6 highlights
-
A few weeks back IndianKanoon contributed this incredible dataset of the top 100 cited judgements across the Supreme Court of India, High Courts and selected tribunals.
-
Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab & Anr (📜cited in 14672): Many civil disputes are often escalated to criminal disputes. They are then withdrawn by the parties once the civil hurt is remedied. In this case the court explored the question, “can a High Court invoke its inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings against an offender who has settled his dispute with the victim of the crime, but the crime is not compoundable under Section 320 of the Code?” The short answer, yes!
-
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors (📜cited in 10571): Historically, most courts were stringent in granting anticipatory bail, and even when they did, they imposed significant conditions on the applicant. In this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court sought to emphasise on the rights of personal liberty envisaged in the legislation and outlined factors to be considered in determining conditions that may be imposed.
-
Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr (📜cited in 8012): Often, cases where no substantial questions of law are involved are brought before the higher courts. Motor Vehicles Tribunals across the country apply contradictory principles in determining compensation on death, and in this case the Supreme Court explored diverse existing approaches and laid out the principles and methods of calculation to be adopted in deciding compensation.
-
State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors (📜cited in 6672): A judgement that delves into the scope of inherent (and discretionary) powers of the High Courts to quash FIRs, criminal proceedings against public servants, powers of an investigating officer in corruption cases - all make for a decision that is bound to be referred extensively in future cases.
-
Lalita Kumari vs Govt.Of U.P.& Ors (📜cited in 6156): Through this decision, the Supreme Court settled the position that if a cognizable offence is made out in a complaint, a police officer has no option or discretion - they must register an FIR. In the process of its analysis, the Court also discussed other provisions of the Criminal Code, and the balance that has to be maintained between the interest of the society and protecting the liberty of an individual. In addition, the Court stated that action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.