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

Private Compromise Cannot Override Statutory Tenancy Protection: Commentary on Communidade of Tivim, Bardez-Goa v. State of Goa (2025 INSC 835)

Private Compromise Cannot Override Statutory Tenancy Protection: Commentary on Communidade of Tivim, Bardez-Goa v. State of Goa (2025 INSC 835)

Date: Jul 14, 2025
Private Compromise Cannot Override Statutory Tenancy Protection: Commentary on Communidade of Tivim, Bardez-Goa v. State of Goa (2025 INSC 835) Introduction The Supreme Court of India, in its...
Reaffirmation of Suo-Motu Senior Designation & Abolition of the 100-Point Grid – A Commentary on Orissa High Court v. Banshidhar Baug (2025)

Reaffirmation of Suo-Motu Senior Designation & Abolition of the 100-Point Grid – A Commentary on Orissa High Court v. Banshidhar Baug (2025)

Date: Jul 14, 2025
Reaffirmation of Suo-Motu Senior Designation & Abolition of the 100-Point Grid – Supreme Court Commentary on Orissa High Court v. Banshidhar Baug, (2025 INSC 839) 1. Introduction Orissa High Court v....
“Res Judicata Cannot Be Tried Through Order VII Rule 11 CPC When Fraud/Fundamental Facts Are Alleged” – Commentary on Pandurangan v. T. Jayarama Chettiar (2025 INSC 825)

“Res Judicata Cannot Be Tried Through Order VII Rule 11 CPC When Fraud/Fundamental Facts Are Alleged” – Commentary on Pandurangan v. T. Jayarama Chettiar (2025 INSC 825)

Date: Jul 14, 2025
“Res Judicata Cannot Be Tried Through Order VII Rule 11 CPC When Fraud/Fundamental Facts Are Alleged” – Commentary on Pandurangan v. T. Jayarama Chettiar (2025 INSC 825) 1. Introduction Pandurangan...
“Notice to Partners is Notice to Firm” – A New Rule on Prosecuting Partnership-Related Cheque Dishonour Cases

“Notice to Partners is Notice to Firm” – A New Rule on Prosecuting Partnership-Related Cheque Dishonour Cases

Date: Jul 14, 2025
“Notice to Partners is Notice to Firm” – Supreme Court Clarifies Criminal Liability In Cheque Dishonour Involving Partnership Firms Introduction In Dhanasingh Prabhu v. Chandrasekar (2025 INSC 831),...
“From Conviction to Clemency” – Supreme Court’s Dual Pronouncement on Article 161 Mercy Jurisdiction and the Evidentiary Status of Call-Detail-Records

“From Conviction to Clemency” – Supreme Court’s Dual Pronouncement on Article 161 Mercy Jurisdiction and the Evidentiary Status of Call-Detail-Records

Date: Jul 14, 2025
“From Conviction to Clemency” – Supreme Court’s Dual Pronouncement on Article 161 Mercy Jurisdiction and the Evidentiary Status of Call-Detail-Records 1. Introduction In Shubha @ Shubhashankar v....
“Doctrine of Flexible Reconstitution”: Supreme Court Reconciles IOCL Policy with Partnership Autonomy

“Doctrine of Flexible Reconstitution”: Supreme Court Reconciles IOCL Policy with Partnership Autonomy

Date: Jul 14, 2025
“Doctrine of Flexible Reconstitution” Supreme Court Clarifies the Inter-play Between IOCL Dealership Guidelines and the Indian Partnership Act 1. Introduction Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. M/s...
Civil Litigation Is No Bar to Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court’s Re-affirmation in Kathyayini v. Sri Sidharth P.S. Reddy (2025)

Civil Litigation Is No Bar to Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court’s Re-affirmation in Kathyayini v. Sri Sidharth P.S. Reddy (2025)

Date: Jul 14, 2025
Civil Litigation Is No Bar to Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court’s Re-affirmation in Kathyayini v. Sri Sidharth P.S. Reddy (2025) Introduction In its reportable judgment dated 14 July 2025, the...
Supreme Court Re-affirms Mandatory Section 65-B Certification & Restraint on Reversing Acquittals – A Comment on Rahil v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2025

Supreme Court Re-affirms Mandatory Section 65-B Certification & Restraint on Reversing Acquittals – A Comment on Rahil v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2025

Date: Jun 26, 2025
Supreme Court Re-affirms Mandatory Section 65-B Certification & Restraint on Reversing Acquittals – A Commentary on Rahil v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2025) INSC 858 1. Introduction The Supreme Court’s...
The “Amlesh Kumar Doctrine” – Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Narco-Analysis, Bail Jurisdiction and the Myth of an Indefeasible Right to the Test

The “Amlesh Kumar Doctrine” – Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Narco-Analysis, Bail Jurisdiction and the Myth of an Indefeasible Right to the Test

Date: Jun 10, 2025
The “Amlesh Kumar Doctrine” – Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Narco-Analysis, Bail Jurisdiction and the Myth of an Indefeasible Right to the Test 1. Introduction Case: Amlesh Kumar v. The State of...
“Single-Head Compensation” in Housing Delay Cases:  Supreme Court Limits Liability to Contractual Interest – Commentary on GMADA v. Anupam Garg (2025 INSC 808)

“Single-Head Compensation” in Housing Delay Cases: Supreme Court Limits Liability to Contractual Interest – Commentary on GMADA v. Anupam Garg (2025 INSC 808)

Date: Jun 8, 2025
“Single-Head Compensation” in Housing Delay Cases: Supreme Court Limits Liability to Contractual Interest – Commentary on GMADA v. Anupam Garg (2025 INSC 808) 1. Introduction The judgment in Greater...
“Cancel Bail, Don’t Detain” – Supreme Court Directs States to Exhaust Ordinary Criminal Remedies before Invoking Preventive Detention (Commentary on Dhanya M v. State of Kerala, 2025 INSC 809)

“Cancel Bail, Don’t Detain” – Supreme Court Directs States to Exhaust Ordinary Criminal Remedies before Invoking Preventive Detention (Commentary on Dhanya M v. State of Kerala, 2025 INSC 809)

Date: Jun 7, 2025
“Cancel Bail, Don’t Detain” – Supreme Court Directs States to Exhaust Ordinary Criminal Remedies before Invoking Preventive Detention Commentary on Dhanya M v. State of Kerala (2025 INSC 809) 1....
“Process, Not Possession” – Supreme Court Clarifies that Delivery of Property Is NOT an Ingredient of Section 387 IPC (M/s Balaji Traders v. State of U.P., 2025)

“Process, Not Possession” – Supreme Court Clarifies that Delivery of Property Is NOT an Ingredient of Section 387 IPC (M/s Balaji Traders v. State of U.P., 2025)

Date: Jun 6, 2025
“Process, Not Possession” – Supreme Court Clarifies that Delivery of Property Is NOT an Ingredient of Section 387 IPC Case Comment on: M/s Balaji Traders v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. — 2025 INSC...
Post-Delivery Penal Charges for Mis-declared Railway Consignments: 
            Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 66, Railways Act, 1989

Post-Delivery Penal Charges for Mis-declared Railway Consignments: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 66, Railways Act, 1989

Date: Jun 5, 2025
Post-Delivery Penal Charges for Mis-declared Railway Consignments: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 66, Railways Act, 1989 1. Introduction Case Name: Union of India v. M/s Kamakhya Transport...
Limitation Re-affirmed & Omnibus Allegations Rebuked: Commentary on Ghanshyam Soni v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 2025 INSC 803

Limitation Re-affirmed & Omnibus Allegations Rebuked: Commentary on Ghanshyam Soni v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 2025 INSC 803

Date: Jun 5, 2025
Limitation Re-affirmed & Omnibus Allegations Rebuked: Commentary on Ghanshyam Soni v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 2025 INSC 803 1. Introduction In Ghanshyam Soni v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)...
“The Trajectory-Consistency Rule” – Supreme Court clarifies limits of relying on post-offence conduct in circumstantial murder cases (Commentary on Vaibhav v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 INSC 800)

“The Trajectory-Consistency Rule” – Supreme Court clarifies limits of relying on post-offence conduct in circumstantial murder cases (Commentary on Vaibhav v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 INSC 800)

Date: Jun 4, 2025
“The Trajectory-Consistency Rule” – Supreme Court clarifies limits of relying on post-offence conduct in circumstantial murder cases (Commentary on Vaibhav v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 INSC 800) 1....
“Deemed Closure & the Proper Authority under Section 25-O” – Comment on Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2025 INSC 801)

“Deemed Closure & the Proper Authority under Section 25-O” – Comment on Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2025 INSC 801)

Date: Jun 4, 2025
“Deemed Closure & the Proper Authority under Section 25-O”: Supreme Court Clarifies Competent Authority and Time-Limits for Industrial Closures 1. Introduction On 4 June 2025 the Supreme Court...
“Void” or “Voidable”? – Supreme Court Re-defines Section 48(e) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act

“Void” or “Voidable”? – Supreme Court Re-defines Section 48(e) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act

Date: Jun 3, 2025
“Void” or “Voidable”? – Supreme Court Re-defines Section 48(e) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1. Introduction Civil Appeal (SLP (C) No. 7728 / 2020) Machhindranath (deceased) through...

        “Transformative Public Use” as an Exception to Mandatory Restoration of Natural Resources:
        A Commentary on Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Pankaj Babulal Kotecha (2025 INSC 792)

“Transformative Public Use” as an Exception to Mandatory Restoration of Natural Resources: A Commentary on Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Pankaj Babulal Kotecha (2025 INSC 792)

Date: May 31, 2025
“Transformative Public Use” as an Exception to Mandatory Restoration of Natural Resources Case Commentary on Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. v. Pankaj Babulal Kotecha & Ors., 2025 INSC...
Re-affirming the Public Trust Doctrine & Procedural Fairness in Industrial Land Allotments – A Detailed Commentary on Kamla Nehru Memorial Trust v. U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (2025)

Re-affirming the Public Trust Doctrine & Procedural Fairness in Industrial Land Allotments – A Detailed Commentary on Kamla Nehru Memorial Trust v. U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (2025)

Date: May 31, 2025
Re-affirming the Public Trust Doctrine & Procedural Fairness in Industrial Land Allotments A Commentary on Kamla Nehru Memorial Trust v. U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (2025 INSC...
“Bridging the Temporal Gap” – Supreme Court Clarifies the Extended Last-Seen Rule with Forensic Corroboration in Chetan v. State of Karnataka

“Bridging the Temporal Gap” – Supreme Court Clarifies the Extended Last-Seen Rule with Forensic Corroboration in Chetan v. State of Karnataka

Date: May 31, 2025
“Bridging the Temporal Gap” – Supreme Court Clarifies the Extended Last-Seen Rule with Forensic Corroboration (Commentary on CHETAN v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, 2025 INSC 793) 1. Introduction Chetan v....
Previous   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