The Supreme Court held that a court is not bound to send a disputed signature to a handwriting expert: under Section 72 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 it may compare signatures itself, and an expert's opinion does not bind it. Setting aside a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that called expert opinion on a Will 'essential', it restored the trial court's refusal in an eviction suit (paras 10-14).
The Supreme Court has upheld the acquittal of two men convicted of a double murder, dismissing the State's appeal against the High Court's benefit-of-doubt finding. It held the circumstantial evidence chain was incomplete: no eyewitness, a key witness's delayed disclosure, and recoveries made days after the arrest that appeared stage-managed and artificial.
The Supreme Court dismissed Himachal Pradesh's appeal against a 2014 High Court judgment acquitting a labourer of murdering his wife in 2006. None of the five circumstances relied on (last seen together, suspicious conduct, soil-stained clothes, an extra-judicial confession and recovery of a knife) was proved, and together they formed no complete chain; where two views are possible, the view favouring the accused prevails (paras 7-16).
The Supreme Court has acquitted two men convicted under the NDPS Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the seized substance was charas. The forensic report was discarded because the chain of custody of the samples was broken, including an unexplained five-day gap, and no other admissible evidence identified the substance.
In a claim against the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation over the death of a 25-year-old labourer in an accident on 20.11.1997, the Supreme Court held that the Rajasthan High Court ought not to have reduced the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of Rs 6,11,600 to Rs 3,36,112. It set aside the High Court's order and restored the Tribunal's award (paras 2, 5-8).
The Supreme Court upheld a High Court decree in favour of purchasers of agricultural land at Muktsar, holding that the Dera Bhai Mastan Singh failed to prove either a completed dedication of the land or title by adverse possession (para 43). Revenue entries describing possession "for Dharam-Arth" prove possession, not title, and long possession of permissive origin is not adverse (paras 23, 29-32).
The Supreme Court issued notice on Dilip S. Ghumare's special leave petition against a Bombay High Court order of 01.09.2026. As an interim measure, it provided only that the High Court may proceed with the pending contempt proceedings but may not take a final decision till the next date. The one-page record of proceedings of 10.09.2026 gives no reasons and decides nothing on the merits (paras 1-3).
A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice dismissed Sumit Roy's special leave petition against the Calcutta High Court's order of 03.08.2026 in CRM (A) No. 1748/2026, declining to interfere having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances, and vacated the interim protection earlier granted to him (paras 2-3). The order records no further reasons.
The Supreme Court posted the batch of cases on Exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC and Exception 2 to Section 63 of the BNS, the marital rape exception, for final hearing on 18.11.2026. The Solicitor General stated that the Union's counter affidavit in the lead case may serve as its reply in the connected matters, and nodal counsel were asked to compile the pleadings and judgments (paras 1-4). Nothing was decided on the merits.
The Supreme Court set aside the compulsory retirement under FR 56(j) of an Indian Trade Service officer, ordered on 10.05.2018 within months of his promotion to the Senior Administrative Grade, holding it vitiated by malice in law (paras 24, 49, 65). It awarded ₹9 lakh for loss of reputation and ₹6 lakh costs, full service benefits including notional promotion, and directed that he be given a farewell with full honour (paras 67-69).
Supreme Court permits Himachal Pradesh to withdraw prosecution in the remaining 48 of 63 criminal cases registered against MPs and MLAs over Covid-era dharnas and protests, after the Himachal Pradesh High Court had allowed withdrawal in only 15 of them.
Supreme Court directs three National Green Tribunal members whose tenure was expiring to continue in office until fresh appointments are made, after the NGT Bar Association warned the Tribunal's functioning could otherwise be affected, and asks the Centre to expedite appointments to other vacant tribunal posts.