Live now

Indian Case Law Database

Search Supreme Court, High Court and tribunal judgments with filters by court, subject and date.

Supreme Court of India1978-01-25

Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India

AIR 1978 SC 597

A 7-judge bench held that the 'procedure established by law' under Article 21 must be fair, just and reasonable and not arbitrary. Established the golden triangle of Articles 14, 19 and 21 — any law depriving personal liberty must satisfy all three.

Supreme Court of India2017-08-24

K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (Right to Privacy)

(2017) 10 SCC 1

A 9-judge bench unanimously held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 and other provisions of Part III. Any invasion must satisfy legality, necessity and proportionality.

Supreme Court of India1997-08-13

Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan

(1997) 6 SCC 241

Laid down guidelines against sexual harassment of women at the workplace, later codified in the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

Supreme Court of India2013-11-12

Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P.

(2014) 2 SCC 1

Constitution Bench held that registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC (now BNSS 173) if the information discloses a cognizable offence. No preliminary inquiry is permissible in such cases except in limited categories (matrimonial, commercial, medical negligence etc.) where a preliminary inquiry may be conducted, ordinarily within 7 days.

Supreme Court of India2014-07-02

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar

(2014) 8 SCC 273

Directed police not to automatically arrest under IPC Section 498A (now BNS Section 85) and similar offences punishable with up to 7 years. A checklist under Section 41 CrPC (now BNSS 35) must be recorded. Magistrates must not authorise detention casually.

Supreme Court of India2015-03-24

Shreya Singhal v. Union of India

(2015) 5 SCC 1

Struck down Section 66A of the IT Act as unconstitutionally vague and violative of Article 19(1)(a). Read down Section 79 intermediary safe harbour and clarified Section 69A blocking rules.

Supreme Court of India2018-09-06

Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India

(2018) 10 SCC 1

Decriminalised consensual same-sex conduct between adults by reading down Section 377 IPC. Grounded in Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 and the Puttaswamy privacy judgment.

Supreme Court of India2020-01-10

Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India

(2020) 3 SCC 637

Held that freedom of speech and to carry on business through the internet is protected under Article 19. Any restriction (including internet shutdowns) must satisfy proportionality, be published, and be subject to periodic review.

Supreme Court of India2010-05-05

Selvi v. State of Karnataka

(2010) 7 SCC 263

Held that involuntary administration of narco-analysis, polygraph and brain-mapping tests violates the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) and the right to privacy under Article 21. Consent must be voluntary and informed.

Supreme Court of India1997-12-18

Vineet Narain v. Union of India

(1998) 1 SCC 226

Directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate to function fairly and impartially in corruption cases. Laid down guidelines for the appointment of an independent Central Vigilance Commissioner and the autonomy of investigating agencies.

Supreme Court of India1986-12-20

MC Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak)

AIR 1987 SC 1086

Applied the rule of absolute liability for hazardous industries under Article 21 and Article 32. A person carrying on a hazardous activity owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to ensure that no harm results to anyone.

Supreme Court of India1962-08-21

Vishwanathan v. Abdul Wajid

AIR 1963 SC 1

Discussed res judicata under Section 11 CPC. A matter directly and substantially in issue in a former suit and finally decided operates as res judicata in a subsequent suit between the same parties or their privies.

Supreme Court of India1975-11-07

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain

AIR 1975 SC 2299

Upheld the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution. Parliament can amend the Constitution but cannot alter its basic features such as judicial review, democracy, secularism and the rule of law.

This is general legal information, not legal advice. Please consult a qualified advocate for your specific situation.