Judgments - Supreme Court of India
The State of Andhra Pradesh Versus M/s Linde India Ltd. (Formerly BOC India Ltd)
Shashank Deo Sudhi Versus Union of India and Ors. - 13/04/2020
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL EXTRAORDINARY JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2020 (D. NO.10816/2020) Shashank Deo Sudhi … Petitioner Versus Union of India and Ors. … Respondents O R D E R I.A. No.48265/2020, Application for Intervention is allowed. Heard Mr. Gopal Shankarnarayan, learned counsel for the intervenor. By I.A. No.48266/2020, the applicant has prayed for modification of the order dated 08.04.2020. Another IA has been filed by one Mr. Bijon Kumar Mishra seeking impleadment and directions to ensure the treatment of COVID-19 infected patients free Full Judgment
P. GOPINATHAN PILLAI VERSUS UNIVERSITY OF KERALA & ORS.
JERRYL BANAIT VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
RAMJIT SINGH KARDAM & ORS. VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ORS.
SHASHANK DEO SUDHI VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The tests relating to COVID-19 whether in approved Government Laboratories or approved private Laboratories shall be free of cost.The respondents shall issue necessary direction in this regard immediately. Tests relating to COVID-19 must be carried out in NABL accredited Labs or any agencies approved by WHO or ICMR. Full Judgment
IN RE: GUIDELINES FOR COURT FUNCTIONING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC
Social distancing guidelines and best public health practices shall be deemed to be lawful. The Supreme Court of India and all High Courts are authorized to adopt measures required to ensure the robust functioning of the judicial system through the use of video conferencing technologies. High Court is authorised to determine the modalities which are suitable to the temporary transition to the use of video conferencing technologies. Quality or audibility of feed shall be communicated during the proceeding or immediately after its conclusion Full Judgment
BHAGWAT SHARAN (DEAD THR.LRS.) Versus PURUSHOTTAM & ORS.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Versus R. THIYAGARAJAN
SAI WARDHA POWER GENERATION LIMITED. Versus THE TATA POWER COMPANY LIMITED DISTRIBUTION & ORS.
NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
RAJA @ AYYAPPAN VERSUS STATE OF TAMIL NADU
Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Versus Rohit Prajapati & Ors.
ALAKH ALOK SRIVASTAVA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA
PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI - 20/03/2020
The alleged torture, if any, in the prison cannot be a ground for judicial review of the executive order passed under Article 72 of the Constitution of India rejecting the mercy petition. When the power is vested in the very high constitutional authority, it must be presumed that the said authority had acted carefully after considering all the aspects of the matter.It cannot be said that His Excellency the President of India did not consider the mercy petition with open mind Full Judgment