AI Overview...
The Latest on Abhishek and Samarth Fight: Key Legal Battles Explained
Recent searches for Abhishek and Samarth fight latest highlight high-profile legal disputes where names like Abhishek (often Abhishek Manu Singhvi or parties) and Samarth (Samarth Sinha, Samarth Sagar, or cases like Samarth Kumar) appear as counsel or litigants in opposing sides. While no single 'street fight' emerges, these point to intense courtroom fights in landmark cases like the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi verdict, PMLA interpretations, NDPS quashings, and more. This post breaks down the core issues, court holdings, and takeaways from these cases, drawing directly from judgments. Note: This is general information based on public judgments and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for personalized guidance.
The Landmark Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi 'Fight': Supreme Court Verdict
The most prominent 'fight' in the results is the decades-long Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute, resolved by the Supreme Court in a historic 2019 judgment (M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Das). Spanning Mughal era to modern India, it pitted Hindu and Muslim claims over 1500 sq yards in Ayodhya. Hindus claimed it as Lord Ram's birthplace; Muslims as Babri Masjid site built by Babur. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
Key Holdings on Title and Possession
- Possessory Title for Hindus: On balance of probabilities, there is clear evidence to indicate that worship by Hindus in outer courtyard continued unimpeded... Their possession of outer courtyard stands established. Hindus proved exclusive possession of outer courtyard via Ram Chabutra worship, despite 1857 wall. Inner courtyard showed pre-1857 Hindu worship, with Muslims failing to prove exclusive possession since 1528. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
- No Joint Possession: While both Hindus and Muslims visited disputed property as worshippers, only distinction was that Hindus visited entire property while Muslims were confined to inner courtyard. Muslims couldn't establish exclusive possession. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
Juristic Personality of Deity
A pivotal issue: Is Lord Ram a juristic person able to sue? The Court affirmed:
- Hindu idols embody pious purposes, recognized as legal persons. Courts in India have held that Hindu idols are legal persons – To be a legal person is to be recognised by law as a subject which embodies rights, entitlements, liabilities and duties. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
- Suit 5 Maintainable: Filed by Deity (Lord Ram) via next friend. No Shebait (manager) existed; Nirmohi Akhara's claim rejected. Suit 5 has been held to be maintainable at behest of first plaintiff (Deity of Lord Ram) who is a juristic person. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
- Shebait Rights: A person claiming to be a de facto Shebait can never set up a claim adverse to that of idol and claim a proprietary interest in Debutter. Pujaris aren't Shebaits. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
Archaeological Evidence (ASI Report)
- Underlying Structure: There is adequate basis... to lead to conclusions that Babri mosque was not constructed on vacant land; excavation indicates presence of an underlying structure below disputed structure... of non-Islamic origin. ASI's expert findings on 10th-century shrine bases were upheld on preponderance of probabilities. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
Final Relief
- Site to Hindus for Ram Temple; 5 acres alternate land to Sunni Waqf Board via Article 142 for complete justice. Dividing land will not subserve interest of either of parties... Land admeasuring 5 acres directed to be allotted. Nirmohi Akhara included in Trust despite non-suit. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
This verdict balanced faith, history, and law, deferring to Hindu belief in site's sanctity: Ram Janmabhumi is undoubtedly of religious significance to Hindus based on faith and belief. M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1
PMLA 'Fights': Money Laundering Offence Clarified
In ongoing battles argued by seniors like Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the Supreme Court clarified Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provisions. Vijay Madanlal Choudhary VS Union of India - 2022 7 Supreme 193
- Standalone Offence: Offence of money-laundering is an independent offence regarding process or activity connected with proceeds of crime... Relevant date is date on which person indulges in process or activity connected with such proceeds of crime. Not tied to scheduled offence date. Vijay Madanlal Choudhary VS Union of India - 2022 7 Supreme 193
- Bail Conditions Upheld: Twin conditions (no hazard to probe/society) valid post-amendment; Section 436A CrPC applies as statutory bail. Vijay Madanlal Choudhary VS Union of India - 2022 7 Supreme 193
- No ECIR Needed: There is no need to formally register ECIR... Non-supply of ECIR... cannot be cited as violation of constitutional right. Vijay Madanlal Choudhary VS Union of India - 2022 7 Supreme 193
Authorities must act on credible evidence, with safeguards like Adjudicating Authority oversight.
NDPS FIR Quashing: Recent High Court 'Fights'
Recent cases feature Samarth references (e.g., Samarth Kumar), denying quashing:
- No Quashing at Threshold: FIR and subsequent proceedings cannot be quashed at this stage... certain CDR available against him – his location also found on spot. 2022 SCC Online SC 2087 followed, distinguishing Tofan Singh. Mohan VS State of M. P. - 2024 Supreme(MP) 177 Mohan, S/o. Sitaram Gurjar vs State of Madhya Pradesh Station House Officer Through Police Station Kukdeshwar Neemuch (Madhya Pradesh) - 2024 Supreme(MP) 757
- Memo Under S.27 Insufficient Alone: Reliance solely on co-accused memo lacks concrete evidence like recovery; CDRs suggest involvement. Mohan, S/o. Sitaram Gurjar vs State of Madhya Pradesh Station House Officer Through Police Station Kukdeshwar Neemuch (Madhya Pradesh) - 2024 Supreme(MP) 757
Courts emphasize pleadings + proof for adverse possession or quashing.
Other Notable Disputes
- Corruption FIR Quashed: In Chhattisgarh case, FIR against ex-officer (Abhishek context?) quashed for no prima facie case, no preliminary inquiry per Charansingh. Politically motivated. Aman Kumar Singh VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2022 Supreme(Chh) 18
- Anticipatory Bail in GST Fraud: Custodial interrogation unnecessary; personal bond granted. Lupita Saluja VS DGGI - 2021 Supreme(Del) 250
- Sports/Admission Quotas: Fairness in evaluations upheld; no arbitrariness. Kevin C. C. Wong VS Delhi University - 2018 Supreme(Del) 383 UNIVERSITY OF DELHI VS ZOYA GILL - 2017 Supreme(Del) 3252
- Tender Disputes: Defer to authority unless irrational. Abhishek M. Singhvi argued. L And T Hydrocarbon Engineering Ltd. VS Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. - 2019 Supreme(Del) 1719
High Court orders show Abhishek/Samarth as counsel opposing, e.g., in transfer stays Gupta Timber Products Private Limited Vs State, development disputes M/S MOHD TAHIR ANSARI TRANSPORT & ANR. VS. M/S SPG GLOBAL LOGISTICS & ANR. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46534.
Key Takeaways from These Legal Fights
- Faith vs. Evidence: Courts defer to genuine beliefs but decide on preponderance (Ayodhya).
- Criminal Probes: FIR quashing rare without strong grounds; CDRs, location key in NDPS/PMLA.
- Juristic Entities: Idols as legal persons protect religious properties.
- Equity in Relief: Article 142 ensures complete justice, like alternate land.
| Case Type | Core Principle | Citation |
|-----------|----------------|----------|
| Ayodhya | Deity's Title | M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Mahant Suresh Das - 2019 8 Supreme 1 |
| PMLA | Independent Offence | Vijay Madanlal Choudhary VS Union of India - 2022 7 Supreme 193 |
| NDPS | No Early Quashing | Mohan VS State of M. P. - 2024 Supreme(MP) 177 |
These rulings shape Hindu law, economic crimes, and procedure. For latest updates, follow SC/HC sites.
Disclaimer: This article summarizes public judgments for educational purposes. Legal outcomes depend on facts; seek professional advice. Laws evolve—verify current status.
Search Results for "The Latest Abhishek & Samarth Court Fight Updates"
2019 8 Supreme 1 • India - Supreme Court
RANJAN GOGOI, S. A. BOBDE, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, ASHOK BHUSHAN, S. ABDUL NAZEER
without a physical manifestation, example of this being worship offered to Sun and Wind – But a Swayambhu is premised on physical ... person claiming to be a de facto Shebait can never set up a claim adverse to that of idol and claim a proprietary interest in Debutter ... (Paras 322, 324, 326, 327, 328, 329, 331, 332 and 333) (S) Hindu Law – Legal Status of Pujari – A#H....
2019 0 Supreme(Del) 1719 • India - Delhi
S.RAVINDRA BHAT, PRATEEK JALAN
Bidders, and Section A-2 of the Bid Evaluation Criteria. ... possess a higher stake in the contract and execute the task of project management. ... Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court, without any order as to costs. ... Abhishek M. Singhvi and Mr. Gourab K. ... Ltd. (2016) 16 SCC 818, the Court was concerned particularly with a dispute relating to the interpretation of tender documents, and ... Bidders are advised to fill #....
1997 0 Supreme(All) 1231 • India - Allahabad
PALOK BASU, R.K.MAHAJAN
Singh either at Allahabad or at Lucknow concerning his latest suspension order, dated 3-11-1995 are intrinsically connected with ... Mehrotra has, however, drawn attention of the Court to the three latest decisions of Honble Supreme Court i. e. ... No. 4353/92 ultimately came up before Honble B. Kumar and Honble A. S. Gill, JJ.
2022 7 Supreme 193 • India - Supreme Court
A. M. KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
the date on which scheduled offence has been committed – Relevant date is date on which person indulges in process or activity connected ... (Paras 176 to 179) Facts of the case: In present batch of petition(s)/appeal(s)/case ... got revived – Observations in Nikesh distinguishing challenge to twin bail condition under PMLA from Kartar Singh v. ... Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Mr. Vikram Chaudhari,....
2022 0 Supreme(Chh) 18 • India - Chhattisgarh
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Fact of the Case: A complaint was filed against the petitioner, a former Principal Secretary to the Government of Chhattisgarh ... The complaint was forwarded to the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) for investigation. ... The petitioner challenged the FIR by filing a writ petition in the High Court. ... It has been further contended that when petitioner's wife came to know that the latest complaint dated 11.10.2019 made by respondent ... 21.10.2019 in WP(S#HL_....
2024 0 Supreme(MP) 177 • India - Madhya Pradesh
SUBODH ABHYANKAR
C., 1973 -- S. 482 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -- Ss. 8/15 and 29 -- Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 420 -- quashing ... A. No. 1273 of 2021 decided on 25.10.2021 (SC) and M. Cr. C. No. 1803 of 2022 decided on 26.9.2022 distinguished. ... distinguished in the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Samarth Kumar (supra), and it has been held that it has ... (supra), but this Court has not considered the order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of #HL....
2024 0 Supreme(MP) 757 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
SUBODH ABHYANKAR
... ... Issues: The core issue was whether a memo under Section 27 can stand alone for conviction. ... (A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8/15 and 29 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 420 - Quashment ... of FIR sought - The petitioner was implicated based on a memo under Section 27, without substantial evidence connecting him to the ... but it (Tofan singh) has been distinguished in the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Samarth #HL_....
2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1023 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
12-15, 21, 32-33, 38-40, 46-48) ... ... (B) Prosecution - Principle of parity - It was asserted that a ... Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel has submitted by referring to the provision of remittances of the Foreign Exchange and Investment ... Jitendra S. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners assisted by Mr. ... Prasad and his son Kamlesh Kumar.
2021 0 Supreme(Del) 250 • India - Delhi
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
: The court found that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required and directed her release on furnishing a ... court decided that custodial interrogation was unnecessary based on the facts presented and directed the petitioner's release on a ... Ltd, M/s Blue Star International Pvt. Ltd, M/s Sun Flame Trading Pvt. Ltd., M/s Blue Evolution Pvt. ... It is not in dispute that the W.P.(C) 10013/2020 and W.P.(C) 10014/2020 and W.P. ... Ltd and M/s White Mo....
2019 0 Supreme(Del) 1719 • India - Delhi
S.RAVINDRA BHAT, PRATEEK JALAN
TENDER - OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION - Clause 14.1, Clause 23.1, Clause 23.2, Section A-2 of Bid Evaluation Criteria - The ... by ONGC and the relevant clauses including Clause 14.1, Clause 23.1, and Clause 23.2 of the Instructions to Bidders, and Section A- ... L&T, part of a consortium, contested the technical qualification of another consortium (ASC) and the acceptance of their bid. ... Abhishek M. Singhvi and Mr. Gourab K. ... Ltd. (2016) 16 SCC 818, the Court was concerned particularly with a #....
2023 0 Supreme(Raj) 1986 • India - Rajasthan
SAMEER JAIN
In this regard, reliance is placed on Apex Court judgments of Abhishek Kumar v. State of Delhi : (2022) 6 SCC 399, Dheeraj Bhadviya v. State of Rajasthan : (2022) 6 SCC 63 and Jarnail Singh v. ... Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the incident in question occurred on 28/29.03.2021, which was an inter-se fight between the accused-applicants and the complainant party, who are relatives and neighbours, on account of long standing land dispute. ... Learned counsel contends that complainant party were the aggressors, who initiated the #HL_....
• India - High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Samarth Sagar, Addl. A.G. Haryana. ... Samarth Sagar, Addl. A.G. Haryana, on instructions from Mr. ... Samarth Sagar, Addl. A.G. Haryana. **** ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. ... Abhishek Sher, Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Health and Engineering Department, Haryana, submits that the order of transfer dated 14.01.2021 transferring the petitioner from Karnal to Kosli (Rewari), shall not be implemented
• India - Allahabad High Court
& 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Samarth Sinha Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. ... Order Date :- 10.8.2021 Abhishek Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Kumar Birla Date: 2021.08.10 15:55:26 IST Reason: Document Owner Location ... Heard Sri Chandra Bhan Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Samarth Sinha, learned counsel for the contesting respondent no. 3 and
• India - Allahabad High Court
& 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Vijay Sinha,Samarth Sinha Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. ... Order Date :- 10.8.2021 Abhishek Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Kumar Birla Date: 2021.08.10 15:55:25 IST Reason: Document Owner Location ... Heard Sri Chandra Bhan Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Samarth Sinha, learned counsel for the contesting respondent no. 3 and
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46534 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Abhishek Kumar, Proxy counsel for Mr. Anilendra Pandey, Advocate versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. ... Samarth Sood, Advocate for R-2/DMRC Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel with Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr. M.S. Akhtar, Advocates for GNCTD/L&B Ms. ... Samarth Sood, Advocate for R-2/DMRC Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel with Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr. M.S. Akhtar, Advocates for R-3 Mr.
Filter by Legal Phrase
