Supreme Court of India

SATWANT SINGH SAWHNEY versus D. RAMARATHNAM, ASSISTANT PASSPORT OFFICER GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI AND OTHERS

Decided: 10 April 1967
Judges listed: K. SUBBA RAO (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)

Citations

Official

[1967] 3 S.C.R. 525 · 1967 INSC 99

Also cited as

AIR 1967 SC 1836 (44 citing judgments)
1967 SCC OnLine SC 21 (3 citing judgments)
MANU/SC/0040/1967 (2 citing judgments)

Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.

Cited by

Cited in 10 other Supreme Court judgments we hold. The 5 most recent:

JUSTICE K. S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 26 September 2018 · bench of 5 judges · cites it at para 81
JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.), AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 24 August 2017 · bench of 9 judges · cites it at para 35
ESSAR STEEL LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 19 April 2016 · bench of 2 judges · cites it at para 13
SURESH NANDA versus C.B.I 24 January 2008 · bench of 2 judges · cites it at para 4 and 1 other paragraph
PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES (PUCL) AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 13 March 2003 · bench of 3 judges

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Unnumbered paragraph¶

In accordance with the opinion of the majority a writ of mandamus will issue directing the respondents to withdraw and cancel the decision contained in their letters dated August 31, 1966, and' $56 SUPllBMB COUllT llBPOllTS [1967) 3 S.C.R, September 20, 1966 and to forbear from taking any steps or proceedings in the enforcement or implementation of the aforesaid decision and further to forbear from withdrawing and depriving the petitioner of his two passports and of his passport facilities. The petitioner will have his costs, R.K.P.S.

pp. 555–556, margin G