The circumstantial evidence murder case Supreme Court judgment India clarifies that conviction cannot stand where forensic chain of custody is broken and electronic evidence fails Section 65B requirements.

The COVID vaccine injury compensation Supreme Court judgment India examines the State’s constitutional duty to provide institutional redress and a possible no-fault compensation policy for serious vaccine adverse events.

The specific performance sale agreement Supreme Court judgment India clarifies that courts may deny specific performance where the plaintiff suppresses material documents and the sale agreement appears to be a sham transaction.

The Gobind Singh v Union of India Order 41 Rule 27 Supreme Court judgment reiterates that appellate courts cannot admit additional evidence unless strict statutory conditions are satisfied.

The Abhishek Sharma v State of Jammu and Kashmir regularisation Supreme Court judgment rules that artificial classifications in public employment cannot defeat Article 14 equality rights.

The Union of India v Larsen & Toubro arbitration interest Supreme Court judgment explains the distinction between pre-award and post-award interest and reinforces party autonomy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The Suhas Chakma open prisons Supreme Court judgment lays down a national framework for open correctional institutions, prison reform and rehabilitation of prisoners under Article 21.

The WBSEDCL v Adhunik Power change in law PPA judgment explains how courts interpret fuel source risk, indemnity clauses, and change in law compensation in long term power purchase agreements.

The Kerala Technical Education Service Rule 6A Supreme Court judgment resolves the conflict between AICTE qualification norms and state promotion rules, safeguarding prior Supreme Court beneficiaries while preserving remedies for affected non-parties.

The ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Era Infrastructure simultaneous CIRP Supreme Court judgment settles whether creditors must elect between debtor and guarantor, addressing double recovery safeguards and NCLT discretion.

The Supreme Court decision in Bhagyalaxmi Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Babaldas Amtharam Patel surety liability settles how far guarantors remain liable when borrowers exceed sanctioned limits and when partial discharge applies.

The Torrent Power Supreme Court judgment reinforces the primacy of CoC commercial wisdom, holding courts cannot interfere with approved resolution plans absent statutory violations or material irregularity.

In the Lease vs Licence Supreme Court 2026 ruling, the Court restores a 99-year registered lease in Vivekananda Kendra, clarifies the intention test, limits unilateral cancellation, and reinforces lis pendens protection in property disputes.

The Panacea Biotec Supreme Court judgment clarifies when limitation begins in Drugs Act prosecutions and holds that complaints by public servants need not mechanically follow Section 202 CrPC enquiry requirements.

The Sistema Shyam Teleservices Supreme Court judgment clarifies when liability begins after licence cancellation and holds that government delay cannot justify retrospective interest claims.

The Sriganesh Chandrasekaran Supreme Court judgment clarifies that landowners are not automatically liable for construction delays caused by developers. Interpreting JDA and indemnity clauses, the Court held liability depends on contractual allocation of obligations.

The Priyanka Kumari Supreme Court judgment clarifies that employees cannot be punished for degrees obtained from universities later declared invalid. The Court reinstated terminated librarians, balancing equity by denying back wages while preserving service continuity.

The Dinesh Kumar Supreme Court judgment clarifies that welfare societies operating on government land can face Article 226 scrutiny. The Court set aside allotments tainted by favouritism and reaffirmed fiduciary duties of ex officio public officials.

The Parameshwari Supreme Court sentencing judgment clarifies that victim compensation cannot substitute custodial punishment. Restoring the trial court’s sentence, the Court reaffirmed proportionality, deterrence, and reasoned sentencing as core principles of criminal justice.

The Rohit Jangde Supreme Court judgment clarifies the evidentiary limits of Section 27 and reinforces that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain. The Court set aside conviction citing investigative lapses, partial forensic linkage, and insufficient corroboration.