<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
  <title>Supreme Court — LegalRepublic.in</title>
  <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/</link>
  <description>Daily Supreme Court reporting that explains what the Court held, why it matters, and where each judgment sits in Indian law.</description>
  <language>en-IN</language>
  <atom:link href="https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
  <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:35:16 GMT</lastBuildDate>
  <item>
    <title>Supreme Court Cuts Five-Year Sentence to Time Served in Forged Bail Document Case</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/israfil-khan-vs-state-madhya-pradesh-sentence-reduced-forged-document-bail/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/israfil-khan-vs-state-madhya-pradesh-sentence-reduced-forged-document-bail/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:35:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria reduced a five-year rigorous imprisonment sentence to the period already undergone, applying proportionality in sentencing.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court holds Commissioner is disciplinary authority for all municipal staff post-1993</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/commissioner-disciplinary-authority-delhi-municipal-corporation-section-59/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/commissioner-disciplinary-authority-delhi-municipal-corporation-section-59/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:30:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra held that the substituted Section 59(d) made the Commissioner the disciplinary authority, validating an Executive Engineer&#39;s dismissal.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Raises Motor Accident Award to Rs 40.29 Lakh, Fixes Functional Disability at 100% for Amputee Mason</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/paramesh-vrl-logistics-functional-disability-motor-accident-compensation-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/paramesh-vrl-logistics-functional-disability-motor-accident-compensation-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:25:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A division bench corrected two calculation errors by the Madras High Court and held that a mason who lost his leg above the knee suffers 100% functional disability, not 70%.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Sale Deed from 1957 Cannot Be Voided by a Law Enacted After the Transfer, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sarafat-ali-deputy-director-consolidation-sale-deed-1957-bhumidhar-transfer/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sarafat-ali-deputy-director-consolidation-sale-deed-1957-bhumidhar-transfer/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:20:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria reverses concurrent findings against a 1957 sale deed, holding the amended void-transfer regime cannot operate retrospectively on accrued rights.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Adds Filial Consortium to Motor Accident Award for Parents of Deceased CA Student</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/oriental-insurance-kalu-ram-filial-consortium-ca-student-compensation-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/oriental-insurance-kalu-ram-filial-consortium-ca-student-compensation-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:15:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench upheld concurrent negligence findings against a truck driver and corrected the omission of filial consortium compensation for parents of a deceased CA student.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Financier Cannot Claim Insurance on Stolen Vehicle Without Privity of Contract, Supreme Court Rules</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/prakashchand-oriental-insurance-no-privity-hypothecation-vehicle-theft/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/prakashchand-oriental-insurance-no-privity-hypothecation-vehicle-theft/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:10:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi held that a vehicle financier has no enforceable claim against an insurer absent a direct contractual relationship.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Late FDRs and 33-month delay sink specific performance claim, Supreme Court rules</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/mohammed-khaleel-jayamma-specific-performance-readiness-willingness/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/mohammed-khaleel-jayamma-specific-performance-readiness-willingness/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:05:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench dismissed the buyer&#39;s appeal, holding that funds shown years after suit and a delayed filing defeat the readiness and willingness required under Section 16(c).</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>High Court Cannot Replace Injunction Decree With Compensation When No Such Relief Was Sought</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rajat-kumar-v-sd-adarsh-jain-kanya-maha-vidyalaya-high-court-cannot-substitute-injunction-decree-with-compensation/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rajat-kumar-v-sd-adarsh-jain-kanya-maha-vidyalaya-high-court-cannot-substitute-injunction-decree-with-compensation/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 16:00:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and Atul S. Chandurkar sets aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that substituted a removal decree with monetary compensation never prayed for.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Sets Aside Reinstatement Award Where Employee Led No Evidence of Unauthorised Absence</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rifilis-engineering-arjun-gupta-unauthorised-absence-reinstatement-set-aside/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rifilis-engineering-arjun-gupta-unauthorised-absence-reinstatement-set-aside/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 15:55:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta reversed reinstatement and back-wages directions, holding an employee cannot benefit from his own failure to inform his employer of an address change.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court declares the right to walk on demarcated footpaths a fundamental right</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/fundamental-right-to-walk-demarcated-footpaths/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/fundamental-right-to-walk-demarcated-footpaths/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 14:35:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar held the right to walk integral to Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, with footpaths a correlative enforceable duty.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Arbitration Clause Cannot Oust Consumer Forum After Complaint Is Admitted, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/tka-padmanabhan-abhiyan-cooperative-arbitration-consumer-forum-jurisdiction/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/tka-padmanabhan-abhiyan-cooperative-arbitration-consumer-forum-jurisdiction/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 14:30:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and V. Mohana restores a 2005 flat-delay complaint, ruling that an arbitration clause cannot displace consumer forum jurisdiction once a complaint is admitted.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Upholds Fresh TNPSC Recruitment Exercise for Motor Vehicle Inspector Posts, Restores Excluded Candidates</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/tnpsc-motor-vehicle-inspector-recruitment-workshop-experience-retrospective-approval/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/tnpsc-motor-vehicle-inspector-recruitment-workshop-experience-retrospective-approval/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2026 14:50:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court upheld a direction to redo the TNPSC Motor Vehicle Inspector selection, ruling no vested right arises from placement in an intermediate select list.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Revives Excluded Candidates in TNPSC Motor Vehicle Inspector Recruitment Stalled Since 2018</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/tnpsc-motor-vehicle-inspector-recruitment-workshop-experience-retrospective-renewal/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/tnpsc-motor-vehicle-inspector-recruitment-workshop-experience-retrospective-renewal/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 06:35:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar restores candidates excluded over workshop approval gaps, directing TNPSC to complete selection from a wider eligible pool.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court strikes down RTI exemption for Madhya Pradesh Lokayukt police wing</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/spe-lokayukt-rti-section-24-intelligence-security/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/spe-lokayukt-rti-section-24-intelligence-security/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:00:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A division bench held the Madhya Pradesh SPE is not an intelligence and security organisation, voiding the 2011 RTI exemption notification and upholding disclosure of sanction records.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Rule 23(1) suspension does not bar compassionate appointment, holds Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/atul-chauhan-haryana-rule-23-compassionate-appointment/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/atul-chauhan-haryana-rule-23-compassionate-appointment/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 15:55:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court division bench held that Rule 23(1) of Haryana&#39;s 2019 Rules suspends only financial assistance during criminal proceedings, not compassionate appointment, and set aside the High Court order.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Delhi High Court Cannot Invoke Forum Non Conveniens When Writ Jurisdiction Rests on Article 226(1)</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/baksish-ahmad-v-union-of-india-bsf-forum-non-conveniens-delhi-high-court-article-226/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/baksish-ahmad-v-union-of-india-bsf-forum-non-conveniens-delhi-high-court-article-226/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 03:35:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma holds that forum non conveniens rarely applies where writ jurisdiction is grounded in the situs of the respondent&#39;s office under Article 226(1).</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court bars Article 32 challenge to rejected Rajya Sabha nomination</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/meenakshi-natarajan-rajya-sabha-nomination-article-329b/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/meenakshi-natarajan-rajya-sabha-nomination-article-329b/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 16:10:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Atul S. Chandurkar held that Article 329(b) bars writ relief against nomination rejection, leaving an election petition as the only remedy.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court restores title decree, holds constructive res judicata cannot defeat undisputed ownership</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/makardhwaj-ram-jagdish-rai-constructive-res-judicata/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/makardhwaj-ram-jagdish-rai-constructive-res-judicata/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 16:05:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A division bench held that a plaintiff who challenged only specific sale deeds was not barred from later asserting his larger, undisputed title from the 1960 deed.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court treats absent officials at appointment meeting as curable defect, not fatal</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gaurav-mehla-haryana-cooperative-society-rule-3-appointments/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gaurav-mehla-haryana-cooperative-society-rule-3-appointments/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 16:00:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A division bench held that the absence of mandatory officials under Rule 3 was a curable, severable defect, directing the cooperative society to reconvene and reconsider the appointments.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court quashes MHA refusal of remission, frees convict after 22 years</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rohit-chaturvedi-premature-release-mha-non-speaking-order/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/rohit-chaturvedi-premature-release-mha-non-speaking-order/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:55:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan set aside a non-speaking MHA letter, held heinousness alone cannot bar remission, and ordered Rohit Chaturvedi&#39;s premature release.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court sets aside MSEDCL clerk&#39;s dismissal as disproportionate, orders fresh penalty</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/surekha-bele-msedcl-dismissal-disproportionate-subsistence-allowance/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/surekha-bele-msedcl-dismissal-disproportionate-subsistence-allowance/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:50:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh set aside the dismissal of an MSEDCL clerk as disproportionate while leaving the misconduct finding intact and ordering subsistence allowance.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: June 7 to 13, 2026</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/round-up/weekly/jun-07-13-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/round-up/weekly/jun-07-13-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2026 04:27:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Legal Republic</dc:creator>
    <description></description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Disciplinary Action Against Judicial Officer Void If Not Authorised by Chief Justice, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/high-court-uttarakhand-v-deepali-sharma-disciplinary-action-void-registrar-general/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/high-court-uttarakhand-v-deepali-sharma-disciplinary-action-void-registrar-general/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 14:05:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi holds that the Registrar General cannot suo-motu initiate disciplinary proceedings against a judicial officer without the Chief Justice&#39;s authority.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Notice in Mutation Proceedings Amounts to Constructive Notice of Probate, Rules Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/dhiraj-dutta-v-anirban-sen-probate-revocation-limitation-constructive-notice-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/dhiraj-dutta-v-anirban-sen-probate-revocation-limitation-constructive-notice-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 14:00:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi holds that ignoring a court notice in mutation proceedings bars a later probate revocation application as time-barred.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Refusing Phone Calls for 13 Days Is Not Cruelty Under Section 498A, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/jayesh-kanna-v-assistant-commissioner-section-498a-non-communication-acquittal/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/jayesh-kanna-v-assistant-commissioner-section-498a-non-communication-acquittal/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 05:40:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench acquits a husband convicted solely for not speaking to his wife by phone for thirteen days, holding the prosecution failed to produce call records to support the charge.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Tree Fall on Autorickshaw Not an MVA Claim, But Supreme Court Raises Compensation to Rs 25 Lakh Under Article 142</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bbmp-tree-fall-mva-liability-act-of-god-article-142-compensation/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bbmp-tree-fall-mva-liability-act-of-god-article-142-compensation/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 05:35:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh held that a falling tree branch is not an MVA accident, yet invoked Article 142 to enhance compensation to Rs 25 lakh.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Sets Limits on Psychological Evaluation of Child Victims in Custody Disputes</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sheetal-vasant-thakur-v-chirag-arora-pocso-child-psychological-evaluation/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sheetal-vasant-thakur-v-chirag-arora-pocso-child-psychological-evaluation/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:55:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that multi-expert psychological panels cannot be imposed on child victims in custody proceedings, laying down nineteen guidelines for trauma-informed adjudication.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Creates &#39;Loss of Domestic Care&#39; Head for Homemaker Deaths in Motor Accident Claims</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/shishu-pal-v-surjeet-homemaker-loss-of-domestic-care-mact-compensation/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/shishu-pal-v-surjeet-homemaker-loss-of-domestic-care-mact-compensation/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:50:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh directs Rs. 30,000 per month as a minimum stand-in income for deceased homemakers, rejecting decades of conservative notional income calculations.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Quashes SARFAESI Auction Sale Over Bank&#39;s Failure to Enforce Rule 9 Payment Timeline</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/vasumathi-v-authorized-officer-sarfaesi-auction-sale-quashed-rule-9-non-compliance/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/vasumathi-v-authorized-officer-sarfaesi-auction-sale-quashed-rule-9-non-compliance/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:20:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta set aside a 2010 auction sale, holding that the balance 75% bid amount was paid beyond the mandatory 15-day period without any written extension agreement.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction Under Article 142 After Victim Marries Accused and Receives Rs 10 Lakh</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/maruthupandi-v-state-pocso-conviction-set-aside-article-142/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/maruthupandi-v-state-pocso-conviction-set-aside-article-142/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 07:05:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench invoked Article 142 to quash a ten-year POCSO sentence after the victim married the convict and received Rs 10 lakh compensation, expressly barring the order from being treated as precedent.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Forum Non Conveniens Cannot Oust Delhi High Court When BSF Headquarters Grounds Jurisdiction Under Article 226(1)</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/baksish-ahmad-v-union-of-india-bsf-delhi-high-court-forum-non-conveniens-article-226/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/baksish-ahmad-v-union-of-india-bsf-delhi-high-court-forum-non-conveniens-article-226/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 11:50:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma holds that the doctrine of forum non conveniens rarely applies where writ jurisdiction is traceable to Article 226(1).</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Quashes SARFAESI Auction Sale After Buyer Paid Balance Beyond 15-Day Limit</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/vasumathi-indian-bank-sarfaesi-auction-sale-quashed-rule-9-payment-default/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/vasumathi-indian-bank-sarfaesi-auction-sale-quashed-rule-9-payment-default/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 11:45:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih set aside a 2010 auction sale, holding that late payment of the 75% balance without a written extension agreement vitiated the sale.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Upholds DNA Paternity Test Order, Balances Privacy Against Child&#39;s Right to Know Father</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/chaturbhuj-pradhan-v-amar-pradhan-dna-paternity-test-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/chaturbhuj-pradhan-v-amar-pradhan-dna-paternity-test-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 07:30:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh dismissed a father&#39;s appeal against a DNA test order, holding that Amar Pradhan&#39;s right to know his biological parentage outweighed the privacy claim.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>IBC Appeal Dies After 60 Days Plus 28: Supreme Court Bars Refiling Delay Condonation Under Section 62</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/ibc-section-62-appeal-refiling-delay-time-bar-adani-infrastructure/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/ibc-section-62-appeal-refiling-delay-time-bar-adani-infrastructure/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 07:25:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma holds that once the 60-day filing window and 28-day defect-cure window close, a Section 62 IBC appeal is extinguished.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Hostile Panch Witnesses Cannot Vitiate Recovery Proved by Investigating Officer, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/upendra-khare-v-state-of-madhya-pradesh-section-302-circumstantial-evidence-hostile-panch-witnesses/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/upendra-khare-v-state-of-madhya-pradesh-section-302-circumstantial-evidence-hostile-panch-witnesses/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 13:48:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale dismisses a murder appeal, holding that recovery evidence stands when proved through the investigating officer alone.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Quashes FIR Filed 23 Years After Complainant Knew of Alleged Fraud</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/nazibul-rahim-khan-fir-quashing-23-year-delay-criminal-proceedings/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/nazibul-rahim-khan-fir-quashing-23-year-delay-criminal-proceedings/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 13:43:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Amanullah and Mahadevan held that a 23-year gap between civil suit and criminal complaint, unexplained, renders the FIR an abuse of process.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Conviction Upheld but Life Sentence Cut to Time Served in 1984 Truck-Murder Case</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gopi-chand-pappu-v-state-nct-delhi-approver-testimony-conspiracy-murder-sentence-modified/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gopi-chand-pappu-v-state-nct-delhi-approver-testimony-conspiracy-murder-sentence-modified/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 13:38:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Narasimha and Misra upheld conspiracy-murder conviction of Gopi Chand while converting his life sentence to the period already undergone, exceeding 18 years.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Lok Adalat Compromise Cannot Be Treated as Admission of Guilt for Police Recruitment, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gajula-thirupathi-telangana-police-recruitment-lok-adalat-compromise-moral-turpitude/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gajula-thirupathi-telangana-police-recruitment-lok-adalat-compromise-moral-turpitude/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 06:25:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan restores a constable candidate&#39;s appointment, ruling that a Lok Adalat settlement in a cheating case cannot ground an adverse character finding.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Authorised Signatory Who Signs All Cheques on NGO&#39;s Behalf Is the Drawer Under Section 138 NI Act</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/k-ranganayakulu-v-state-of-telangana-section-138-ni-act-authorised-signatory-drawer/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/k-ranganayakulu-v-state-of-telangana-section-138-ni-act-authorised-signatory-drawer/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 06:20:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria upholds conviction of an NGO treasurer under Section 138, finding the MOU made him the effective drawer.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: May 31 to June 6, 2026</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/round-up/weekly/may-31-jun-06-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/round-up/weekly/may-31-jun-06-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2026 06:22:33 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Legal Republic</dc:creator>
    <description></description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Bars Accused From Travelling Abroad Without Sessions Court Leave, Restores Magistrate&#39;s Passport Order</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/seesa-santhosh-v-state-of-telangana-passport-travel-abroad-article-21-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/seesa-santhosh-v-state-of-telangana-passport-travel-abroad-article-21-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 05:10:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma held that the right to travel abroad under Article 21 must yield to the victim&#39;s right to a speedy trial in a decade-old abetment of suicide case.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Widow Cannot Act as Karta to Sell Family Property Under Section 8 Hindu Succession Act</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/darubai-kamalabai-section-8-hsa-tenants-in-common-karta-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/darubai-kamalabai-section-8-hsa-tenants-in-common-karta-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 05:05:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih holds that heirs under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act take as tenants-in-common, barring any karta claim over co-heirs&#39; shares.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Orders Gujarat Police to File Chargesheet in Six Weeks After Nearly Two Decades of Inaction</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sahil-mansuri-gujarat-chargesheet-delay-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sahil-mansuri-gujarat-chargesheet-delay-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 05:00:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih faulted the Gujarat High Court for refusing to intervene despite nearly twenty years of stalled investigation into a forgery complaint.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Casual Labourers With Temporary Status Entitled to Pension Even Without Formal Regularisation, Supreme Court Rules</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bhikhani-devi-union-of-india-pension-casual-labourers-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bhikhani-devi-union-of-india-pension-casual-labourers-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 04:55:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih holds that decades of continuous service cannot be negated by administrative inaction on regularisation.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Section 34 Limitation Runs From Section 33 Disposal Date, Even If Application Fails: Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/nhai-v-younis-section-33-34-limitation-arbitration-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/nhai-v-younis-section-33-34-limitation-arbitration-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 04:50:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench holds that formally invoking Section 33 defers the Section 34 limitation clock regardless of whether the correction application ultimately succeeds or is found maintainable.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Statutory Royalty Rate Prevails Over Mining Contract; Buyer Cannot Freeze Rate at Auction Date</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/royalty-rate-statutory-amendment-prevails-over-mining-contract-bmm-ispat/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/royalty-rate-statutory-amendment-prevails-over-mining-contract-bmm-ispat/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 13:50:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh holds that a statutory hike in iron ore royalty overrides a prior contractual rate, as royalty crystallises on dispatch, not on bid acceptance.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Orders Gujarat Police to File Chargesheet in Six Weeks After Nearly Two Decades of Delay</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sahil-abdulsattar-mansuri-gujarat-chargesheet-delay-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sahil-abdulsattar-mansuri-gujarat-chargesheet-delay-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 13:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih faulted the Gujarat High Court for refusing to intervene in a forgery complaint that has remained uninvestigated for nearly twenty years.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Allows Mother to Execute Development Agreement Over Minor Son&#39;s Property Share</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/shephali-chakraborty-v-state-of-west-bengal-minor-property-development-agreement-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/shephali-chakraborty-v-state-of-west-bengal-minor-property-development-agreement-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 03:50:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh held that a built flat plus cash consideration better serves a minor&#39;s interest than an undivided share in undeveloped land.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Married Daughters Cannot Be Excluded from Fair Price Shop Dependent Quota, Supreme Court Rules</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/kulsum-nisha-v-state-of-up-married-daughter-fair-price-shop-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/kulsum-nisha-v-state-of-up-married-daughter-fair-price-shop-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 03:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe holds that excluding married daughters from the definition of &quot;family&quot; violates Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Statutory Royalty Hike Overrides Auction Contract, Supreme Court Rules in Iron Ore Dispute</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/director-mines-geology-vs-bmm-ispat-royalty-mmdr-act-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/director-mines-geology-vs-bmm-ispat-royalty-mmdr-act-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 03:40:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh held that a Central Government amendment raising iron ore royalty from 10% to 15% binds a buyer who lifted ore after the amendment, regardless of the earlier auction contract.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Fifteen Years Apart: Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Under Article 142, Upholds Cruelty Finding</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sonal-talpada-v-veerbhan-singh-divorce-cruelty-article-142/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sonal-talpada-v-veerbhan-singh-divorce-cruelty-article-142/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 03:35:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih dissolves a doctor-couple&#39;s marriage after 15 years of separation, holding prolonged estrangement itself constitutes cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia).</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Cancels Bail in NDPS Case Where High Court Ignored Section 37 Twin Conditions</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-of-punjab-v-balraj-singh-billa-ndps-bail-section-37-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-of-punjab-v-balraj-singh-billa-ndps-bail-section-37-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 03:30:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh set aside Punjab and Haryana High Court bail for an accused alleged to run a drug network from jail.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Fifteen Years Apart: Supreme Court Upholds Divorce, Finds Prolonged Separation Itself Constitutes Cruelty</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sonal-talpada-v-veerbhan-singh-divorce-cruelty-irretrievable-breakdown-article-142/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sonal-talpada-v-veerbhan-singh-divorce-cruelty-irretrievable-breakdown-article-142/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 17:00:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih dismisses a wife&#39;s appeal, holding that fifteen years of separation and denial of conjugal rights amount to mental cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Concealing Graduate Degree to Secure Lower-Rung Post Voids Appointment, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/general-manager-hr-v-k-poovarasan-overqualification-employment-exchange-dismissal-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/general-manager-hr-v-k-poovarasan-overqualification-employment-exchange-dismissal-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 16:55:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices Amanullah and Mahadevan restores dismissal of an employee who hid his graduate qualification to obtain a post reserved for candidates with limited education.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Cutting and Grooving Aluminium Composite Panels Is Not Manufacture, Supreme Court Rules</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/alupro-building-systems-acp-cutting-grooving-not-manufacture-central-excise/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/alupro-building-systems-acp-cutting-grooving-not-manufacture-central-excise/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 16:50:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Pardiwala and Mahadevan held that adapting ACPs by cutting and grooving does not produce a distinct product, reversing the Karnataka High Court.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Pistol at Schoolchildren Satisfies Section 364A Threat Condition, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/harjindra-singh-state-up-section-364a-kidnapping-ransom-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/harjindra-singh-state-up-section-364a-kidnapping-ransom-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 16:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale upholds life sentences for two men who abducted an eight-year-old at gunpoint, ruling the firearm itself proved the statutory threat.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Allows Sale of Minor&#39;s Property Share for Development, Sets Protective Conditions</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/shephali-chakraborty-west-bengal-minor-property-section-8-hmga-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/shephali-chakraborty-west-bengal-minor-property-section-8-hmga-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 16:40:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh reversed lower courts, holding that a built flat and cash better serve a minor&#39;s interest than undivided undeveloped land.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Section 138 Cheque Bounce Cases Split Into Two Tiers; Criminal Limb Not Shielded by IBC Moratorium</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/dineshchand-surana-uco-bank-section-138-moratorium-ibc-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/dineshchand-surana-uco-bank-section-138-moratorium-ibc-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 05:15:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Pardiwala and Viswanathan holds that personal insolvency moratorium shields only the compensatory, not the criminal, aspect of cheque dishonour proceedings.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Rejects Benami Suit Dressed as Will Claim, Orders Property Confiscation</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/manjula-vs-da-srinivas-benami-plaint-rejection-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/manjula-vs-da-srinivas-benami-plaint-rejection-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 05:10:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan held that clever pleading cannot disguise a benami transaction, restoring the trial court&#39;s plaint rejection and directing confiscation.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>States Can Ban Betting on Skill Games Online, Supreme Court Rules, Reversing High Court Orders</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-of-tamil-nadu-v-junglee-games-india-online-gaming-betting-entry-34-list-ii/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-of-tamil-nadu-v-junglee-games-india-online-gaming-betting-entry-34-list-ii/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 05:05:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan holds that Entry 34 List II covers betting on games of skill, restoring Tamil Nadu and Karnataka online gaming bans.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Issues Binding Victim Protection Plan for Trafficking Survivors, Declines to Order OCIA</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/prajwala-v-union-of-india-victim-protection-plan-trafficking-cse-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/prajwala-v-union-of-india-victim-protection-plan-trafficking-cse-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 05:00:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala issues a comprehensive Victim Protection Plan for trafficking victims while urging Parliament to enact dedicated anti-trafficking legislation.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Holds GST on Online Gaming Stakes Constitutionally Valid, Restores Gameskraft Show Cause Notice</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gameskraft-gst-online-gaming-betting-gambling-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gameskraft-gst-online-gaming-betting-gambling-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 04:55:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan upholds GST on actionable claims from online gaming, ruling the 2023 amendments operate retrospectively and restoring a Rs. 21,000-crore demand against Gameskraft.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Alleged Drug Network Operator, Faults High Court for Ignoring Section 37 NDPS Twin Conditions</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-of-punjab-v-balraj-singh-billa-ndps-section-37-bail-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-of-punjab-v-balraj-singh-billa-ndps-section-37-bail-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 04:50:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Kotiswar Singh set aside Punjab and Haryana High Court bail in a commercial-quantity heroin case, holding Section 37 NDPS compliance is non-negotiable.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Section 34 Limitation Runs From Section 33 Disposal Date, Not Original Award: Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/nhai-v-t-younis-section-33-34-limitation-arbitration-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/nhai-v-t-younis-section-33-34-limitation-arbitration-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 04:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court holds that once Section 33 proceedings are formally invoked, limitation for a Section 34 challenge starts only from their disposal.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Married Daughters Cannot Be Excluded from Fair Price Shop Dependent Quota, Rules Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/kulsum-nisha-v-state-up-married-daughter-fair-price-shop-compassionate-allotment/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/kulsum-nisha-v-state-up-married-daughter-fair-price-shop-compassionate-allotment/</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 04:40:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court holds that excluding married daughters from compassionate allotment of fair price shops violates Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Mother Cannot Be Denied Motor Accident Compensation Because She Is Ineligible for State Welfare Assistance</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sarla-devi-reliance-general-insurance-mother-compensation-2006-rules-deduction/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/sarla-devi-reliance-general-insurance-mother-compensation-2006-rules-deduction/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A three-judge Supreme Court bench held that deducting state compassionate assistance from a mother&#39;s accident compensation, when she was never eligible for that assistance, amounts to illegal enrichment of the insurer.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Grants Notional HAG Promotion to Railway Doctor After ACR Destruction and Fractional Scoring</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/dr-indira-saranath-v-union-of-india-railway-promotion-acr-pension/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/dr-indira-saranath-v-union-of-india-railway-promotion-acr-pension/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:40:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench found that non-communication of ACRs, destruction of service records during litigation, and fractional point-scoring without policy basis collectively prejudiced a railway medical officer&#39;s promotion.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Railway Servants Are Central Government Employees, Cannot Be Denied Pay Weightage: Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bency-john-v-kerala-state-electricity-board-railway-servant-central-government-weightage/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bency-john-v-kerala-state-electricity-board-railway-servant-central-government-weightage/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:35:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that separate service rules for railway servants do not strip them of their status as Central Government employees for pay weightage purposes.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Revives Corruption FIR Against PSI, Holds Directing Bribe Through Subordinates Is an Offence Under PC Act</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-lokayuktha-police-v-k-rangayya-fir-quashing-pc-act-section-7/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/state-lokayuktha-police-v-k-rangayya-fir-quashing-pc-act-section-7/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:30:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A division bench restores an FIR quashed by the Karnataka High Court, holding that directing a complainant to pay subordinates falls within Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Delay Alone Cannot Justify Quashing an FIR, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/pushpendra-v-state-up-fir-delay-quashing-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/pushpendra-v-state-up-fir-delay-quashing-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:24:45 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and S.V.N. Bhatti restores FIR No.0512/2025, holding that a 24-day delay in lodging a complaint is not by itself sufficient to quash it.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Casual Labourers With Temporary Status Entitled to Pension Even Without Formal Regularisation, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bhikhani-devi-union-of-india-pension-casual-labourers-temporary-status/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/bhikhani-devi-union-of-india-pension-casual-labourers-temporary-status/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:20:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that Department of Posts casual labourers who completed ten years under temporary status are entitled to superannuation pension regardless of formal regularisation.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Step-Mother Cannot Sell as Karta When Heirs Hold Property as Tenants-in-Common Under Section 8 HSA</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/darubai-v-kamalabai-section-8-hsa-tenants-in-common-karta-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/darubai-v-kamalabai-section-8-hsa-tenants-in-common-karta-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:15:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih holds that heirs under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act take as tenants-in-common, extinguishing any karta authority over co-heirs&#39; shares.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Upholds Termination Payment Award Against MP Road Body, Warns Against Judicial Overreach in Arbitration</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/mprdc-v-jabalpur-corridor-termination-payment-arbitration-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/mprdc-v-jabalpur-corridor-termination-payment-arbitration-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:10:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar dismisses MPRDC&#39;s challenge to a BOT concession arbitral award, reaffirming minimal judicial interference and party autonomy.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Quashes NI Act Conviction After Post-Sentence Settlement, Orders Immediate Release</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/parsharvanath-weld-wires-conviction-quashed-ni-act-compounding-settlement/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/parsharvanath-weld-wires-conviction-quashed-ni-act-compounding-settlement/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:05:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale quashed a cheque-dishonour conviction after the accused paid Rs. 30 lakh to the complainant and compounded the offence under Section 147 of the NI Act.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Defendant Cannot Use Additional Written Statement to Contradict Original Pleading, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/mondira-ghosh-v-chaitali-ghosh-additional-written-statement-order-8-rule-9-cpc/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/mondira-ghosh-v-chaitali-ghosh-additional-written-statement-order-8-rule-9-cpc/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 14:00:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SC Desk</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court set aside a Calcutta High Court order that allowed a defendant to reverse her own pleaded position mid-trial through an additional written statement.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Order in Aman Singh Prompts Meghalaya High Court to Form Death Sentence Panel</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/aman-singh-state-of-bihar-death-sentence-panel-meghalaya-high-court/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/aman-singh-state-of-bihar-death-sentence-panel-meghalaya-high-court/</guid>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 04:50:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>Acting on a Supreme Court direction of 27 April 2026, the High Court Legal Services Committee of Meghalaya constituted a dedicated panel to assist in death sentence reference matters.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>President Appoints Four Judges to Supreme Court of India With Effect From 1 June 2026</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/four-judges-appointed-supreme-court-india-june-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/four-judges-appointed-supreme-court-india-june-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 09:50:41 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Manaswi Singh</dc:creator>
    <description>The President of India, exercising power under Article 124(2), appointed four judges to the Supreme Court on 1 June 2026, including one direct advocate elevation.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Issues Sweeping Directions to Clear Forest Encroachments Across Agasthyamalai Landscape</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/agasthyamalai-forest-encroachment-supreme-court-directions-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/agasthyamalai-forest-encroachment-supreme-court-directions-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 06:25:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Umang Sultania</dc:creator>
    <description>A Supreme Court bench found Tamil Nadu&#39;s encroachment removal efforts &quot;significantly below&quot; what the crisis demands, issuing fifteen binding directions covering eviction, moratoriums, and criminal action.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>Supreme Court Upholds 28% GST on Online Gaming Stakes as Betting and Gambling</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gameskraft-gst-online-gaming-betting-gambling-actionable-claims-supreme-court-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/gameskraft-gst-online-gaming-betting-gambling-actionable-claims-supreme-court-2026/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 06:20:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Umang Sultania</dc:creator>
    <description>A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan holds that online gaming platforms supply taxable actionable claims from betting and gambling, validating GST on full stake amounts.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
<item>
    <title>MIDC Industrial Units Exempt from NMMC Property Tax Until Facilities Were Handed Over, Supreme Court Holds</title>
    <link>https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/small-scale-entrepreneurs-association-nmmc-property-tax-ttc-midc-exemption/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.legalrepublic.in/supreme-court/small-scale-entrepreneurs-association-nmmc-property-tax-ttc-midc-exemption/</guid>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 06:15:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Umang Sultania</dc:creator>
    <description>A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that TTC MIDC industrial units were exempt from NMMC property tax only until MIDC transferred infrastructure maintenance to NMMC in December 2005.</description>
    <category>Supreme Court</category>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>