Hi, Amritesh Kumar Tripathi Logout

BOOKMARKS TOP STORIES NEWS UPDATES COLUMNS INTERVIEWS ENVIRONMENT RTI

KNOW THE LAW VIDEOS SPONSORED ROUND UPS PODCAST LAW EXAMS

JOB UPDATES BOOK REVIEWS EVENTS CORNER LAW FIRMS SC JUDGMENTS लाइव लॉ हिंदी LAW SCHOOLS IBC

 Search... 
Home / Top Stories / 100 Important Supreme...

TOP STORIES

100 Important Supreme Court

Judgments Of 2022 [Part 2]
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 21 Dec 2022 12:15 PM
As is the annual tradition, LiveLaw brings to you the list of 100 important

Supreme Court judgments of the current year - a much awaited article by our

dear readers.

The judgments are selected based on the following criteria - (i) importance to

the general public; (ii) settlement of a contested position of law; (iii) utility for

practising lawyers and.

A disclaimer is added here that the judgments included in the list are not

necessarily good or the best judgments; some of them are controversial and

regarding some others, there are strong counter-views. Yet, these judgments

are worthy of being noted and discussed upon, considering their general

importance and impact on litigation and general socio-political arena. Hence,

the inclusion in this list. The judgments are arranged in the chronological

order. The reports about the judgments are hyperlinked at the case

description.

Also Read - 100 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2022 [Part 1]

The list of 100 judgments will be published in three parts and this is the

second part containing 33 judgments. First part[1-33] can be read here.

Here you go :

34. State Enactments Like Kerala/Gujarat Money Lenders Act Have No

Application To NBFCs Registered Under RBI Act

The Court held that the state enactments such as Kerala Money Lenders Act,

1958 and Gujarat Money Lenders Act, 2011 will have no application to Non­‐
Banking Financial Companies (NBFC) regulated by the Reserve Bank of India

(RBI).

Also Read - Police Officers Not Required To Do 'Moral Policing' : Supreme

Court Upholds Dismissal Of CISF Officer Who Harassed Couple At Night

The bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian

observed that the Chapter III­B of the RBI Act is a complete code in itself and

the power of intervention available for the RBI over NBFCs, is 'from the cradle

to the grave'.

Case : Nedumpilli Finance Company Limited vs State of Kerala | 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 464

35. KEEP THE SEDITION LAW IN ABEYANCE: SUPREME COURT RULES IN A

HISTORIC ORDER

Also Read - 100 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2022 - PART-1

[VIDEO]

In a historic development, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered that the

152-year old sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code should

be effectively kept in abeyance till the Union Government reconsiders the

provision.

In an interim order, the Court urged the Centre and the State governments to

refrain from registering any FIRs under the said provision while it was under

re-consideration.
Also Read - Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: December 12 To December

18, 2022

A bench comprising the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant

and Justice Hima Kohli held that all pending trials, appeals and proceedings

with respect to charges framed under Section124 A be kept in abeyance.

How Supreme Court's Order Has The Effect Of Suspending Sedition Cases

Under Section 124A IPC?

Case Title: S.G. VOMBATKERE vs UNION OF INDIA ( WPC 682/2021) EDITORS

GUILD OF INDIA AND ANR. vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS| 2022 LiveLaw (SC)

470

36. Domestic Violence Victim Can Enforce Her Right To Reside In 'Shared

Household' Even If She Has Not Actually Lived There: Supreme Court

A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna delivered

a significant verdict settling several questions related to the Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It was held that a victim of

domestic violence can enforce her right to reside in a shared household,

irrespective of whether she actually lived in the shared household.

The Court further held that every woman in a domestic relationship has a

right to reside in the shared household even in the absence of any act of

domestic violence.

Case Title : Prabha Tyagi vs Kamlesh Devi | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 474
37. Wife's Dying Declaration Can Be Used To Prove Cruelty Even If Husband

Is Acquitted Of Charges Relating To Her Death

Overruling some of its earlier judgments, the Supreme Court observed that

evidence of a deceased wife under Section 32 of Evidence Act with respect

to cruelty could be admissible in a trial for a charge under Section 498A of the

IPC.

Case Title : Surendran vs State of Kerala | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 482

38. Remission To Be Considered By Govt Of The State Where Crime Was

Committed, Even If Trial Was Transferred To Another State

In the Bilkis Bano case, the Supreme Court held that the Gujarat Government

had the jurisdiction to decide the remission of convicts, even if the trial was

held in the State of Mahrashtra. A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi

and Vikram Nath held so while allowing writ petition filed by one of the

convicts. Recently, the bench dismissed an application filed by Bilkis Bano

seeking review of the judgment.

Also Read - Supreme Court Ignored Binding Precedents While Dismissing

Bilkis Bano's Review Petition

Case : Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah @ Lala Vakil vs State of Gujarat | 2022

LiveLaw (SC) 484

39. Supreme Court Orders Release Of Perarivalan, Life Convict In Rajiv

Gandhi Assassination Case

Exercising the powers under Article 142, a bench comprising Justices L

Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai ordered the release of AG Perarivalan, who was

serving life sentence in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, considering the

fact that he was undergoing sentence for 32 years and that the Tamil Nadu

Government had recommended his remission in 2018, which the Governor

kept pending for over four years.

The judgment also reiterated the important principle that the Governor is

bound by the advice given by the State Government regarding remission.

Also, with respect to the offence under Section 302 IPC, the Court held that

the State Government is the "appropriate government" to decide the

remission, instead of the Union Government.

Few months later, the Court ordered the release of the remaining convicts in

the case as well, following the Perarivalan precedent.

Case : A.G. Perarivalan v. State, Through Superintendent of Police

CBI/SIT/MMDA, Chennai, Tamil Nadu | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 494

40. National Green Tribunal Does Not Oust Jurisdiction Of High Courts;

Direct Appeals From NGT To SC Do Not Undermine HCs

The Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 3 of the National Green

Tribunal Act 2010, which provides for the establishment of the NGT by the

Central Government.

The Court also held that the National Green Tribunal under Section 14 & 22 of

the NGT Act does not oust the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 &

227 as the same is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. The
bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy also held that the remedy

of direct appeal to the Supreme Court under Section 22 of the NGT Act is intra

vires the Constitution of India.

Case : Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Bar Association vs Union of

India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 495

41.Enhances Sentence Of Navjot Sidhu To One Year Imprisonment In 1988

Road Rage Case

The Supreme Court enhanced the sentence of Congress leader and former

Indian Cricket team member Navjot Singh Sidhu to one year imprisonment in

a 1988 road rage accident in which a 65-year old person named Gurnam Singh

had died.

A bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and SK Kaul allowed the review petition

preferred by the family of victim Gurnam Singh against its 2018 verdict that

had reduced the sentence of Navjot Singh Sidhu to a sentence of fine of Rs

1000 from 3 years imprisonment in the case.

Case : Jaswinder Singh (Dead) Through Legal Representatives versus Navjot

Singh Sidhu| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 498

42. GST Council Recommendations Not Binding On Parliament & State

Legislatures

In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court held that the recommendations of

the GST council are not binding on the Parliament and State Legislatures.
Though some of the recommendations of the GST council are binding on the

Union and State Governments in relation to tax rate and taxable goods etc., by

virtue of the provisions of the GST Act, it cannot mean that all

recommendations are binding on the Parliament and the State Legislatures.

Contestation Between Centre & States Furthers Democracy : Supreme Court

On "Uncooperative Federalism"

Case : Union of India and Anr versus M/s Mohit Minerals Through Director |

2022 LiveLaw (SC) 500

43. Management Of Private Medical Colleges Prohibited From Accepting

Payment Of Fees In Cash: SC Issues Directions To Curb Capitation Fee

Menace

The Supreme Court prohibited managements of private medical colleges

from accepting payment of fees in cash.

This is to avoid charging of capitation fee. The bench comprising Justices L.

Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai also agreed to the suggestion for setting up

web-portal under the aegis of Supreme Court wherein any information about

the private medical colleges charging capitation fees can be furnished by the

students.

Case : Rashtreeya Sikshana Samithi Trust vs Committee For Fixation of Fee

Structure Of Private Professional Colleges | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 501

44.Supreme Court Overrules 1983 Judgment Which Held That Vacancies

Arising Before Amendments Will Be Governed By Old Rules

The Supreme Court held that the conditions of service of a public servant,

including matters of promotion and seniority, are governed by the extant

rules.

The three judge bench headed by Justice Uday Umesh Lalit overruled its

judgment in Y.V. Rangaiah v. J. Sreenivasa Rao which held that the

appointments to the public posts that fell vacant prior to the amendment of

the Rules would be governed by the old Rules and not by the amended rules.

Case : State of Himachal Pradesh vs Raj Kumar | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 502

45. Sec 138 NI Act- Set Up Pilot Courts With Retired Judges For Cheque

Bounce Cases In 5 States With Highest Pendency : Supreme Court

With a view of reduce the pendency of cheque bounce cases under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Supreme Court on Thursday

directed the establishment of pilot courts presided over by retired judges in 5

districts of 5 states with the highest pendency (namely, Maharashtra,

Rajasthan, Gujarat, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh).

A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and S Ravindra Bhat

passed the direction in the suo motu case taken by the Supreme Court last

year to deal with the pendency of cheque dishonour cases(In Re Expeditious

Trial Of Cases Under Section 138 of N.I Act).

Case : IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT

1881 | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 508

46. Supreme Court criticises 'sealed cover' process

In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court criticized the Madras High Court

adopting a "sealed cover procedure" by not sharing the copy of a preliminary

enquiry report with a former Minister in relation to a corruption case

investigation.

The judgment is also relevant for its discussion on the right of the accused to

get copies of the materials under Section 207 CrPC and its connection with

the right to fair trial.

Case : SP Velumani vs Arappor Iyakkam & Ors | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 507

Another related judgment - Sealed Cover Procedure Sets A Dangerous

Precedent ; Affects Function Of Justice Delivery System : Supreme Court

47. Death Penalty -Trial Court Must Elicit Information From State & Accused

On Mitigating Circumstances : Supreme Court Issues Guidelines

Observing that death sentences are most often imposed by the trial courts in

a retributive sense, the Supreme Court has issued a set of practical

guidelines to ensure that the mitigating circumstances of the accused are

properly considered at the trial stage itself.

A bench comprising Justice UU Lalit, Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M

Trivedi noted that in most cases, the information relating to the mitigating

circumstances are collected at the appellate stage, and such information

mostly relate to the post-conviction circumstances.

Also read another report about the judgment : Prosecution In All Criminal

Cases Shall Furnish List Of Statements, Documents, Material Objects &

Exhibits Not Relied Upon By Investigating Officer: Supreme Court

Case Title : Manoj & Others versus State of Madhya Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 510

48. Compassionate Appointments Must Be Decided Within Six Months Of

Applications

A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna opined that the

applications for appointment on compassionate ground ought to be decided

in a time bound manner and not beyond a period of six months from the date

of submission of the completed applications. The Apex Court was

apprehensive that if the applications are not decided expeditiously, then the

whole purpose of such appointments would be frustrated.

Case Title : Malaya Nanda Sethy v. State of Orissa And Ors | 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 522

49. Arbitration Act - Dispose Sec 11(5) & 11(6) Applications Pending For

Over 1 Year Within 6 Months : Supreme Court To High Courts

Expressing concerns about the long pendency of applications under Section

11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Court issued

directions for timely disposal of such matters.

Case : M/s Shree Vishnu Constructions v. The Engineer in Chief Military

Engineering Service Service And Ors | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 523

50. Directions issued to prevent police harassment of sex workers, UIDAI

asked to provide them Aadhaar cards

Asserting that the basic protection of human decency and dignity extends to

sex workers, the Supreme Court has directed that the police should treat sex

workers with dignity and should not abuse them, verbally or physically.

Further, the Court directed that media should not publish their pictures or

reveal their identity while reporting rescue operations and stated that the

offence of voyeurism under Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code should be

enforced if media publishes the pictures of sex workers with their clients.

The Press Council of India has been directed to issue appropriate guidelines

in this regard.

The Court also issued directions to the Unique Identification Authority of India

(UIDAI) to issue Aadhaar Cards to sex workers without insisting on residence

proof.

Case : : Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal And Ors|2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 525

51. Supreme Court Mandates Minimum 1 KM ESZ For Protected Forests;

Bans Permanent Structures There; No Mining In Wildlife Sanctuaries &

National Parks

In a significant order, the Supreme Court on Friday directed that each

protected forest should have an Eco Sensitive Zone (ESZ) of 1 kilometre.

The Court further directed that no permanent structure will be allowed within

the ESZ. Mining within national wildlife sanctuary or national park cannot be

permitted.
If the existing ESZ goes beyond 1 km buffer zone or if any statutory

instrument prescribes a higher limit, then such extended boundary shall

prevail.

A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and Aniruddha Bose

passed the directions in applications filed in the TN Godavarman Thirumalpad

case.

In Re : TN Godavarman Thirumalpad versus Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC)

540

52. Supreme Court Dismisses Zakia Jafri's Plea Against SIT Clean Chit To

Narendra Modi In 2002 Gujarat Riots Larger Conspiracy Case

A bench comprising Justices AK Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT

Ravikumar dismissed the petition filed by Zakia Jafri seeking probe against

the then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi and high state functionaries for alleged

larger conspiracy behind the Gujarat 2002 riots.

The Court observed that mere state failure or inaction during the riots cannot

be basis to infer criminal conspiracy. While upholding the SIT findings

completely, the judgment made certain harsh remarks against the petitioners

by saying that the petition was an attempt to "keep the pot boiling" and said

that the persons who abused the process of court must be put in the dock.

Following the remarks of the Court, the Gujarat Police registered an FIR for

alleged fabrication of evidence and arrested co-petitioner Teesta Setalvad

and former Gujarat ADGP RB Sreekumar.

Case Title : Zakia Ahsan Jafri and another versus State of Gujarat and another

|2022 LiveLaw (SC) 558

53. Supreme Court Sentences Vijay Mallya To 4 Months Imprisonment For

Contempt Of Court; Asks Him To Deposit 40 Million US Dollars

The Supreme Court sentenced fugitive liquor baron Vijay Mallya to four

months imprisonment and a fine of Rupees 2000 for contempt of court.

Mallya was found guilty in 2017 for transferring USD 40 million to his children

in violation of the orders passed in a case filed by a consortium of banks led

by the State Bank of India. The Court has directed Mallya to deposit 40 million

US Dollars with 8 percent interest within 4 weeks with the concerned

recovery officer, failing which attachment proceedings will be initiated against

his properties. The Court also directed the Centre to secure the presence of

Mallya in India for serving the sentence.

Case Title : State Bank of India and others vs Dr.Vijay Mallya | Citation : 2022

LiveLaw (SC) 575

54. "Democracy Can Never Be A Police State ": Supreme Court Stresses

Importance Of Bail; Issues Guidelines To Prevent Unnecessary Arrest &

Remand

In a very important order from the standpoint of personal liberty, the Supreme

Court stressed the importance of the rule "bail over jail" and issued a slew of

guidelines to prevent unnecessary arrest and remand.

The judgment in the case Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of

Investigation, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul

and MM Sundersh, acknowledged that jails in India are flooded with

undertrials.

Different reports about the judgment can be read here.

Case : Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau Of Investigation | 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 577

55. Bombay Blasts Case Convict Abu Salem Has To Be Released After 25

Years Of Sentence As Per Extradition Treaty With Portugal : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on

Abu Salem in the 1993 Bombay Blasts case has to remitted upon the

completion of 25 years from the date of his detention in Portugal for

extradition to India(12.10.2005), as the sovereign commitment made by the

Government of India to the Republic of Portugal at the time of extraditing

Salem to India was that his sentence will not exceed 25 years.

A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh directed

that the Union Government is to place the necessary documents before the

President within one month of completion of 25 years. The Bench also

observed that the Central Government can itself consider remission in the

said one month period upon completion of 25 years, in terms of Sections 432

and 433 of the CrPC.

Also Read : Set-Off Under Section 428 CrPC Can't Be Claimed For Detention

Undergone For Offence In Foreign Country : Supreme Court In Abu Salem's

Case
Case Title: Abu Salem v. State of Maharashtra Criminal Appeal No. 679 of

2015]

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 578

56. 'Detention Beyond Release Date Violates Article 21' : Supreme Court

Grants Rs 7.5 Lakh Compensation To Convict Kept In Prison In Excess Of

Sentence Period

The Supreme Court has directed the State of Chhattisgarh to pay Rs 7.5

Lakhs as compensation to a rape convict who was kept in prison beyond the

period of sentence.

"When a competent court, upon conviction, sentenced an accused and in

appeal, the sentence was modified upon confirmation of the conviction and

then the appellate judgment had become final, the convict can be detained

only up to the period to which he can be legally detained on the basis of the

said appellate judgment.", the bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT

Ravikumar observed.

Case : Bhola Kumhar vs State Of Chhattisgarh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 589

57. Preliminary Assessment To Try Juvenile As Adult - JJB Should

Mandatorily Take Assistance Of Psychologist/Psycho-Social Workers :

Supreme Court

A bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath held that

when the Juvenile Justice Board does not comprise a practicing professional

with a degree in child psychology or child psychiatry, it would be obligated to

take assistance of experienced psychologists or psychosocial workers or

other experts under proviso to Section 15(1) of Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (Act).

Case : Barun Chandra Thakur v. Master Bholu And Anr | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 593

58. Supreme Court Dismisses Plea For Independent Probe Into Alleged

Extra-Judicial Killings Of Chhattisgarh Tribals By Forces With Rs 5 Lakh

Costs

The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed in 2009 seeking

independent investigation into alleged extra-judicial killings of tribals in

Chhattisgarh by security forces during anti-Naxal operations with an

"exemplary cost" of Rs 5 lakhs.

A bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and JB Pardiwala delivered the

judgment on the petition filed by one Himanshu Kumar and 12 others in 2009.

The cost of Rs 5 lakhs is imposed on the first petitioner Himanshu Kumar,

who has been directed to deposit the same within 4 weeks before the

Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, failing which recovery steps will

be taken against him.

The Central Government had not only opposed the plea but also had filed an

application seeking perjury proceedings against the petitioners alleging that

they were depicting the executions carried out by Naxals as done by security

forces.

Case : Himanshu Kumar and othes versus Union of India and others| 2022

LiveLaw (SC) 598

59. All Women Entitled To Safe & Legal Abortion, Distinction Between

Married & Unmarried Women Unconstitutional : Supreme Court

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court declared that unmarried women

are also entitled to seek abortion of pregnancy in the term of 20-24 weeks

arising out of a consensual relationship.

The Court ruled that exclusion of unmarried women who conceive out of live-

in relationship from the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules is

unconstitutional.

"All women are entitled to safe and legal abortion", a bench led by Justice DY

Chandrachud said noting that the 2021 amendment to the Medical

Termination of Pregnancy Act does not make a distinction between married

and unmarried women.

The judgment is also significant for holding that the meaning of rape must be

held to include "marital rape" for the purpose of the Medical Termination of

Pregnancy Act and Rules. This means that wives, who conceive out of of

forcible sex by their husbands, are also entitled to seek abortion. The

judgment affirmed that consent of family or spouse is not required for a wife

to seek termination of pregnancy.

Another notable facet of the judgment is its direction that in cases of

teenage pregnancies, doctors need not disclose the identity of the minor

victim to the police while reporting the crime under POCSO. The court passed

this direction after noting that this condition of mandatory reporting might
deter parents of the victim from seeking safe and legal abortion, for fear of

social stigma.

Case :X vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt of

NCT Of Delhi | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 809

60. "Arrest Must Not Be Used As Punitive Tool" : Supreme Court Says

Mohammed Zubair Was "Trapped In Vicious Cycle Of Criminal Process"

The Supreme Court granted relief to fact-checker Mohammed Zubair by

granting bail to him in the 6 FIRs registered by the UP Police over a satirical

tweet posted in 2018, after noting that the criminal justice system was

"relentlessly employed against" him and that he was trapped in a "vicious

cycle of the criminal process".

The bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud further held that the "bail

conditions must be proportionate" while refusing the UP Police's request that

he should be asked not to tweet while out on bail.

"Merely because the complaints filed against the petitioner arise from posts

that were made by him on a social media platform, a blanket anticipatory

order preventing him from tweeting cannot be made. A blanket order

directing the petitioner to not express his opinion - an opinion that he is

rightfully entitled to hold as an active participating citizen - would be

disproportionate to the purpose of imposing conditions on bail."

Case : Mohammed Zubair vs State of NCT of Delhi and others| 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 629
61. Supreme Court Dismisses Petitions Filed By Private Tour Operators

Seeking GST Exemption For Haj-Umrah Services

A bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar ,AS Oka and CT Ravikumar

dismissed a batch of petitions filed by various private tour operators seeking

exemption from the Goods and Services Tax for the Haj and Umrah services

offered by them to pilgrims travelling to Saudi Arabia.

Haj Group Organizers Are Not Performing Religious Ceremonies, Can't Claim

GST Exemption : Supreme Court

Case Title : All India Haj Umrah Tour Organizer Association Mumbai vs Union

of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 632

62. Supreme Court Upholds ED's Power Of Arrest, Attachment, Search &

Seizure And "Twin-Conditions" For Bail; Says PMLA Has Stringent

Safeguards

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, upheld the provisions of Prevention of

Money Laundering Act, 2002 which relate to the power of arrest, attachment

and search and seizure conferred on the Enforcement Directorate.

The Court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions of Sections 5, 8(4),

15, 17 and 19 of the PMLA, which relate to the powers of ED's power of arrest,

attachment, search and seizure. The Court also upheld the reverse burden of

proof under Section 24 of the Act and said that it has "reasonable nexus" with

the objects of the Act.

The Court also upheld the "twin-conditions" for bail in Section 45 of the PMLA

Act and said that the Parliament was competent to amend the said provision
in 2018 even after the Supreme Court's judgment in the Nikesh Tharachand

Shah case (which had struck down the twin conditions). The bench said that

the Parliament is competent to amend Section 45 in the present form to cure

the defects pointed out in the Supreme Court judgment.

Case : Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 633

ED Authorities Are Not Police Officers; Article 20(3) Protection Available

Only After Arrest & Not At Summons Stage : Supreme Court

Summary Of Supreme Court's PMLA Judgement- Vijay Madanlal

Choudhary Vs Union of India

Money Laundering Offence Attracted By Mere Possession Of Crime

Proceeds ; Projection As Untainted Property Not Required : SC

Interprets "And" In Sec 3 PMLA As "Or"

Prosecution Under PMLA Not Possible After Accused Is Acquitted Of

Scheduled Offence: Supreme Court

63. Supreme Court Directs Pay Hike For Judicial Officers As Per Judicial

Pay Commission Recommendations From January 1,2016; Arrears To Be

Paid By June 30, 2023

Emphasizing on the need to revise the pay structure for the judicial officers,

the Supreme Court ordered for implementation of the enhanced pay scale as
recommended by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission with effect

from January 1, 2016.

The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and

Hima Kohli also directed the Center and the States to pay the arrears to the

officers in 3 instalments - 25% in 3 months, another 25% in next 3 months and

balance by June 30, 2023.

Case : All India Judges Association vs Union of India & Ors |2022 LiveLaw (SC)

635

64. Mother Can Give Surname Of Second Husband To Child After Death Of

Biological Father : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that a mother who remarries after the

death of the biological father can decide the surname of the child and include

it in her new family.

The bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari set

aside an Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment which directed a mother to

change the surname of her child and also to show the name of her new

husband in records only as 'step father'.

Case : Akella Lalita vs Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 638

65. S. 313 CrPC - All Adverse Evidences Should Be Put As Questions; Avoid

Bundling Circumstances Together With Only Single Opportunity To Explain

The Supreme Court observed that while examining an accused under Section

313 CrPC, all the adverse evidences has to put in the form of questions so as
to give an opportunity to the accused to articulate his defence and give his

explanation.

"If all the circumstances are bundled together and a single opportunity is

provided to the accused to explain himself, he may not able to put forth a

rational and intelligible explanation.", the bench comprising CJI NV Ramana

and Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli observed. The court clarified

such an omission does not ipso facto vitiate the trial, unless the accused

fails to prove that grave prejudice has been caused to him.

Case : Jai Prakash Tiwari vs State of Madhya Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 658

66. Hold In-Camera Trial In All Sexual Harassment Cases, Apart From Rape

Cases; Disallow Questions On Sexual History

Reiterating the importance of the Courts dealing with the victims of sexual

crimes in a sensitive manner, the Supreme Court has issued a slew of

directions to the trial courts to avoid agony and harassment for women who

file complaints of sexual harassment.

A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrchud and JB Pardiwala directed that

in-camera trials should be allowed in all cases relating to sexual harassment.

As per Section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in-camera trials are

mandated only in rape cases. This ambit has been expanded by the Court.

Case Title : XYZ versus State of Madhya Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 676

Also Read : S 156(3) CrPC - Magistrate Should Order Police Investigation

When Cognizable Offence Is Prima Facie Found, Especially In Sexual

Offences: Supreme Court

 Also Read -100 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2022 [Part 1]

TAGS ANNUAL DIGESTS 2022 SUPREME COURT

SIMILAR + VIEW MORE

POSTS

100 Important 100 Important

Supreme Court Supreme Court
Police Officers Not Required
Judgments Of 2022 Judgments Of 2022 -
To Do 'Moral Policing' :
[Part 1] PART-1 [VIDEO]
Supreme Court Upholds
Dismissal Of CISF Officer Who
Harassed Couple At Night
19 Dec 2022 11:18 21 Dec 2022 11:22
AM 20 Dec 2022 10:23 AM AM

Supreme Court Courts Today- A Daily

Weekly Round-Up:
December 12 To
December 18, 2022
21 Dec 2022 8:55 AM
Round Up Of Important Supreme Court Directs
Centre, IITs To Allow
Legal Developments-
Reservation In Faculty,
20.12.22
Research Degree
Admissions As Per 2019
Act
20 Dec 2022 9:27 PM 20 Dec 2022 3:42 PM