Major Verdicts by Supreme Court of India

Since Independence, Indian Judiciary has delivered some landmark judgements and interpreted the existing laws that later became the law in itself, such verdicts are now became very important feature of Indian legislation system. In India’s common law system, judgements are critical for setting a precedent that serves as the foundation for delivering justice.

Major Verdicts by Supreme Court of India

AK Gopalan Case, 1950

• The case relates to the charges of violation of Fundamental Rights to freedom under the Preventive Detention Act. The Supreme Court was approached over the rationality of the act.
• The Supreme Court held that the constitutional rationality of a law cannot be certified by the judiciary and the judiciary has only the ability to authenticate whether the due process of the law has been followed or not.

Champakam Dorairajan Case, 1951

• This case tested the reservations given to backward classes in educational institutes in Tamil Nadu. The first Amendment Act was inserted as Article 15(4) in the Constitution.

Shankari Prasad Case, 1952

• The First Constitutional Amendment Act, providing for reservations, was challenged that it violated the Fundamental Rights itself. The Supreme Court held that the Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution.

Berubari Case, I960

• While ceding a part of Indian Territory to an alien state, the court in an advisory opinion held that such process cannot take place without a Constitutional Amendment to that effect is made.

Golaknath Case, 1967

• The Supreme Court held that Constitutional Amendment cannot be prolonged to infringement of Fundamental Rights.

Keshvananda Bharati Case, 1973

• The Supreme Court put forward the Basic Structure Doctrine and held that certain “Basic features” of the Constitution cannot be amended.

Minerva Mills Case, 1980

• The Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy are corresponding to each other and any law legislated to implement the Directive Principle could not restraint the Fundamental Rights.

Waman Rao Case, 1981

• In this case, the Supreme Court upheld that the basic structure and declared that Article 31 (b) was well within the purview of amending power of the Parliament

Neeraja Chaudhary Case, 1984

• The Supreme Court held that the bonded labour demeans the Right to Life under Article 21 and the Government must enact suitable policies to immediately eliminate the practice of bonded labour.

Shah Bano Case, 1985

• The Supreme Court held that Muslim women also have the right to get maintenance from their husbands after they were divorced.

St. Stephen’s College Case, 1992

• The Supreme Court held that atleast 50% of seats in minority institutions should be held in reserve for non- minority students.

Unnikrishnan Case, 1993

• In this case, the Supreme Court upheld that the Right to Education is also a part of Fundamental Rights as a part of the Right to Life under Article 21.

Indira Sawhney Case, 1993

• In this case, the Supreme Court stated that reservation cannot exceed 50% and presented the term ‘Creamy Layer’.

SR Bommai Case, 1994

• The Supreme Court held that Federalism is a part of Basic Structure and State Governments cannot be randomly dismissed by a Governor of a State. This case laid down the procedures in proving a majority under Article 356.

Chandra Kumar Case, 1997

• In this case, the Supreme Court safeguarded that judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be taken away or restricted.

TMA Pai Case, 2002

• In this case, the Supreme Court held that the right to administer minority educational institution is not absolute and the state can control the institutional affairs in the interest of maintaining healthy educational criterions.

IR Coelho Case, 2006

• In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Governor of a State doesnot enjoy absolute immunity from judicial review and the courts can invalidate any malafide actions of the Governor.

Right to Reject, 2013

• The Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to introduce a ‘None of The Above’ (NOTA) button on electronic voting machines (EVM) and ballot papers which can be used by the voters to reject all the contestants contesting elections in a constituency.

Transgender as “Third Gender”, 2014

• The Supreme Court created a “Third Gender” status for the Transgenders.

National Judicial Appointments Commission, 2015

• In this case, the Supreme Court by a majority upheld the collegium system and struck down the NJAC terming it as unconstitutional in nature.

Re-Opening Dance Bars, 2013

• Eight years after the Maharashtra Government banned dance bars in Mumbai, the Supreme Court on 16th July gave its nod to their re-opening in the city.

Shayara Bano v. Union of India, 2017

• In a path-breaking judgment, by a majority of 3:2, the Supreme Court set aside the practice of ‘talaq-e-biddat’ – triple talaq.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, 2017

• The Nine-Judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously upheld that right to privacy as a fundamental right.

Decriminalisation of Section 377, 2018

• In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court on 6 September 2018 decriminalised homosexuality. The five-judge SC bench's decision to make gay sex legal has restored the LGBTQ community members' faith in the Indian judicial system. While many take a sigh of relief that "they would not be seen as a criminal", Shashi Tharoor feels we all should "savour this victory".
• The Supreme Court decriminalised homosexuality between consenting adults by declaring Section 377, the penal provision which criminalised gay sex, as "manifestly arbitrary".

Reservation in Promotion for SC/ST Government Employees, 2018

• The Supreme Court turned down an appeal to reconsider its own earlier order that had rejected the idea of reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs) or Scheduled Tribes (STs) in government job promotions on September 26, 2018.

Validity of Aadhaar, 2018

• The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Aadhaar on September 26, 2018 and struck down Section 57 of Aadhaar Act. It said, private companies cannot ask for Aadhaar. It won't be mandatory for opening of bank accounts, mobile connections.

Verdict on Adultery, 2018

• In a historic judgement, the Supreme Court quashed adultery as a criminal offence in India. The court underlined that Section 497 treats women as properties of their husbands and is hence manifestly discriminatory. It trashed the central government's defence of Section 497 that it protects the sanctity of marriages.

Sabarimala Verdict, 2018

• The Supreme Court lifted centuries' old prohibition of women between ages 10 and 50 from entering Sabarimala temple in Kerala on Friday. "The practice in Sabarimala temple violates the rights of Hindu women. It has to be in harmony with the Constitution" said Chief Justice of India DipakMisra.

Bhima Koregaon Arrest, 2018

• In a setback for activists, the Supreme Court ordered an extension of the house arrest of activists for four more weeks on September 28, 2018.

Live streaming of Court Hearing, 2018

• The Supreme Court on Wednesday decided to bring its courtroom proceedings under public glare by agreeing to live-streaming of court functioning, paving the way for people to watch the courtroom drama live as it unfolds on September 26, 2018.

SC on Politicians with Criminal Antecedents, 2018

• In its unanimous verdict, a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice Misra on Tuesday left it to Parliament to bar lawmakers facing trial for heinous and grievous offences from contesting elections by enacting a "strong law", while it observed that the criminalisation of politics is a bitter manifest truth and a "termite" to the citadel of democracy.
• Refusing to put a ban on candidates with criminal antecedents from entering the poll fray, the court said the law should also make it mandatory for political parties to revoke the membership of candidates facing serious criminal cases.

Triple Talaq, 2018

• The Supreme Court on August 22, 2017 banned a controversial Islamic practice of instant divorce as arbitrary and unconstitutional, in a landmark verdict for gender justice that will stop Muslim men calling off a marriage on a whim.
• The top court said Triple Talaq violates the fundamental rights of Muslim women as it irrevocably ends marriage without any chance of reconciliation.