Where the Supreme Court covered itself with shame

While legal luminaries will doubtless have many more incidents to recall, the recency effect limits me only to cases I've stumbled across. To avoid any contempt of court action(!), let me just say that this is a critique of the judgements, not of the institution itself which has delivered several landmark verdicts over its lifespam, especially in the last few years. The reason I'm stating this is to show that nobody is infalliable

1. SDM Jabalpur Case:- This was an Emergency era case which dealt with the rights of the Government to subject a person to preventive detention. And contrary to its stand before and after Emergency, the Supreme Court then sided with the Government in curtailing individual liberties.
2. RTI appeal before the Supreme Court:-A petitioner had sought information from the Supreme Court via RTI. The Chief Administrative official of the Supreme Court('Registrar') opposed that, lost the battle before the chief RTI authority(CIC), and then took up the case before the Delhi High Court, fully aware that even if he lost, it would come up before the Supreme Court. The fact that the judges even allowed this to happen, does not reflect well on them.
3. Delhi 'illegal premises' sealing case:-While the Supreme Court took the moral high ground of taking a stance against illegal realty development, that order came as a shocker, and later it was revealed that the sons of the Chief Justice gained substantially in their realty holdings because of the sudden supply constraint. Again, this was a case where appearances mattered, and the least the judge could have done was to have excused himself from the case. 
4. Raj Narain vs State of UP(the election fraud case): The UP HC judge had held Indira Gandhi guilty of misusing government machinery(therefore 'election fraud') and debarred her from contesting elections for 6 years. The following furore partly stoked unrest and Emergency was declared in June, 1975, with Indira Gandhi still the Prime Minister. Yet, the Supreme Court did not seek an independent atmosphere/status quo before reversing the verdict and confirming Indira Gandhi's prime ministership. Without going into the legal merits, it is doubtful how a verdict against the incubent prime minister under Emergency conditions, could have been 'free and fair'.

These are just 4 stray cases in 60yrs, so I guess we should consider ourselves lucky compared to other countries.