12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

Hi, Avichal Mishra Logout

BOOKMARKS TOP STORIES NEWS UPDATES COLUMNS INTERVIEWS FOREIGN/INTERNATIONAL


ENVIRONMENT RTI KNOW THE LAW VIDEOS SPONSORED ROUND UPS

JOB UPDATES BOOK REVIEWS EVENTS CORNER LAWYERS & LAW FIRMS CARTOONS SC JUDGMENTS लाइव लॉ
हिंदी ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT


Home / Top Stories / 100 Major Supreme...

TOP STORIES

100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021

[Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 27 Dec 2021 10:25 AM

SHARE THIS -

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 1/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

This is the third part of the article covering 100 major Supreme Court judgments of 2021.

The first part covered 52 judgments delivered from January to June. The second part

included judgments(53-75) delivered from July to October. The third part will cover

judgments (76-100) from October to December. Read the first part here and the second

part here.

76. National Green Tribunal Has Suo Motu Jurisdiction

Also Read - 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 2, Judgments 53-75]

[Case : Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha; Citation : LL 2021 SC

549]

The Supreme Court declared that the National Green Tribunal is vested with suo motu

powers to take cognizance on the basis of letters, representations and media reports.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 2/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

A bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravikumar

delivered the judgment on a batch of petitions which raised the issue whether NGT has

suo motu jurisdiction (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha and

other and connected cases).

Also Read - 'Cow Exhales Oxygen', 'Skin To Skin' , 'Will You Marry Her' & Other

Controversial Judicial Remarks Of 2021

The Court held that the NGT must be seen as a sui generis institution as the National

Green Tribunals Act, 2010 (NGT Act) provides the Tribunal with wide ranging powers

beyond that of a mere adjudicatory body.

Opining on the intention behind the legislature in establishing such a tribunal, the Court

held,

"NGT Act, when read as a whole, gives much leeway to the NGT to go beyond a mere

adjudicatory role. The Parliament's intention is clearly discernible to create a

multifunctional body, with the capacity to provide redressal for environmental

exigencies. Accordingly, the principles of environmental justice and environmental

equity must be explicitly acknowledged as pivotal threads of the NGT's fabric. The NGT

must be seen as a sui generis institution and not unus multorum, and its special and

exclusive role to foster public interest in the area of environmental domain delineated in
the enactment of 2010 must necessarily receive legal recognition of this Court"

Also Read - 'Not A Mute Spectator' : Suo Motu Cases Taken By Supreme Court In 2021

The Court also acknowledged that environmental impact on climate change is gaining

increasing visibility in recent times and thus the NGT must be given the discretion to

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 3/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

exercise suo moto powers in order to salvage adverse environmental consequences for

generations to come.

77 .Director Of Enforcement Can Be Appointed For A Period Of More Than Two Years

[Case: Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India; Citation: LL 2021 SC

429]

Also Read - How Supreme Court Protected Rights Of Disabled In 2021

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 done only in rare and

exceptional cases.

The Court was delivering its judgment in a PIL that challenged the extension of tenure

given to ED Director SK Mishra. The Court however held that SK Mishra's tenure should

not be further extended.

Note : The Parliament later passed a law allowing the extension of the term of ED

Director and CBI Chief up to five years.

78. Magistrates Cannot Extend Time To Complete Investigation In UAPA Cases

[Case: Sadique v. State of Madhya Pradesh; Citation: LL 2021 SC 434]

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 4/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

The Supreme Court held that magistrates would not be competent to extend the time to

complete investigations in UAPA cases. The only competent authority to consider 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.

79. PC Act Is A Code By Itself- Bank Account Of A Person Accused of Prevention of

Corruption Act Cannot Be Attached U/S 102 CrPC

[Case: Ratan Babulal Lath v. The State Of Karnataka; Citation: LL 2021 SC 440]

The Supreme Court has observed that bank account of a person accused under

Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be attached invoking Section 102 of Code of

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. I

80 .Refund For Unutilised Input Tax Credit Can't Be Claimed On Account Of Input

Services: Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Section 54(3) CGST Act

[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.

"When there is neither a constitutional guarantee nor a statutory entitlement to refund,

the submission that goods and services must necessarily be treated at par on a matter

of a refund of unutilized ITC cannot be accepted", the court observed while rejecting the

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 5/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

challenge against Section 54(3) on the ground that it violates equality doctrine under

Article 14 of the Constitution. The bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah set

aside the Gujarat High Court judgment which held that Rule 89(5) of Central Goods and

Service Tax Rules, 2017, by restricting the refund only to input goods, had acted ultra

vires Section 54(3) of the CGST Act. It approved a Madras High Court judgment which

upheld the Rule.

81.NCLAT Has No Jurisdiction To Condone Delay Exceeding 15 Days From Period Of 30

Days, Contemplated U/s 61(2) IBC

[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 of 30 days,

as contemplated under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

82. Moratorium Ordered U/Sec.14 IBC Does Not Apply To Proceedings In Respect Of

Directors/Management Of Corporate Debtor

[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

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code does not apply in respect of the directors/management

of the Corporate Debtor. It applies only in relation to the Corporate Debtor and against its

directors/management, proceedings could continue, the bench of Justices DY

Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli observed.

83. Summoning And Detaining A Person Without There Being Any Crime Registered

Against Him Illegal

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 6/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

[Case: M.A Khaliq v. Ashok Kumar; Citation: LL 2021 SC 472]

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

Bhat and Bela M. Trivedi observed.

84 . Supreme Court Recalls Suo Motu Extension Of Limitation With Effect From October

2; Period From 15.03.2020 To 02.10.2021 Stands Excluded From Computing Limitation

[Case: In Re Cognizance For Extension of Limitation; Citation: LL 2021 SC 498]

The Supreme Court has 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. The Court said that the suo motu extension of limitation

period will stand withdrawn with effect from October 2, 2021. A bench comprising Chief

Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices L Nageswara Rao and Surya Kant made these

observations in the suo motu case In Re Cognizance For Extension of Limitation.

85.Office Bearers Of Bar Association Are To Be Elected By Advocates Regularly

Practicing In That Court; Outsiders Cannot Be Permitted To Take Part

[Case: Amit Sachan & Anr v. Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh ; Citation: LL 2021 SC 507]

The Supreme Court has observed that office-bearers of the Bar Association are to be

elected by genuine voters and advocates genuinely/regularly practising in the High

Court/Court concerned. Outsiders not regularly practicing in that court cannot be

permitted to hijack the system by permitting them to take part in the election process of

electing members of the Bar Association, the Court added.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 7/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

86. Right To Apply For Bail Is An Individual Right Implicit In Articles 14, 19 & 21

[Case: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan v. State of Rajasthan and Another;

Citation: LL 2021 SC 523]

Disapproving the blanket orders passed by a single judge of the Rajasthan High Court to

not list applications for bail and suspension of sentence as urgent matters during the

lockdown, the Supreme Court has observed that the right to apply for bail is an individual

right implicit in Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The Court has observed that

such blanket bans would suspend Fundamental Rights of individuals and block access

for seekers of liberty to apply for bail. A Bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao

and Aniruddha Bose made the observations while delivering the judgement in special

leave petitions filed against orders of the Rajasthan High Court which directed the

Registry to not to list bails, appeals, applications for suspension of sentence in appeals

and revisions in the category of extreme urgent matters.

87. Supreme Court Sets Aside Calcutta HC's Total Ban Of Firecrackers In West Bengal;

State To Ensure No Import Of Banned Firecrackers

[Case: Goutom Roy and Anr v. State of West Bengal; Citation: LL 2021 SC 629]

The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Calcutta High Court which imposed a

complete ban on the use of firecrackers in the State of West Bengal. "...we are convinced

that Calcutta High Court should have called upon parties to give explanation before

passing such an extreme order", the Court observed in the order. The Court observed that

the High Court ought to have given opportunities to the authorities to place on record if

any mechanism was in place to ensure that only "green crackers", as permitted by the

Supreme Court, are being used. While setting aside the High Court's order, the Supreme

Court also gave liberty to any party to approach the High Court with adequate materials.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 8/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

"There cannot be a complete ban of firecrackers. Strengthen the mechanism to stop

misuse", orally observed the bench during the course of the hearing.

88. Advocate Losing A Case After Arguing Is Not 'Deficiency Of Service' For Filing

Consumer Complaint

[Case: Nandlal Lohariya v. Jagdish Chand Purohit; Citation: LL 2021 SC 636]

The Supreme Court has observed that an advocate losing a case cannot be said to be

deficiency in service on his/her part. "In every litigation, either of the party is bound to

lose and in such a situation either of the party who will lose in the litigation may
approach the consumer fora for compensation alleging deficiency in service, which is not

permissible at all", the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna

observed while dismissing a Special Leave Petition filed against the order passed by

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

89. Compensation / Penalty Cannot Be Restricted To Value Of Illegally-Mined Mineral;

Cost Of Restoration Of Environment Also To Be Considered

[Case: Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society v. State of Rajasthan; Citation: LL 2021

SC 638]

The Supreme Court has observed that the compensation/penalty to be paid by those

indulging in illegal sand mining cannot be restricted to the value of illegally-mined

mineral. The cost of restoration of the environment, as well as the cost of ecological

services, should be part of the compensation, the bench comprising Justices L.

Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna, and BR Gavai observed. The polluter, according to the

court, is liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as well as the cost of reversing

the damaged ecology.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 9/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

90. Supreme Court Upholds Application Of RERA To Real Estate Projects Ongoing At

Act's Commencement

[Case: Newtech Promoters And Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of UP; Citation: LL 2021 SC

641]

The Supreme Court has upheld the retroactive application of the Real Estate(Regulation

and Development) Act, 2016 to the real estate projects which were ongoing at the

commencement of the Act. The bench comprising Justices Uday Umesh Lalit, Ajay

Rastogi, and Aniruddha Bose observed that the RERA Act does not apply to the projects

already completed or to which the completion certificate has been granted at the

commencement of the Act. The Court rejected the contentions raised by

Promoters/Developers that the first proviso to Section 3(1) of the Act is violative of

Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

Taking note of the statutory provisions especially Section 3 of the RERA, the court

observed that all "ongoing projects" that commence prior to the Act and in respect to

which completion certificate has not been issued are covered under the Act. It said: "It

manifests that the legislative intent is to make the Act applicable not only to the projects

which were yet to commence after the Act became operational but also to bring under its

fold the ongoing projects and to protect from its inception the inter se rights of the
stakeholders, including allottees/home buyers, promoters and real estate agents while

imposing certain duties and responsibilities on each of them and to regulate, administer

and supervise the unregulated real estate sector within the fold of the real estate

authority."

Also Read: Condition Of Pre-Deposit For Filing Appeal U/Sec 43(5) RERA Not

Discriminatory Against Promoters

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 10/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

Also Read: RERA - Regulatory Authority Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Direct Refund To

Allottee; Adjudicating Officer Has Power To Determine Compensation

Also Read: RERA Authority Can Delegate Single Member To Decide Homebuyers'

Complaint Under Section 31

Also Read: Sec 40 RERA - Homebuyers Entitled To Recover Amount Invested Along

With Interest As Land Revenue Arrears From Builder

91. Preliminary Enquiry By CBI In Corruption Cases Not Mandatory; Accused Cannot

Demand It As Of Right

[Case : Central Bureau of Investigation vs Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi; Citation

: LL 2021 SC 551]

The Supreme Court has held that preliminary enquiry by Central Bureau of Investigation

in cases of corruption is not mandatory.

"In case the information received by the CBI, through a complaint or a "source

information" discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, it can directly register a

Regular Case instead of conducting a Preliminary Enquiry, where the officer is satisfied

that the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence", the bench of

Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and BV Nagarathna observed.

"An FIR will not stand vitiated because a Preliminary Enquiry has not been conducted",

the Court stated in the judgment.

92. Section 482 CrPC - High Court Must Furnish Reasons For Issuing Interlocutory

Direction At Interim Stage

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 11/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

[Case : Jitul Jentilal Kotecha vs State of Gujarat; Citation : LL 2021 SC 642]

The Supreme Court has observed that while issuing an interlocutory direction at an

interim stage while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, the High Court must furnish reasons.

"Even at the interim stage, the High Court must demonstrate an application of mind and

furnish reasons for issuing any interlocutory direction, which is capable of being tested

before this Court in an appropriate case", a bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud

and BV Nagarathna observed.

The bench referred to the dictum laid down in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs.

State of Maharashtra LL 2021 SC 211 in this regard.

93. Mere Support To Terrorist Organization Without Intention To Further Its Activities

Does Not Attract Section 38/39 UAPA

[ Case :Thwaha Fasal vs. Union of India; Citation : LL 2021 SC 605]

In its judgment restoring the bail granted to Thwaha Fasal and Allan Shuhaib, the

Supreme Court observed that mere support given to a terrorist organization or mere

association with it, is not sufficient to attract offences under Sections 38 and 39 of the

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

The association and the support have to be with intention of furthering the activities of a

terrorist organisation, the bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka

observed.

UAPA - If Chargesheet Does Not Reveal Prima Facie Case, Embargo For Bail Under Sec

43D(5) Won't Apply : Supreme Court

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 12/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

94. UAPA- State Police Has Duty To Continue Investigation Of Schedule Offence Till NIA

Actually Takes It Over

[ Case:Naser Bin Abu Bakr Yafai vs State of Maharashtra; Citation : LL 2021 SC 576]

The Supreme Court has observed that the State police has a duty to continue with the

investigation of a scheduled offence under the NIA Act till the National Investigating

Agency actually takes it over.

The court added that mere renumbering of the case filed by the NIA did not take away

the power of the State police (ATS) to continue the investigation.

95. Pension Shall Be Determined On Rules Existing At The Time Of Retirement

[ Case : Dr. G. Sadasivan Nair V. Cochin University Of Science And Technology; Citation :

LL 2021 SC 701]

The Supreme Court has observed that the pension payable to an employee on retirement

shall be determined on the rules existing at the time of retirement. The Court also

observed that the law did not allow the employer to apply the rules differently in relation

to persons who are similarly situated.

96. Persons With Disabilities Should Not Be Asked to Remove Prosthetic Limbs At

Airport Security Checks

[Case : Jeeja Ghosh vs Union of India; Citation : LL 2021 SC 704]

In a petition filed to ensure convenient air travel for persons with disabilities, the Supreme

Court of India on Wednesday observed that differently abled persons with prosthetic

limbs/calipers should not be asked to remove the prosthetics at airport security checks

so as to maintain human dignity.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 13/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

The Court also observed that lifting a person with disability during air travel or security

checkup is inhumane, and held that the same should not be done without the person's

consent.

97. States Should Not Deny Ex-Gratia For COVID Deaths On Ground That Death

Certificate Does Not Mention COVID As Cause Of Death

[ Case: Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India; Citation : LL 2021 SC 536]

The Supreme Court ordered that no state should deny the ex-gratia compensation of Rs

50,000 to the kin of persons who died of COVID on the sole ground that the death

certificate does not mention COVID as the cause of death.

A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and AS Bopanna passed the order while

approving the guidelines issued by the National Disaster Management Authority for grant

of compensation in COVID death cases.

The bench also said that the next kin of the deceased shall be paid an amount of Rs

50,000 from the State Disaster Response Funds and it will be over and above the

amounts paid by centre and state under various benevolent schemes.

Such amount will be disbursed within 30 days of submitting application and cause of

death being certified as of COVID19.

The court has also directed the publication of the details of the district level authorities

and grievance redressal committee in media.

98. NCDRC Can Direct Deposit Of Entire Or More Than 50% Of Amount Determined By

SCDRC For Stay

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 14/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

[Case : Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Private Ltd versus Sanjeev Kumar

Sharma and others; Citation : LL 2021 SC 714]

In a significant judgment on the Consumer Protection Act 2019, the Supreme Court on

Tuesday held that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission(NCDRC) can

direct the deposit of the entire amount or more than 50% of the amount determined by

the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for conditional stay.

The Court added that however to pass such an order, the NCDRC has to pass a speaking

order assigning cogent reasons.

A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna laid down this dictum in a

case involving the interpretation of Section 51 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019,

which prescribes pre-deposit for filing appeal before the NCDRC

99. Applications To Condone Delay In Filing Version In Consumer Cases Pending On

04.03.2020 Not Impacted By CB Judgment

[Case :Diamond Exports and another versus United India Insurance Co Ltd and others;

Citation : LL SC 736]

Settling a conflict between two division bench judgments, a 3-judge bench of the

Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified that the applications to condone the delay of more

than 45 days in filing the version of the opposite party in consumer cases, which were

pending as of March 4, 2020, will not be impacted by the ruling of the Constitution Bench

judgment in the case New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold

Storage Private Limited, which had held that Consumer Forum cannot condone the delay

of more than 45 days in filing the version of the opposite party.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 15/27
12/27/21, 2:53 PM 100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 3, Judgments 76 -100]

100. Court Cannot Second Guess Infrastructural Needs Of Armed Forces: SC Allows

Widening Of 'Char Dham' Highway

[Case : Citizens for Green Doon vs Union of India; Citation : LL 2021 SC 737]

While allowing the Ministry of Defence's plea to allow the double lane widening of the

Char Dham highway due to strategic reasons, the Supreme Court said that it cannot

second-guess the infrastructural needs of the Armed Forces.

This observation was made by the bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud while

allowing an application filed by the Ministry of Defence for the double-lane widening of

roads that are part of the 899-km Char Dham project in Uttarakhand. The court said it is

impermissible to interrogate the policy choice of the establishment which is entrusted by

law with the defence of the nation

The Court also appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice AK Sikri as the head of

the oversight committee to ensure that the double-laning of the highway is in accordance

with the recommendations made by the High Powered Committee to address ecological

concerns.

Also Read :

100 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 1, 52 judgments]

100 Major Supreme Court Judgments Of 2021 [Part 2, Judgments 53-75]

Reports of previous years :

Good & Bad : 65 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2020

Good & Bad : 50 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2019

The Good And Bad : Read 35 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2018

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/100-major-supreme-court-judgments-of-2021-part-3-judgments-76-100-188424 16/27