Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: September 30 – October 4, 2024
1) Frivolous & vexatious proceedings should be met with due sanctions in form of exemplary costs
The Court observed that frivolous and vexatious proceedings should be met with due sanctions in the form of exemplary costs to dissuade parties from resorting to such tactics.
The Court set aside the order of the Madras High Court which ordered further investigation in a decade-old murder case by a “cryptic order.” Noting the “outrageous and ex facie unbelievable averments” made in the pleadings/petitions with “no inhibition whatsoever,” the Court said that any proceeding or application that prima facie lacks merit should not be instituted in a court.
Cause Title- K. Vadivel v. K. Shanthi & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 746)
Date of Judgment- September 30, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
2) Altering seniority list after a long period is unjust to employees
The Court observed that altering a seniority list after a long period would be unjust to employees.
The Court upheld the decision of the Madras High Court which restored the seniority of the petitioners, who were senior to the appellant, both as per the date of initial appointment and also in the promotional post of skilled grade.
Cause Title- V. Vincent Velankanni v. The Union Of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 748)
Date of Judgment- September 30, 2024
Coram- Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice R. Mahadevan
3) A talented student belonging to marginalized group should not be left in the lurch: SC directs admission of Scheduled Caste student to IIT Dhanbad
The Court directed the admission of a scheduled caste student to IIT Dhanbad while observing that a talented student belonging to a marginalized group who had done everything to secure admission should not be left in the lurch.
The Court, under Article 142 of the Constitution, ordered the creation of a supernumerary seat for the petitioner, who was unable to process his online fee payment before the portal closed, despite making six earnest attempts to log in and successfully upload his documents.
Cause Title- Atul Kumar v. The Chairman (Joint Seat Allocation Respondents Authority) & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 749)
Date of Judgment- September 30, 2024
Coram- Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra
4) Test of manifest arbitrariness can apply to invalidate legislation: Supreme Court strikes down Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017
The Court struck down the Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 as being unconstitutional. It said that the test of manifest arbitrariness would apply to invalidate legislation as well as subordinate legislation under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Court was dealing with an appeal preferred by the Khalsa University, challenging the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court by which it dismissed the writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the said 2017 Act.
Cause Title- Khalsa University and Another v. The State of Punjab and Another (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 751)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
5) “Matter compromised between borrowers and bank”: Supreme Court quashes criminal cases against accused
The Court quashed criminal proceedings against persons accused in a cheating case noticing that the matter has been compromised between the borrower and the bank.
The Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant under Sections 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC The Court noted that after the receipt of the amount under One Time Settlement (OTS), the Allahabad Bank (Bank) had also decided to close the loan account.
Cause Title- Tarina Sen v. Union of India & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 752)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
6) Criminal cases with overwhelming & predominant civil character should be quashed when parties have resolved entire disputes among themselves
The Court reiterated that criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
The Court quashed the criminal proceedings against two women arraigned as wives of the accused involving allegations of using forged and fabricated documents to secure credit facilities amounting to crores of rupees. It noted that after the receipt of the amount under One Time Settlement (OTS), the Indian Bank (Bank) had also decided to close the loan account.
Cause Title- K. Bharathi Devi & Anr v. State Of Telangana & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 750)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
7) Supreme Court directs all States & UTs to revise prison manuals; says there cannot be caste discrimination among prisoners
The Court directed all States and Union Territories to revise their prison manuals observing that there cannot be caste discrimination among prisoners.
The Court made the observation while dealing with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, drawing attention to the ongoing caste-based discrimination in prison systems across various states. The petition highlighted that numerous state prison manuals continue to enforce rules and practices rooted in caste hierarchy, in clear violation of constitutional principles of equality.
Cause Title- Sukanya Shantha v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 753)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra
8) TOLA will continue to apply to Income Tax Act after April 1, 2021 if any action or proceeding falls for completion between March 20, 2020 & March 31, 2021
The Court held that the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA) will continue to apply to the Income Tax Act, 1961 (ITA) after April 1, 2021 if any action or proceeding falls for competition between March 20, 2020 and March 31, 2021.
The Court held thus in a batch of civil appeals involving the interplay of three Parliamentary statutes: the ITA, the TOLA, and the Finance Act, 2021.
Cause Title- Union of India & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 754)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra
9) Mere delay in forwarding FIR to Jurisdictional Magistrate not sufficient to discard prosecution case
The Court reiterated that mere delay in forwarding an FIR (First Information Report) to the jurisdictional Magistrate is not sufficient to discard and disbelieve the case of prosecution.
The Court was deciding two sets of appeals, one by the State of Bihar through CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) and the other by the wife of the deceased MLA (Member of Legislative Assembly) - Brij Bihari Prasad.
Cause Title- Rama Devi v. The State of Bihar and Others (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 755)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice R. Mahadevan
10) "Test of vice of discrimination in taxing law is less rigorous": Supreme Court upholds constitutional validity of Section 17(5) (c) & (d) CGST Act
The Court upheld the constitutional validity of clauses (c) and (d) of Section (5) of Section 17(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), while holding that the test of vice of discrimination in a taxing statute is less rigorous.
The Court said that the alleged violation of Articles 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution was not elaborated by the assessees.
Cause Title- Chief Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax & Ors. v. M/s Safari Retreats Private Ltd. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 756)
Date of Judgment- October 3, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol
11) Government bodies are expected to act in absolutely fair, reasonable & transparent manner, particularly in award of contracts for mega projects
The Court reiterated that the government bodies/instrumentalities are expected to act in an absolutely fair, reasonable and transparent manner, particularly in the award of contracts for Mega projects.
While holding that the rejection of the technical bid by Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL) was “grossly arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution,” the Court also reiterated the scope of judicial intervention in Government contracts.
Cause Title- Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Bharat Coking Coal Limited & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 757)
Date of Judgment- October 4, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
12) Assessing Officer cannot consider assessee's claim in time-barred revised return u/s 139(5) of Income Tax Act
The Court observed that the assessing officer has no jurisdiction to consider the claim made by the assessee in the revised return filed after the time prescribed by Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act for filing a revised return had already expired.
In this case, the assessee filed an income tax return and submitted revised returns on two different occasions and after the assessing officer ignored the second revised return, an appeal was filed. The Commissioner of Income Tax dismissed the appeal on the ground that the revised return was time-barred under Section 139(5) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, but the Madras High Court later set aside the Tribunal’s order, stating the revised return was filed too late to be considered.
Cause Title- M/s. Shriram Investments v. The Commissioner of Income Tax III Chennai (2024 INSC 760)
Date of Judgment- October 4, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
13) Cancellation of selection process after its completion and preparation of final selection list is impermissible
The Court held that the cancellation of the entire selection process after its completion and preparation of the final list is impermissible.
The Court said that changing the said process would effectively change the “rules of the game after the game was played” which was impermissible and deprived the candidates of their legitimate right of consideration under the previous Rules. The Bench directed the Bihar government to revise the selection list for the Junior Engineer (Civil) recruitment process issued by the Bihar Technical Service Commission (BTSC).
Cause Title- Shashi Bhushan Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 763)
Date of Judgment- October 4, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
