100+ JUDGEMENTS

BY THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

2022 -2023

PART 3
33. Senior Advocate Designation
Process : One Mark Each Should
Be Awarded For Each Year Of
Practice From 10-20 Years
In relation to the criteria for senior
advocate designation, the Supreme
Court clarified that the High Courts
should allocate one mark each for
each year of practice from 10 to 20
years, instead of allocating 10 marks
flat for the counsel who has put in 10-
20 years practice.
A bench comprising Justices UU Lalit,
S Ravindra Bhat and PS Narasimha
issued this clarification allowing a
prayer in an application made by
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising.
Case : Indira Jaising v. Supreme
Court of India | 2022
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 Non­Banking Financial
Companies (NBFC) regulated by the
Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
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 v. State of
Kerala | 2022
 35. Keep the sedition law in
abeyance: SC rules in a historic
order
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.
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.
Case Title: S.G. Vombatkere v. UOI
( WPC 682/2021)
Editors Guild of India & Anr. v. UOI
| 2022
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 v.
Kamlesh Devi | 2022
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 v. State of
Kerala | 2022
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.
Case : Radheshyam Bhagwandas
Shah @ Lala Vakil v. State of
Gujarat | 2022
 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.
Case : A.G. Perarivalan v. State,
Through Superintendent of Police
CBI/SIT/MMDA, Chennai, Tamil
Nadu | 2022
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 Govt. The
Court also held that the NGT u/s 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 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 v.
Union of India | 2022
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 v.
Navjot Singh Sidhu | 2022
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.
Case : Union of India and Anr v. M/s
Mohit Minerals Through Director |
2022
 43. Management Of Private
Medical Colleges Prohibited
From Accepting Payment Of
Fees In Cash: SC Issues
Directions To Curb Capitation
Fee Menace
The SC 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 v. Committee For
Fixation of Fee Structure Of
Private Professional Colleges |
2022
44.Supreme Court Overrules
1983 Judgment Which Held That
Vacancies Arising Before
Amendments Will Be Governed
By Old Rules
The SC 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
v. Raj Kumar | 2022
45. Sec 138 NI Act- Set Up Pilot 46. Supreme Court criticises
Courts With Retired Judges For 'sealed cover' process
Cheque Bounce Cases In 5
States With Highest Pendency : In a notable judgment, the Supreme
Supreme Court Court criticized the Madras High
Court adopting a "sealed cover
procedure" by not sharing the copy of
With a view of reduce the pendency
a preliminary enquiry report with a
of cheque bounce cases under
former Minister in relation to a
Section 138 of the Negotiable
corruption case investigation.
Instruments Act, the Supreme Court
The judgment is also relevant for its
on Thursday directed the
discussion on the right of the accused
establishment of pilot courts
to get copies of the materials under
presided over by retired judges in 5
Section 207 CrPC and its connection
districts of 5 states with the highest
with the right to fair trial.
pendency (namely, Maharashtra,
Rajasthan, Gujarat, Delhi and Uttar
Pradesh). A bench comprising Case : SP Velumani v.
Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai ArapporIyakkam & Ors | 2022
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: expeditous trial of

cases u/s 138 NI Act | 2022