Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments
  • Acts

Supreme Court Case Commentaries

Abatement Avoided Where Deceased Vendor’s Estate Is Substantially Represented; Earlier Non‑Abatement Orders Operate as Res Judicata in the Same Appeal

Abatement Avoided Where Deceased Vendor’s Estate Is Substantially Represented; Earlier Non‑Abatement Orders Operate as Res Judicata in the Same Appeal

Date: Jan 12, 2026
Abatement Avoided Where Deceased Vendor’s Estate Is Substantially Represented; Earlier Non‑Abatement Orders Operate as Res Judicata in the Same Appeal 1. Introduction KISHORILAL (D) THR. L.RS v....
Section 439 CrPC Limits: Bail Courts Cannot Mandate Medical Age-Determination in POCSO Cases; Section 94 JJ Act Hierarchy Governs Age Proof at Trial

Section 439 CrPC Limits: Bail Courts Cannot Mandate Medical Age-Determination in POCSO Cases; Section 94 JJ Act Hierarchy Governs Age Proof at Trial

Date: Jan 10, 2026
Section 439 CrPC Limits: Bail Courts Cannot Mandate Medical Age-Determination in POCSO Cases; Section 94 JJ Act Hierarchy Governs Age Proof at Trial 1. Introduction Case: THE State of UTTAR PRADESH...
Preventive Detention Under the Telangana 1986 Act Cannot Substitute Bail Cancellation: “Public Order” Requires Specific Material Beyond Mere NDPS FIRs

Preventive Detention Under the Telangana 1986 Act Cannot Substitute Bail Cancellation: “Public Order” Requires Specific Material Beyond Mere NDPS FIRs

Date: Jan 10, 2026
Preventive Detention Under the Telangana 1986 Act Cannot Substitute Bail Cancellation: “Public Order” Requires Specific Material Beyond Mere NDPS FIRs Case: ROSHINI DEVI v. THE STATE OF TELANGANA...
Amalgamation as Business Realisation: Taxing Stock-in-Trade Share Substitution under Section 28 upon Allotment

Amalgamation as Business Realisation: Taxing Stock-in-Trade Share Substitution under Section 28 upon Allotment

Date: Jan 9, 2026
Amalgamation as Business Realisation: Taxing Stock-in-Trade Share Substitution under Section 28 upon Allotment 1. Introduction M/S Jindal Equipment Leasing Consultancy Services Ltd. v. Commissioner...
Off‑Road Construction Equipment Vehicles Used Only in Enclosed Premises Are Excluded from “Motor Vehicle” and State Road Tax/Registration Regime

Off‑Road Construction Equipment Vehicles Used Only in Enclosed Premises Are Excluded from “Motor Vehicle” and State Road Tax/Registration Regime

Date: Jan 9, 2026
Off‑Road Construction Equipment Vehicles Used Only in Enclosed Premises Are Excluded from “Motor Vehicle” and State Road Tax/Registration Regime Case: ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED v. THE STATE OF GUJARAT...
POCSO Bail Orders Must Reflect Statutory Rigour and Case-Specific Facts; Mechanical Reliance on General Bail Precedents Renders Bail Perverse and Cancelable

POCSO Bail Orders Must Reflect Statutory Rigour and Case-Specific Facts; Mechanical Reliance on General Bail Precedents Renders Bail Perverse and Cancelable

Date: Jan 9, 2026
POCSO Bail Orders Must Reflect Statutory Rigour and Case-Specific Facts; Mechanical Reliance on General Bail Precedents Renders Bail Perverse and Cancelable 1. Introduction In X v. THE STATE OF UTTAR...
“Offence Covered Under Section 447” Includes Section 448: Private Complaints Barred by Section 212(6) and Consequential Transfer of IPC Offences

“Offence Covered Under Section 447” Includes Section 448: Private Complaints Barred by Section 212(6) and Consequential Transfer of IPC Offences

Date: Jan 9, 2026
“Offence Covered Under Section 447” Includes Section 448: Private Complaints Barred by Section 212(6) and Consequential Transfer of IPC Offences Case: YERRAM VIJAY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF TELANGANA...
Distinct Dishonour, Distinct Prosecution: Multiple Section 138 Complaints Maintainable for Separate Cheques Despite Same Underlying Liability (Limits on Section 482 CrPC “Mini-Trial”)

Distinct Dishonour, Distinct Prosecution: Multiple Section 138 Complaints Maintainable for Separate Cheques Despite Same Underlying Liability (Limits on Section 482 CrPC “Mini-Trial”)

Date: Jan 9, 2026
Distinct Dishonour, Distinct Prosecution: Multiple Section 138 Complaints Maintainable for Separate Cheques Despite Same Underlying Liability (Limits on Section 482 CrPC “Mini-Trial”) Case: SUMIT...
Section 482 CrPC: Civil Findings on Title/Validity of Deeds Do Not, By Themselves, Justify Quashing Fraud/Forgery Prosecutions

Section 482 CrPC: Civil Findings on Title/Validity of Deeds Do Not, By Themselves, Justify Quashing Fraud/Forgery Prosecutions

Date: Jan 9, 2026
Section 482 CrPC: Civil Findings on Title/Validity of Deeds Do Not, By Themselves, Justify Quashing Fraud/Forgery Prosecutions 1) Introduction Case: C.S. PRASAD v. C.SATYAKUMAR (2026 INSC 39),...
Continuity of Section 2(s) CrPC “Police Station” Notifications After State Reorganisation: Relocated ACB CIU Retains FIR Jurisdiction

Continuity of Section 2(s) CrPC “Police Station” Notifications After State Reorganisation: Relocated ACB CIU Retains FIR Jurisdiction

Date: Jan 9, 2026
Continuity of Section 2(s) CrPC “Police Station” Notifications After State Reorganisation: Relocated ACB CIU Retains FIR Jurisdiction 1. Introduction These appeals arose from a batch of petitions in...
Admission/Training Does Not Create a Right to Public Appointment: Limits of Legitimate Expectation After Policy and Recruitment-Process Change

Admission/Training Does Not Create a Right to Public Appointment: Limits of Legitimate Expectation After Policy and Recruitment-Process Change

Date: Jan 9, 2026
Admission/Training Does Not Create a Right to Public Appointment: Limits of Legitimate Expectation After Policy and Recruitment-Process Change 1. Introduction STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH v. BHAWANA MISHRA...
Article 54 Limitation Runs from Clear Refusal: Effect of Post-Revocation Ratification Affidavit on Specific Performance

Article 54 Limitation Runs from Clear Refusal: Effect of Post-Revocation Ratification Affidavit on Specific Performance

Date: Jan 8, 2026
Article 54 Limitation Runs from Clear Refusal: Effect of Post-Revocation Ratification Affidavit on Specific Performance 1. Introduction In MUSLIMVEETIL CHALAKKAL AHAMMED HAJI v. SAKEENA BEEVI (2026...
Section 37 Appeals Cannot Re-argue Merits: Appellate Review Is Strictly Co-extensive with Section 34 and Must Defer to the Arbitral Tribunal’s Plausible Contract Interpretation

Section 37 Appeals Cannot Re-argue Merits: Appellate Review Is Strictly Co-extensive with Section 34 and Must Defer to the Arbitral Tribunal’s Plausible Contract Interpretation

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Section 37 Appeals Cannot Re-argue Merits: Appellate Review Is Strictly Co-extensive with Section 34 and Must Defer to the Arbitral Tribunal’s Plausible Contract Interpretation 1. Introduction Jan De...
CLB Cannot Condon Delay in Section 58(3) Appeals Pre-Section 433: Limitation Act Section 5 Principles Inapplicable to Quasi-Judicial Bodies

CLB Cannot Condon Delay in Section 58(3) Appeals Pre-Section 433: Limitation Act Section 5 Principles Inapplicable to Quasi-Judicial Bodies

Date: Jan 7, 2026
CLB Cannot Condon Delay in Section 58(3) Appeals Pre-Section 433: Limitation Act Section 5 Principles Inapplicable to Quasi-Judicial Bodies Introduction Case: THE PROPERTY COMPANY (P) LTD v. ROHINTEN...
Section 9(2) Compliance: “Commencement/Initiation” of Arbitration Means Section 21 Notice-Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing

Section 9(2) Compliance: “Commencement/Initiation” of Arbitration Means Section 21 Notice-Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Section 9(2) Compliance: “Commencement/Initiation” of Arbitration Means Section 21 Notice-Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing Case: REGENTA HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED v. M/S HOTEL GRAND CENTRE POINT AND...
Departmental Exoneration Does Not Quash Parallel Bribery Prosecution Unless Merits Finding Extinguishes the Substratum

Departmental Exoneration Does Not Quash Parallel Bribery Prosecution Unless Merits Finding Extinguishes the Substratum

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Departmental Exoneration Does Not Quash Parallel Bribery Prosecution Unless Merits Finding Extinguishes the Substratum 1. Introduction THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA BAGALKOTE DISTRICT, BAGALKOT v....
Sports-Quota Admission Norms Cannot Be Kept “Elastic” Mid-Stream: Undisclosed Conflict-Driven Policy Change Is Arbitrary and Unsustainable (Divjot Sekhon v. State of Punjab)

Sports-Quota Admission Norms Cannot Be Kept “Elastic” Mid-Stream: Undisclosed Conflict-Driven Policy Change Is Arbitrary and Unsustainable (Divjot Sekhon v. State of Punjab)

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Sports-Quota Admission Norms Cannot Be Kept “Elastic” Mid-Stream: Undisclosed Conflict-Driven Policy Change Is Arbitrary and Unsustainable Case: DIVJOT SEKHON v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS, 2026 INSC...
Pre-condition to Cognizance under Section 142 NI Act: Delay Must Be Condoned Before Taking Cognizance

Pre-condition to Cognizance under Section 142 NI Act: Delay Must Be Condoned Before Taking Cognizance

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Pre-condition to Cognizance under Section 142 NI Act: Delay Must Be Condoned Before Taking Cognizance 1. Introduction S. Nagesh v. Shobha S. Aradhya (2026 INSC 27) concerns the procedural sequencing...
Conspiracy-Based Mass Cheating: Single FIR Permissible; “Same Transaction” to be Assessed at Charge Stage; Other Complaints as Section 161 Statements with Protest-Petition Safeguards

Conspiracy-Based Mass Cheating: Single FIR Permissible; “Same Transaction” to be Assessed at Charge Stage; Other Complaints as Section 161 Statements with Protest-Petition Safeguards

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Conspiracy-Based Mass Cheating: Single FIR Permissible; “Same Transaction” to be Assessed at Charge Stage; Other Complaints as Section 161 Statements with Protest-Petition Safeguards Case: THE STATE...
Mandatory Service of ULC Act Section 10(5) Notice on the Actual Possessor: Paper Vesting Without De Facto Possession Triggers Abatement under the Repeal Act

Mandatory Service of ULC Act Section 10(5) Notice on the Actual Possessor: Paper Vesting Without De Facto Possession Triggers Abatement under the Repeal Act

Date: Jan 7, 2026
Mandatory Service of ULC Act Section 10(5) Notice on the Actual Possessor: Paper Vesting Without De Facto Possession Triggers Abatement under the Repeal Act 1. Introduction Case: Dalsukhbhai...
Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert