Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 — S. 8(5) (after 2002 Amendment) and S. 8(4) — Applicability of S. 8(5) after amendment to cases where exemption has already been granted: Every statute prima facie is prospective therefore, 2002 Amendment to CST Act, held, will not affect accrued rights. Though after amendment of S. 8(5) of the CST Act, State Government’s right to grant exemption from tax has ceased to exist however, amendment being prospective, would not apply to cases where an absolute exemption has already been granted, [State of Maharashtra v. Prism Cement Ltd., (2025) 4 SCC 300]
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Ss. 100 & 151, Or. 41 R. 5 and Or. 39 — Second appeal — Framing of substantial question of law: Interim order or stay, in second appeal without first framing substantial question of law, not permissible, [U. Sudheera v. C. Yashoda, (2025) 4 SCC 215]
Contract Act, 1872 — S. 74: Forfeiture clause in an allotment agreement providing of forfeiture of earnest money in case of cancellation, when is not valid, principles reiterated, [Godrej Projects Development Ltd. v. Anil Karlekar, (2025) 4 SCC 259]
Contract and Specific Relief — Contractual Obligations and Rights — Price/Escalation Clauses — Claim for damages by contractor-claimant on account of delay on part of employer — Rejection of: Plea against validity of contract clause prohibiting claim for damages/compensation for failure or delay caused by the employer in fulfilling its obligations, as in the present case Clause 49.5 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC), by contractor-claimant itself during the currency of contract, for seeking extension of time in view of Ss. 23 and 28 of the Contract Act is not entertainable, when such plea not raised before Tribunal/Courts below, [C & C Constructions Ltd. v. IRCON International Ltd., (2025) 4 SCC 234]
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Grant of bail: A superficial application of bail parameters not only undermines the gravity of the offence itself but also risks weakening public faith in the judiciary’s resolve to combat the menace of dowry deaths. Duty of Court as well as relevant consideration, while granting bail in such serious matters, stated, [Shabeen Ahmad v. State of U.P., (2025) 4 SCC 172]
Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 9 — Test identification parade — Evidentiary value and purpose: A test identification parade, held, not substantive evidence but only corroborative evidence. Purpose of holding a TIP during the stage of investigation, held, firstly, to ensure that the investigating agency is proceeding in the right direction where the accused is unknown. Secondly, purpose, held, to serve as a corroborative piece of evidence when the witness identifies the accused during trial, [Vinod v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2025) 4 SCC 312]
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 307 — Sentence — Quantum of, if life sentence is avoided and powers of appellate court: As per S. 307, of threshold term of imprisonment, of life sentence, is avoided, held, can only be 10 yrs and not more, [Ganesan v. State of T.N., (2025) 4 SCC 231]
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 366-A — Acquittal: Acquittal granted on the ground of consent of victim and she being not proved less than 18 yrs, [Akula Raghuram v. State of A.P., (2025) 4 SCC 209]
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 201 — Acquittal: Reversal of acquittal by High Court by upholding admissibility of extra-judicial confession made before the Village Police Patil, not justified, [Sadashiv Dhondiram Patil v. State of Maharashtra, (2025) 4 SCC 275]
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 376, 90, 384, 323, 504 and 506 r/w S. 313 — Quashing of proceedings — Plea as to vitiation of consent under misconception of fact: Continued sexual relationship for 16 yrs indicated absence of proof as to forcible intercourse and false promise of marriage, relationship between the complainant and appellant, held, consensual without the existence of any element of deceit or misconception, [Rajnish Singh v. State of U.P., (2025) 4 SCC 197]
Railways Act, 1989 — S. 143 — Online fraud — Invocation of S. 143 of the Railways Act, 1989 in case of illegal sale of e-tickets: S. 143, Railways Act, 1989 can be invoked against unauthorised procurement and supply of railway tickets, irrespective of mode of procurement and supply, [Union of India v. Mathew K. Cherian, (2025) 4 SCC 245]
Succession Act, 1925 — S. 63 — Will — Proof of its execution and its genuineness — Onus of proof on propounder: If objection raised on genuineness of will by pointing out suspicious circumstances, propounder has to remove them. Propounder has to establish that testator had signed the will in a sound disposing state of mind and understanding nature and effect of disposition, [Leela v. Muruganantham, (2025) 4 SCC 289]
U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (26 of 1947) — S. 12-C(1) — Re-counting of votes — Order for — Validity: When three out of four candidates questioning veracity of elections and important documents about election are missing and such absence is unexplained, order of re-counting of votes, held, not illegal, [Vijay Bahadur v. Sunil Kumar, (2025) 4 SCC 180]