1) Restricting migration of meritorious reserved category candidates to unreserved seats is illegal
The Court observed that compartmentalising different categories in the horizontal reservation and restricting the migration of the meritorious reserved category candidates to the unreserved seats is “totally unsustainable.”
In this case, the students (appellants), who had participated in the NEET (UG) Examination conducted in 2023, challenged the Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision that denied them admission under the UR-GS quota, despite their higher merit scores. The appellants had challenged the decision of the Department of Medical Education (respondent) for not allotting MBBS Unreserved (UR) Category Government School (GS) quota seats to the meritorious reserved candidates, who had passed from the Government Schools.
Cause Title- Ramnaresh @ Rinku Kushwah & Ors. v. State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 611)
Date of Judgment- August 20, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
2) Natural guardian cannot be denied custody merely because someone looked after child for few years: SC allows a father's appeal
The Court, while allowing appeal filed by a father, observed that a natural guardian cannot be denied custody of the child merely because someone looked after the child for a few years.
The Court was hearing an appeal challenging the decision of the High Court which disposed of the petition filed by the Appellant, seeking to obtain the custody of his minor daughter from the alleged unlawful custody of the respondent by granting liberty to the parties to approach the family court of competent jurisdiction for seeking custody of the child.
Cause Title- Gautam Kumar v. NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 610)
Date of Judgment- August 20, 2024
Coram- Justice B R Gavai and Justice K V Vishwanathan
3) Power of West Bengal should not be unleashed on people who are protesting peacefully: SC says as it sets up National Task Force for safety & well-being of medical professionals
The Court has set up a "National Task Force (NTF)" for suggestions about the safety, working conditions and well-being of the medical professionals, as it took suo motu cognizance of the rape and murder case of a postgraduate medic at the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata, stating that it raises a systemic issue regarding the safety of doctor across India.
The incident took place on August 9, 2024, at R.G. Kar Medical College & Hospital, wherein a postgraduate trainee doctor, who was on duty was found dead inside the hospital premises, reportedly in half-naked condition.
Cause Title- In Re: Alleged Rape and Murder Incident of a Trainee Doctor in R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata and Related Issues (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 613)
Date of Judgment- August 20, 2024
Coram- CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra
4) If High Court’s Division Bench is of view that earlier decision of coordinate bench is incorrect, only option available is to refer case to larger bench
The Court elucidated that if the Division Bench of the High Court is of the view that the earlier decision of the Coordinate Bench is not correct in law, the only option available is to refer the case to a larger Bench.
The Court was dealing with a criminal appeal filed against the judgment of the Kerala High Court by which it dismissed the petition of the sister-in-law of the detenu and upheld the detention order issued against the detenu under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA).
Cause Title- Shabna Abdulla v. The Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 612)
Date of Judgment- August 20, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
5) SC directs States to implement Section 19(6) of POCSO Act & Sections 30 to 43 of JJ Act, sets aside Calcutta HC's remarks regarding female adolescent sexual behaviour
The Court pronounced the judgment in a suo motu case against a judgment delivered by the Calcutta High Court that had made remarks related to the biological rationale behind sexual urges in female adolescents and underscoring that while libido is a natural aspect.
In this case, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, while dealing with a Criminal Appeal challenging the conviction in the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), had acquitted the appellant of the aforesaid offences.
Cause Title- In Re: Right To Privacy Of Adolescents (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 614)
Date of Judgment- August 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
6) Rajasthan Judicial Service| Non-fixation of cut-off marks for persons with benchmark disability not illegal
The Court observed that the non-fixation of cut-off marks for persons with benchmark disability is neither arbitrary nor violative of any of the Fundamental Rights of a candidate.
The Bench reiterated that candidates who consciously participated in the selection process cannot question the advertisement or the selection methodology under the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, after being declared unsuccessful in the Preliminary Examinations. The Court clarified that the reservation for Persons with disabilities was treated as a Horizontal Reservation under Clause (1) of Article 16, not a Vertical reservation under Clause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution.
Cause Title- Rekha Sharma v. The Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 615)
Date of Judgment- August 21, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
7) When accused is unable to find sureties in multiple cases, requirement to furnish sureties must be balanced with his fundamental rights
The Court observed that when an accused is unable to find sureties as ordered in multiple cases, there is a need to balance the requirement of furnishing sureties with his or her fundamental rights.
The Court permitted the accused to furnish the same set of sureties as surety in all the States where he was granted bail. Reiterating the principle that “excessive bail is no bail,” the Court clarified that imposing excessive and onerous conditions on the grant of bail was equivalent to “take away with the left hand, what is given with the right.”
Cause Title- Girish Gandhi v. The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 617)
Date of Judgment- August 22, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
8) Discretion cannot be based on whim & caprice of decision making authority: SC allows law teacher's appeal against denial of confirmation of service
The Court observed that the denial of service to a teacher by the University despite his/her satisfactory performance, amounts to an arbitrary and unreasonable exercise of power.
The Court observed thus in a civil appeal questioning the correctness of the judgment of the Tripura High Court.
Cause Title- Maitreyee Chakraborty v. The Tripura University & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 616)
Date of Judgment- August 22, 2024
Coram- Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
9) Form of order terminating services of employee is not its final determinant; Court can find out the real reason & true character behind it
The Court reiterated that form of an order terminating services is not its final determinant and the Court can find out the real reason and true character behind terminating/removing an employee.
In this case, the Court ordered continuation in service of an employee at par with other similarly situated employees, but with the back wages restricted to 50%. The Court was dealing with a civil appeal filed by a woman against the final judgment and order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Division Bench by which it overruled the judgment of the Single Judge.
Cause Title- Swati Priyadarshini v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 620)
Date of Judgment- August 22, 2024
Coram- Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
10) Statement recorded u/s. 67 NDPS Act cannot be used as a confessional statement during trial: SC sets aside conviction
The Court set aside the conviction under the NDPS Act while reiterating that a statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be used as a confessional statement in a trial of an offence under the NDPS Act.
Relying on the decision in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (2021), the Bench acquitted the accused convicted under Section 22(c) and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), while observing that the appellant's statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was not admissible in evidence.
Cause Title- Ajay Kumar Gupta v. Union Of India (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 619)
Date of Judgment- August 22, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
11) Denial of pensionary benefits solely on the basis of their temporary status not justifiable: Supreme Court grants relief to SSD Fund temporary employees
The Court directed to extend the benefits of the 6th Central Pay Commission including the pensionary benefits under the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 2008 to some Compulsory Saving Scheme Deposits (SDD) Fund temporary employees.
The Court allowed a civil appeal preferred against the judgment of the Delhi High Court.
Cause Title- Rajkaran Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 621)
Date of Judgment- August 22, 2024
Coram- Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Sandeep Mehta
12) Merely after having Ph.D. Qualification, technical personnel will not become eligible for grant of two advance increments: SC allows ICAR’s appeal
The Court allowed the Indian Council of Agricultural Research’s appeal against the order of Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) which extended the technical staff of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) the benefit of the scheme in terms of which a scientist was eligible for two advance increments as and when they acquired a Ph.D. degree in their service career.
In this case, a circular issued by ICAR provided for two advance increments to scientists upon acquiring a Ph.D. degree during their service. The respondents, who were technical personnel employed by the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), sought similar benefits, arguing that their Ph.D. qualifications equally enhanced their contributions to agricultural research.
Cause Title- Indian Council Of Agricultural Research v. Rajinder Singh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 622)
Date of Judgment- August 22, 2024
Coram- Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal
13) CBI embarked on roving inquiry on strength of CAG’s audit report: Supreme Court quashes criminal case against coal company
The Court quashed a criminal case against M/s. Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited (KECML) registered under Section 120-B read with Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act).
The Court said that CBI heavily relied on the observations made in the Audit Report of the CAG that has not attained finality till date. The said company had filed appeals challenging the order of the Special Judge (PC Act) Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Coal Block Case.
Cause Title- M/s. Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited and Another v. Central Bureau of Investigation (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 623)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
14) "Courts & police yet don't understand": Supreme Court explains fine distinction between criminal breach of trust & cheating
The Court explained the fine distinction between Criminal Breach of Trust and Cheating, saying that the Courts and Police Officers still do not understand the difference between the two.
The Court explained thus in a criminal appeal filed by Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. against the order of the Allahabad High Court by which it rejected an application and declined to quash the summoning order by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Cause Title- Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 626)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
15) Failure to pay consideration amount in case of sale of goods will not attract offence of criminal breach of trust
The Court observed that the failure to pay the consideration amount in case of sale of goods will not attract the offence of Criminal Breach of Trust under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Court observed thus in a criminal appeal filed by Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. against the order of the Allahabad High Court by which it rejected an application and declined to quash the summoning order by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Cause Title- Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 626)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
16) Mere knowledge that victim is SC/ST member not sufficient to attract offence under SC-ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act: SC grants anticipatory bail to Shajan Skariah
The Court while granting anticipatory bail to Shajan Skariah, Editor of an online news channel ‘Marunandan Malayali’, held that mere knowledge that the victim is a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) is not sufficient to attract offence under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The Court held thus in a criminal appeal filed by Shajan against the judgment of the Kerala High Court by which it dismissed his appeal and affirmed the order of the Special Judge declining anticipatory bail to him.
Cause Title- Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 625)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
17) If complaint doesn’t make prima facie case for applying SC/ST Act, Court is not precluded from granting anticipatory bail to accused
The Court while granting anticipatory bail to Shajan Skariah, held that if a complaint does not make out a prima facie case for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 i.e., SC/ST Act, the Court would not be precluded from granting anticipatory bail to the accused.
The Court held thus in a criminal appeal filed by Shajan against the judgment of the Kerala High Court by which it dismissed his appeal and affirmed the order of the Special Judge declining anticipatory bail to him.
Cause Title- Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 625)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
18) Consumer Protection Act| Dominant purpose of transaction is to be looked into to find out if it had any nexus with profit generation as part of commercial activities
The Court observed that the dominant purpose of a transaction is to be looked into to find out if it had any nexus with some kind of profit generation as part of commercial activities. It said that merely because the purchaser is a real estate company it does not mean that the flat was purchased by it for commercial purposes or resale to earn profits.
The Court was hearing a statutory appeal under Section 67 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which challenged the judgment and order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission that has partly allowed the complaint of the respondent and directed the appellant to refund Rs.7.16 Cr along with delay compensation @ 6% per annum.
Cause Title- Omkar Realtors and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Kushalraj Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 629)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Pankaj Mithal
19) Arbitrator's power to award pre-reference & pendente lite interest is not restricted when agreement is silent about it
The Court held that the power of the Arbitrator to award pre-reference and pendente lite interest is not restricted when the agreement is silent on whether interest can be awarded or does not contain a specific term that prohibits the same. It summarised the propositions relating to the power of the Arbitrator to grant pre-reference interest, pendente lite interest, and post-award interest under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (A&C Act).
The Court was deciding civil appeals preferred by a private company challenging the order of the Calcutta High Court by which it restored the arbitral award and modified a claim relating to pre-reference interest.
Cause Title- Pam Developments Private Limited v. The State of West Bengal & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 628)
Date of Judgment- August 23, 2024
Coram- Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Pankaj Mithal