Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

5,133 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 3,201–3,400.

JAYENDRA VISHNU THAKURversusSTATE OF MAHARAHSTRA AND ANOTHER

2009 INSC 78711 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Jayendra Vishnu Thakur was charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) for the murder of Suresh Narsinh Dube. He was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the CrPC, later arrested several times, and the prosecution sought to record the testimony of ten witnesses in his abs

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2006 INSC 31711 May 2006Dismissed

The appellant Om Prakash was convicted of raping a married woman (the prosecutrix) in the veranda of a Zila Parishad near a court, after having come to the premises to help her husband obtain bail. The victim’s testimony, corroborated by an eye‑witness (her brother‑in‑law) and medical examination, led the trial court t

RAM BIRAJI DEVI AND ANR.versusUMESH KUMAR SINGH AND ANR.

2006 INSC 31811 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, Umesh Kumar Singh, alleged that the appellants, Ram Biraji Devi and another, accepted part payment for a plot of land but later refused to transfer it, leading him to file a criminal complaint under IPC sections 406, 419, 420 and 120B. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences, and the ap

HARDEO SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2000 INSC 31811 May 2000Dismissed

Hardeo Singh, a contractor, obtained overdraft facilities totalling Rs 21.5 lakh from the Birpur branch of Central Bank of India, facilities that were beyond the authorised limit of the branch manager, S.K. Roy, who was alleged to habitually receive illegal gratification from a third party. Although the FIR named only

REGISTRAR OF COMPANIESversusRAJSHREE SUGAR AND CHEMICALS LTD. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 31611 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Registrar of Companies (appellant) filed a criminal complaint against Rajshree Sugar and Chemicals Ltd. and others (respondents) alleging default in transferring share certificates in violation of Section 113 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint on the ground that it was

STATE THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI/SIT ETC.versusNALINI AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 23511 May 1999Disposed off

The case concerns the assassination of former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi by a human bomb at Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, orchestrated by the LTTE. The Supreme Court heard appeals from 26 accused convicted by a Designated Court under TADA and IPC, along with a death reference. The Court held that the prosecuti

JAI KUMARversusSTATE OF M.P.

1999 INSC 23611 May 1999Dismissed

Jai Kumar was convicted for the brutal murder of his pregnant sister‑in‑law and his eight‑year‑old niece, whom he killed after attempting to rape the former and then dismembering and displaying the bodies. The Sessions Court sentenced him to death under IPC 302 (with a concurrent seven‑year term under IPC 201), a sente

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusADIMURTHY ALIAS B. MOORTHY

1983 INSC 6711 May 1983Appeal(s) allowed

A supervisor of the Karnataka Electricity Board discovered that the respondent had tampered with the electric meter to avoid recording consumption and lodged a complaint with the police. The trial magistrate acquitted the respondent, holding that the supervisor was not authorized under section 50 of the Indian Electric

SURENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2023 INSC 35411 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The FIR dated 01.12.2010 named five persons as perpetrators of a lathi‑blow assault that resulted in the death of Bhawani Singh. Although the charge‑sheet initially named only two accused, the remaining three were later added and tried separately under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The High Court acquitted the respondent Vijendr

JAHIR HAKversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2022 INSC 41211 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Jahir Hak was arrested in May 2014 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 for a range of serious offences and has been in custody for nearly eight years as an under‑trial prisoner. The High Court rejected his application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prompting an appeal to

JEETU KHATIKversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2022 INSC 41411 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jeetu Khatik, was convicted by a trial court for kidnapping a nine‑year‑old girl and outraging her modesty, under IPC sections 363 and 354 and POCSO Act section 8, and was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment to run concurrently. He applied for suspension of the execution of his sentence during the pen

ATMA RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2019 INSC 51611 April 2019Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of multiple murders and sentenced to death. The trial court recorded the statements of twelve prosecution witnesses without the accused being present, violating Section 273 of the CrPC. The High Court set aside the conviction and ordered a de novo examination of those witnesses in the pres

ROOPENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF TRIPURA & ANR.

2017 INSC 33611 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Roopendra Singh was acquitted of offences under Sections 342, 376(2)(b) and 506 IPC. The victim, the widow of the deceased, filed a criminal appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC, which the Gauhati High Court admitted without requiring leave under Section 378(3). The State challenged this, citing the Supreme

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusRAMANAND

2017 INSC 33411 April 2017Disposed off

The respondent Ramanand was charged with the deaths of his wife Anita and daughter Ekta, alleged to be caused by strangulation with the bodies later set on fire. Post‑mortem reports established that death resulted from asphyxia due to strangulation and that the burns were post‑mortem, contradicting the initial claim of

K.S. JOSEPHversusPHILIPS CARBON BLACK LTD. & ANR.

2016 INSC 117511 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K.S. Joseph, was charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing bounced cheques. He challenged the magistrate's order of cognizance and issuance of summons on three grounds: the alleged non‑compliance with Section 200 of the CrPC requiring solemn affirmation, the delay of 62‑63 d

DHARAM DEO YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

2014 INSC 26511 April 2014Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Dharam Deo Yadav, was convicted for the murder of a New Zealand tourist, Diana Clare Routley, based largely on circumstantial evidence, including eyewitnesses who saw the accused with the victim, the accused's confession leading police to a skeleton recovered from his house, and DNA testing that matched

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusMANOJ KUMAR

2014 INSC 26611 April 2014Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the Rajasthan High Court’s judgment that acquitted two accused (Hemant Kumar and Manoj Kumar) and convicted Raju (Raj Kumar) for the death of Anirudh Mishra arising out of a property dispute. The accused claimed the right of private defence. The Supreme Court examined whether the

RAM PAL @ BUNDAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 24411 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code for the rape and murder of a young woman named Devi. The prosecution's case was built on circumstantial evidence, including the appellant's presence at the crime scene, his flight from the village, medical findings of sexual intercourse and

TEJINDER SINGH @ KAKAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 24511 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a gang‑rape and murder case where an FIR dated 25‑05‑2000 led to the conviction of six accused under sections 302, 376(2)(g), 201, 404 and 506 IPC. The trial court and the Punjab‑Haryana High Court relied heavily on the testimonies of witnesses PW‑8, PW‑9 and PW‑7, the latter providing an ext

SHABIR AHMED TELIversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

2013 INSC 24111 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Shabir Ahmed Teli, was convicted of murder under section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code for shooting his neighbour, Gani Shah, allegedly because Shah refused to give his daughter in marriage to the appellant. The trial and High Courts upheld the conviction despite a slow, shoddy police investigation that o

MOHAN LAL & ANRversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 24611 April 2013Dismissed

The appellants, teachers including Mohan Lal, were convicted for gang rape and kidnapping of a minor student under Sections 376(2)(g) and 366 IPC and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment. The Supreme Court examined whether the fiduciary relationship between teachers and a student attracted Section 376(2)(b) an

RAM DEO PRASADversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 23811 April 2013Case Partly allowed

Ram Deo Prasad was convicted under IPC sections 376 and 302 for raping and causing the death of his 4‑year‑old daughter, Laila Khatoon. The prosecution relied on witness statements, a post‑mortem report and the fact that the accused was seen carrying the child after the alleged abuse. The Court held that the first part

KULVINDER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 29011 April 2011Dismissed

Kulvinder Singh and Jasvinder Singh were convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the killing of Amardeep. The prosecution relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence: a motive arising from a prior quarrel, the accused’s presence near the victim before the crime, witnesses hearing shrieks and seeing the

KULDIP YADAV & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 28611 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from two FIRs (11/97 and 12/97) lodged on 28‑29 April 1997 concerning a violent incident in which a man named Suresh Yadav died and several others were injured. Eleven accused were charged under IPC sections 302, 324 and 149 and were convicted by the trial court, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On

SUNITA KUMARI KASHYAPversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2011 INSC 29111 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-wife alleged that her husband and in‑laws subjected her to dowry‑related cruelty and forced her to leave the matrimonial home in Ranchi and return to her parental home in Gaya. She filed an FIR in Gaya under IPC sections 498A, 406 r/w 34 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The High Court quashed t

MAHABIRversusTHE STATE OF DELHI

2008 INSC 48611 April 2008Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two appeals arising from convictions for robbery and murder under Sections 394/34 and 302/34 IPC. The key issue was whether the refusal of the accused to participate in a test identification parade (TIP) and the fact that the accused had already been shown to the eyewitness rendered the ident

SONA BALA BORA AND ORS.versusJYOTIRINDRA BHATACHARJEE

2005 INSC 19711 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The widowed appellant Sona Bala Bora and her children claimed that their father‑in‑law Bhogirath Bora, who had sold three bungalows to the respondent Jyotirindra Bhatachary, was of unsound mind when he executed the sale deed and that a prior criminal‑case compromise required him to gift one bungalow to the first appell

NIRANJAN PATNAIKversusSASHIBHUSAN KAR & ANR.

1986 INSC 7311 April 1986Appeal(s) allowed

N. Patnaik, a mine licensee, was a prosecution witness in a case where the senior mining officer was convicted for accepting a bribe under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The Orissa High Court set aside the conviction but harshly described Patnaik and the manager as bribe‑givers and accomplices, even suggesting

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusRAJKUMAR YADAV

2026 INSC 22511 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Rajkumar Yadav applied for the post of constable (driver) in the Madhya Pradesh Police but was rejected by the screening committee because he had been involved in offences of kidnapping, abduction and rape of a minor girl, and his acquittal by the trial court was only on the basis of benefit of doubt, not an honourable

SANJAY KUMAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2026 INSC 22311 March 2026Dismissed

The case involved the alleged arson and murder of an elderly couple whose shanty was set ablaze, resulting in the death of the husband and later his wife. The prosecution alleged that the younger son and his wife committed the crime, relying primarily on several dying declarations, motive stemming from a property dispu

SHAHID ALIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 19111 March 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Shahid Ali, fired a country-made pistol during a celebratory firing at a marriage ceremony on 17 March 2016, striking the deceased Ishfaq Ali in the neck and causing his immediate death. The trial court and the High Court convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder, along wi

BUDH SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2013 INSC 14411 March 2013Dismissed

Budh Singh was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of Section 32A of the NDPS Act, which bars any remission of sentence for convicts

GAMBHIRSINH R. DEKAREversusFALGUNBHAI CHIMANBHAI PATEL AND ANR.

2013 INSC 15011 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Gambhirsinh R. Dekare, a Taluka Mamlatdar, complained that the Gujarati daily "Sandesh" published a defamatory news item alleging his illicit relationship with a doctor's wife. The complaint specifically alleged that the Editor (Falgunbhai Patel) and the Resident Editor (Navinbhai Chauhan) deliberately published the st

DIVINE RETREAT CENTREversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2008 INSC 34111 March 2008Case Allowed

A female remand prisoner alleged sexual exploitation by the head of Divine Retreat Centre and complained of police bias. The High Court, acting suo motu on a petition addressed to a single judge and an anonymous letter, ordered the withdrawal of the police investigation of the rape case and constituted a Special Invest

BOLIN CHETIAversusJOGADISH BHUYAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 13611 March 2005

Bolin Chetia, a losing candidate in the Assam Legislative Assembly election, appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 after his election petition was dismissed by the High Court. The Court considered whether a statutory first appeal of right must automatically be ad

IQBAL SINGH MARWAHversusMEENAKSHI ETC.

2005 INSC 12911 March 2005Dismissed

The appellant filed a probate suit seeking probate of a will, which the respondents alleged was forged and filed a criminal complaint under various IPC sections. The trial court dismissed the complaint invoking the bar under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). On revision, the Sessions Court

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS.versusACHARYA JAGADISHWARANANDA AVADHUTA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 15811 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Ananda Marga sect's performance of the Tandava dance in public processions is an essential or integral part of its religion protected by Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The sect, founded in 1955, introduced the dance in 1966 and later prescribed it in the 1986 edition of i

CUSTOMS, NEW DELHIversusAHMADALIEVA NODIRA

2004 INSC 15911 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Customs detained an Uzbek national who was found carrying a large quantity of Diazepam tablets and she admitted the possession in a statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The Special Court denied bail, but the Delhi High Court granted bail, holding that the prosecution had not produced material showing the tablets

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusPRIYA SHARAN MAHARAJ AND ORS.

1997 INSC 25611 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed the Bombay High Court’s order quashing the charge of rape against spiritual teacher Priya Sharan Maharaj and others. The High Court had discharged the accused on the basis that the accused was a saintly man and that the victims’ delayed complaints and lack of external injuries rendered

KARTAR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1994 INSC 11211 March 1994Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions and appeals challenging the constitutional validity of the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act, 1984, the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985, and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA), along with a c

STATE OF U.P.versusLAXMI BRAHMAN & ANR.

1983 INSC 2211 March 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Laxmi Brahman and Naval Garg, were arrested for murder (IPC s.302) and surrendered before a magistrate on 2 November 1974. The investigating officer failed to file the charge‑sheet within the 60‑day limit prescribed by the then Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C., and the respondents did not apply for bail u

OM PRAKASH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1983 INSC 2411 March 1983Dismissed

The case involved the murder and dacoity of village Pradhan Mauji Lal. The prosecution alleged that nine accused entered the house at night, assaulted the deceased and his family, and looted property. The key issues were whether the first information report (FIR) was ante‑timed and whether Section 157 of the CrPC requi

SUMAN MISHRA & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 20311 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a husband and his in‑laws, sought to quash a FIR and charge‑sheet filed after the husband filed a divorce suit, alleging that the FIR was a retaliatory, vexatious measure. The FIR originally alleged rape under Section 376 IPC, but the charge‑sheet omitted that offence and no protest petition was filed a

UPENDRA CHOUDHURYversusBULANDSHAHAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2021 INSC 7711 February 2021Disposed off

The petitioner, a single home buyer, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking cancellation of agreements, refund of monies, or completion of the Sushant Megapolis real estate project, along with directions for a monitoring committee, forensic audit, and investigations by various agencies. The

PRAVAT CHANDRA MOHANTYversusTHE STATE OF ODISHA & ANR.

2021 INSC 8011 February 2021Case Partly allowed

Two police officers, the in‑charge of Purighat Police Station and a senior inspector, mercilessly beat Kasinath Naik in the police station premises on 4‑5 May 1985, causing injuries that led to his death that night. The trial court convicted them under Sections 304(Part II), 324, 342, 323, 471 and related provisions; t

THE STATE OF MEGHALAYAversusMELVIN SOHLANGPIAW

2020 INSC 17111 February 2020Disposed off

The respondent, a member of the Khasi Scheduled Tribe, was charged with murder and concealment of dead body under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC and was initially ordered to stand trial before the Sessions Court. He filed a petition seeking transfer of the case to the District Council Court of the Khasi Hills Autonomo

VARINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2019 INSC 17011 February 2019Dismissed

Varinder Kumar was seized on his scooter with two gunny bags containing charas. The trial court acquitted him, citing non‑production of the seizure seal and alleged violations of CrPC s.100(4) and NDNDPS Act ss.50, 52, 57. The Himachal High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting him under s.20(ii)(c) NDPS and imposin

TEKAN ALIAS TEKRAMversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2016 INSC 15711 February 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Tekan alias Tekram, was convicted under Section 376 IPC for raping a blind, illiterate girl after promising marriage. The trial and High Court upheld the conviction, finding the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant appealed, challenging both the conviction and the sentence of s

BHIM SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF UTIARAKHAND

2015 INSC 10711 February 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the death of Prema Devi, who died within five months of marriage with extensive burn injuries and traces of poison. The prosecution alleged that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband Bhim Singh and his brothers in connection with dowry demands, invoking Sections 304‑B of

DASIN BAI@ SHANTI BAIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2015 INSC 10511 February 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Dasin Bai, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for setting the deceased, Raju Rajak, on fire after pouring kerosene on him. The prosecution relied on the victim's oral dying declaration recorded in hospital, which was corroborated by two eyewitnesses present at the time. The defence argued that

SONU GUPTAversusDEEPAK GUPTA & ORS.

2015 INSC 10411 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sonu Gupta, alleged that a withdrawn dowry harassment complaint was tampered with and a photocopy was used to register FIR No.73/2002 against her husband and his relatives, facilitating their anticipatory bail. She filed a criminal complaint in 2010 claiming forgery of the FIR. The Judicial Magistrate, a

VIJAYANDER KUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2014 INSC 8911 February 2014Dismissed

The appellants, directors of a textile firm, were accused by a supplier (informant) of fraudulently transferring company assets and issuing post‑dated cheques that later bounced, leading to an FIR under Sections 420 and 120‑B IPC. The police concluded the matter was civil, but the magistrate rejected this view and took

RAJENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2013 INSC 8911 February 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Rajendra Singh, a tailor, was charged under s.302 IPC for murdering Kishan Singh Rana by repeatedly stabbing him with a pair of scissors after a dispute over unstitched cloth. The trial court acquitted him, citing discrepancies in the eye‑witness statements of Makhan Singh (PW‑2) and Deepa (PW‑3). The Hi

JARNAIL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2011 INSC 11911 February 2011Dismissed

The appellant was apprehended while carrying a bag that contained 1.75 kg of opium and was convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act. He challenged the conviction on several grounds, including non‑compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, the admissibility of his consent statement under Section 25 of the Evidence Ac

SATYAVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 9611 February 2010Dismissed

Satyavir Singh, armed with his brother's licensed double‑barrel gun, fired two shots at Dharam Prakash, the brother of an informant, injuring him. The trial court convicted Singh under Section 307 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act; the first appellate court acquitted him on the basis that the firing was accidental, re

STATE OF U.P.versusGAJADHAR SINGH AND ORS.

2009 INSC 14411 February 2009Dismissed

During a village election in April 1995, Gajadhar Singh and his associates created a disturbance. While two accused held the hand of polling agent Chandra Bhan Singh, Gajadhar fired a concealed country‑made pistol, killing the victim and injuring three others. The trial court convicted all seven accused under Sections

ELIAMMA & ANR.versusST ATE OF KARNAT AKA

2009 INSC 13911 February 2009Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of M.T. George and for concealing the offence, under Sections 304 Part II and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC. They appealed the conviction and alternatively claimed that they were entitled to release on probation under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.versusDHANENDRA SHRIRAM BHURLE ETC.

2009 INSC 14011 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed against a Nagpur Bench order of the Bombay High Court that granted bail to the accused Dhanendra Shriram Bhurle and others, who were charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the Arms Act, 1959 and the Indian Penal Code. The High Court had concluded, without detaile

M. GOPALAKRISHNANversusSTATE BY ADDL. S.P. CBI, B.S. & F.C., BANGALORE

2009 INSC 14111 February 2009Dismissed

The CBI filed a case under Sections 120B and 420 of the IPC and Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act against M. Gopalakrishnan, then Executive Director, Chairman and Managing Director of Indian Bank. Gopalakrishnan sought to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)versusD. A. M. PRABHU AND ANR.

2009 INSC 14311 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The State of NCT of Delhi filed a criminal appeal against D.A.M. Prabhu and others for allegedly violating Clause 17 of the Textile (Control) Order, 1986 by declaring incorrect fibre composition, thereby contravening an order made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The trial court and a special jud

STATE OF PUNJABversusPRITAM CHAND AND ORS.

2009 INSC 14511 February 2009Disposed off

The State of Punjab appealed the acquittal of partners of Jagdamba Rice Mills who were charged under Section 406 IPC for criminal breach of trust. The trial court and the High Court dismissed the case on the ground that the dispute was merely a civil breach of contract and that the arbitration award settled the matter.

STATE OF KERALAversusPUTTUMANA ILLATH JATHAVEDAN NAMBOODIRI ETC.

1999 INSC 5711 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, an employee of Western India Plywoods, was convicted by a Judicial Magistrate and affirmed by an Additional Sessions Judge for offences under IPC sections 408, 468 and 477A, involving misappropriation of empty barrels and forgery of documents. He filed a revision before the Kerala High Court, which set asi

RAJENDRA KUMAR SITARAM PANDE ETC.versusUTTAM AND ANOTHER

1999 INSC 5811 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant alleged that the accused had made a false complaint to a Treasury Officer, accusing him of being drunk and abusive, thereby invoking criminal defamation provisions. The magistrate, after directing an inquiry under Section 202 of the CrPC, issued summons against the accused. The Sessions Judge, in revisi

DR. RAMESH CHANDRA TYAGIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 6711 February 1994Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. R.C. Tyagi, a distinguished scientist, was transferred from Delhi to the Institute of Armament Technology, Pune in 1977 by an order issued by the Director General, although the Secretary of the department was the only authority empowered to transfer him. Tyagi challenged the transfer as malicious and unauthorized;

AKHILESH PRASADversusUNION TERRITORY OF MIZORAM

1981 INSC 2911 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Akhlsh Prasad, a member of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), was charged under IPC sections 307, 326 and 324 for allegedly firing on two persons on 30 May 1978. He sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that the offences were committed while he was acting in the discharge of his official duty as a member of th

DINESH GUPTAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 3211 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, Karan Gambhir, filed a police complaint in Gautam Budh Nagar alleging that the promoters of three Delhi‑based companies had induced his firm to give short‑term loans which were later converted into equity. The FIR, registered on 29 July 2018, listed the accused companies and promoters with incomplete a

SMRUTI TUKARAM BADADEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR

2022 INSC 3911 January 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a miscellaneous application seeking implementation of guidelines for recording evidence of vulnerable witnesses in criminal matters, following earlier pronouncements in Sakshi and Bandu @ Daulat. The Court examined the need for special centres to provide a barrier‑free environment for vuln

SRI SURESH KUMAR GOYAL AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 4611 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant alleged that the appellants had forged his signature to obtain bonus shares of Reliance companies and refused to return the original shares, leading to a criminal complaint under various IPC sections. The magistrate initially dismissed the complaint, but a revision remanded it, after which the appellant

COMMON CAUSE (A REGISTERED SOCIETY) AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 6911 January 2017Dismissed

The petitioners, Common Cause and others, sought a court‑ordered Special Investigation Team to probe alleged hawala transactions and cash seizures involving the Aditya Birla and Sahara groups, relying on documents seized in raids such as loose sheets, pen‑drives and laptop data. The respondents opposed, contending that

STATE OF ASSAMversusRAMEN DOWARAH

2016 INSC 3811 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Assam appealed the Gauhati High Court’s order that acquitted Ramen Dowarah of rape (s.376 IPC) and reduced his murder conviction (s.302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (s.304 Part II) on the basis that the sexual intercourse was consensual and the fire‑setting was a spur‑of‑the‑moment act

SUPREME COURT WOMEN LAWYERS ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2016 INSC 116311 January 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking that the legislature impose chemical castration as an additional punishment for perpetrators of rape against girl children. The petition highlighted alarming incidents of child sexual abuse and argued that the Indian Penal Code d

RAVINDER SINGHversusSUKHBIR SINGH & ORS.

2013 INSC 3011 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Ravinder Singh, owner of agricultural land, filed two criminal writ petitions seeking to quash FIRs filed by Sukhbir Singh. The second petition was filed without disclosing the earlier one, leading to a contempt proceeding which the High Court closed after the counsel apologized. Sukhbir Singh then lodged a criminal co

MR. JUSTICE CHANDRASHEKARAIAH (RETD.)versusJANEKERE C. KRISHNA & ORS. ETC.

2013 INSC 3111 January 2013Disposed off

The Karnataka Lokayukta post of Upa‑Lokayukta became vacant and the Chief Minister advised the Governor to appoint Justice Chandrashekaraiah without consulting the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, as required by s.3(2)(b) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984. The High Court quashed the appointment, holding th

VIKAS KUMAR ROORKEWALversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ORS,

2011 INSC 2711 January 2011Disposed off

The petitioner, son of a murdered Superintending Engineer, filed a transfer petition under Section 406 of the CrPC seeking to move the murder trial from Haridwar to Delhi, alleging that witnesses were being threatened by the accused's powerful gang and that the investigating and prosecuting agencies had failed to prote

S.K. JHA COMMODREversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 2811 January 2011Dismissed

Three Naval Officers were arrested for offences under the Indian Penal Code and were remanded to judicial custody. The Commanding Officer of their naval unit applied to the magistrate for the accused to be handed over for trial under the Navy Act, 1957 (court‑martial). The magistrate rejected the application, holding t

MANOJ YADAVversusPUSHPA @ KIRAN YADAV & ORS.

2011 INSC 3111 January 2011Dismissed

Manoj Yadav appealed against the High Court of Madhya Pradesh’s order that enhanced his wife’s maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) from Rs.1,500 to Rs.4,000 per month. The appellant argued that the State amendment (Madhya Pradesh Act 10 of 1998) capped maintenance at Rs.3,000 per month,

M/S. MANDVI CO-OP BANK LTD.versusNIMESH B. THAKORE

2010 INSC 2711 January 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the special provisions introduced by the 2002 amendment to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, particularly section 145 which allows the complainant to give evidence on affidavit and permits the court to summon such deponents for examination. The Court clarified that under s.145(2) the accu

K. PRABHAKARANversusP. JAYARAJAN

2005 INSC 2311 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two election disputes where candidates had been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment of more than two years, raising questions about disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It held that the relevant dates for determining qualification are the date

DHANANJOY CHATIERJEE @ DHANAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

1994 INSC 611 January 1994

The appellant, a security guard, was transferred after complaints of teasing a young girl living in an apartment. Ignoring the transfer, he went to the girl’s flat under the pretext of making a telephone call, raped and murdered her, and stole her wrist‑watch. The prosecution relied on a chain of circumstantial evidenc

KISHUN SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1993 INSC 511 January 1993Dismissed

The appellants, Kishun Singh and others, were not named in the charge‑sheet filed after a police investigation of a murder, but were listed in the FIR. The Sessions Judge, after the case was committed to his court under Section 209 of the CrPC, impleaded them as co‑accused under Section 319 before any trial evidence wa

JAYEDEEPSINH PRAVINSINH CHAVDA & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 96010 December 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants, husband and in‑laws, were charged under Sections 306, 498A and 114 of the IPC for the alleged suicide of the wife after twelve years of marriage, based on a FIR filed by her father. They sought discharge under Section 227 of the CrPC, arguing that no prima facie case existed, particularly for abetment o

DARA LAKSHMI NARAYANA & OTHERSversusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 95310 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The marriage between appellant No.1 and respondent No.2 deteriorated, leading the wife to file an FIR under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Act alleging cruelty and dowry demands, while also implicating the husband’s parents and sisters-in-law. The appellants contended that the FIR was a retaliatory

ROHTAS & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2020 INSC 69410 December 2020Disposed off

The appellants Rohtas, Sanjay and Bijender were convicted for attempt to murder under IPC s.307 read with s.149 and for rioting with deadly weapons under s.148. They challenged the convictions on the ground that, after the acquittal of three co‑accused, the remaining number fell below the statutory minimum of five requ

SAEEDA KHATOON ARSHIversusSTATE OF UP & ANR

2019 INSC 135510 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, mother of a deceased woman, alleged that her daughter was murdered by her son‑in‑law (the second respondent) rather than having committed suicide. During the trial of a friend of the second respondent for abetment of suicide under IPC s.306, the trial court, on the basis of the appellant’s testimony and

ABCDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 134710 December 2019Disposed off

The petitioner (ABCD) filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing that investigations under FIR No.58/2018 (rape) and FIR No.256/2018 (extortion) be transferred from Delhi Police to an independent central agency, along with protection under Section 438 of the CrPC. The Court examined the progress of the investig

RAJAversusSTATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2019 INSC 134610 December 2019Dismissed

The case involved seven accused of a dacoity during which five eye‑witnesses were seriously injured. All six of the accused (Nos.1‑6) were identified by the injured witnesses in a Test Identification Parade (TIP) and were convicted under Sections 394, 395, 396 and 449 of the IPC; accused No.7 was acquitted. On appeal,

GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusM/S. VISAKHA INDUSTRIES

2019 INSC 135210 December 2019Disposed off

The appellant, Google India Private Limited, was summoned under a criminal complaint alleging defamation (IPC ss.120B, 500, 501 r/w s.34) for articles posted in a Google Group hosted by it. It filed a petition under CrPC s.482 seeking to quash the summons, arguing it was not an intermediary and that Section 79 of the I

SHANTHAMALLESHAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2018 INSC 118310 December 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were charged under Section 436 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly throwing kerosene on a thatched shed and setting it alight. The trial court convicted all four accused and imposed fines; the High Court enhanced the sentence of accused No.1 and set aside the convictions of the others. On appeal,

YOGENDRA KUMAR JAISWAL ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 104110 December 2015Disposed off

The petitioners, senior public servants accused of possessing assets disproportionate to their known income under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, challenged the constitutionality of the Orissa Special Courts Act, 2006 and the Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009, which created special courts for s

RAMENDRA@ RAMAN DHULDHUEversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2015 INSC 104110 December 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a junior assistant in the Indore Regional Transport Office, was investigated for possessing property allegedly acquired through corrupt means under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After the Madhya Pradesh Vishesh Nyayalaya Adhiniyam, 2011 came into force, the Special Judge dec

BALBHADRA PARASHARversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2015 INSC 104110 December 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a manager of a primary agriculture credit cooperative society, was charged under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for amassing assets beyond his known income, and a sanction to prosecute was granted. The appellant challenged the sanction before the High Court under Section 482 o

SHLOK BHARDWAJversusRUNIKABHARDWAJ & ORS.

2014 INSC 85410 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The husband and wife married in 1996; the husband filed for divorce in 1997 and the wife filed a criminal case alleging cruelty under Sections 498‑A, 406, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial magistrate acquitted all accused in 2002. While the parties later settled their differences and obta

VEER SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 81810 December 2013Dismissed

The appellants Veer Singh and others were convicted for the murder of twelve persons and the attempted murder of a family member, based primarily on the testimony of a severely injured eye‑witness, Harshan Kaur, supported by medical reports, a hostile witness, and forensic material. The appellants challenged the reliab

DILIP PREMNARAYAN TIWARI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 129510 December 2009Dismissed

The appellants Dilip Premnarayan Tiwari, Manoj Paswan and Sunil Ramashray Yadav were convicted for the brutal murder of three persons and the grievous injury of others during an attack motivated by opposition to an inter‑caste marriage. The prosecution relied mainly on the testimony of two injured eye‑witnesses, who id

RAMRAJ @ NANHOO @ BIHNUversusSTATE OF CHHATIISGARH

2009 INSC 129710 December 2009Dismissed

Ramraj, convicted under IPC sections 302 and 201 for murdering his wife, was sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction, and the petitioner sought release after serving 14 years, arguing that remission had effectively reduced his term to about 17 years. The Supreme Court examined the statutory

ASHFAQversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2003 INSC 70110 December 2003Dismissed

Four accused entered the complainant's house, threatened the occupants with a pistol and knives, and stole cash, a gold chain and a Sten gun. The victims identified the accused in court, but no test identification parade was conducted. The trial court convicted them under Sections 452, 392 and 397 IPC read with Section

BALARAM PRASAD AGRAWALversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1996 INSC 145610 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, father of Kiran Devi, alleged that his daughter was subjected to continuous cruelty by her husband, mother‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law, culminating in her suicide by jumping into a well. The trial court acquitted the accused of murder (Sec. 302) and the High Court upheld that acquittal. On appeal, the Supr

ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY ETC. ETC.versusR.S. NAYAK AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

1991 INSC 32910 December 1991

The Supreme Court examined two writ petitions challenging prolonged criminal proceedings – one by former Maharashtra Chief Minister A.R. Antulay and another by advocate Ranjan Dwivedi – alleging violation of the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court reaffirmed that the right to a speed

BALBIR SINGH DELHI ADMN. DELHIversusD.N. KADIAN, M.M. DELHI & ANR.

1985 INSC 24610 December 1985Disposed off

A complaint was lodged by a Special Railway Magistrate against two Delhi Police officers, Balbir Singh (Sub‑Inspector) and Ram Shankar (Constable), alleging that they tampered with search memos by adding a signature after the documents were in the court's custody. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether prosecut

R. RAJENDRANversusKAMAR NISHA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 130410 November 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, a doctor, was alleged to have had an extramarital affair with respondent No.1, resulting in the birth of a child in 2007 while she was married to Abdul Latheef. Respondent No.1 filed criminal complaints for cheating and harassment and sought a DNA test to establish the appellant as the biological father,

KHEKH RAMversusSTATE OF H.P.

2017 INSC 109310 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

In the early hours of 20 October 2009 a police patrol stopped an Alto vehicle from which the driver fled; a bag of charas and the appellant Khekh Ram's bank passbook were recovered. The trial court acquitted the appellant, finding that the prosecution had not proved beyond reasonable doubt that he was the driver and in

ROHIT TANDONversusTHE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

2017 INSC 109610 November 2017

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of Rohit Tandon challenging the denial of regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Court held that the threshold conditions of Section 45 of the PMLA were not satisfied, as the prosecution presented substantial evidence of the appellant’s involvement

GAJULA SURYA PRAKASARAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2009 INSC 122610 November 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gajula Surya Prakasa Rao was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 IPC for murdering a farmer and attempting to kill his wife, based primarily on the testimony of the deceased’s wife (PW‑3) and daughter (PW‑4). The Supreme Court examined the credibility of these eye‑witnesses, noting that their statements

B.K. CHANNAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2006 INSC 82210 November 2006Disposed off

The case arose from a politically motivated attack in 1995 in which Basavarajaiah was killed and four others were injured. Twenty‑three persons were tried; the trial court convicted several under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149, while others were acquitted. The High Court affirmed the murder convictions of A‑1 an

S.K. SHUKLA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS

2005 INSC 56110 November 2005

The Supreme Court examined a raid that uncovered AK‑56 rifles, ammunition and about 600 g of explosive material at the residence of three accused, leading to prosecution under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA). The State Government’s order withdrawing the POTA cases and the Review Committee’s finding of no p

ROY V.D.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2000 INSC 51810 November 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Roy V.D. was searched and arrested by an Excise Inspector who, at the time of the search, was not authorized under Sections 41(2) or 42(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act to make such a seizure. A charge was filed, later dismissed, and a fresh charge sheet was lodged, leading

BALBIR SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1994 INSC 51010 November 1994Dismissed

The appellants Balbir Singh and Nachhattar Singh were convicted of murder under IPC sections 302 and 34 for inflicting fatal blows with a gandasa. They challenged the conviction on two grounds: that the offence should be culpable homicide under section 325, and that the criminal court lacked jurisdiction to try Air For

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusPOLLONJI DARABSHAW DARUWALLA

1987 INSC 32210 November 1987Dismissed

Pollonji Darabshaw Daruwalla, a customs appraiser, was searched and found to possess assets allegedly disproportionate to his known income for the period 1‑April‑1958 to 31‑Dec‑1968. He was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (s.5(1)(e) read with s.5(2)) for criminal misconduct, but the High Court ac

S.K. JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2025 INSC 121510 October 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a Colonel in the Army Ordnance Corps, was tried by a General Court Martial on three charges: corruption for accepting Rs 10,000, possession of ammunition without licence, and an act prejudicial to good order and discipline for possessing Rs 28,000 cash. The GCM convicted him of the first two charges and

SIBY THOMASversusM/S. SOMANY CERAMICS LTD

2023 INSC 89010 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former partner of a partnership firm, challenged a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that the complaint did not specifically allege that he was in charge of the business at the time the cheque was issued and that he had resigned

N. S. MADHANAGOPAL & ANR.versusK. LALITHA

2022 INSC 132310 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a society treasurer, alleged that the appellant, N.S. Madhanagopal, hurled unparliamentary words during a dispute over waste‑water flow, and claimed offences under IPC sections 294(b) (obscene words) and 341 (wrongful restraint). The High Court refused to quash the proceedings, but the Supreme Court ex

BILAL HAJAR @ ABDUL HAMEEDversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2018 INSC 94510 October 2018Dismissed

The appellant, A-6, was convicted under Section 120-B of the IPC for participating in a criminal conspiracy to murder Siva. The prosecution alleged that nine accused met at A-6's house on 1 September 1991, decided to kill Siva, and the murder was carried out on 5 September 1991 by some of the accused. The conviction re

PRADEEP BISOI @ RANJIT BISOIversusTHE STATE OF ODISHA

2018 INSC 95010 October 2018Dismissed

The appellant, Pradeep BisoI, was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC for causing the death of Bhaskar Sahu through a bomb and acid attack. The victim had given a detailed statement to the investigating officer on 5 December 1990 under Section 161 of the CrPC, but died on 25 March 1991, more than three months later

SANTOSH S/O DWARKADAS FAFATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2017 INSC 102710 October 2017

Santosh was accused under Section 408 IPC read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for receiving misappropriated food grains. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the trial court and the Nagpur High Court. After depositing the alleged amount, he obtained interim protection, but the

RASHEEDA KHATOON (D) THROUGH LRS.versusASHIQ ALI S/O LT. ABU MOHD (D) THROUGH LRS.

2014 INSC 70110 October 2014Dismissed

The case concerned an alleged oral gift (hiba) of a house by Abdul Haq, a Muslim, to Rasheeda Khatoon about seven years before his death. After Haq's death, his heirs sought possession, prompting Rasheeda to file a suit for declaration of ownership. The trial court and first appellate court held the oral gift valid, de

ABUZAR HOSSAIN @ GULAM HOSSAINversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2012 INSC 46110 October 2012Reference answered

The appellant, Abuzar Hossain @ Gulam Hossain, claimed that he was a juvenile at the time of the alleged offence and therefore could not be tried in a regular criminal court. The claim was not raised in the trial or earlier appeals, and the question before the Supreme Court was whether a claim of juvenility under s.7A

MOHD. IMRAN KHANversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2011 INSC 73610 October 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by Mohd. Imran Khan and Jamal Ahmed against their conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC. The Court held that the prosecutrix, Monika, was a minor (under 16) at the time of the offence, based on her birth certificate and the acknowledged margin of error in radiological age estimate

K. PRAKASHANversusP.K. SURENDERAN

2007 INSC 102910 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent advanced a total of Rs. 3,16,000 to the appellant, who later issued a cheque that was dishonoured, leading to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court acquitted the appellant, holding that he had discharged the burden of proof on a pre‑ponderance basis despite not

M.C.MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 102810 October 2007Dismissed

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by environmental lawyer M.C. Mehta concerning the Taj Heritage Corridor project, where the CBI had investigated alleged irregularities involving the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mayawati, and Minister Naseemuddin Siddiqui. After the CBI submit

M/S MAHALAXMI MOTORS LTD.versusMANDAL REVENUE OFFICER AND ORS.

2007 INSC 103410 October 2007Dismissed

Mis Mahalaxmi Motors Ltd. purchased land that had vested in the State of Andhra Pradesh after the 1955 Abolition of Inams Act and constructed a workshop, but the High Court held the land belonged to the State and dismissed its writ petitions. The State, through the Mandal Revenue Officer, initiated proceedings under th

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusMOHD. SAJID HUSAIN MOHD. S. HUSAIN ETC.

2007 INSC 103510 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal appeal against the Bombay High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to eight accused—including police officers, politicians and a businessman—who were alleged to have raped a girl who was a minor at the time of the offence. The girl, identified as Puja, was medically examin

ALLA CHINA APPARAO AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2002 INSC 43210 October 2002Dismissed

The appellants, six convicted accused, appealed against their life sentences for murder under Sections 302, 149, 148 and 506 IPC, arguing that the prosecution's case relied on partisan eyewitnesses, lacked independent witnesses, showed no dragging injuries, and suffered an alleged delay in forwarding the FIR to the mag

MUNSHI PRASAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2001 INSC 49710 October 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Munshi Prasad and others for murder, finding the prosecution’s evidence trustworthy and the defence’s alibi unsubstantiated because the alleged distance of 400‑500 yards did not render the accused’s presence at the crime scene impossible. The Court held that discrepancies betw

STATE OF BIHARversusMURAD ALI KHAN, FARUKH SALAUDDIN & VIKRAM SINGH

1988 INSC 31610 October 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar filed a complaint under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 alleging that the accused killed an elephant and removed its tusks. A Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and issued summons, while a parallel police investigation under the Indian Penal Code was ongoing. The accused invoked

VINOD KUMAR PANDEY & ANR.versusSEESH RAM SAINI & ORS.

2025 INSC 109510 September 2025Disposed off

The case concerned two Central Bureau of Investigation officers, Vinod Kumar Pandey and Neeraj Kumar, who were alleged to have committed a series of cognizable offences under the IPC, prompting writ petitions seeking registration of FIRs against them. The Delhi High Court, after examining the complaints and a prelimina

S. VIJIKUMARIversusMOWNESHWARACHARI C

2024 INSC 73210 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a wife, obtained a maintenance order of Rs.12,000 per month and Rs.1,00,000 compensation under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in 2015. The respondent husband later filed an application under Section 25 seeking to set aside that order and to recover all maintenance

RAGHUVEER SHARANversusDISTRICT SAHAKARI KRISHI GRAMIN VIKAS BANK & ANR.

2024 INSC 68110 September 2024

The appellant, a bank cashier, was examined as a witness in 2016 and admitted altering the tenure of a fixed deposit, a statement recorded at the pre‑summoning stage. During the trial, another witness (PW‑1) testified in 2022 that the appellant had made the interpolations, leading the bank to move an application under

RIZWAN KHANversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2020 INSC 54310 September 2020Dismissed

The appellant Rizwan Khan was seized with 20 kg of ganja from a motorcycle and convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the ND PS Act. He challenged the conviction on several grounds, including that the prosecution relied solely on police witnesses, that the procedural requirements of Sections 42 and 55 of the ND PS Act

AGversusSHIV KUMAR YADAV &ANR.

2015 INSC 65410 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two criminal appeals filed by the Attorney General against the High Court’s order allowing the recall of all prosecution witnesses in a rape trial after the accused’s statement under Section 313 CrPC had been recorded. The accused argued that his earlier counsel was incompetent and that the

DR. (SMT.) MANORAMA TIWARI AND OTHERSversusSURENDRA NATH RAI

2015 INSC 102010 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the death of a 14‑year‑old girl who underwent surgery in a government hospital performed by three medical officers. The girl's father filed a criminal complaint alleging murder under Section 304A of the IPC. The doctors filed an application under Section 197 of the CrPC seeking a sanction from the Sta

MAHAMADKHAN NATHEKHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 100210 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Three accused were tried for the murder of Firozbhai under Sections 302, 120(8), 201 of the IPC and Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act. The trial court acquitted them, finding that the prosecution's circumstantial case did not establish a homicidal death and that the injury could have been accidental. The Gujarat High Co

LAFARGE AGGREGATES & CONCRETE INDIA P. LTDversusSUKARSH AZAD & ANR

2013 INSC 60210 September 2013Dismissed

Lafarge Aggregates & Concrete India Ltd. (appellant) lodged a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after a cheque of Rs.2.5 lakh issued by the managing director of the respondents was stopped, leading to its dishonour. The respondents filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC offering to p

SUNIL DAMODAR GAIKWADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 60110 September 2013Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Sunil Damodar Gaikwad, murdered his wife and two sons and attempted to kill his daughter, later reporting the incident to police. He was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 307 and sentenced to death for the murder and life imprisonment for the attempt. The appeal centered on whether the death sentence

VILAS PANDURANG PAWAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 38610 September 2012Dismissed

The complainant, Savita Madhav Akhade, alleged that she and her family were insulted and assaulted on caste grounds by Vilas Pandurang Pawar and others, leading to an FIR under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The accused applied for anticipatory

ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYOOM ANSARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2010 INSC 60210 September 2010Dismissed

Abu Salem, an absconding accused in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, was arrested in Portugal and extradited to India under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the Indian Extradition Act, 1962 (applied to Portugal by a 2002 notification). Portugal granted extradition for certain offen

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusMAST RAM

2004 INSC 50910 September 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State prosecuted Mast Ram for murder under IPC 302, alleging he shot the deceased Uttam Chand with a double‑barrel muzzle‑loaded gun. The trial court, relying on eyewitness accounts, a post‑mortem report, a ballistic expert report and a spot‑inspection that placed the victim within firing range, convicted the accus

STATE BY POLICE INSPECTORversusT. VENKATESH MURTHY

2004 INSC 51010 September 2004Case Partly allowed

The State prosecuted T. Venkatesh Murthy, a public servant, under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Although a sanction was granted by the Superintending Engineer of the Karnataka Electricity Board, the trial court held that the sanction was insufficient under the Board's 1987 Re

RAM KISHAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2004 INSC 51110 September 2004Dismissed

The deceased Shiv Shankar Singh was attacked and killed with lathis fitted with iron rings after being intercepted on a motorcycle by the appellants. Three eye‑witnesses, who were friends of the deceased, testified to the assault, and a post‑mortem showed head injuries and an empty stomach. The appellants challenged th

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF ASSAM

2004 INSC 51310 September 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed against a Guwahati High Court decision that held all offences under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 to be bailable. The Supreme Court examined the proviso to Section 8(2) of the Act and clarified that it merely gives the railway officer two options—admit to bail or forwa

PHUL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1979 INSC 17610 September 1979Case Partly allowed

Phul Singh, a 22‑year‑old, was convicted of raping his cousin's wife and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Court, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued his youth, lack of prior convictions, and the forgiveness of the victim's family

KHEMA @ KHEM CHANDRA ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 81010 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder, attempted murder and rioting under Sections 302, 307 and 148 of the IPC based primarily on the testimonies of two relatives of the deceased, one an alleged eye‑witness (PW‑1) and the other an injured witness (PW‑2). The Supreme Court examined the credibility of these witnesses,

RAMABORA @ RAMABORAIAH & ANRversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2022 INSC 80910 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants (A‑1 and A‑2) were convicted by the Karnataka High Court for murder under Section 302 IPC, overturning their acquittal by the Sessions Court, while the other 20 accused remained acquitted. The prosecution alleged that 22 persons formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, trespassed into the

BRAJESH SINGHversusSUNIL ARORA & ORS.

2021 INSC 38810 August 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a contempt petition filed by Brajesh Singh alleging that several political parties wilfully disobeyed the Court's order dated 13‑02‑2020, which required parties to disclose the criminal antecedents of their candidates and the reasons for their selection, within 48 hours of nomination. The

C. RONALD & ANR.versusSTATE, U.T. OF ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS

2011 INSC 56510 August 2011Disposed off

The appellants C. Ronald and Anil Kumar were caught with counterfeit Rs.100 notes after a gambling incident; the police seized numerous fake notes from their possession and homes. The trial court acquitted them, but the Calcutta High Court reversed the acquittal, convicted them under the provisions relating to circulat

SAROJBEN ASHWINKUMAR SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2011 INSC 57010 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed against a partnership firm and its two partners. The complainant later applied under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to join two additional partners as co‑accused, relying solely on the firm's registration document that listed them

CHITRESH KUMAR CHOPRAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2009 INSC 104010 August 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Chitresh Kumar Chopra, was charged under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly abetting the suicide of his business partner, Jitendra Sharma, by mental harassment over a profit dispute. The trial court framed charges, finding sufficient material to presume that the appellant had insti

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusRAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAVA, IAS AND ANR.

2006 INSC 50510 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered an FIR under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 against an IAS officer. The respondent filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of the FIR, alleging that the State of Rajasthan had withdrawn its consent for

SHRI S.K. ZUTSHI AND ANR.versusSHRI BIMAL DEBNATH AND ANR.

2004 INSC 43010 August 2004Dismissed

The complainant alleged that Border Security Force personnel, including the appellants, entered his shop, demanded Rs 10,000 as illegal gratification, ransacked the premises, seized goods and documents, and threatened him, constituting offences under IPC sections 395, 447 and 506. The appellants claimed that their acti

AMRUTLAL SOMESHWAR JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1994 INSC 31010 August 1994

Amrutlal Someshwar Joshi, a domestic servant, was convicted of murdering three members of his employer's family and an infant in their Bombay flat and stealing valuables. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts, including eyewitness testimony that Joshi was present in the flat until early afternoon,

MOHD. ABDUL SAMADversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

2024 INSC 50610 July 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a Muslim husband, obtained a triple talaq and was ordered by the Family Court to pay interim maintenance of Rs.20,000 per month to his divorced wife, which the High Court reduced to Rs.10,000. He appealed, arguing that Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) does not apply to Muslim women af

MIR MUSTAFA ALI HASMIversusTHE STATE OF A.P.

2024 INSC 50310 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Forest Section Officer, was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe from a saw‑mill operator. The prosecution relied on the complainant’s testimony, a friend who acted as a shadow witness, and the recovery

MOTIRAM PADU JOSHI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 59410 July 2018Dismissed

The case arose from a factional clash in which the deceased, Machindra Joshi, was attacked with swords, knives and a motorcycle chain by the appellants Motiram Padu Joshi, Ratan Maruti Vaskar, Devidas Maruti Vaskar and Ramnath Joshi, leading to his death. The trial court acquitted all accused, holding that the eyewitne

JITENDRA SINGH @ BABBOO SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 45810 July 2013Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted under IPC sections 304B (dowry death) and 498A (cruelty) and sentenced to imprisonment and a fine. He later claimed to have been a juvenile at the time of the offence, asserting an age of 13 years 8 months, but documentary and medical evidence established his age as about 17 years, making hi

ANAND MOHANversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2012 INSC 27710 July 2012Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of a District Magistrate during a funeral procession of a political leader, where 36 persons were charged. The trial court convicted A‑1 (Anand Mohan) and six others under sections 147, 302/149, 307/149 and 302/109, sentencing A‑1, A‑3 and A‑4 to death. The High Court acquitted A‑2 to A‑7

BABLE @ GURDEEP SINGHversusSTATE OF CHATTISGARH TR.P.S.O.P. KURSIPUR

2012 INSC 27810 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant Bable @ Gurdeep Singh was convicted under IPC s.302 r.w. s.34 for the murder of Ishwari Verma. He challenged the conviction on the grounds that the FIR lost its relevance because the informant turned hostile, the oral dying declaration was not corroborated, his injuries were unexplained, and the acquittal

JUGESH SEHGALversusSHAMSHER SINGH GOGI

2009 INSC 90010 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a petroleum trader, alleged that four members of the same family issued a cheque of Rs 24,92,115 drawn on Indian Bank, Sonepat, which was returned unpaid with the remark "Account closed". He filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the four accused. The acc

SAVITRI AGARWAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2009 INSC 90310 July 2009Disposed off

The appellants, accused of dowry death and related offences under Sections 498A, 304B (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 (Dowry Prohibition Act), obtained anticipatory bail from an Additional Sessions Judge under Section 438 of the CrPC after the court considered two dying declarations that made no allegation against them. The

BHUPINDER SINGHversusUNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH .

2008 INSC 79710 July 2008Dismissed

Bhupinder Singh, already married, concealed his first marriage and married Manjit Kaur, who later discovered his prior marriage, gave birth, and filed a complaint. He was convicted by the trial court under Sections 376 and 417 IPC and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusANIRUDHSING AND ANR.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 23410 July 1997

The State of Gujarat appealed the acquittal of Anirudhsing Mahipatsingh Jadeja (Accused No.1) and Nilesh Kumar (Accused No.2) for the murder of MLA Popatbhai Sorathiya during an Independence Day ceremony. The trial court had held that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's presence, the weapon used, and the conf

ASHOK KUMAR ALIAS GOLUversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 14510 July 1991Dismissed

Ashok Kumar was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He sought premature release under the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 1958, arguing that Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – which imposes a 14‑year minimum before any release for life convicts of capital offen

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.versusRAMESHWAR RATHOD

1990 INSC 19610 July 1990Dismissed

The respondent's truck was seized by police on 10 December 1974 for an alleged violation of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 that purportedly occurred on 15 March 1972. The respondent sought the vehicle's return through petitions before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which held that Section 6A of the Act, as amended

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAVI SHANKAR SINGH & ORS.

2026 INSC 65010 June 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against directions issued by the Madhya Pradesh High Court that trial courts, while trying cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, must examine the sanctioning authority under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before charge‑framing, even when the accused does not c

SRI GULAM MUSTAFAversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2023 INSC 51110 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gulam Mustafa, Managing Director of GM Infinite Dwelling, was named as Accused No.18 in an FIR filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several IPC provisions, arising from a long‑standing land ownership dispute that had been litigated in civil courts for o

REKHA JAINversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2022 INSC 54910 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The original complainant lodged a complaint against her husband, Kamalesh Mulchand Jain, alleging that he cheated her and took 2 kg of gold jewellery, leading to an FIR under Section 420 of the IPC. During investigation, the gold jewellery was found in the possession of the husband’s wife, Rekha Jain, who was also char

RAM PARSHOTAM MITTAL & ORS.versusHOTEL QUEEN ROAD PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 67810 May 2019Disposed off

The Government of India disinvested its stake in ITDC, creating Hotel Queen Road Ltd (HQRL) as a special purpose vehicle. After Moral Trading & Investment Ltd acquired 99.97% of HQRL, the directors (the Mittals) passed three board resolutions in 2004‑2005 allotting and transferring shares to themselves without giving n

BALVEER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 40110 May 2016Dismissed

The appeal arose from a dowry‑death case where the police report did not name the parents of the deceased as accused. The complainant sought cognizance against them under Sections 304‑B and 498‑A IPC. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class rejected the application and committed the case to the Sessions Court for trial

GURNAIB SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 33910 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gurnaib Singh was convicted for the death of his young wife Amarjeet Kaur, who allegedly committed suicide after being harassed for a dowry demand of Rs 50,000. The trial court and the Punjab High Court upheld a conviction under Section 3048 IPC (dowry death) and sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imp

V.L.S FINANCE LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 34210 May 2013Dismissed

The Registrar of Companies filed a complaint alleging that V.L.S. Finance Ltd. misrepresented land holdings in its balance sheet, an offence punishable under Section 211(7) of the Companies Act, 1956. While criminal prosecution was pending, the company and its managing director applied to the Company Law Board (CLB) fo

RAJESH BHATNAGARversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2012 INSC 22510 May 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Ms. Renu, who was burnt to death after her husband, brother‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law allegedly poured kerosene on her for refusing to meet dowry demands for a refrigerator, television and cooler. The trial and High Courts had convicted all three accused under Section 304B of the

MRUDUL M. DAMLE & ANR.versusC.B.I. NEW DELHI

2012 INSC 22610 May 2012Case Allowed

The petitioners, a husband and wife accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, sought transfer of their criminal trial from the Special Judge, CBI Cases, Rohini Court, New Delhi to the Special Judge, CBI Cases, Court of Sessions at Thane, Maharashtra, arguing that most of the 92 witnesses (88) were located in Maha

SALIM GULAB PATHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SHO

2012 INSC 22710 May 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Salim Gulab Pathan, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly setting his wife on fire. The prosecution's case rested on the victim's dying declaration, recorded by a police constable after being certified by a doctor as conscious and fit, and corroborated by eyewitnesses who heard the victim imp

DHARMATMA SINGHversusHARMINDER SINGH & ORS.

2011 INSC 37110 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under several IPC offences based on a FIR filed by respondent No.1, while a cross‑case was filed against respondents No.1 and 2. After the magistrate permitted further investigation, the Superintendent of Police submitted a further report stating that respondent No.1 had acted in self‑defence

BALRAJE @ TRIMBAKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 30210 May 2010Dismissed

Balraje (appellant) was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for inflicting a knife blow to the chest of Kailas, resulting in his death. The prosecution relied on eye‑witness testimony of the deceased's son (PW‑1), wife (PW‑2) and a neighbour (PW‑4), who identified Balraje as the assailant. The defence argued that

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKISHAN LAL

2002 INSC 27910 May 2002Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Kishan Lal for rape under Section 376 IPC; the trial court sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine, which the Rajasthan High Court reduced to the period already served without recording adequate and special reasons. The State appealed to the Supreme Court under A

SHRI BHAGWANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2001 INSC 27410 May 2001Disposed off

Shri Bhagwan, a 20‑year‑old apprentice goldsmith, was convicted of murdering five members of Shiv Pratap's family and committing robbery and dacoity. The conviction was based on circumstantial evidence: he was seen with one of the deceased, sustained injuries, possessed blood‑stained clothing and stolen jewellery, and

RAMDEO CHAUHAN@ RAJ NATHversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2001 INSC 27210 May 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a review petition filed by R.D. Chauhan, who claimed he was a juvenile at the time of committing murder under Section 302 IPC and therefore could not be sentenced to death. The petition argued that the trial and appellate courts failed to apply the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, and that the c

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATIONversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 67510 May 1996

The case arose from the abduction and alleged murder of Advocate Kulwant Singh, his wife and their two‑year‑old child, for which the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association sought an independent inquiry. The High Court declined to intervene, prompting a civil appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dir

MINAKSHI BALA SUDHIR KUMAR AND ORS.versusSUDHIR KUMAR AND ORS.

1994 INSC 20110 May 1994

The appellant filed an FIR alleging offences under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC against her husband, his parents and other relatives. The police investigated, filed a charge sheet and the magistrate took cognizance, framed charges under Sections 239 and 240 of the CrPC and fixed a date for recording evidence. Before tria

MS. JORDAN DIENGDEHversusS.S, CHOPRA

1985 INSC 13810 May 1985Disposed off

The wife, a Christian from the Khasi tribe and an Indian Foreign Service officer, married a Sikh husband under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. She filed a petition under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking a declaration of nullity or judicial separation on the ground of her husband's impotence. The Delhi High

MILIND S/O ASHRUBA DHANVE AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2026 INSC 35510 April 2026Disposed off

The appellants were convicted under IPC sections 323 and 324 read with section 34 for assaulting a victim's family and were sentenced only to pay fines of Rs.500 and Rs.2,000 respectively. They appealed, seeking the benefit of sections 3 and 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, arguing that the Act should apply e

BHUPATBHAI BACHUBHAI CHAVDA & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 29510 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The father and son appellants were acquitted by the Sessions Court of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34. The State appealed, and the Gujarat High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting them of murder and assault under s.323. The Supreme Court examined whether an appellate court can overturn an acquittal and held

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusARYAN SINGH ETC.

2023 INSC 33810 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed appeals after the Punjab & Haryana High Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, quashed the criminal proceedings against Aryan Singh and Gautam Cheema, holding that the charges were not proved and the prosecution was malicious. The ac

QAMAR GHANI USMANIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 33710 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant was arrested on 29 January 2022 and the 90‑day period under Section 167 of the CrPC was set to expire on 29 April 2022. The investigating officer sought a 30‑day extension on 22 April 2022, which the trial court granted without the accused being present, and the accused was informed of the extension on 23

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusVIKAS MISHRA @ VIKASH MISHRA

2023 INSC 34510 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI arrested Vikas Mishra for offences under sections 409 and 120B of the IPC and obtained a seven‑day police‑custody remand on 16 April 2021. Mishra was hospitalized on 18 April and subsequently released on interim bail on 21 April, which was later cancelled on 8 December 2021 for non‑cooperation. He filed an appl

ASHISH SETHversusSUMIT MITTAL AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 36110 April 2020Directions issued

The dispute arose between the Seth Group and the Mittal Group, partners in a joint venture (TFIPL) that owned land in Sector 89, Faridabad. The parties executed a Memorandum of Settlement (MoS) on 4 May 2015, allocating the External Development Charges (EDC) liability of Rs.59.05 crore between them, with the Seth Group

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusNIRMALA DEVI

2017 INSC 32510 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against the Himachal High Court’s order that replaced the trial court’s imprisonment sentences for Nirmala Devi with a fine of Rs.30,000. The trial court had convicted her under IPC sections 307 (attempt to murder), 328 (causing hurt by poison) and 392 (robbery) and sentenced her

SURAIN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2017 INSC 32310 April 2017Disposed off

Surain Singh was convicted of murder (Sec. 302 IPC) for killing two men during a violent clash between rival factions in a court of the Executive Magistrate. The clash erupted when Singh, objecting to the presence of a rival, drew his kirpan and struck several persons, resulting in two deaths. He appealed to the Suprem

CHARANDAS SWAMIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2017 INSC 32210 April 2017Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Gadadharanandji, the newly elected Chairman of the Vadtal Temple Board of Trustees, who was allegedly kidnapped, strangled and his body burnt and dumped in Rajasthan by a group of temple functionaries. The prosecution proved the accused's motive—fear of losing control over temple finance

RAJA @ RAJINDERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 31210 April 2015Dismissed

The appellant Raja Rajinder was convicted of murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34, based primarily on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution established that the deceased was last seen with the appellant, that a knife, blood‑stained clothes and burnt blanket were rec

LAXMIversusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 31710 April 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing a writ petition filed by acid‑attack victims, examined the implementation of its earlier directions in Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) requiring a minimum compensation of Rs.3 lakh per victim and full medical assistance. The Court noted that several states and Union Territories had not fixed t

MS.SversusSUNIL KUMAR & ANR.

2015 INSC 31110 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Ms S, a minor, was raped by Sunil Kumar while guarding her crops. She reported the incident immediately, and a medical examination corroborated her account; three eyewitnesses also attested to the rape. The trial court acquitted the accused because no test identification parade had been conducted, despite the victim id

SWAROOP SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2013 INSC 23410 April 2013Dismissed

In 1992, a 17‑18‑year‑old girl (PW2) was allegedly forced at knife point by Swaroop Singh to have sexual intercourse in a sugarcane field. She reported the incident immediately, and medical examination revealed a torn hymen; other witnesses corroborated her account and broken bangles were recovered from the scene. The

RAM DHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2012 INSC 16810 April 2012Dismissed

Petitioner Ram Dhan filed a complaint alleging his son had been kidnapped, leading to the conviction of Balraj and others under IPC 364 r/w 149. The son later testified that he had left voluntarily, prompting Balraj to file an FIR against the petitioner for false information under IPC sections 177, 181, 182, 195 and 42

MAHESH S/O.JANARDHAN GONNADEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 47610 April 2008Dismissed

Mahesh was accused of murdering his former lover Sunita and injuring her husband Sanjay and mother‑in‑law Nirmalabai. The trial court acquitted him, disbelieving the testimony of several relatives who were eye‑witnesses, on the ground that they were interested and lacked independent corroboration. The State appealed un

RAITANLALversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

2007 INSC 39410 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rattanlal was charged with murder of Santosh Kumar along with two co‑accused. The trial court acquitted them, citing serious inconsistencies in witness statements, medical evidence, the recovery of weapons and the non‑examination of the investigating officer, which created reasonable doubt. The High Court

EVEREST ADVERTISING PVT. LTD.versusSTATE, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.

2007 INSC 39710 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Everest Advertising Pvt. Ltd. filed a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act against Dalmia Industries Ltd. and its Chairman and Managing Director for dishonour of post‑dated cheques. A Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons against the respondents under CrPC s.204, but later recalled the order for the Chairman

NARAVAN @ NARANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 40210 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted by the trial court and the Rajasthan High Court for raping the prosecutrix three times and for robbery, under Sections 376 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the prosecutrix’s testimony and found it riddled with contradictions – differing accounts of the

DILIP S. DAHANUKARversusKOTAK MAHINDRA CO. LTD. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 40410 April 2007Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Dilip S. Dahanukar and Goodvalue Marketing Co. Ltd., were convicted under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and were ordered to pay a fine of Rs.25,000 and a compensation of Rs.15,00,000 under Section 357(3) of the CrPC. The trial court also directed the appellants to d

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search