Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

5,133 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 4,001–4,200.

SUKUMARANversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2019 INSC 3277 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sukumar, a Forest Range Officer, chased a lorry he suspected of sandalwood smuggling. The lorry occupants attacked his jeep with stones and shouted “fire them”. Sukumar fired his DBL‑gun, killing the driver. He later loaded sandalwood and a gun from the lorry and claimed he acted in private defence. He w

NISHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2008 INSC 3217 March 2008Dismissed

The case involved three successive murders and related injuries in Punjab, for which the accused Nishan Singh, Pargat Singh‑I and others were convicted under Section 302 IPC, with some also charged under Section 34 IPC for common intention. The appellants challenged the convictions on procedural grounds, chiefly allegi

RAJESH @ RAJU CHANDULAL GANDHI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2002 INSC 1287 March 2002Dismissed

The appellants Rajesh and others were convicted under IPC sections 120B, 452 and 302, and the Arms Act for the murder of Girish Namdar, alleged to have been motivated by a love‑affair dispute. They appealed, claiming the First Information Report (FIR) was ante‑timed to plant eye‑witnesses, that the inquest panchanama’s

GOVIND RAMJI JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1990 INSC 807 March 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant and two others were convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and of concealing evidence under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC. The High Court set aside the murder convictions, confirmed the conviction under Section 201 for the appellant, and enhanced his sentence from three to s

GURWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 927 February 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Gurwinder Singh, was arrested along with co‑accused for alleged involvement in a terrorist module of the banned organization ‘Sikhs for Justice’, including raising funds, conspiracy and attempts to procure weapons. The investigation, taken over by the NIA, resulted in charges under the UAPA, IPC and Arms

RANA AYYUBversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

2023 INSC 1017 February 2023Dismissed

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner conducted three crowdfunding campaigns on the Ketto platform. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opened investigations under FEMA and later filed a complaint under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA), attaching the petitioner’s bank account in Navi Mumbai. The Specia

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusRAHUL MODI & ORS.

2022 INSC 1587 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) appealed against the Delhi High Court's order granting statutory bail to Rahul Modi and others, who had been arrested in connection with alleged offences under the Companies Act and the Indian Penal Code. The charge‑sheet was filed within the 60‑day period prescribed by Sec

IQBAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2017 INSC 1157 February 2017Dismissed

The case involved six accused, including Iqbal and Virendra, who entered the complainant's house armed with rifles and fired upon the family, resulting in the death of Bhoop Singh and injuries to others. All were convicted under IPC Sections 148, 149, 302 and 307 for forming an unlawful assembly with the common object

STATE OF U.P.versusAJAI KUMAR

2008 INSC 1517 February 2008Case Allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh charged Ajai Kumar and others under IPC sections 394, 307 and 411 for allegedly snatching Rs 1,25,000 from a bank and injuring two victims. Part of the stolen money, bearing the bank's stamp, was recovered from the accused. The trial court acquitted the appellant, relying on the victims' inab

UMESHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 1117 February 2007Dismissed

Umesh was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Dilip Ganpatrao Shirbhate on 26 November 1997. The prosecution’s case rested on two eyewitnesses who saw Umesh stab the victim, forensic evidence showing the victim’s blood group on Umesh’s shirt, and the recovery of the alleged murder weapon at Umesh’s reside

ANURAN RASTOGI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 1137 February 2007Disposed off

The informant filed a complaint alleging offences under Sections 498A, 323 and 504 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The magistrate took cognizance of those offences only and issued summons. The informant later applied that the material in the case diary also justified adding Sections 406 and 307 I

STATE OF HARYANAversusRAM PAL AND ORS.

2005 INSC 667 February 2005Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana sought leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the CrPC against the acquittal of several accused in a case involving offences under Sections 148, 302, 452, 506, 323 and 149 of the IPC. The trial court had convicted some accused but acquitted others, holding that Section 149 IPC did not apply becaus

CHANDER PALversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2002 INSC 707 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Ravinder Kumar on 1 August 1992. The prosecution alleged that Chander Pal (appellant‑1) and Rajinder (appellant‑2) stabbed the deceased, relying primarily on the testimony of the victim's brother (PW‑1) and a tea‑stall owner (PW‑2), while other key witnesses such as the person who took

SANJAY @ KAKAversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2001 INSC 777 February 2001Dismissed

The appellants Sanjay, Nawabuddin and Vinod were convicted for murder and robbery after the police recovered a weapon, blood‑stained clothes and stolen jewellery based on their disclosure statements made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The defence argued that the statements were inadmissible because they containe

RANADHIR BASUversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2000 INSC 527 February 2000Case Partly allowed

Randhir Basu and a co‑accused were convicted of murdering the mother, father and grandparents of a girl named Sudipa. Sudipa, after being granted pardon, was examined as an approver before a magistrate in chambers, without the accused present for cross‑examination. The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground

STATE OF HLMACHAL PRADESHversusSURINDER MOHAN AND ORS.

2000 INSC 537 February 2000

The State prosecuted Surinder Mohan and others for murder and related offences. An accomplice, Sandeep Kumar, was granted pardon by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and his statement was recorded before the case was committed to the Sessions Court, but the accused were not cross‑examined at that stage. During the trial th

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusMOHINDER SINGH

2000 INSC 557 February 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana issued circulars under Section 432 of the Criminal Procedure Code granting remission of sentence to prisoners confined in jail and those on parole or furlough on a specified date, expressly excluding persons convicted of rape or dowry death. Five respondents were on bail and one, Mohinder Singh, wa

SMT. TRIVENIBEN & -ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

1989 INSC 457 February 1989Disposed off

The petitioners, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, sought commutation to life imprisonment on the ground of an inordinate delay in execution. The Supreme Court examined conflicting precedents on whether a two‑year rule or any fixed period of delay makes a death sentence inexecutable. It held that only the del

MD IMRAN @ D.C. GUDDUversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 367 January 2026

The case arose from a murder investigation where the FIR named nine persons, but the police filed a charge sheet against only three, filing a closure report for the remaining six. Based on oral eyewitness testimony, the first informant applied under Section 319 CrPC to have the six dropped co-accused added as accused;

OM PRAKASH @ ISRAEL @ RAJU @ RAJU DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 437 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, convicted of culpable homicide amounting to murder for a 1994 incident, claimed he was a minor at the time of the offence, asserting a plea of juvenility under s.9(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Despite earlier courts treating him as an adult based on a bank‑accou

THE STATE OF PUNJABversusHARI KESH

2025 INSC 507 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab prosecuted Hari Kesh under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, after a sanction order dated 19‑Nov‑2018 was issued. The trial had commenced and the prosecution had examined several witnesses when the accused filed a petition in the High Court seeking quashing of the sanct

JASDEEP SINGH @ JASSUversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 237 January 2022Disposed off

The case involved the murder of a man at a dhaba in Jalandhar, where four accused (A1‑A4) were convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC. The father of the deceased (PW6) initially did not allege that A3 and A4 instigated the shooting, but later, in a supplementary statement under Section 161 CrPC, claimed they did. The t

RAJESH PRASADversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. ETC.

2022 INSC 197 January 2022Case Partly allowed

The case concerned an appeal by Rajesh Prasad, the informant, against a High Court order that set aside the conviction and death sentences of three accused who had been found guilty under IPC s.302/34, 120B and the Explosive Substances Act s.3/4 for throwing bombs that killed his father and another victim. The High Cou

M.E. SHIVALINGAMURTHYversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BENGALURU

2020 INSC 67 January 2020Dismissed

The case involved a partnership firm (AMC) whose reconstitution in 2009 led the Director of Mines and Geology of Karnataka (the appellant) to issue Mineral Dispatch Permits (MDPs) to the new partners. The Central Bureau of Investigation alleged that the appellant acted without the prior State Government sanction requir

MONUversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2019 INSC 247 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Monu appealed to the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court Single Judge dismissed his Section 482 application seeking quashal of a charge‑sheet filed under IPC sections 420, 498A, 323, 376, 506 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The High Court dismissed the petition with a terse order stating there was

PARBIN ALI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 107 January 2013Dismissed

The appellants Parbin Ali and another were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for the murder of Sakat Ali, based primarily on an oral dying declaration made by the deceased to his wife, father‑in‑law and relatives. The trial court and the Gauhati High Court upheld the conviction, finding the declaration credible d

RAJ PALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 117 January 2013Dismissed

The appellant Raj Pal was convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the killing of his rival's brother. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony of the deceased's brother and sister, medical reports indicating fatal injuries that could not be self‑inflicted, and the recovery of weapons. The appellant

SAJJAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 247 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sajjan Sharma, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Narain Kunwar in an alleged unlawful assembly that fired weapons. The FIR and the original Fard‑e‑beyan named five accused, including the appellant's father and brother, but did not name the appellant himself. He was later added in the

DEEN DAYAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2009 INSC 67 January 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the death of Asha Devi, who was found dead in a well after 15 months of marriage to Amar Singh. Medical evidence showed two distinct head injuries inconsistent with a fall, indicating she was beaten before being dumped in the well. Witnesses, including the deceased's father, brother, and moth

BRINDABAN DAS AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2009 INSC 97 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a murder FIR filed on 29‑11‑2002 in which, besides the named assailant Laxman Murmu, the complainant alleged that several other persons might have been involved. The appellants were granted anticipatory bail, later discharged from the case on 30‑6‑2004, and were not named in the charge‑sheet. Two ye

CHOUDHURY PARVEEN SULTANAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

2009 INSC 107 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a complaint alleging that a Deputy Superintendent of Police, while investigating a shooting case, threatened her husband to withdraw his statement and attempted to obtain his signature on a blank paper. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the alleged offences under IPC sections 384 and 506 an

MOHD. SHAMIM AND ORS.versusSMT. NAHID BEGUM AND ANR.

2005 INSC 167 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The husband (Mohd. Shamim) and his relatives were accused by his wife, Nahid Begum, of offences under Sections 406, 498A and 34 IPC. During the hearing of an anticipatory bail application, an Additional Sessions Judge facilitated a settlement whereby the appellants paid Rs. 2.25 lakh and agreed to pay a further Rs. 50,

LALLU MANJHI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2003 INSC 17 January 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved ten accused charged with offences under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the IPC for an alleged murder during an unlawful assembly. The sole eyewitness, PW9, altered his testimony at trial compared to his original FIR statement, and his account was not corroborated by medical or forensic evidence. Th

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusM.V. MANJUNATHEGOWDA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 37 January 2003Case Partly allowed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted M.V. Manjunathegowda (A‑1) and others for the murder of his wife Kamalamma, alleging that she was killed within seven years of marriage after the accused demanded a dowry of Rs 10,000 and three sovereigns of gold, of which only Rs 8,000 was paid. The trial court convicted A‑1 under Sec

STATE OF M.P.versusBHUPENDRA SINGH

2000 INSC 97 January 2000Dismissed

The respondent was arrested on 17 February 1977 with detonators in his possession and was charged under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. He challenged the prosecution on the ground that the consent required under Section 7 of the Act had not been properly obtained. The High Court of Madhya Prades

M.C. MEHTA ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 37 January 1998

The Supreme Court considered a petition filed under Article 32 seeking clarification on the constitution of an Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority for the National Capital Region (NCR) under Section 3 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986. The Court examined whether the earlier order of 13 Septem

DHARAMPAL AND ORS .versusSMT. RAMSHRI AND ORS.

1993 INSC 17 January 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants and the first respondent disputed possession of a house. The respondent filed a criminal application under Section 145 of the CrPC, and the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate attached the property under Section 146, directing that the attachment continue until a competent civil court determined the parties' right

KUNHIMUHAMMED@KUNHEETHUversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2024 INSC 9376 December 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a sympathiser of a political party, participated in a violent clash on 11 April 2006 during which he stabbed the deceased Subrahmannian multiple times with a knife, causing fatal injuries to vital organs. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 324 and 326/34 of the IPC and sentenced him to lif

LAKHAN SINGHversusAMARJEET SINGH & ANR

2022 INSC 13276 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Lakhan Singh, convicted of murder under IPC s.302 and sentenced to life, appealed the conviction and also sought to adduce additional evidence to support an insanity defence under IPC s.84. The Delhi High Court, invoking CrPC ss.311 and 391, allowed the application and directed the trial court to record the extra evide

THE STATE OF TELANGANAversusSRI MANAGIPET @ MANGIPET SARVESHWAR REDDY

2019 INSC 13336 December 2019Disposed off

The State of Telangana filed a criminal appeal against a Hyderabad High Court order that partially quashed a charge‑sheet under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against former OSD Sri Managipet @ Mangipet Sarveshwar Reddy for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. The High Court had held that the

DARSHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2019 INSC 13276 December 2019Dismissed

The deceased, Surjit Kaur, was found dead in a jute bag with her face disfigured by acid; she had inherited land and was not receiving lease money from her son, providing a motive for the accused. The prosecution relied on extra‑judicial confessions recorded by a witness, medical evidence of a fractured hyoid bone and

LAJPAT & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2018 INSC 11636 December 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Lajpat and others were charged under Sections 420, 406 and 504 of the IPC. They filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the charge sheet. The Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court dismissed the application, relying solely on Supreme Court pronouncements about the scope of Se

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusPRADEEP SHARMA

2013 INSC 8106 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged Pradeep Sharma and co‑accused with murder and conspiracy (IPC ss.302, 120B, 34) for allegedly poisoning the deceased. Both accused were declared absconders and proclaimed offenders under CrPC s.82, and the High Court granted them anticipatory bail under s.438. The Supreme Court exami

ALSIA PARDHIversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2013 INSC 8076 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Alsia Pardhi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the production of his 14‑year‑old niece, Rajnandani, alleging that forest officials had abducted her from a fish market. The State police, acting on the High Court's direction, recorded statements only of the forest officials and ignored eyewi

SRI BHAGWANversusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 5686 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Sri Bhagwan, was convicted for murdering Yogender Nath Bhargava by pouring acid on him, an offence initially registered under Section 326 IPC and later altered to Section 302 IPC. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two eyewitnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑3) who claimed to have seen the assault, and on the

AKIL@ JAVEDversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2012 INSC 5676 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant Akil @ Javed was convicted for murder (IPC s.302) and robbery (IPC s.392) along with a co‑accused. The prosecution relied on the testimony of several eye‑witnesses, especially PW‑20 who identified the appellant, and on the recovery of a Rado watch and gold chain from the appellant that were identified by

PARKASH SINGH BADAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9606 December 2006Dismissed

The petitioners, including former Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, challenged prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the IPC on the ground that no prior sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was obtained and that the complaints were filed with malafide intent. The Court examined the scope of

LALU PRASAD@ LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CBI (AHD) PATNA

2006 INSC 9616 December 2006Dismissed

The appeals concerned the validity of a sanction to prosecute Lalu Prasad Yadav under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The sanction had been issued under Section 19(1)(b) of the Act and Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but was signed by the Secretary to the Government

K.KARUNAKARANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 9646 December 2006Disposed off

The appellant, K. Karunakaran, was prosecuted for an alleged abuse of office. The High Court held that no sanction under CrPC Section 197 was required because the appellant was not holding the office at the time the court took cognizance of the offence. The appellant further contended that the prosecution was driven by

SUNITA DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6976 December 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Sunita Devi filed a complaint alleging assault, attempted rape and robbery by Anuj Kumar and others. Anuj Kumar obtained anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC from the Patna High Court, which granted him an unconditional, unlimited protection. Sunita Devi appealed, contending that such blanket protection cont

STATE OF PUNJABversusBHAG SINGH

2003 INSC 6926 December 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Bhag Singh was tried under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and acquitted by the trial court because the prosecution case rested solely on official witnesses and lacked an independent witness. The State of Punjab sought leave to appeal the acquittal under Section 378(3) of the CrPC, but the Punjab and Haryana High Court dism

HARJEET SINGH @ SEETAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2001 INSC 5986 December 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Harjeet Singh, charged under Sections 302/34 and 307/34 of the IPC, applied for bail which was denied by the trial court but granted by a Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The State filed a separate application before another High Court judge seeking cancellation of the bail on the ground that the orig

MIHIR RAJESH SHAHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 12886 November 2025Directions issued

The appellant, Mihir Rajesh Shah, was arrested for a fatal hit‑and‑run involving his BMW, but the police failed to provide him with a written copy of the grounds of arrest as required by Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The High Court upheld the arrest de

STATE OF CHHATTISGARHversusAMIT AISHWARYA JOGI

2025 INSC 12856 November 2025Dismissed

The trial court acquitted Amit Aishwarya Jogi in a 2007 murder case involving the killing of a Congress leader, after a CBI‑investigated chargesheet superseded the original police investigation. The State of Chhattisgarh, the CBI and the victim’s son (de‑facto complainant) sought leave to appeal the acquittal, but the

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusBIBHU PRASAD ACHARYA, ETC.

2024 INSC 8436 November 2024Dismissed

The Enforcement Directorate filed complaints under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA alleging money‑laundering offences by two civil servants, one a Vice Chairman/Managing Director of a state corporation and the other a Principal Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh government. The Special Court took cognizance of the complaints

DEVENDRA KUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 8416 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants assaulted the deceased, Bahal, with lathis and an axe after threatening to kill him, during a land dispute that created prior enmity between the families. Bahal later died from head injuries, and the trial court convicted the appellants under Section 302 IPC and Section 307 read with Section 34, sentenci

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusT. NASEER @ NASIR @ THANDIANTAVIDA NASEER @ UMARHAZI @ HAZI & ORS.

2023 INSC 9886 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted accused persons for a series of bomb blasts in Bangalore in 2008, seizing numerous electronic devices that were examined by the CFSL, Hyderabad, producing a report dated 29‑11‑2010. The trial court refused to admit the CFSL report without a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence

ADITI ALIAS MITHIversusJITESH SHARMA

2023 INSC 9816 November 2023Disposed off

The minor daughter of Jitesh Sharma challenged the High Court's order that reduced the maintenance awarded by the Family Court from Rs 20,000 to Rs 7,500 per month. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court had not required the parties to file the uniform affidavits of disclosure of assets and liabilities prescrib

MANJUNATH & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 9786 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of six appellants for offences under various sections of the IPC, based primarily on a dying declaration, ocular testimony and circumstantial evidence. The trial court had acquitted all accused, but the Karnataka High Court overturned the acquittals of five appellants, sentencing them

JAVED ABDUL RAJJAQ SHAIKHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 12106 November 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh, was accused of murdering his wife by throttling her after demanding half tola gold, money and a dress. The trial court convicted him and three co‑accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and also under Section 498A. The High Court acquitted the co‑accused and c

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusTRIBHUWAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 10786 November 2017Case Partly allowed

In 1980 a violent altercation in Azamgarh resulted in the death of Ram Lagan and injuries to Baij Nath. Six persons, including Tribhuwan, were tried; Tribhuwan was convicted under Section 325 IPC read with Section 149 and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Court. The Allahabad High Court uphe

VIPUL SHITAL PRASAD AGARWALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2012 INSC 5086 November 2012Dismissed

Dr. Vipul Shital Prasad Agarwal, a Superintendent of Police, was arrested in connection with FIR No.115 of 2006 concerning a alleged fake encounter. The Supreme Court had directed the CBI to take over the investigation and the CBI registered a fresh FIR, but the original charge‑sheet filed under the first FIR was submi

MD. ANKOOS & ORS.versusTHE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, H!GH COURT OF A.P.

2009 INSC 12186 November 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The accused (MD. Ankoos & others) were charged with murder, rioting, house trespass and related offences for the killing of five villagers suspected of sorcery. The trial court acquitted all 77 accused, finding the eye‑witness testimonies (PW‑2 to PW‑4) unreliable and noting contradictions. The High Court set aside the

RASIKLAL DALPATRAM THAKKARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2009 INSC 12226 November 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Rasiklal Dalpatram Thakar, was charged by Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank for alleged loan fraud. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, under Section 156(3) of the CrPC ordered the Economic Offences Wing, State CID, to investigate. The investigating agency submitted a report stating that t

JAYABALANversusU.T. OF PONDICHERRY

2009 INSC 12236 November 2009Dismissed

Jayabalan was convicted of murdering his wife Vasanthi after the High Court reversed a trial‑court acquittal. The prosecution proved that the couple’s relationship was strained, the husband had beaten the wife, poured kerosene on her and set her on fire, as corroborated by an oral dying declaration and the testimony of

MD. SHAKEELversusSTATE POLICE THROUGH P.S. HANMAKONDA & ANR.

2008 INSC 12546 November 2008Disposed off

MD Shakeel was convicted under IPC sections 304‑B and 498‑A and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for the alleged dowry‑related death of his wife. The conviction was affirmed by the trial court and the first appellate court, while the co‑accused were acquitted. Shakeel filed a revision petition in the Andhra Prade

NARESH J. SUKHAWANIversusUNION OF INDIA

1995 INSC 6896 November 1995Dismissed

The Customs officials seized foreign exchange worth Rs.13,27,212 being exported from India. During investigation, a co‑accused, Mr. Dudani, gave a statement to customs officers under Section 108 of the Customs Act, implicating both himself and the petitioner, Mr. Sukhawani, in the contravention. The Additional Collecto

BALVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 8796 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant Balvir Singh was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC and dowry harassment under s.498A IPC, while his mother‑in‑law Maheshwari Devi was convicted of s.498A IPC read with s.34 IPC. The prosecution proved that the victim died from aluminium phosphide poisoning, a fumigant not explainable by her heart medica

RANJAN KUMAR CHADHAversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2023 INSC 8786 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant was arrested at a bus stand after police received a tip that he was carrying charas. He consented to be searched by the police, and during the search of his bag, 1.25 kg of charas was recovered. The trial court acquitted him, holding that Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which mandates informing the suspect of

BHARATH BOOSHAN AGGARWALversusSTATE OF KERALA

2021 INSC 6216 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a sandalwood oil manufacturer, was convicted under Section 27(1)(d) of the Kerala Forest Act for allegedly possessing forest produce illicitly removed from a reserved forest. The High Court upheld the conviction, treating the presumption under Section 69 as creating a reverse burden of proof on the accus

HIRAL P. HARSORA AND ORS.versusKUSUM NAROTTAMDAS HARSORA AND ORS.

2016 INSC 9556 October 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the definition of "respondent" in Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which limited it to an "adult male person". The Court held that this restriction bore no rational relation to the Act's purpose of protecting women from all forms of domestic violence a

SATYAPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2015 INSC 7376 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a deceased woman filed an appeal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the acquittal of five accused in a dowry‑death case. The High Court dismissed the appeal mechanically, without examining whether the appellant needed leave of the High Court under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Proce

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE THR. CBI

2010 INSC 6796 October 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Santosh Kumar Singh, was accused of raping and murdering Priyadarshini Mattoo. The trial court acquitted him, rejecting the DNA evidence and deeming the circumstantial evidence insufficient. The High Court reversed the acquittal, finding the chain of circumstantial facts – continuous harassment, presence

RATHINAM @ RATHINANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2009 INSC 11666 October 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the rape and murder of a mill worker, Chitra, for which Rathinam, the son of the mill owner, was charged under Sections 376, 302 and 201 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court reversed this acquittal based largely on the later statements of two witnesses, PW‑4 and PW‑5,

CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION AND ANR .versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4886 October 2005

The Supreme Court examined a petition challenging the appointment of Ms. Neera Yadav as Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, where she faced pending corruption investigations and disciplinary proceedings. The petition raised whether Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, barred prosecution of a public servan

IN THE MATTER OF; "RV", A JUDICIAL OFFICER versus

2004 INSC 5796 October 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellant, a subordinate judicial officer, was ordered by a High Court Single Judge to expedite a criminal trial and to explain delays. After the trial judge submitted a detailed written explanation citing massive case pendency, witness numbers, and administrative bottlenecks, the High Court dismissed the accused’s

LEELA RAM (D) THROUGH DULI CHANDversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1999 INSC 4616 October 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Om Prakash was charged under Section 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for shooting Maman Ram during a village dispute. The trial court convicted him based on eye‑witness testimony, ballistic evidence and the post‑mortem report, sentencing him to life imprisonment. The Punjab & Haryana High Court acqui

ARVINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1994 INSC 4496 October 1994Disposed off

Arvinder Singh filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that he, his wife Nidhi, and other family members were illegally detained, assaulted, and tortured by police officers in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. The District Judge conducted an inquiry, examined witnesses and concluded that the police had fabricated record

BACCAROSE PERFUMES AND BEAUTY PRODUCTS PVT. LTDversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2024 INSC 6626 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Pvt. Ltd (the appellant) challenged the Special Judge's order taking cognizance of alleged offences relating to the payment of Countervailing Duty (CVD) on invoice value instead of Maximum Retail Price (MRP). The company claimed that it had been granted immunity from prosecution u

MANDAKINI DIWAN AND ANR.versusTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2024 INSC 6666 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, mother and brother of Ranjana Diwan, alleged that her death in 2016, officially recorded as suicide, was suspicious due to six ante‑mortem injuries and possible influence by her husband, a senior judicial officer, over the police investigation. They filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a fair

R. SREENIVASAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 8036 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a co-accused in a murder case, was acquitted by the trial court on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was last seen in his company. The High Court reversed this acquittal and convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, relying on a disputed 'last seen' th

K. HYMAVATHIversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 8116 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant K. Hymavathi loaned Rs 20 lakh to respondent No.2, who executed a promissory note on 25 July 2012 promising repayment by December 2016. The respondent later issued a cheque for Rs 10 lakh on 28 April 2017, which was dishonoured, leading the appellant to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable

SMT. ROOPA SONIversusKAMALNARAYAN SONI

2023 INSC 8146 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The marriage between Roopa Soni and Kamalnarayan Soni, solemnised in 2002, broke down after the birth of their child, leading to a separation that has lasted for over fifteen years. Both parties filed serious allegations against each other, including a complaint under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, and

DHARIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusKISHORE WADHWANI & ORS.

2016 INSC 8536 September 2016Disposed off

Dhariwal Industries Ltd filed a complaint under Sec. 200 CrPC alleging several IPC offences. After the police investigation and filing of a charge‑sheet, the accused applied for discharge under Sec. 239 CrPC. The appellant sought, orally, permission to be heard alongside the Assistant Public Prosecutor at the charge‑fr

L. NARAYANA SWAMYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2016 INSC 8566 September 2016Dismissed

The petitioners alleged that certain public officials abused their positions to facilitate a land transaction and sought quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The High Court had dismissed the petition, holding that the order directing investigation under Section 156(3) C

UMESH KUMARversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR

2013 INSC 5906 September 2013Disposed off

The case arose from a complaint alleging that a senior police officer, V. Dinesh Reddy, had amassed disproportionate assets, which was later claimed to be forged and signed by a fictitious MP. An investigation led to a charge sheet against Umesh Kumar under IPC sections 468, 471, 120‑B and 201, and the appellant sought

AJAY KUMAR DASversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2011 INSC 6556 September 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Ajay Kumar Das, was charged under IPC 304B (dowry death) read with s.34 for the death of his wife, who was allegedly pushed into a well by her parents‑in‑law after a telephone conversation with the appellant. The FIR implicated the parents‑in‑law and the appellant, and a charge‑sheet was filed. The appel

SURINDER SINGH @ SHINGARA SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 4016 September 2005Disposed off

Surinder Singh, convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 and sentenced to life imprisonment, appealed his conviction. While his appeal was pending, he applied for regular bail; the Punjab and Haryana High Court denied it, though a co-accused was released on bail. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court's

HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2001 INSC 4296 September 2001Dismissed

The appellants, Harshad S. Mehta and others, sought to revoke conditional pardons granted by the Special Court under the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, arguing that the Court lacked jurisdiction to grant pardon because the power under Sections 306 and 307 of the Crim

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusKAJAD

2001 INSC 4306 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, KAJAD, was arrested under Section 50 of the NDPS Act with 7 kg of opium and charged under Section 18, an offence punishable with imprisonment of ten to twenty years. His bail applications were rejected by the trial court and initially by the High Court, but a later High Court order granted bail despite

NARSINGH DAS TAPADIAversusGOVERDHAN DAS PARTANI AND ANR.

2000 INSC 4366 September 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Narsingh Das Tapadia, lent Rs. 2,30,000 to the respondent, G.D. Partani, who issued a post‑dated cheque that was dishonoured on 6 October 1994. After serving a notice on 26 October 1994, the appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 8 November 1994, which was retu

MAJOR ASHOK KUMAR SINGHversusVITH ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, VARANASI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 5416 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant and respondent were married in 1981. The wife filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking maintenance and a separate residence on the ground that the husband was impotent and neglected her. The magistrate awarded Rs. 500 per month, which was affirmed by the Sessions

SHAFIQ AHMADversusDISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MEERUT & ORS.

1989 INSC 2706 September 1989Case Allowed

The petitioner challenged his preventive detention under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, arguing that the order dated 15 April 1988 was executed after an unreasonable delay (arrest on 2 October 1988) and that the grounds cited were not genuinely related to public order and were vague. The Supreme Court

SUSHIL CHOWDHARY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1979 INSC 1756 September 1979Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by special leave concerning the convictions of Munni Marandi and Babua Marandi for offences under Section 149 read with Section 326 of the IPC. Munni, an adult, was found to have participated in a crowd that chased the deceased and was sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonmen

AASIF @ PASHAversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2025 INSC 9446 August 2025Disposed off

The appellant was convicted under several provisions of the IPC, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Atrocities Act and sentenced to a maximum of four years’ rigorous imprisonment, to run concurrently. While his appeal against conviction was pending before the Allahabad High Court, he filed an application under Section 389 of

SHANTI DEVIversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 9876 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shanti Devi, her son Rajbir and another accused Veena were convicted by the trial court and upheld by the High Court for the murder of Balwant, the informant's son, under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC. The prosecution's case relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including a motive of illegal occupa

JAMNALALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 9356 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a minor rape victim appealed against the Rajasthan High Court's order that suspended the conviction and sentence of the accused under Section 389 of the CrPC and released him on bail. The accused had been convicted under Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act and Section 376(3) of the IPC, receiving a 20‑year r

ANAND RAMACHANDRA CHOUGULEversusSIDARAI LAXMAN CHOUGALA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 8636 August 2019Dismissed

The case arose from a land dispute between related parties that escalated into a verbal duel and scuffle on 7 June 2002, resulting in the death of a person. The trial court convicted all four accused under Section 302 IPC with a common intention charge, but the Karnataka High Court altered the conviction of two accused

MANZOOR ALI KHANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 5266 August 2014Disposed off

The petition sought a declaration that Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which requires prior sanction before a public servant can be prosecuted, is unconstitutional and that all pending cases should proceed without such sanction. The Court examined whether the sanction requirement infringes the rig

BAKHSHISH SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2013 INSC 5186 August 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Bakhshish Singh, his nephew Satbir Singh and Rachhpal Singh for the murder of Gurcharan Singh, who was stabbed while taking a morning walk in a park. The prosecution proved that Satbir and Rachhpal, identified by the victim's wife Kulwinder Kaur, carried out the stabbing, whil

DINESH B. PATEL & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2010 INSC 4856 August 2010Dismissed

A criminal complaint was filed against a medicine‑manufacturing company and its directors alleging that the drug was defective due to fungal growth, constituting a breach of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The company and its directors sought to quash the complaint under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Guj

MOHD. FAROOQ ABDUL GAFUR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 10196 August 2009Disposed off

The case involved a gang‑led shoot‑out in Mumbai that resulted in three deaths and several injuries. The accused were charged under the IPC, the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) and the Arms Act. The trial court convicted six of the eight accused, sentencing three to death, while two were acquitted. O

DEVIDAS RAMSUNDER SHUKLAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 9116 August 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Devidas Ram Sunder Shukla (A‑2), together with his son Santosh Devidas Shukla (A‑1) and two others, were convicted under IPC sections 302, 202 and 34 for the murder of Manoja, who was burnt to death in the house they shared. The prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the presen

RAJENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 8116 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a murder in which the first informant, Rajendra Singh, alleged that Kapil Dev Singh (respondent No.2) participated. Although the charge‑sheet named only the co‑accused, the Sessions Court summoned Kapil Dev Singh under Section 319 of the CrPC based on the informant’s statement. Kapil Dev Singh filed

SILAK RAM AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2007 INSC 8126 August 2007Dismissed

The appellants Silak Ram, Narotam alias Raja and Bijender alias Binder were convicted for the murder of Jagbir under Sections 302 and 34 IPC. The prosecution relied on three eye‑witnesses (PW10, PW11 and PW14); PW11’s testimony was found cogent and consistent with medical evidence, while PW10’s identification was imper

KULWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2007 INSC 8156 August 2007Disposed off

Kulwinder Singh was accused of attempting to rape the sister of the complainant, subsequently strangling her, and assaulting the complainant's grandmother with a gandasi, leading to both victims' deaths. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to death; the High Court set aside the death s

AMIT @ AMMUversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2003 INSC 3736 August 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 20‑year‑old male, was accused of raping and murdering an 11‑12‑year‑old girl who was last seen with him on 28 March 2001. The girl's body was discovered the next day in a dilapidated building, and the post‑mortem report confirmed strangulation and sexual assault. The prosecution relied on the testimony

ANIL RAIversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2001 INSC 3426 August 2001Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals by several accused convicted of murder and offences under the Arms Act. It addressed whether the two‑year delay by the Patna High Court in pronouncing its judgment violated the right to speedy justice under Article 21 and the right of appeal. The Court held that such unexplained delay

UMAR ABDUL SAKOOR SORA THIAversusINTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU

1999 INSC 3106 August 1999Dismissed

The police intercepted a truck carrying a large consignment of Mandrax tablets that had been dispatched from an Indian port to a fictitious foreign company. The appellant, the chairman of the clearing agency that took possession of the consignment during off‑loading, was identified by a police inspector through a photo

MADAN LALversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

1997 INSC 5996 August 1997Dismissed

Madan Lal, a school headmaster, was charged under Sections 376/511 IPC for attempting to rape a 13‑year‑old student who he allegedly detained at his residence and forced to sexual intercourse. The trial court acquitted him, finding the victim’s testimony unreliable, the medical report inconclusive, and the semen eviden

RAMBHAI NATH BHAI GANDHVI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1997 INSC 6006 August 1997Case Partly allowed

The accused were arrested for smuggling arms and were tried by a Designated Court under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) and the Arms Act, 1959. The trial court convicted them, relying on an order dated 3 September 1993 issued by the Director General of Police, which the appellants

U.P. POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDversusMODI DISTILLERY & ORS.

1987 INSC 1996 August 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (the Board) refused consent to Modi Distillery's discharge of trade effluents into the Kali River because its application was incomplete and the unit lacked proper treatment facilities. After repeated notices, the Board lodged a complaint under section 44 of the Water (Preventi

SIRAJUL & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. &ANR.

2015 INSC 4816 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Sirajul and others, were summoned in a criminal complaint under Section 307 IPC filed by respondent No.2, a co‑accused who had been convicted in a cross‑case relating to the same 1992 incident. The complaint was lodged in 2008, sixteen years after the alleged offence and more than a decade after the cro

MAINUDDIN ABDUL SATTAR SHAIKHversusVIJAY D. SALVI

2015 INSC 4806 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant booked a flat with the respondent's company and paid Rs.74,200, for which the respondent later issued a cheque for refund. The cheque was drawn by the respondent in his personal capacity and was dishonoured, leading the appellant to issue a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and fi

STATE OF M.P.versusMANISH & ORS.

2015 INSC 4846 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order that quashed an FIR for offences under IPC sections 307, 294, 34 and Arms Act sections 25, 27 on the ground that the victim and accused had settled the dispute out of court. The issue was whether the High Court could invoke its inherent power under Section 482 of

MS. MAYAWATIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2012 INSC 2726 July 2012Case Allowed

Mayawati, then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging FIR No. RC 0062003A0019 dated 05.10.2003, which the CBI had lodged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act alleging disproportionate assets. The FIR was said to be based on a Sup

JAHID SHAIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2011 INSC 4636 July 2011Disposed off

The petitioners, accused in the 2008 Ahmedabad‑Surat bomb blast cases, sought transfer of the Sessions trial from Gujarat to another state under Section 406 of the CrPC, alleging bias by police, jail authorities and the judiciary and a hostile communal atmosphere that would deny them a free and fair trial. The State op

JALPAT RAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 4646 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a triple murder and injury incident in Jind, Haryana, where six accused were tried. The trial court convicted only A‑2 under IPC s.302 and the Arms Act, acquitting the other five appellants. The High Court reversed the acquittals, convicting the five under s.148 and s.302 r.w. s.149 IPC. On appeal,

SUBA SINGH & ANR.versusDAVINDER KAUR & ANR.

2011 INSC 4696 July 2011Dismissed

Suba Singh and his son Shingara Singh were convicted of murder and related offences for the killing of Surinder Singh. The widow of the deceased and her minor daughter filed a civil suit under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 seeking Rs. 3 lakh as compensation. The trial court awarded the amount with 12% interest, which w

SHIVJEE SINGHversusNAGENDRA TIWARY AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3556 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shivjee Singh filed a protest petition that was converted into a complaint alleging that four persons killed his son. The Judicial Magistrate, after examining the appellant and only two of the four witnesses he named, took cognizance of offences under Sections 302, 1208 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act and iss

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. ASIAN GLOBAL LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 3566 July 2010Dismissed

The Central Bank of India sued Asian Global Ltd., its sister concern, and several directors for offences under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that a cheque issued as a corporate guarantee was dishonoured. The trial court held the bank to be a holder in due course and rejected the direc

JAGRITI DEVIversusSTATE OF H.P.

2009 INSC 8636 July 2009Case Partly allowed

Jagriti Devi was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly killing her co‑wife Shama Devi with a khukri after an altercation. She claimed she acted in private defence after the deceased attacked her with the same weapon, which the deceased had kept under her pillow. The trial court and High Court upheld t

STATE OF U.P.versusNANDU VISHWAKARMA & ORS.

2009 INSC 8646 July 2009Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted Nandu Vishwakarma and others for the murder of Dangar Yadav and injuries to two witnesses arising out of a land‑related dispute. The trial court convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 367 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Allahabad High C

RAMVIR & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2009 INSC 8666 July 2009Disposed off

The prosecution alleged that on 17 April 1978, the deceased Yashpal was surrounded by three brothers, Ramvir, Ranpal Singh and Chatar Singh, and Ramvir delivered a fatal knife blow to his chest. The trial court convicted Ramvir under s.302 IPC and the other two brothers under s.302 read with s.34 IPC, sentencing all to

MASAUDDIN AHMEDversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2009 INSC 8586 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Masauddin Ahmed was convicted by the Sessions Court and later by the High Court for raping a maid, Mira Begum, under Section 376 IPC. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the evidence, noting that the doctor who examined the victim stated she was 18 years old, while the prosecution relied on the victim’s claim of bein

K.K. AHUJAversusV.K. VORA AND ANR.

2009 INSC 8596 July 2009Dismissed

The appellant filed complaints under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against a company and its officers, including the Deputy General Manager (first respondent), for dishonoured cheques. The trial court issued summons to all accused, but the Deputy General Manager sought quashing of the summons on the gro

SHAKSON BELTHISSORversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2009 INSC 8626 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Shakson Belthisor appealed against the Kerala High Court’s order refusing to quash the FIR and charge sheet filed under Section 498A IPC for alleged cruelty by the husband. The Supreme Court examined whether the FIR and charge sheet disclosed any of the essential ingredients of cruelty as defined in explanations (a) or

CHANIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2006 INSC 4026 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by Channi, who had been convicted under the IPC and whose sentence was partially altered by the Allahabad High Court. Channi applied for release on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, alternatively under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but t

V.K. RATHEESHversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 4046 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

V.K. Ratheesh was tried for murder (IPC 302) and the trial court acquitted him, finding serious discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence. The Kerala High Court set aside the acquittal, deeming the discrepancies trivial, and convicted him under IPC 304(1) with a seven‑year sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court exami

AJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 6906 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Ajay Singh was convicted of murdering his wife under Section 302 IPC, primarily on the basis of an alleged extra‑judicial confession and the presence of kerosene on his clothing. The Supreme Court examined whether the confession, recorded by witnesses who were either inimical or had a relationship with the

MOHAMMED ASARUDEENversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2025 INSC 7466 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, accused in a NIA case, challenged an order of the Special Court that granted witness protection to a large number of witnesses under sub‑section 2 of section 44 of the UAPA and the corresponding provision in the NIA Act, without recording individual satisfaction for each witness. The High Court upheld mo

RAMKIRAT MUNILAL GOUDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.

2025 INSC 7026 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 3‑year‑9‑month‑old child based on three strands of circumstantial evidence: a disputed 'last seen together' testimony, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, and a forensic soil match. The Supreme Court examined whether the investigation was

CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIAversusM.R VIJAYABHASKAR & ORS.

2021 INSC 2866 May 2021Disposed off

The Chief Election Commissioner (EC) sought an order restraining the media from reporting oral remarks made by the Madras High Court, which alleged that the EC was "singularly responsible for the second wave of COVID‑19" and should face murder charges. The High Court’s oral observations were not part of its written ord

GURU DUTT PATHAKversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 2856 May 2021Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of village Pradhan Ram Aasare Pathak, for which four accused were charged under IPC sections 302 and 34. The trial court acquitted all four, relying on alleged relationships among witnesses, lack of independent witnesses, disputed motive, and questions about the place of occurrence and inju

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusMEHRAM & ORS.

2020 INSC 3846 May 2020Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the High Court's conversion of the murder conviction of accused Mehram (No.5) under Section 302 IPC to a lesser offence under Section 326 IPC and the reduction of his sentence to five months. The facts reveal that the accused, armed with lethal weapons, lay in wait behind bushes

STATE OF HLMACHAL PRADESHversusRAJIV JASSI

2016 INSC 3846 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed the High Court's acquittal of Dr. Rajiv Jass, who was convicted by a trial court for murdering his pregnant wife by forcibly administering organophosphorus poison. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including multiple ante‑mortem injuries on the victim, the accused

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusP. VENKATESHWARLU

2015 INSC 3846 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub Registrar, was caught in a police‑laid trap after demanding a bribe of Rs.500 for registering a will. The prosecution proved demand and acceptance through eyewitness testimony, a positive phenolphthalein test, and the unchallenged recovery of the tainted money. The High Court acquitted the accused

SUBRATA ROY SAHARAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 3676 May 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Subrata Roy Sahara challenging an order dated 4.3.2014 directing his arrest and detention for non-compliance of earlier orders to refund money collected through Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCDs). The Court held that the two Sahara companies flouted orde

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusDIRECTOR, CENTERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2014 INSC 3586 May 2014Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 6‑A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (inserted by Section 26(c) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003), which required prior approval of the Central Government before the CBI could inquire into or investigate alleged offences u

KUSHALBHAI RATANBHAI ROHIT & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 3666 May 2014Dismissed

An FIR under the NDPS Act led to the arrest of a accused who escaped while being escorted by police constables. The constables were charged under IPC Section 222 and convicted, prompting them to file a criminal appeal. The Gujarat High Court, after dictating an acquitting order in open court but before signing it, reca

RAJ KUMAR SINGH @ RAJU @ BATYAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 3136 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder, rape and kidnapping of a 4‑year‑old girl based solely on circumstantial evidence, including the testimony of four family members and forensic findings. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the credibility of the witnesses, noting material contradictions, embellishments and incons

SUSHIL SURIversusC.B.I & ANR.

2011 INSC 3616 May 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a petition by Sushil Suri, an executive director of Morepen Labs Ltd., who sought to quash a CBI chargesheet under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. on the ground that the company had repaid the hire‑purchase loan it obtained fraudulently from Punjab & Sind Bank and thus caused no loss. The chargesh

MOHAMMED ISHAQversusS. KAZAM PASHA & ANR.

2009 INSC 7096 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a violent intrusion by A‑1 and his associates into the house of Mohammed Ishaq, during which household articles were seized and several occupants were assaulted. The trial court convicted A‑1 under IPC sections 148 (unlawful assembly), 392 (robbery) and 452 (house‑trespass) and sentenced him to rigo

MITHABHAI PASHABHAI PATEL AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2009 INSC 7116 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with multiple offences arising from an incident in August 2002 and were initially remanded to police custody under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. After a charge‑sheet was filed, the Sessions Court took cognizance and the High Court granted them bail. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was lat

C.B.I, NEW DELHI.versusABHISHEK VERMA

2009 INSC 7136 May 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by the CBI challenging the Delhi High Court’s grant of bail to Abhishek Verma, who was charged under Sections 3 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Sections 409/109 read with 120‑B of the IPC for allegedly receiving classified defence information via pen drives. The Court held

JAMIRUDDIN ANSARIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2009 INSC 7336 May 2009Disposed off

The case arose from a private complaint filed under Section 9(1) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) alleging organised crime offences by senior police officials. The Special Court ordered an investigation, but the Bombay High Court Full Bench was split on whether such a complaint could be enterta

GURNUNATH DONKAPPA KERI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 7356 May 2009Dismissed

The case arose from a long‑standing boundary dispute between two families in a Karnataka village, which escalated into a violent confrontation that resulted in the deaths of three persons. The prosecution relied on the testimony of three natural witnesses who were relatives of the victims, and on a First Information Re

BALDEV SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2009 INSC 7376 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Baldev Singh, was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC for the murder of his brother Pritam Singh. The conviction was based mainly on the testimony of a taxi driver (PW‑26) who claimed to have overheard a conspiratorial discussion, and on an alleged extra‑judicial confession of a co‑acc

DEVENDRA &ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2009 INSC 7386 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from a civil dispute among co‑sharers over the extent of their shares in a joint family property. Two co‑sharers sold a portion of the property to third parties, prompting the remaining co‑sharer to file a suit for cancellation of the sale deed and a criminal complaint alleging cheating and forgery und

PERLA SOMASEKHARA REDDY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2009 INSC 7196 May 2009Dismissed

The accused were charged with murder and related offences under the IPC and the Explosive Substances Act. The trial court acquitted them, but the High Court, on appeal by the State, convicted several of the accused under sections 302, 302 r/w 149 and 307, while acquitting them of other charges. The State appealed to th

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusRAKESH KUMAR

2009 INSC 7256 May 2009Case Partly allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh charged Rakesh Kumar with murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing the deceased, Sanjiv Sen, in the chest during a party at Yash Pal's house. The trial court convicted Kumar based on the testimony of three natural witnesses present in the room and the recovery of a blood‑stained knife fro

SHINDHU & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 7276 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Sharada allegedly committed suicide by jumping into a well due to alleged cruelty by her relatives. Five persons – the father‑in‑law, mother‑in‑law, husband, brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law – were charged under Sections 498‑A and 306 IPC read with Section 34. The trial court acquitted all five for lack of

BHARAT PRASAD & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2009 INSC 7296 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who had been granted Bataidari rights over a parcel of land through a proceeding under Section 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, saw those rights later challenged through multiple criminal proceedings under Sections 144 and 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The High Court refused to quash the criminal

SHANTHA @ USHADEVI AND ANR.versusB.G. SHIVANANJAPPA

2005 INSC 2666 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Shantha @Ushadevi and her minor daughter filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance, which was granted on 20 January 1993. They later filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.47/1993 under Section 125(3) to recover arrears up to August 1993, but the husband filed revisions in the Sessions Court an

N. SOMASHEKAR (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2004 INSC 3616 May 2004Disposed off

The accused, a senior police officer, was alleged to have assaulted and caused the death of a man in a hotel swimming pool. The trial court acquitted him, finding the medical evidence and witness testimony insufficient, while the Karnataka High Court set aside the acquittal, convicted him under Sections 302, 304(II), 2

VILAS PANDURANG PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2004 INSC 3636 May 2004Dismissed

V.P. Patil was accused of murdering his first wife Suman. The prosecution relied on motive, the accused's suspicious conduct, extra‑judicial confessions to two witnesses, blood‑stained articles, the mangalsutra and blood found in the accused's nail clippings, and a medical report indicating death by sub‑dural hematoma.

THAMAN KUMARversusSTATE OF UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH

2003 INSC 2796 May 2003Dismissed

The case involved three accused who were alleged to have strangled a rickshaw puller, Bhanwar Singh, using a cloth rolled into a rope. Two constables on night patrol heard the victim’s cries, entered the guest house and saw the assault, catching two of the accused while the third escaped by scaling a wall. The prosecut

STATE OF BIHARversusKAMLA PRASAD SINGH AND ORS.

1998 INSC 2216 May 1998Case Allowed

Kamla Prasad Singh filed a complaint alleging that police officers raided his house without a warrant, assaulted his wife, abused occupants and seized his property. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, after an inquiry under Section 202 of the CrPC, found that the raid was conducted under a valid warrant and supervised by an

TANVIBEN PANKAJ KUMAR DIVETIAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1997 INSC 4856 May 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tanviben Pankaj Kumar Divetia, was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of her mother‑in‑law, based solely on circumstantial evidence. The conviction was upheld by a third judge of the Gujarat High Court after a division bench was split, and the appellant appealed to

HARI SHANKER ETCversusSTATE OF U.P. ETC.

1996 INSC 6226 May 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Parshadi Lal, in which Hari Shanker fired a licensed 12‑bore gun belonging to Shiam Behari, killing the victim while the motorcycle was being pushed. The Court held that the medical evidence of blackening and a cork wad indicated a firing distance of roughly three feet to two ya

BHAGWANT SINGHversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI

1983 INSC 626 May 1983Disposed off

Bhagwant Singh, a senior Indian Revenue Service officer, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that his daughter Gurinder Kaur was murdered in a dowry‑related dispute and that the Delhi police investigation was irregular, delayed and failed to collect crucial evidence. The Supreme Court ex

SIVAKUMARversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2026 INSC 3186 April 2026Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a boundary dispute between close relatives in which the deceased Ganesan’s brother was killed after a heated altercation. The accused Senthil (A‑1) and Sivakumar (A‑2) were originally convicted of offences under Sections 324 and 325 IPC respectively, while the trial court acquitted them of the more

DR. S. BALAGOPALversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

2026 INSC 3196 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a pediatric surgeon, performed an orchidectomy on a 1½‑year‑old boy after obtaining a consent form that listed both orchidopexy and orchidectomy, but the father alleged that consent for orchidectomy was never given and that the term was interpolated. An FIR was filed under multiple IPC sections and the c

SAJAL BOSEversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2026 INSC 3226 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an FIR registered on 18 October 2022 alleging assault, criminal intimidation and related offences against eight persons, including Sajal Bose, his wife Nabina Bose and Chandidas Joardar. The High Court quashed the proceedings against two co‑accused but refused to grant the same relief to the three ap

JASPAL SINGH KAURALversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2025 INSC 4576 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jaspal Singh Kaural, had a consensual physical relationship with the complainant after promising to marry her and care for her children, leading her to obtain a divorce. When the appellant later refused to marry and threatened her children, the complainant filed an FIR under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. The

BISWAJYOTI CHATTERJEEversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2025 INSC 4586 April 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, a former judicial officer, was charged under Sections 376(2)(f), 417 and 506 IPC for allegedly promising marriage to a woman who was in the midst of a divorce, subsequently having a consensual relationship and later avoiding her. The complainant claimed the appellant used his position to exploit her, whi

DR. SOU JAYSHREE UJWAL INGOLEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2017 INSC 3176 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, a haemophiliac road‑accident victim, was admitted to Irvin Hospital. On 5 September 1997, after developing abdominal pain, the Emergency Medical Officer called Dr. Jayshree Ingole, the surgeon on call, who examined the patient, ordered a physician to be summoned and then left the hospital at about 11 p.m.

DEVENDRA NATH SRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF U.P.

2017 INSC 3166 April 2017Dismissed

Devendra Nath Srivastava was convicted by a trial court for murdering his wife after assaulting her with a brick, resulting in her death by asphyxia due to multiple ante‑mortem injuries. The trial court sentenced him to death under Section 302 IPC. On appeal, the Allahabad High Court set aside the murder conviction, ho

STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ETC.

2016 INSC 2986 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Standard Chartered Bank filed three complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against ABG Shipyard Ltd. and several of its directors for the dishonour of cheques issued to repay a Rs.200 crore loan. The Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons to the company and the directors, but the Bombay High Cou

SHAMIMA FAROOQUIversusSHAHID KHAN

2015 INSC 2836 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Shamima Farooqui, a Muslim woman, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance after being harassed and deserted by her husband Shahid Khan, who later divorced her. The Family Court ordered Rs 2,500 per month from the date of application and Rs 4,000 per month from the da

JASBIR SINGH @ JAVRI @ JABBAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 2846 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Jasbir Singh was convicted under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act for allegedly planning and attempting a dacoity with firearms. The Supreme Court examined the evidence, noting the absence of independent witnesses, the fact that the investigating officer himself conducted the

UTTAM CHAKRABORTYversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2010 INSC 1986 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

An eight‑month‑pregnant woman was found dead with severe abdominal injuries and the foetus removed. The husband, Mission Suklabaidhya, and his friend, Uttam Chakraborty, were convicted of murder; the husband received the death penalty and the friend life imprisonment. Both appealed to the Supreme Court, which examined

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAMESHWAR & ORS.

2009 INSC 4566 April 2009Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted directors of Indore Premier Co-operative Bank for allegedly sanctioning loans without proper verification, invoking Sections 409, 418, 420, 120‑B IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Trial Court framed charges, but the High Court

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusNARAYAN K. PATODIA

2000 INSC 1976 April 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The West Bengal Sales Tax Bureau, after investigating alleged fraud by Narayan K. Patodia involving forged applications and tax evasion, forwarded a complaint to the police which resulted in the registration of an FIR under several IPC offences and sections of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act. The Calcutta High Court quas

NARINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2000 INSC 1986 April 2000Dismissed

The appellants, Narinder Singh and Ravinder Singh alias Khanna, were charged with murdering Gurdev Singh, the Granthi of a village Gurudwara, after threatening him to relinquish his post. The Sessions Court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution failed to prove motive, that key witnesses were unreliable, and that

BHUPINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1988 INSC 936 April 1988Dismissed

Bhupinder Singh, his father Sher Singh and mother Mukhtiar Kaur were convicted of murdering Bhupinder's wife Gian Kaur by administering an organophosphorus poison, motivated by dowry demands. The trial and High Courts upheld the conviction of Bhupinder and Sher, acquitting Mukhtiar. On appeal, the Supreme Court examine

GYANENDRA SINGH @ RAJA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2025 INSC 3356 March 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Gyanendra Singh, was convicted for raping his nine‑year‑old daughter, resulting in convictions under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(i) of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, with a life sentence and a fine. He appealed, arguing that because the offences overlapped, the special law (POCSO) under

YUVRAJ LAXMILAL KANTHER & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 3386 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a contractor and a store manager, were charged with offences under Sections 304 Part II, 304A, 182 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the deaths of two employees who were electrocuted while working on a sign board using an iron ladder. They filed discharge applications under Section 227 of the

JAMIN & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 3306 March 2025Dismissed

The appellants Jamin and Akil were summoned as accused under Section 319 of the CrPC after the original murder trial had concluded and the co‑accused were convicted. They challenged the summoning order, arguing that the trial court could not entertain a Section 319 application after the trial and that the High Court ha

M/S SHRI SENDHUR AGRO & OIL INDUSTRIESversusKOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

2025 INSC 3286 March 2025Disposed off

Shri Sendhur Agro & Oil Industries, a proprietorship based in Coimbatore, defaulted on an overdraft facility and Kotak Mahindra Bank filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the Judicial Magistrate Court at Chandigarh. The petitioner sought transfer of the criminal case to a court in Tam

XXXXversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 1816 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought to quash FIR No. 52, registered under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC, alleging that the complaint was an abuse of process because the complainant, a married woman, had voluntarily entered into a relationship with him. The High Court dismissed the petition, but the Supreme Court examined the complai

VISHNU CHANDRU GAONKARversusN.M. DESSAI

2018 INSC 2146 March 2018Dismissed

Vishnu Chandra Gaonkar, a legal heir, alleged that advocate N.M. Dessai forged the thumb impression of a deceased appellant, Shaba Manju Velip, to withdraw a civil appeal and related execution proceedings. Gaonkar filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure Code seek

G.N. VERMAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2014 INSC 1736 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, G.N. Verma, the Chief General Manager of Karkata Colliery, was charged under s.72‑B of the Mines Act, 1952 for contravening a prohibitory order that led to a fatal accident. The complaint alleged that he was a "deemed Agent" of the mine, but it contained no specific allegation that he acted on behalf of

IZHARUL HAQ ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2009 INSC 3326 March 2009Disposed off

Three criminal appeals under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) sought bail for appellants – Izharl Haq Abdul Hamid Shaikh, Amir Gulam Husein Bandukwala and labourer Jivan Raghu Varli – who had been denied bail by Designated TADA Courts. The appellants argued that the FIRs were lodged

SAMIRA KHANUMversusMD. AFSAR TOWHEED AND ANR

2009 INSC 3346 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a complaint by Samira Khanum alleging dowry harassment, cruelty and breach of trust under Sections 498‑A and 406 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial magistrate ordered summons against the husband and his parents, which the husband challenged by filing an application unde

INSPECTOR OF CUSTOMS, AKHNOOR J & KversusYASH PAL AND ANR.

2009 INSC 3276 March 2009Dismissed

The respondents Yash Pal and others were convicted by a trial court for offences under Sections 8 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 based largely on their confessions to customs officials after a heroin seizure. The High Court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution had failed to p

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusMANGI LAL

2009 INSC 3406 March 2009Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of Mangilal, who was charged with the murder of four members of a family in August 1998. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including alleged illicit relationships, prior threats, a statement under Section 164 CrPC, alleged beating of an eye‑witness who la

JAGJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2009 INSC 3426 March 2009Dismissed

Jasprit Kaur, married to Jagjit Singh, died within 1 year 3 months of marriage, her body found hanging from a ceiling fan. The prosecution alleged that Jagjit and his parents subjected her to cruelty and demanded Rs 1 lakh for a house purchase, constituting dowry demand, leading to her death. The trial court acquitted

SANTOSH DEVIDAS BEHADE AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 3436 March 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Santosh Devidas Behade and others, upholding their conviction under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the murder of Bharat Kharat. The Court held that the prosecution had proved a common object of the unlawful assembly, satisfying the requirements of S

G.V. RAOversusL.H.V. PRASAD AND ORS.

2000 INSC 1226 March 2000Dismissed

The petitioner, a forward‑community scientist, married respondent No.4 after being told she belonged to a forward caste, later discovering she was from a Scheduled Tribe. He filed a criminal complaint under IPC sections 415, 419, 420 read with 34, alleging cheating due to the caste misrepresentation. The respondents ob

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusPRANAB RANJAN ROY

1998 INSC 1376 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal prosecuted Pranab Ranjan Roy under the Prevention of Corruption Act for disproportionate assets. Roy filed a vakalatnama on 29‑02‑1992 through his counsel to obtain certain documents, and the charge‑sheet was filed only on 04‑05‑1994. When summoned, Roy sought discharge under Section 167(5) of

M/S. NAV NIRMAN BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NAVEEN SINGHversusTHE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT OF INDIA RANCHI, JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 1306 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Nav Nirman Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) had two parcels of land provisionally attached under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and a confirmation order under s.8(3) was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal under s.26. While the appeal was pending, the Enforcement Directorate filed a

SANJAYversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 3176 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Sanjay was convicted of murder and rape of a four‑year‑old girl, X, and sentenced to death by the trial court, a decision affirmed by the High Court. The prosecution's case relied on the victim’s last‑seen testimony, an extra‑judicial confession by the accused that led to the recovery of the body and clot

VIHAAN KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 1626 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vihaan Kumar was arrested on 10 June 2024 for alleged offences under the IPC, but he was not informed of the grounds of his arrest as required by Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the CrPC. The High Court held that the information given to his wife and the entry in the police diary did n

AYYUB & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 1686 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a suspected romantic relationship between Ziaul Rahman and his cousin Tanu. After Ziaul’s death in a physical assault, Tanu allegedly committed suicide, and the complainant Vijay (R‑2) filed an FIR accusing the appellants of abetting her suicide under Section 306 IPC. The High Court refused to quash

RAJA KHANversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 1676 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Raja Khan was convicted for murder and concealment of evidence based on circumstantial evidence, including a weapon and gold chains recovered after his alleged disclosure under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution relied on the recovery of a stone, a gandasa, and gold chains, as well as testimo

VINUBHAI MOHANLAL DOBARIAversusCHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR

2025 INSC 1556 February 2025Disposed off

The appellant, an individual with salary and partnership income, filed his income‑tax returns for AY 2011‑12 and AY 2013‑14 well after the statutory due dates, attracting show‑cause notices under section 276CC of the Income Tax Act. He sought compounding of the offences under the 2014 Guidelines; the first application

GEDDAM JHANSI & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2025 INSC 1606 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant alleged dowry demands, mental and physical harassment by her husband and in‑laws, and implicated the appellant Geddam Jhansi (her mother‑in‑law’s sister) and her son Geddam Sathyakama Jabali as pressurising her to obey her husband’s wishes. The High Court declined to quash criminal proceedings under Sec

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