
of the opinion that the High Court has erred in granting bail to respondent no.1 herein
without taking into consideration the overall facts, otherwise having a bearing on
exercise of its discretion on the issue. The order passed by the High Court fails to
notice material facts and shows nonapplication of mind to the seriousness of the
crime and circumstances, which ought to have been taken into consideration.", the
Court said.
403. Section 482 CrPC: High Court Not Required To Appreciate Evidence To Find Out
The Supreme Court reiterated that, at Section 482 CrPC stage, a High Court is not
required to appreciate the evidence to find out whether the accused is likely to be
observed, "The High Court has entered into the appreciation of the evidence and
considered whether on the basis of the evidence, the accused is likely to be convicted
or not, which as such is not permissible at all at this stage while considering the
[Case: SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation v. Power Mech Projects Ltd;
that it is incomprehensible why bank guarantee from Scheduled Private Banks in India
should be preferred to Scheduled Foreign Banks in India with high global rating, even
though, some Scheduled Private Sector Banks have not even been running well. The
against the High Court order refusing to accept a legally valid irrevocable Bank
Guarantee of Rs.30 Crores, issued by the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China
Limited, Mumbai, which is a Scheduled Bank included in the Second Schedule of the
Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, and insisting that the Appellant should furnish a fresh
Bank Guarantee of the same amount, with identical terms, issued by a "Scheduled
Against Journalist
LL 2021 SC 404]
While quashing an externment order passed against a journalist, the Supreme Court
has observed that a person cannot be denied his fundamental right to reside
anywhere in the country or to move freely throughout the country, on flimsy grounds.
that the drastic action of externment should only be taken in exceptional cases, to
maintain law and order in a locality and/or prevent breach of public tranquility and
peace.
406. Supreme Court Directs Compulsory Retirement Of Judicial Officer; Says Solitary
2021 SC 405]
The Supreme Court has observed that solitary remark regarding lack of integrity is
AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna set aside a Rajasthan High Court judgment which
2021 SC 406]
Deprecating the practice of issuing oral directions, the Supreme court said that
Judges ought to speak through their judgments and orders and not by issuing oral
directions which does not form a part of the judicial record. "The element of judicial
accountability is lost where oral regimes prevail. This would set a dangerous
conduct they preside, are accountable for their actions.", the bench comprising
408. Supreme Court Grants Bail To YSRCP MP Raghu Rama Krishna Raju In Sedition
Case
[Case: Kanumuri Raghurama Krishnam Raju v. Stateof Andhra Pradesh & Ors.;
A Bench of Justices Vineet Saran and BR Gavai granted bail to YSR Congress MP K.
Raghu Rama Krishnam Raju from Andhra Pradesh, who was arrested by Guntur CID on
May 14 for alleged sedition and promotion of communal hatred over his speeches. It
observed that custodial interrogation would not be required as all statements of
Petitioner are on record. The bench also took note of the medical condition of the
petitioner, having regard to the heart surgery underwent by him last year. The bench
also opined on the basis of the medical report from Army Hospital, Secundarabad,
The Supreme Court in a recent judgment examined the applicability of res judicata
between co-defendants. The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant
Gupta observed that the requisite conditions to apply the principle of res judicata as
between co-defendants are that: (a) there must be conflict of interest between the
defendants concerned; (b) it must be necessary to decide this conflict in order to give
the plaintiff the relief he claims; and (c) the question between the defendants must
410. Principle Of Equal Pay For Equal Work Cannot Be Applied Merely On Basis Of
Designation
The Supreme Court has observed that the principle of equal pay for equal work cannot
Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy observed, "we are fortified in the view we are seeking
observations in Union of India v. Tarit Ranjan Das, where it was opined that the
principle of equal pay for equal work cannot be applied merely on basis of
designation. While dealing with the 5th Pay Commission recommendations with
respect to functional requirements, it was held that there was no question of any
equivalence on that basis. The said case dealt with Stenographers of the Geological
Survey of India. While observing that as a general statement it was correct to state
that the basic nature of work of a Stenographer remained by and large the same
whether they were working for an officer in the Secretariat or for an officer in a
subordinate office; it was held that Courts ought not to interfere if the Commission
itself had considered all aspects and after due consideration opined that absolute
Convicted U/s 498A IPC Agrees To Pay Compensation To His Wife & Children
The Supreme Court has reduced sentence awarded to a man convicted under section
498A of IPC to period already undergone after he agreed to pay compensation to his
wife and children. The object of any criminal jurisprudence is reformative in character
and to take care of the victim, the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and
412. Second Appeal- Question Of Law Doesn't Arise In Abstract; Mere Reference To
The Supreme Court has observed that merely because the High Court, while
considering a second appeal, refers to certain factual aspects in the case to raise and
conclude on the question of law, the same does not mean that the factual aspect and
evidence has been re-appreciated. Question of law for consideration will not arise in
abstract but in all cases will emerge from the facts peculiar to that case and there
cannot be a strait jacket formula, the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana,
[Case: Sanjay Ramdas Patil v. Sanjay and Others; Citation: LL 2021 SC 412]
The Supreme Court set aside a judgment delivered by the Bombay High Court
belonging to Other Backward Class (OBC) category. Disagreeing with the High Court's
opinion, the Bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai observed that
possible that there will be repeat of OBC reservation in Mayor post even before the
turn for SC reservation occurs, and this by itself cannot be termed as violation of
Members
[Case: J. Chitra v. District Collector and Chairman State Level Vigilance Committee;
members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the Supreme Court has
observed. The bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose said that the
and bogus claims and reopening of inquiry can be only in case they are vitiated by
415. Employee Not Estopped From Challenging Terms & Conditions Of Employment
2021 SC 414]
The Supreme Court has observed that employee is not estopped from questioning
terms and condition of employment at a stage where he finds himself aggrieved. "It is
open for the employee to challenge the conditions if it is not being in conformity with
the statutory requirement under the law and he is not estopped from questioning at a
stage where he finds himself aggrieved", the bench of Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and
SC 415]
The Supreme Court has observed that to attract the applicability of Section 113-A of
the Evidence Act, three conditions are required to be fulfilled- 1) The woman has
committed suicide 2) Such suicide has been committed within a period of seven years
from the date of her marriage 3) The charged-accused had subjected her to cruelty. If
all the three conditions stand fulfilled, presumption can be drawn against the accused
and if he could not rebut the presumption by leading evidence, he can be convicted,
the bench comprising Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari observed.
417. Magistrate While Accepting Chargesheet Has To Invariably Issue Summons And
The Supreme Court has observed that, while accepting charge-sheet, the Magistrate
or the Court is required to invariably issue a process of summons and not warrant of
arrest. The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M Sundresh also
observed that, if an accused in a non-bailable offence has been enlarged and free for
many years and has not even been arrested during investigation, it would be contrary
to the governing principles for grant of bail to suddenly direct his arrest merely
418. 'Well Established Process With Sufficient Safeguards Exists For Judges
Sufficient safeguards exist in the system, the Supreme Court has said while it
the High Court for the State of Telangana. Advocate B. Sailesh Saxena filed a writ
regard. The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh observed that
this writ petition is a gross abuse of law filed to harass the concerned judicial officer
and for abusing the court proceedings. Therefore, costs of Rs. 5 lakhs was imposed.
419. Presiding Deity Is Owner Of Land Attached To Temple, Not Pujari: Supreme
[Case: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pujari Utthan Avam Kalyan Samiti; Citation: LL
2021 SC 418]
Presiding deity of the temple is the owner of the land attached to the temple and
Pujari is only to perform puja and to maintain the properties of the deity, the Supreme
Court observed while upholding the circulars issued by the Madhya Pradesh
Government to delete the names of Pujari from revenue record pertaining to temple
properties. "The Law is clear on the distinction that the Pujari is not a Kashtkar
Mourushi, i.e., tenant in cultivation or a government lessee or an ordinary tenant of the
maufi lands but holds such land on behalf of the Aukaf Department for the purpose of
management. The Pujari is only a grantee to manage the property of the deity and
such grant can be reassumed if the Pujari fails to do the task assigned to him, i.e., to
offer prayers and manage the land. He cannot be thus treated as a Bhumiswami", the
2021 SC 419]
The Supreme Court has observed that a rule or law cannot be construed as
Committees
[Case: Sanghar Zuber Ismail v. Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change;
The Supreme Court has observed that adjudicatory function of the National Green
obviated by tasking committees to carry out a function which vests in the tribunal", the
The Supreme Court has explained the differences between the concepts of 'royalty'
and 'tax' in a recent decision. A division bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and
Vineet Saran observed that 'Royalty' has its basis in an agreement entered into
between parties and has a nexus with the benefit or privilege conferred on a grantee.
Tax is imposed under a statutory power without reference to any special benefit
423. What The Court Says, And How It Says It, Is Equally Important As What It
The Supreme Court, while setting aside a High Court order that granted bail to a
what should be contained in the judgment'. The Court said that a judgment should
have a clarity, both on facts and law and on submissions, findings, reasoning's and the
ultimate relief granted. What the court says, and how it says it, is equally important as
what the court decides, the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah
observed.
424. Suit Simpliciter For Injunction Without Claiming Declaration Of Title Not
The Supreme Court has observed that a suit simpliciter for permanent injunction
without claiming declaration of title is maintainable only in cases where the plaintiff's
title is not in dispute or under a cloud. The bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and
B.R. Gavai observed that if the matter involves complicated questions of fact and law
relating to title, the court has to relegate the parties to the remedy by way of
comprehensive suit for declaration of title, instead of deciding the issue in a suit for
mere injunction.
The Supreme Court has observed that fraudulent practice to gain public employment
mobility, must be protected against such fraudulent process which manipulates and
corrupts the selection process, the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and
[Case: Dr. Harish Kumar Khurana v. Joginder Singh; Citation: LL 2021 SC 425]
The Supreme Court has observed that a medical professional cannot be held
negligent merely because the treatment is not successful or the patient dies during
surgery. To indicate negligence, the bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna
evidence should be tendered. The court said that the principle of res ipsa loquitur
applied when the negligence alleged is so glaring and not based on perception.
427. Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal Of A Title Suit Filed 54 Years Ago
[Case: Rakesh Bhushan Prasad Alias Rakesh Prasad v. Radha Devi; Citation: LL 2021
SC 426]
The Supreme Court, in a judgment upheld the dismissal of a 'Title' suit filed 54 years
ago on 5th August 1967. "We find that the judgment of the trial court dismissing the
suit is correct", the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna observed
while setting aside the Patna High Court order and first appellate court order that had
428. Railways Liable To Pay Compensation For Late Arrival Of Trains If Delay Is Not
Explained Or Justifiable
[Case: Northern Western Railway and Another v. Sanjay Shukla; Citation: LL 2021 SC
427]
The Supreme Court has held that until and unless the railways provide evidence and
explain the late arrival of a train to establish and prove that delay occurred because of
the reasons beyond their control, they would be liable to pay compensation for such
delay. "Therefore, unless and until the evidence is laid explaining the delay and it is
established and proved that delay occurred which was beyond their control and/or
even there was some justification for delay, the railway is liable to pay the
compensation for delay and late arrival of trains", a bench of Justice MR Shah and
25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. "We find that reinstatement cannot be
430. Director Of Enforcement Can Be Appointed For A Period Of More Than Two
Years
429]
The Supreme Court has held that a Director of Enforcement can be appointed for a
period of more than two years by following the procedure prescribed Section 25 of the
Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003. The bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao
and BR Gavai also upheld the power of the Union of India to extend the tenure of
Director of Enforcement beyond the period of two years. It clarified that extension of
tenure granted to officers who have attained the age of superannuation should be
431. Mutation Entry Does Not Confer Any Right, Title Or Interest In Favour Of Any
Person
The Supreme Court has observed that mutation entry in the revenue record is only for
fiscal purposes and does not confer any right, title or interest in favour of a person. "If
there is any dispute with respect to the title and more particularly when the mutation
entry is sought to be made on the basis of the will, the party who is claiming title/right
on the basis of the will has to approach the appropriate civil court/court and get his
rights crystalised and only thereafter on the basis of the decision before the civil court
necessary mutation entry can be made", the bench of Justices MR Shah and
432. Use Of Gauchar Land By State Or Any Third Party Contrary To What Is Permitted
Cannot Go On
431]
While directing the State of Gujarat to bring Gauchar Land (grazing land) of Village
Bhandu in conformity with its use, the Supreme Court observed that use of gauchar
land, whether by State of any third party, contrary to what was permitted could not go
on. "It is trite to say that gauchar land can be used only for purposes for which it is
permitted to be used. If there is a user contrary to the permissible user, whether by the
State or by any third party, the same cannot go on," the division bench of Justice SK
[Case: Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd;
The Supreme Court has observed that contravention of a statute which is not linked to
public policy or public interest cannot be a ground to set aside an arbitration award.
"There is a disturbing tendency of courts setting aside arbitral awards, after dissecting
and reassessing factual aspects of the cases to come to a conclusion that the award
needs intervention and thereafter, dubbing the award to be vitiated by either perversity
or patent illegality, apart from the other grounds available for annulment of the award",
434. Second Appeal- High Courts Can Exercise Limited Factual Review Under
The Supreme Court has observed that High Courts are empowered to exercise limited
factual review under Section 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The bench of
Justices L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat observed that the rule that sans a
substantial question of law, the High Courts cannot interfere with findings of the lower
Court or concurrent findings of fact, is subject to the following two important caveats:
First, if the findings of fact are palpably perverse or outrage the conscience of the
court; in other words, it flies on the face of logic that given the facts on the record,
interference would be justified. Second, where the findings of fact may call for
examination and be upset, in the limited circumstances spelt out in Section 103 CPC.
The Supreme Court held that magistrates would not be competent to extend the time
such request would be "the Court" as specified in the proviso in Section 43-D (2)(b) of
the UAPA, the bench of Justices Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Belam M
Trivedi held.
436. Government Should Keep Taxation System Convenient & Simple, Says Supreme
Court
[Case: South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; Citation: LL 2021 SC
435]
The Supreme Court has observed that it is the responsibility of the Government should
endeavour to keep taxation regime convenient and simple. "Just as the Government
does not wish for avoidance of tax equally it is the responsibility of the regime to
design a tax system for which a subject can budget and plan", the bench of Justices
Also Read: Income Tax Act - Disallowance Under Section 14A Can't Be Made Just
Because Assessee Has Not Maintained Separate Accounts For Expenditures Incurred
437. Delay In Conducting Disciplinary Enquiry Does Not Ipso Facto Vitiate It
Every delay in conducting a disciplinary enquiry does not, ipso facto, lead to the
enquiry being vitiated, the Supreme Court observed. The bench of Justices D.Y.
Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli has observed that the prejudice caused by
the delay must be demonstrated to have been caused and cannot be a matter of
surmise.
[Case: Sau. Sangeeta w/o Sunil Shinde v. The State of Maharashtra and others;
The Supreme Court has observed in a judgment that "in a democratic set up, the will
of the majority has to prevail". A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR
Gavai made this observation in a case related to the approval of the group leader of a
2021 SC 438]
The Supreme Court bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli
observed that, when an alternate remedy is available, a writ petition under Article 226
natural justice; (iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or (iv) a challenge to the vires of the
440. Trees To Be Valued Separately When Acquired Land Value Is Determined With
The Supreme Court has observed that the trees have to be valued separately in a case
where the land value for the purpose of its acquisition is determined with reference to
the sales statistics. The Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka noted the
land value had been determined with reference to the sale statistics or compensation
awarded for a nearby vacant land, then necessarily, the trees will have to be valued
separately. But if the value of the land has been determined on the basis of the sale
trees, then there is no question of again adding the value of the trees."
The Supreme Court has observed that bank account of a person accused under
Criminal Procedure. "It is not possible to sustain the freezing of the bank account of
the appellant taking recourse to Section 102 Cr.P.C. as the Prevention of Corruption
Act is a Code by itself", the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh
observed while allowing an appeal against a Karnataka High Court judgment. "It is not
possible to sustain the freezing of the bank account of the appellant taking recourse
to Section 102 Cr.P.C. as the Prevention of Corruption Act is a Code by itself. In view of
the aforesaid position, the freezing of the account of the appellant cannot be
The Supreme Court has observed that consumer complaints on the ground of
allotment of a site or a plot, the bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and A.S.Bopanna
observed. "The expression 'service' includes housing construction and not allotment
of a site or a plot. Since the respondents are already in possession of the sites as
lessee on 99 years basis, it cannot be said that the appellant was deficient in
providing any service, which even if used in a liberal sense would not include transfer
Also Read: Typical Case Of 'You Show Me Face, I Will Show The Rule': Supreme Court
[Case: Seema Kausar v. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors; Citation: LL 2021 SC 442]
The Supreme Court on September 6, 2021 while upholding Bombay High Court's order
of rejecting compassionate appointment, observed that it can be made only as per the
Government's policy, and only in case where eligibility criteria under the Scheme has
been satisfied. Dismissing the special leave petition, the bench of Justices MR Shah
and Aniruddha Bose also observed that, "It also cannot be disputed that the policy
which was prevailing at the time when the deceased employee died/the application
444. Writ Court Cannot Adjudicate Factual Disputes Arising Out Of Pure Contractual
The Supreme Court has observed that writ court cannot adjudicate factual disputes
arising out of pure contractual matters in the field of private law having no statutory
flavour. "Though, the jurisdiction of the High Court is wide but in respect of pure
contractual matters in the field of private law, having no statutory flavour, are better
adjudicated upon by the forum agreed to by the parties. The dispute as to whether the
amount is payable or not and/or how much amount is payable are disputed questions
of facts. There is no admission on the part of the appellants to infer that the amount
stands crystallized", the bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna said.
445. Employee Cannot Insist On Transfer To A Particular Place; It's For Employer To
Decide
employee to insist the transfer or non-transfer to a particular place but it was for the
employer to do the same considering the requirement. The observations were made
by the division bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose while dismissing the
special leave petition assailing Allahabad High Court's order of refusing to interfere
The Supreme Court has observed that the requirement to frame substantial question
of law in a second appeal is not a mere formality, but is meant to be adhered to. The
limitation on the exercise of power by the High Court in the Second Appeal interfering
with the judgment of the First Appellate Court is premised on high public policy, the
447. Refund For Unutilised Input Tax Credit Can't Be Claimed On Account Of Input
[Case: Union of India v. VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC 446]
The Supreme Court has held that Section 54(3) of the Central Goods and Services Act
excludes unutilised input tax credit that accumulated on account of input services.
the submission that goods and services must necessarily be treated at par on a
Chandrachud and MR Shah observed while rejecting the challenge against Section
54(3) on the ground that it violates equality doctrine under Article 14 of the
Constitution.
Also Read: Practical Effect Might Result In Certain Inequities': Supreme Court Points
Commercial Uncertainty
The Supreme Court has urged NCLT/NCLAT, the adjudicating and appellate authorities
under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, to strictly adhere to the timelines stipulated
under the IBC and clear pending resolution plans forthwith. The court said that
Corporate Debtor and makes the insolvency process inefficient and expensive. The
449. Repeated Filing Of Cases & Complaints Against Spouse Can Amount To 'Cruelty'
The Supreme Court has observed that repeated filing of cases and complaints against
a spouse can amount to 'cruelty' for the purpose of granting divorce under Hindu
Marriage Act. The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy, in a
case, referred to such conducts, even if they were subsequent to filing of the divorce
449]
The Supreme Court has set aside a Karnataka High Court judgment that held that a
divorced daughter would fall in the same class of an unmarried or widowed daughter
Rules, 1996. The bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose reiterated that
norms prevailing on the date of consideration of the application should be the basis of
[Case: Uttar Pradesh Jal Vidyut (S) Nigam Limited v. Balbir Singh; Citation: LL 2021
SC 450]
Bench", the Supreme Court observed while it set aside observations made by
Uttarakhand High Court on an order passed by Allahabad High Court. The bench of
Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose observed, "Even otherwise once a judicial
order was passed by the High Court of Allahabad permitting the appellants to
withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a writ petition before the appropriate court
(the High Court of Uttarakhand) and thereafter when the appellants preferred the writ
petition before the High Court of Uttarakhand, the learned Single Judge of the High
Court of Uttarakhand is not at all justified in making comments upon the judicial order
passed by the Coordinate Bench of the Allahabad High Court. "
452. Amicable Settlement' : Supreme Court Reduces Sentence Awarded To Man
[Case: Sy. Azhar Sy. Kalandar v. State of Maharashtra; Citation: LL 2021 SC 451]
The Supreme Court has reduced the sentence awarded to a man accused of attempt
to murder taking note of the amicable settlement between the accused and the victim.
The bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka noted that in earlier judgments,
the court has taken note of the compromise between the parties to reduce the
The Supreme Court has reiterated that a sentence of imprisonment for life means
rigorous imprisonment for life. A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR
Gavai held so while disposing two special leave petitions, in which the court had
454. NCLAT Has No Jurisdiction To Condone Delay Exceeding 15 Days From Period
[Case: National Spot Exchange Limited v. Anil Kohli; Citation: LL 2021 SC 453]
The Supreme Court observed that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
(NCLAT) has no jurisdiction to condone the delay exceeding 15 days from the period
Code. The bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose, referring to the relevant
provisions of IBC observed: "The appeal preferred before the NCLAT was under
Section 61(2) of the IB Code. As per Section 61(2) of the IB Code, the appeal was
required to be preferred within a period of thirty days. Therefore, the limitation period
prescribed to prefer an appeal was 30 days. However, as per the proviso to Section
61(2) of the Code, the Appellate Tribunal may allow an appeal to be filed after the
expiry of the said period of 30 days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for
not filing the appeal, but such period shall not exceed 15 days. "
455. Bar U/s 9(3) Arbitration Act Not Applicable If Application Was Taken Up By
[Case: Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd v. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd; Citation: 2021
SC 454]
The Supreme Court has observed that the bar under Section 9(3) of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act operates only when the application under Section 9(1) had not
been entertained till the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal. "Once an Arbitral Tribunal
application is entertained in the sense it is taken up for consideration, and the Court
has applied its mind to the Court can certainly proceed to adjudicate the application",
The marriage between the parties is emotionally dead and there is no point in
persuading them to live together any more, the Supreme Court has remarked while it
dissolved a marriage invoking its powers Article 142 of the Constitution. "The
marriage between the parties is emotionally dead and there is no point in persuading
them to live together any more. Therefore, this is a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction
under Article 142 of the Constitution of India", the bench comprising Justices L.
457. Mere Quarrel On The Day Of Occurrence Does Not Attract Offence Of Abetment
The Supreme Court has observed that mere quarrel on the day of occurrence cannot
attract the offence of abetment of suicide under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
The bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose reiterated that mere harassment
without any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of
occurrence which led to the suicide would not amount to an offence under Section
306.
458. Evidence Act - Failure Of Accused To Discharge Burden U/S 106 Irrelevant If
The Supreme Court has observed that the failure of accused to discharge burden
under Section 106 of the Evidence Act, 1872 is not relevant in a case governed by
Section 106 of the Evidence Act, such a failure may provide an additional link to the
chain of circumstances…When the chain is not complete, the falsity of the defence is
no ground to convict the accused," the bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S
Oka remarked.
459. Commercial Suits & Requirement Of Establishing Reasonable Cause For Non
[Case: Sudhir Kumar @ S. Baliyan v. Vinay Kumar G.B; Citation: LL 2021 SC 458]
The Supreme Court has observed that the requirement under Order XI Rule 1(4) of
reasonable cause for non disclosure of the documents along with the plaint under
shall not be applicable if it is averred and it is the case of the plaintiff that those
documents have been found subsequently and in fact were not in the plaintiff's power,
possession, control or custody at the time when the plaint was filed.
The Apex Court bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose observed, "However,
at the same time, the requirement of establishing the reasonable cause for non
disclosure of the documents along with the plaint shall not be applicable if it is
averred and it is the case of the plaintiff that those documents have been found
subsequently and in fact were not in the plaintiff's power, possession, control or
460. IBC- Every Attempt Has To Be First Made To Revive The Concern And Make It A
Every attempt has to be first made to revive the concern and make it a going concern,
liquidation being the last resort, the Supreme Court has observed while upholding
adjudicating authority under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code can allow withdrawal of
CIRP proceedings on an application made by the applicant with the approval of 90%
[Case: Jaipur Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited v. M/s Ajay Sales &
arbitrator would make him ineligible to conduct arbitration. The bench of Justices MR
Shah and Aniruddha Bose observed that the ineligibility of an arbitrator can be
462. Difference Lies In The Degree Of The Act: Supreme Court Explains Subtle
[Case: Mohd. Rafiq @ Kallu v. State Of Madhya Pradesh; Citation: LL 2021 SC 461]
In a judgment delivered on September 15, 2021, the Supreme Court has explained the
difference between culpable homicide under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and
murder under Section 300 IPC. The Court observed that, though it difficult to
distinguish between culpable homicide and murder as both involve death, there is a
subtle distinction of intention and knowledge involved in both the crimes. "This
difference lies in the degree of the act. There is a very wide variance of degree of
intention and knowledge among both the crimes", the bench of Justices KM Joseph
and S. Ravindra Bhat observed.
463. Moratorium Ordered U/Sec.14 IBC Does Not Apply To Proceedings In Respect
[Case: Anjali Rathi v. Today Homes & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC
462]
The Supreme Court has observed that the moratorium ordered under Section 14 of the
the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli observed.
While upholding Chhattisgarh High Court's order of not granting extension of time for
joining a post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, the Supreme Court observed that
extension of time of joining cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The division bench
of Justices Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose in their order noted that, "Appointment
letter was categorical to the effect that the petitioner had to join within 30 days.
Admittedly, life of select list expired on January 5, 2011 & petitioner did not join even
after expiry of period of select list. Petitioner not joining within a period of 30 days
disentitles him to be appointed for the post. Extension of time of joining cannot be
465. Statutory Tenant Cannot Seek Repossession After Demolition Of Building Under
The Supreme Court has observed that the rights and liabilities of a statutory tenant
have to be found under the Rent Act alone and not under Transfer of Property Act. The
bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna observed that a statutory tenant
cannot seek repossession after the demolition of building under Section 108(B)(e) of
the TP Act.
Also Read: Rent Control Act Will Not Bar Demolition Of Building As Per Municipal Law
"The ground reality today is that almost no tender remains unchallenged", the
Supreme Court has remarked. The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and
Hrishikesh Roy observed that the enlarged role of the Government in economic
activity and its corresponding ability to give economic 'largesse' was the bedrock of
creating what is commonly called the 'tender jurisdiction'. The objective was to have
greater transparency and the consequent right of an aggrieved party to invoke the
jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the court
said.
Also Read: Imposition Of Costs Not A Reflection On Counsel; Costs Must Follow
Cause In Commercial Matters Including Writ Petitions
[Case: Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited v. Anil Kanwariya; Citation: LL
2021 SC 466]
The Supreme Court observed that an employee who made a false declaration and/or
suppressed the material fact of his involvement in a criminal case shall not be entitled
feels that an employee who at the initial stage itself has made a false statement
and/or not disclosed the material facts and/or suppressed the material facts and
therefore he cannot be continued in service because such an employee cannot be
relied upon even in future, the employer cannot be forced to continue such an
employee always must be given to the employer", the bench of Justices MR Shah and
AS Bopanna observed.
468. 'No Positive Act': Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Girl Accused
The Supreme Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a girl accused of
abetting suicide of a man by allegedly refusing to marry him. The bench of Justices R.
Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy reiterated that Section 306 of the Indian Penal
Code will not be attracted if there was no positive act on the part of the accused to
instigate or aid in committing suicide. The court said that it would be travesty of
justice to compel the accused to face a criminal trial without any credible material
whatsoever. It requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit
suicide, seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased
469. Section 319 CrPC: Summoning Power Should Be Exercised Only When Strong
The Supreme Court has observed that the power under Section 319 of the Criminal
Procedure Code should be exercised only when strong and cogent evidence occurs
against a person from the evidence. The bench of Justices KM Joseph and PS
Narasimha reiterated that the power under Section 319 CrPC cannot be exercised in a
casual and cavalier manner. The test to be applied is one which is more than prima
facie case which is applied at the time of framing of charge, the bench added.
470. Single Bench Hearing Transfer Petitions Cannot Pass Mutual Consent Divorce
[Case: Neha @ Pooja Alizad v. Vaibhav Kumar @ Chetan Sancheti; Citation: LL 2021
SC 469]
The Supreme Court has observed that a single bench hearing Transfer petition cannot
pass a decree divorce by mutual consent under Section under Section 13 B of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India. In a recent
order, Justice Abhay S. Oka, referring to Supreme Court Rules 2013, said he could not
pass a decree of divorce 'sitting singly'. Therefore, the judge directed the registry to
place the petition before the Chief Justice for necessary directions.
Multiple Murders
murder of more than one persons, the Supreme Court observed in a recent order. "In
terms of the policy of sentencing, there cannot be consecutive life imprisonment one
after the another. But the fact remains that for each of the death of the victim, the
petitioner has been convicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC. It is not a case of
imposition of life imprisonment consecutively. It is a case of imposition of concurrent
said.
472. Assessee Not Liable To Pay Interest On Short Payment Of Advance Tax Due To
2021 SC 471]
The Supreme Court has held that the amount of income tax which is deductible or
collectible at source can be reduced by the assessee while calculating advance tax
before 2012-2013 Financial Year. Therefore, the assessee cannot be held liable for
interest under Section 234B of Income Tax for short-fall of advance tax which arises
due to reducing the income tax deductible or collectible at source from the advance
tax, a bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose said.
473. Summoning And Detaining A Person Without There Being Any Crime Registered
The Supreme Court observed that summoning and detaining a person without there
being any crime registered against him would be violative of basic principles. The
directions issued in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273, would be
applicable even if no crime was registered, the bench of Justices UU Lalit, S. Ravindra
474. Conversion To Christianity: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Man
The Supreme Court quashed criminal case against a man accused of forcibly
and CT Ravikumar held, "In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and
especially when the entire fulcrum of the prosecution rests upon the version of the
man who was stated to be forcibly converted, in our view, the testimony of said person
assumes great significance. According to his own version neither was he forcibly
Condition
[Case: Syed Afsar Pasha Quadri v. The State of Telangana; Citation: LL 2021 SC 474]
The Supreme Court has observed that a registered sale deed cannot be cancelled
unilaterally by one party to the said document in purported compliance of the direction
given by the High Court, since that adversely affects the rights of the purchasers who
are not a party before the High Court. The bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana, Justice
Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli in the present matter was hearing a special leave
petition filed assailing the order dated June 8, 2021 by the High Court of Telangana
wherein the High Court while granting anticipatory bail had directed the accused to
cancel the registered sale deed executed by him and return the money received from
the complainant.
The Supreme Court has observed that a consumer complaint on behalf of one or two
consumers having same interest can be filed only with the permission of the
consumer forum of which the jurisdiction is invoked. "The complaint on behalf of one
or two consumers having same interest can be filed only with the permission of the
forum of which the jurisdiction is invoked. Since the complainant is neither a voluntary
consumer association nor a registered body, nor the permission of the appropriate
forum has been sought, therefore, the complaint itself was not maintainable", the
bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian said allowing the appeal.
477. Order VII Rule 11 CPC - Plaint Can't Be Rejected If Limitation Is A Mixed
[Case: Salim D.Agboatwala and others v.Shamalji Oddavji Thakkar and others;
The Supreme Court has held that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule
11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure if the issue of limitation is a mixed question of
law and fact. A bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramaniam
observed so while reversing a Bombay High Court's judgment which had upheld a civil
court's order to reject a plaint. The suit in question was filed essentially to set aside an
order passed by the Agricultural Land Tribunal to issue sale certificate in respect of a
tenancy under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
478. Delay In Intimating Insurance Company About Theft Not A Ground To Deny
Claim
[Case: Dharamender v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC 477]
The Supreme Court has observed that mere delay in intimating the insurance
company about the occurrence of the theft cannot be a ground to deny the insurance
claim. The bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian noted that the
case of Insurance Company throughout was based upon delay in intimation to the
Insurance Company. Therefore, in respect of the argument that the FIR was delayed,
the said arguments need not be examined in this case, the court said while allowing
the appeal and restoring the order passed by the District Forum.
479. 'Karta' Of Joint Hindu Family Cannot File Consumer Complaint In Respect Of
regarding the treatment given to his pregnant sister-in-law. The concept of Joint Hindu
Family does not extend to the treatment of a pregnant sister-in-law, the bench of
Long Possession
[Case: Himalaya Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. v. Md. Zahid; Citation: LL 2021 SC 479]
The Supreme Court observed that a caretaker/servant can never acquire interest in
the property irrespective of his long possession. The bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi
and Abhay S. Oka observed: "After we heard counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the material on record, in our considered view, the Trail Court has
committed a manifest error in appreciating the pleadings on record from the plaint
filed at the instance of respondent no.1-plaintiff who as a caretaker/servant can never
acquire interest in the property irrespective of his long possession and the
caretaker/servant has to give possession forthwith on demand and so far as the plea
does not discloses the cause of action for institution of the suit."
481. Reinstatement With Full Back Wages Is Not Automatic In Every Case Of Illegal
Termination / Dismissal
The Supreme Court reiterated that reinstatement with full back wages is not
accordance with procedure prescribed under law. "The reinstatement with full back
wages is not automatic in every case, where termination / dismissal is found to be not
in accordance with procedure prescribed under law. Considering that the respondent
was in effective service of the Bank only for about six years and he is out of service
since 1991, and in the meantime, respondent had attained age of superannuation, we
deem it appropriate that ends of justice would be met by awarding lump sum
monetary compensation", the bench of Justices R. Subhash Reddy and Sanjiv Khanna
observed.
Has To Be Applied
2021 SC 481]
The Supreme Court has observed that, while computing Motor Accident
Compensation, the multiplier which is relevant to the deceased has to be applied. The
bench of Justices KM Joseph and PS Narasimha observed that the claimants should
be granted increase by 40 per cent having regard to the admitted age of the deceased
being below 40 years on the basis of the salary which we have arrived upon based on
483. 'Fraud Vitiates Every Solemn Act': Supreme Court Upholds A Trial Court
Fraud vitiates every solemn act, remarked the Supreme Court bench of Justices Uday
Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Bela M. Trivedi while it upheld a Trial Court
judgment which declared a registered gift deed void on the ground of fraud and undue
influence.
484. Order VII Rule 11 CPC: Plaint Has To Be Rejected If Reliefs Claimed In It Cannot
The Supreme Court observed that a court has to reject a plaint if it finds that none of
the reliefs sought in it can be granted to the plaintiff under the law. In such a case, it
will be necessary to put an end to the sham litigation so that further judicial time is
not wasted, the bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai observed. The
court added that underlying object of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC is that when a plaint
does not disclose a cause of action, the court would not permit the plaintiff to
485. Successful Allottee/ Bidder Free To Decide Whether To Continue Any Existing
[Case: Punjab State Power Corporation Limited v. Emta Coal Ltd; Citation: LL 2021 SC
484]
The Supreme Court observed that a successful allottee or bidder has complete
contracts in relation to coal mining operation. "In the event the successful bidder or
allottee elects not to adopt or continue with the existing contracts, all such contracts
shall cease to be enforceable against the successful bidder or allottee in relation to
Schedule I coal mines", the bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and BV
Nagarathna observed.
486. Change Of Date Of Birth In Service Records Cannot Be Claimed As Of Right; Can
LL 2021 SC 485]
The Supreme Court observed that change of date of birth in the service record cannot
be claimed as of right, even if there is cogent evidence. Such applications, the court
They can be rejected on the ground of delay and latches also more particularly when it
is made at the fag end of service and/or when the employee is about to retire on
attaining the age of superannuation, the bench of Justices MR Shah and AS Bopanna
observed.
that the departmental inquiry is to maintain discipline in the service and efficiency of
public service.
[Case: Chandan Banerjee & Ors v. Krishna Prosad Ghosh & Ors; Citation: LL 2021 SC
487]
The Supreme Court has held that educational qualification is a valid ground for
not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Holding so, the Court upheld the
489. 'No Intention': Supreme Court Reduces Jail Sentence Awarded To Man Accused
[Case: Kala Singh @ Gurnam Singh v. State of Punjab; Citation: LL 2021 SC 488]
The Supreme Court reduced jail sentence awarded to an accused who allegedly killed
a person for 'stealing' his pigeon. the bench of Justices R. Subhash Reddy and
Hrishikesh Roy said that the killing was not a pre-meditated one and there was no
intention on the part of the accused to cause death or cause such bodily injury as is
The Supreme Court observed that bail cannot be granted to an accused under
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, merely on a finding of the absence
of possession of the contraband on the person of the accused. Such a finding does
not absolve the court of the level of scrutiny required under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the
NDPS Act, the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna observed. The
court reiterated that the test to apply while granting bail is whether there are
reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has not committed an offence and
[Case: DLF Home Developers Limited v. Rajapura Homes Private Limited; Citation: LL
2021 SC 490]
The Supreme Court observed that prayer for reference to Arbitration under Section 11
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can be declined if the dispute in question does
not correlate to the arbitration agreement. The bench of Chief Justice of India NV
Ramana and Justice Surya Kant observed that it is not expected to act mechanically
merely to deliver a purported dispute raised by an applicant at the doors of the chosen
Arbitrator.
492. Section 92 CPC- Judgment In Representative Suit Binds All Parties Interested
In The Trust
The Supreme Court observed that a suit under section 92 CPC is of a representative
character and all persons interested in the Trust would be bound by the judgment in
the suit. Such persons interested would be barred by the principle of res judicata from
instituting a subsequent suit on the same or substantially the same issue, the bench
of Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli observed. The court added
that while deciding on a scheme for administration in a representative suit filed under
Section 92 of the CPC the court may, if the title is contested, have to decide if the
Also Read: Plea Of Res Judicata Can Be Determined As A Preliminary Issue When It
Only Involves Adjudication Of Question Of Law
493. Gravity Of Complaint Under Negotiable Instruments Act Cannot Be Equated
The Supreme Court has observed that the gravity of complaint under Negotiable
Instruments Act cannot be equated with an offence under the provisions of the Indian
Penal Code or other criminal offence. The court reiterated that that the presumption
under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would remain, until the contrary
is proved. Whether there is rebuttal or not would depend on the facts and
circumstances of each case, the bench of CJI NV Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and
AS Bopanna said.
494. 'In India, Every State Action Must Be Fair, Failing Which It Will Fall Foul Of
Article 14' : Supreme Court Sets Aside Direction To Shift NH Toll Plaza
493]
The Supreme Court set aside a Patna High Court judgment which directed the
National Highway Authority of India to shift the toll plaza on Patna-Bakhtiyarpur four-
lane road (NH-30) from Karmalichak near Deedarganj. "Undoubtedly, in India, every
state action must be fair, failing which, it will fall foul of the mandate of Article 14. It is,
at this juncture, we may also notice that the duty to give reasons, would arise even in
the case of administrative action, where legal rights are at stake and the
The perception of the common man about the credentials and background of the
judicial officer is vital, the Supreme Court observed while upholding non-appointment
observed that most suitable persons should be occupying the post of judicial officer,
496. Existence Of Alternate Remedy Does Not Bar Exercise Of Writ Jurisdiction If
[Case: Magadh Sugar & Energy Ltd. v. State of Bihar; Citation: LL 2021 SC 495]
The Supreme Court observed that even if an alternate remedy exists, a High Court can
exercise its writ jurisdiction if the order of the authority is challenged for want of
Exceptions to the rule of alternate remedy arise, the the bench of Justices DY
Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and BV Nagarathna noted, were:(a) the writ petition has
been filed for the enforcement of a fundamental right protected by Part III of the
Constitution; (b) there has been a violation of the principles of natural justice; (c) the
order or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction; or (d) the vires of a legislation is
challenged.
497. SARFAESI - Fresh 30 Days Notice Not Needed If Failure To Conduct Sale As Per
[Case: S.Karthik & Ors v. N.Subhash Chand Jain & Ors; Citation: LL 2021 SC 496]
If the sale of a mortgaged property as per the SARFAESI Rules was interrupted during
the 30 days notice period due to the actions of the borrower, a fresh notice of 30 days
is not necessary for the sale process to resume after the interruptions are over, held
Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna stated that a fresh notice is necessary only if the
sale got stopped due to reasons which are not attributable to the borrower.
2021 SC 497]
In a case related to land acquisition compensation, the Supreme Court approved the
deduction for development is to be made to arrive at the market value of large tracts
499. Supreme Court Recalls Suo Motu Extension Of Limitation With Effect From
Limitation
The Supreme Court recalled the suo motu order of April 27, 2021, which had extended
with effect from March 14, 2021 the limitation period for filing of cases in view of the
COVID second wave. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices
L Nageswara Rao and Surya Kant said that the suo moto extension of limitation
appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall
15.03.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 03.10.2021. II. In cases
where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till
persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 03.10.2021. In the event the
actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 03.10.2021, is greater
than 90 days, that longer period shall apply. III. The period from 15.03.2020 till
02.10.2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under
Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of
the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of
limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal
can condone delay) and termination of proceedings. IV. The Government of India shall
500. Retirement Will Not Terminate Mandate Of Dept Officer Appointed As Sole
499]
Deciding an appeal arising out of the Arbitration Act 1940, the Supreme Court has held
that a department officer, who was appointed as the arbitrator, can continue to preside
over the arbitration proceedings even after his retirement. A bench comprising
Justices MR Shah and AS Bopanna was considering the question "whether once an
loading....
+ VIEW MORE
SIMILAR POSTS
100 Major Supreme Court Arbitration Supreme Court All India Family Law Digest
Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Digest 2021 : Major 2021 : Judgments Of
Judgments 76 -100] Judgments Supreme Court & High
Courts
27 Dec 2021 10:25 AM 29 Dec 2021 7:21 PM 29 Dec 2021 12:10 PM
Insolvency &
Cancellation Of Exams, Bankruptcy Code :
There Cannot Be Two Different
Conduct Of Online Classes, Important Supreme
Pay-Scales For Employee
School Fees : How Supreme
Appointed On Compassionate
Court Judgments Of
Ground & On Regular Basis: Court Dealt With Students'
2021
Supreme Court Issues In 2021
28 Dec 2021 11:50
28 Dec 2021 7:34 PM 28 Dec 2021 6:07 PM AM
Polls
27 Dec 2021 10:10 PM 27 Dec 2021 9:49 PM 27 Dec 2021 8:17 PM
+ MORE
WEBINARS
FULL VIDEO - Justice VR Krishna Iyer Memorial Lecture By Justice Nageswara Rao
+ MORE
LATEST NEWS
Andhra Pradesh High Court Strikes Down GOs Fixing Fees Of Private Unaided
1 Schools
2 No Precipitative Action Against Google India Till Next Date Of Hearing: CCI Tells
Karnataka High Court
3 New Year's Eve: Madras High Court Imposes Temporary Ban On Liquor Sale In
Puducherry In The Wake Of Omicron Fears
4 Letter Plea In Supreme Court Seeks Inquiry, Action Against Delhi Police
Personnel Who Assaulted Protesting Resident Doctors
6 Advocates' Welfare Fund Scam: Kerala High Court Orders CBI Probe
7 All India Family Law Digest 2021 : Judgments Of Supreme Court & High Courts
8 InCase
Absence Of Allegation Of 'Pre-Existing Bias', Power U/S 407 CrPC To Transfer
Shouldn't Be Invoked: MP High Court
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में साल 2021 में मौत की सज़ा के मामले : पहला भाग
कें द्र सरकार ने मध्य प्रदेश स्थानीय निकाय चुनावों में ओबीसी सीटों पर चुनाव प्रक्रिया पर रोक लगाने के
आदेश में संशोधन के लिए सुप्रीम कोर्ट का रुख किया
+ MORE
INTERNATIONAL
1 Myanmar Court Sentences Ousted Leader Aung San Suu Kyi To 4 Years Jail
4 Media Liable For Defamatory Comments By Third Party Users In Its Facebook
Page: Australia High Court
ENVIRONMENT + MORE
1 Total Ban On Legal Mining Will Give Rise To Illegal Mining & Cause Huge Loss
To Public Exchequer: Supreme Court Modifies NGT Directives On Sand Mining
2 Dolomite Mining In Uttarakhand: NGT Orders ₹2 Cr Interim Compensation For
Environment Damage, Spreading Muck Beyond Allotted Area
3 Pollution In Doodh Ganga & Mamath Kull Of Jammu & Kashmir; NGT
Constitutes Five Member Committee To Ascertain Water Quality
JOB UPDATES
+ VIEW MORE
NEWSLETTERS
DIRECTLY IN YOUR MAILBOX
Submit
ARTICLES SEMINARS
INTERNSHIPS
Powered By Hocalwire
Who We Are Careers Advertise With Us Contact Us Privacy Policy Terms And Conditions