Showing 1213 articles
Limitation Under Section 469 CrPC Begins When Offender’s Identity Becomes Known, Not from Date of Complaint Receipt: Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court has clarified that in criminal prosecutions, the period of limitation begins from the date when the identity of all accused persons becomes known to the competent authority, and not from the date of the first complaint. A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and SVN Bhatti set aside the Kerala High…
Marketing Labels Not Determinative for Tax Classification, Rooh Afza Held Taxable as Fruit Drink: Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India has clarified that marketing labels and licensing descriptions cannot dictate a product’s tax classification. In a judgment delivered on 25 February 2026, the Court held that Rooh Afza, a fruit-based beverage preparation intended for dilution, qualifies as a “fruit drink” under Entry 103,…
Detailed Appreciation of Evidence Not Permissible at Bail Stage: Supreme Court of India
On 24 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India reiterated an important principle of criminal law while deciding the case titled SHOBHA NAMDEV SONAVANE VERSUS SAMADHAN BAJIRAO SONVANE AND OTHERS. The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta. The Court set aside an order of…
Once Unlawful Assembly Is Established, Individual Attribution of Fatal Injury Becomes Irrelevant Under Section 149 IPC: Supreme Court of India
On 24 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India delivered a crucial judgment in the case titled SITARAM KUCHHBEDIA VERSUS VIMAL RANA AND OTHERS. The Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order which had reduced the conviction of the accused from…
Mere Pendency of Restructuring Arrangements Cannot Stall CIRP Under IBC: Supreme Court of India
On 24 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment clarifying that mere existence of a restructuring arrangement does not bar initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The case titled CATALYST TRUSTEESHIP LTD. VERSUS ECSTASY REALTY PVT. LTD. was decided by a Bench comprising…
No One Can Denigrate Any Community Through Speech or Art, Ministers Must Refrain from Targeting Communities: Supreme Court of India
On 25 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India made significant observations on fraternity, freedom of speech and constitutional duties while dealing with a petition challenging the title of a Netflix film “Ghooskhor Pandat.” The case titled Atul Mishra VERSUS Union of India was heard by a Bench comprising Justice BV…
Bail Cancelled in Brutal Murder Case Involving Dowry and Caste Abuse Under IPC and SC/ST Act: Supreme Court of India
In a landmark judgment delivered on 23 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India set aside the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench’s order granting bail to accused in a gruesome murder and caste atrocity case. The case titled Shobha Namdev Sonavane VERSUS Samadhan Bajirao Sonvane and Others arose from…
Landowners Not Liable for Construction Delay Caused by Developer: Supreme Court
In an important judgment delivered on 23 February 2026, the Supreme Court clarified the liability of landowners in cases of delay in construction of flats under a Joint Development Agreement. The Bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe dismissed an appeal filed by a homebuyer and upheld the order…
Illegality in Search Does Not Automatically Render Collected Evidence Invalid: Supreme Court
In a significant judgment delivered on 23 February 2026, the Supreme Court clarified an important legal principle regarding search and seizure. A Bench comprising Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held that even if a search is found to be illegal due to lack of proper authorisation, the materials or…
Prosecution Against Pharma Firm in Drugs Act Case Cleared, Complaint Held to Be Filed Within Limitation: Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India on February 20, 2026 upheld the prosecution of M/s SBS Biotech and its officials under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi dismissed the appeal filed by the pharmaceutical company and confirmed that the criminal…
