Landmark court decisions in India substantially change the interpretation of existing law. Such a landmark decision may settle the law in more than one way. In present-day common law legal systems it may do so by:[1][2]

In India, landmark court decisions come most frequently from the Supreme Court of India, which is the highest judicial body in India. High courts of India may also make such decisions, particularly if the Supreme Court chooses not to review the case or if it adopts the holding of the lower court.

Individual rights

Name of the case Year Judgement
Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras[3] 1950 Ban on dissenting media under the Section 9 (1-A) of the Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1949 struck down as unconstitutional.
This in-turn led to formulation of the 1st amendment of the Constitution of India which clarified public order can form grounds for reasonable restrictions of free speech.
Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh[4] 1977 Right to propagate religion does not include the right to convert by force, fraud or allurement.
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum[5] 1985 Upheld the payment of maintenance and alimony to Shah Bano and hence to Muslim women by Muslim Husbands.
The Rajiv Gandhi ministry passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986 which diluted this judgement and restricted the right to maintenance and alimony which was heavily criticized as a move to appease Muslims opposing the judgement.[6][7][8][9][10][11] The Supreme court later through Danial Latifi v. Union of India case and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan upheld the Shah Bano judgement effectively nullifying the Muslim Women Act 1986.
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India[12] 2014 Recognised transgender as 'third gender' in law and affirmed that the fundamental rights granted under the Constitution of India will be equally applicable to them.
ABC v. The State (NCT of Delhi)[13] 2015 Unwed woman belonging to the Christian faith can become a legal guardian of her child without the father's consent.
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India[14] 2015 Struck down restrictions on online speech introduced in Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Justice K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India[15]

or The Right to Privacy verdict

2017 Right to privacy is protected as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India thus overruling ADM Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla.[16]
This judgement thus overruled the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976):[17] A person's right to not be unlawfully detained (i.e. habeas corpus) can be suspended during emergency.
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India[18] 2018 Decriminalisation of acts of Oral sex and Anal sex which effectively decriminalised Homosexual sex.
This judgement thus overruled Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2013):[19] Upheld and reinstated the Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code criminalising Anal sex
This judgement thus overruled Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009):[20] Decriminalization of homosexual acts involving consenting adults throughout India.
Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal[21] 2022 Atypical families and same-sex couples are deserving of equal protection under law and benefits available under social welfare legislation.
Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India or EWS Reservation Case. 2022 The legality of the 103rd Amendment of the Constitution, which provides reservation in educational institutes as well as in jobs for the economically weaker sections, was upheld.
Supriyo v. Union of India 2023 The right to marry is a statutory right, not a constitutional right. Therefore, only Parliament can recognize the marriage between non-heterosexual couples.

Criminal law

Name of the case Year Judgement
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[22] 1978 A 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable.

A law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of the Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

This judgement thus overruled A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)[23] Court upheld the validity of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, with the exception of Section 14, which restricted disclosure of the grounds of detention ,which was deemed unconstitutional.
Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan[24] 1997 Establishment of the Vishakha Guidelines to handle sexual harassments of women at workplace until sufficient legislature is implemented for the purpose.
This ruling was superseded by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013
Om Prakash v. State of Uttar Pradesh[25] 2006 A person is not convictable under Section 376 2e (Raping a pregnant women) if he had certain knowledge of the fact that the victim is pregnant. The knowledge of the fact must be proven to certainty and not possibility. Consequently, in this case, the accused was sentenced under Section 376 (1), and was sentenced to milder punishment.
Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar[26]

or The Arnesh Kumar Guidelines

2014 Arrests should be an exception, in cases where the punishment is less than seven years of imprisonment.[27]

Constitutional jurisprudence

The Supreme Court of India, which is the highest judicial body in India, has decided many leading cases of Constitutional jurisprudence, establishing Constitution Benches for hearing the same. Given below are a list of some leading cases.

Name of case Year Judgement
State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan[28] 1951 Struck down the Communal G.O. of 1927 by the Madras government rejecting caste-based reservations in government jobs and college seats.
This in-turn led to formulation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution which clarified that right to equality does not bar the enactment of laws which provide "special consideration" for weaker sections of society.
Golaknath v. State Of Punjab[29] 1967 Struck down Parliament's power to amend all parts of the Constitution, including Part III related to Fundamental Rights. The judgement left Parliament with no power to curtail Fundamental Rights.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala[30] 1973 Formally outlined and adopted the Basic structure doctrine.
Minerva Mills v. Union of India[31] 1980 Added clarifications about the Basic Structure doctrine. Court ruled that the power of the parliament to amend the constitution is limited by the constitution. Hence the parliament cannot exercise this limited power to grant itself an unlimited power.
Olga Tellis Vs. BMC[32] 1985 The right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to livelihood.
Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka[33] 1992 Established right to education as an integral part of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21.
Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India[34] 1992 Upheld that caste was an acceptable indicator of backwardness.
S. R. Bommai v. Union of India[35] 1994 Court discussed at length provisions of Article 356 of the Constitution of India (President's Rule) and related issues. This helped put an end to the arbitrary impositions seen until then.
Sarla Mudgal, & others. v. Union of India[36] 1995 Principles against the practice of solemnizing second marriage by conversion to Islam, with first marriage not being dissolved. It highlighted the need for a uniform civil code.
Three Judges Cases
1981 S.P. Gupta v. Union of India[37]

Established the Collegium system of the Indian Judicial System.

1993 Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India[38]

Struck down the 99th Amendment of the Constitution of India and the proposal of the National Judicial Appointments Commission.

1998 In re Special reference 1[39]

Reply by the Chief Justice of India to the questions raised by President of India K. R. Narayanan regarding the Collegium system.

M. C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath[40] 1996 Established that the Public trust doctrine applied in India.
Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India[41] 2021 Rejected appeals to provide relief to Illegal Rohingya immigrants from deportation.

Policy and Administration

Name of the case Year Judgement
T. S. R. Subramanian v. Union of India[42] 2013 Officers of the IAS, other All India Services and other civil servants are not bound to follow oral directives, as they "undermine credibility".
Lily Thomas v. Union of India along with Lok Prahari v. Union of India[43] 2013 MP, MLA/MLC who is convicted of a crime and given a minimum of two years', loses membership of the House with immediate effect.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India[44] 2018 Chief Minister and not the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi the executive head of the National Capital Territory (NCT) government
This overruled the Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India in the Delhi High Court (2016) : The Lt Governor of Delhi exercised complete control of all matters regarding National Capital Territory of Delhi.

Established new tests and regulations

Name of the case Year Judgement
RG Anand v. Deluxe Films[45] 1978 Copyright protection does not extend to mere ideas. Where theme is same but presented differently, there can be no question of infringement.
Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib[46] 1981 Laid down a test to determine whether an individual, corporation, or society was an instrumentality or agency of the government.
Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.[47] 2004 The Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999 is applicable to the regulation of domain names.
Swasthya Adhikar Manch v. Union of India[48] 2013 Laid down the regulations regarding Clinical trials held by Contract research organizations to protect participants.

See also

References

  1. ^ Meaning of leading case in the English Dictionary
  2. ^ A. W. B. Simpson, Leading Cases in the Common Law, Clarendon Press, 1996 [1]
  3. ^ Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras [1950] INSC 16 (26 May 1950), S.C. (India)
  4. ^ Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh [1977] INSC 13 (17 January 1977), S.C. (India)
  5. ^ Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum [1985] INSC 99 (23 April 1985), S.C. (India)
  6. ^ Anand, Utkarsh. "From Shah Bano to Salma". The Indian Express. Retrieved 3 May 2014.
  7. ^ Rashid Faisal, Malik. "The ghost of Shah Bano". Business & Economy. Retrieved 3 May 2014.
  8. ^ Ali, Subhashini. "1985: Shah Bano case". India Today. Retrieved 3 May 2014.
  9. ^ "Cementing of dynastic democracy". The Sunday Guardian. 29 April 2012. Retrieved 1 May 2014.
  10. ^ "What If Rajiv Hadn't Caved In To The Zealots?". Outlook India. 23 August 2004. Retrieved 1 May 2014.
  11. ^ Makarand R Paranjape (2009). Altered Destinations: Self, Society, and Nation in India. Anthem Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-1-84331-797-5.
  12. ^ National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India [2014] INSC 282 (15 April 2014), S.C. (India)
  13. ^ ABC v. The State (NCT of Delhi) [2015] INSC 476 (6 July 2015), S.C. (India)
  14. ^ Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [2015] INSC 251 (24 March 2015), S.C. (India)
  15. ^ Justice K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India [2017] INSC 689 (24 August 2017), S.C. (India)
  16. ^ "Supreme Court rights old judicial wrongs in landmark Right to Privacy verdict, shows State its rightful place". Firstpost. 29 August 2017. Retrieved 31 December 2021.
  17. ^ ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla [1976] AIR 1207 (28 April 1976), S.C. (India)
  18. ^ Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India [2018] INSC 746 (6 June 2018), S.C. (India)
  19. ^ Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation [2013] INSC 1096 (11 December 2013), S.C. (India)
  20. ^ Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi [2009] INSC 2450 (2 July 2009), S.C. (India)
  21. ^ Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal [2022] INSC 802 (16 August 2022), S.C. (India)
  22. ^ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [1978] INSC 16 (25 January 1978), S.C. (India)
  23. ^ A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras [1950] INSC 14 (19 May 1950), S.C. (India)
  24. ^ Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan [1997] INSC 665 (13 August 1997), S.C. (India)
  25. ^ Om Prakash v. State of Uttar Pradesh [2006] INSC 297 (11 May 2006), S.C. (India)
  26. ^ Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar [2014] INSC 495 (2 July 2014), S.C. (India)
  27. ^ James, Sebin (21 November 2021). "Police Officials To Face Action If Arrest Procedure Under Sec 41A CrPC & 'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines Are Violated : Telangana High Court". www.livelaw.in. Retrieved 21 November 2021.
  28. ^ State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan [1951] INSC 25 (9 April 1951), S.C. (India)
  29. ^ Golaknath v. State Of Punjab [1967] INSC 45 (27 February 1967), S.C. (India)
  30. ^ Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala [1973] INSC 258 (24 April 1973), S.C. (India)
  31. ^ Minerva Mills v. Union of India [1980] INSC 141 (31 July 1980), S.C. (India)
  32. ^ Olga Tellis Vs. BMC [1985] INSC 155 (10 July 1985), S.C. (India)
  33. ^ Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka [1992] INSC 184 (30 July 1992), S.C. (India)
  34. ^ Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India [1992] AIR 1993 SC 477 (16 December 1992), S.C. (India)
  35. ^ S. R. Bommai v. Union of India [1994] INSC 173 (11 March 1994), S.C. (India)
  36. ^ Sarla Mudgal, & others. v. Union of India [1995] INSC 269 (10 May 1995), S.C. (India)
  37. ^ S.P. Gupta v. Union of India [1981] AIR 1982 SC 149 (30 December 1981), S.C. (India)
  38. ^ Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India [1993] 4 SCC 441 (6 October 1993), S.C. (India)
  39. ^ In re Special reference 1 [1998] AIR 1999 SC 1 (28 October 1998), S.C. (India)
  40. ^ M. C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath [1996] INSC 1608 (13 December 1996), S.C. (India)
  41. ^ Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India [2021] INSC 127 (8 April 2021), S.C. (India)
  42. ^ T. S. R. Subramanian v. Union of India [2013] INSC 1003 (31 October 2013), S.C. (India)
  43. ^ Lily Thomas v. Union of India [2013] INSC 674 (10 July 2013), S.C. (India)
  44. ^ Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India [2018] INSC 541 (4 July 2018), S.C. (India)
  45. ^ RG Anand v. Deluxe Films [1978] INSC 140 (18 August 1978), S.C. (India)
  46. ^ Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib [1980] INSC 219 (13 November 1980), S.C. (India)
  47. ^ Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. [2004] 3 AWC 2366 SC (6 May 2004), S.C. (India)
  48. ^ Swasthya Adhikar Manch v. Union of India [1978] INSC 140 (18 August 1978), S.C. (India)
Categories