Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

5,133 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 4,201–4,400.

RAJKUMARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 7186 February 2023Directions issued

Petitioner Rajkumar sought enforcement of the Supreme Court’s earlier directions in Rashidul Jafar for premature release of life‑imprisoned convicts, alleging that Uttar Pradesh had not considered eligible prisoners despite the existence of the Uttar Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act, Rules and a Standing Po

BIR SINGHversusMUKESH KUMAR

2019 INSC 1496 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Bir Singh (complainant) advanced a Rs 15 lakh loan to Mukesh Kumar (accused) and received a cheque which was dishonoured for insufficient funds on two occasions. After a statutory notice went unanswered, a criminal complaint under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was filed. The trial court c

DATARAM SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2018 INSC 1076 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under Sections 419, 420, 406 and 506 of the IPC and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheating a complainant of over Rs. 37 lakh. During a seven‑month investigation he was never arrested, and when he sought to quash the FIR the High Court granted him time to appear before the t

ANGANA & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 1126 February 2009Disposed off

The appellants Angana and others were convicted under IPC s.326 read with s.34 and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment. They had been on bail during the trial, and most co‑accused were acquitted. While their appeal was pending before the High Court, they filed an application under Section 389 of the CrPC see

RADHEY SHYAM AGGARWALversusSTATE N.C.T. DELHI

2009 INSC 1156 February 2009Disposed off

The appellant was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for adulterating a small quantity of red chilli. The trial magistrate conducted the case as a warrant case, although Section 16‑A of the Act provides for a summary trial of such offences. The appellant argued that the summary‑trial provisio

ZINDAR ALI SKversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2009 INSC 1166 February 2009Disposed off

The appellant Zindar Ali SK, aided by a juvenile accomplice, was charged with rape (IPC s.376), cheating (IPC s.417) and criminal conspiracy (IPC s.120‑B) after forcibly raping the prosecutrix Chandmoni Khatoon, who had refused his marriage proposal. The prosecutrix reported the incident to her family; a village meetin

GANANATH PATTANAIKversusSTATE OF ORISSA

2002 INSC 666 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The wife, Rashmirekha, hanged herself at home, leading her father to file an FIR alleging that her husband, Ganatanii Paitanaik, and his family murdered her over dowry demands. The trial court acquitted the husband of the dowry‑death charge (Sec. 304B IPC) but convicted him under Sec. 498A IPC for cruelty, sentencing h

GURBAX SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2001 INSC 746 February 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Gurbax Singh was seized carrying 7 kg of poppy straw in a polythene bag at a railway platform. A 100‑gram sample was taken and sealed in the presence of a witness, but the seal was later claimed to be wooden by the witness and brass by the investigating officer, and it remained with the witness for ten days. The trial

STATE OF U.P.versusO.P. SHARMA

1996 INSC 1926 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of U.P. filed an FIR against O.P. Sharma, manager of Modi Paints and Varnish Works, for storing large quantities of edible oils without a licence under the U.P. Oil‑seeds and Oil‑seeds Products Control Order, 1966 and the Edible Oil‑seeds and Edible Oils (Storage Control) Order, 1977. The High Court quashed t

STATE OF M.P. AND ANR.versusRAM KISHNA BALOTHIA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 996 February 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against a High Court judgment that held Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989— which bars the application of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (anticipatory bail) to offences under the Act—unconstitutional. The Supre

KSHITISH CHANDRA BOSEversusCOMMISSIONER OF RANCHI

1981 INSC 266 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Kshitis Chandra Bose sued the Ranchi Municipality for declaration of title and possession of plot No. 1735, claiming title by a 1912 Hukumnama and by prescription after 30 years of continuous, open, hostile possession. The trial court and the Additional Judicial Commissioner upheld his claim on both title and adverse p

THE STATE (NCT) OF DELHIversusKHIMJI BHAI JADEJA

2026 INSC 256 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court decision that held each deposit made by investors in a large cheating scheme constituted a separate transaction and that separate FIRs and charge sheets were required. The scheme, alleged to involve 1,852 victims defrauded of ₹46.40 crore, was initially investigate

S. NAGESHversusSHOBHA S. ARADHYA

2026 INSC 276 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging dishonour of a cheque, but the complaint was filed two days after the statutory one‑month period. The magistrate took cognizance of the complaint on the same day it was filed, before any application for condonation of the dela

BISHWAJIT DEYversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2025 INSC 326 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bishwajit Dey, owned a truck that was stopped at a police checkpoint in Assam where two soap boxes containing 24.8 g of heroin were discovered. The drug was found in the vehicle but the charge‑sheet named only a third‑party occupant, Md Dimpul Ali, as the accused; the owner and driver were not alleged to

ABDUL NASSARversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2025 INSC 356 January 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Abdul Nassar, was convicted of raping and murdering a nine‑year‑old girl, offences punishable under Sections 376 and 302 of the IPC, and was sentenced to death. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts, forensic DNA evidence linking the appellant’s semen to the victim’s clothing, and te

SURINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 16 January 2020Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act for possession of 1 kg 750 g of opium seized during a police patrol on 12 September 1996. The prosecution’s case relied on the testimony of police officials and the recovery of the narcotic in the presence of the ASP, while the ASI who handled the seized prop

THE STATE OF TELANGANAversusHABIB ABDULLAH JEELANI & ORS.

2017 INSC 326 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Telangana filed a criminal appeal against a Hyderabad High Court order that, while refusing to quash FIR No. 205/2014 (offences under IPC sections 147, 148, 149 and 307), directed the police not to arrest the three accused. The Supreme Court held that such a direction amounts to an order under Section 438

MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIMversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2017 INSC 296 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Md. Sajjad, was convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Ramchandra Singh, based primarily on the testimony of three eyewitnesses and the suspicion of the victim's widow. The eyewitnesses identified the accused in a test identification parade held more than two month

SRI GANESHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2017 INSC 346 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of having sexual intercourse with the complainant on five to six occasions, allegedly on a false promise of marriage, the last of which occurred in August 2009. The trial court, relying on documentary evidence, held that the appellant was born on 19 October 1991 and was therefore a juvenile at

AJAY SINGH AND ANR. AND ETC.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR.

2017 INSC 356 January 2017Dismissed

The trial judge in two dowry‑death cases recorded the acquittal of the accused in the order sheet but did not pronounce a judgment in open court, nor was any typed judgment signed or dated. A complaint led the High Court to investigate and find that no judgment existed on record, resulting in the judge's suspension and

PREM SAGAR MANOCHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2016 INSC 196 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

In the Jessica Lal murder investigation, the police sought a forensic opinion on two .22 cartridges. The appellant, Deputy Director of the State Forensic Science Laboratory, reported that the cartridges were .22 caliber and likely from a pistol, but could not give a definitive opinion on whether they were fired from th

STATE OF A.P.versusPATCHIMALA VIGNESWARUDU@ VIGGANNA @ GANAPATHI

2016 INSC 156 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted Patchimala Vigneswarudu for the murder of his wife, alleging he strangled her after a night out, motivated by strained marital relations and suspicion of venereal disease transmission. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC, but the High Court acquitted him, holding t

STATE (NCT OF DELHI)versusNARENDER

2014 INSC 126 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The police seized a vehicle carrying 47 cartons of illicit liquor and filed an FIR under Sections 33(a) and 58 of the Delhi Excise Act, 2009. The Metropolitan Magistrate refused the owner’s application for release of the vehicle, but the Delhi High Court, invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), o

NANDLAL WASUDEO BADWAIKversusLATA NANDLAL BADWAIK & ANR.

2014 INSC 96 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The husband, Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik, challenged a maintenance order under Section 125 of the CrPC granted to his wife Lata Badwaik and their daughter, asserting that he was not the biological father of the child. He obtained two DNA test reports, both excluding him as the father. The trial courts had upheld maintenanc

DR. MRS. NUPUR TALWARversusC.B.I., DELHI & ANR.

2012 INSC 86 January 2012Disposed off

The case arose from the murder of a young girl, Arushi, and a domestic help, Hemraj, where the CBI filed a closure report. The father of the deceased filed a protest petition, leading the Special Judicial Magistrate to take cognizance of offences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC against Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nu

BODDELLA BABUL REDDYversusPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P.

2010 INSC 146 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Boddella Babul Reddy, was convicted by the Andhra Pradesh High Court for murder (Sec. 302 IPC) arising from a factional clash in which he was alleged to have hurled a bomb that killed a coolie. The trial court had acquitted all accused, including the appellant, on the ground that the prosecution evidence

HARINARAYAN G. BAJAJversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2010 INSC 156 January 2010Dismissed

In a criminal proceeding under Sections 406 and 114 IPC, the trial court had framed charges against respondents No.2‑4 and later, under Section 319(1) Cr.P.C., added respondent No.5 as a co‑accused. The newly added accused sought to have the proceedings against him commenced afresh from the inquiry stage (Section 244)

INDRESH KUMARversusRAM PHAL AND ORS.

2010 INSC 166 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Indresh Kumar alleged that Inspector Ramphal and six other police officers tortured him and his family in 1992. The trial court convicted Ramphal under IPC sections 218, 342 and 323, while acquitting the six co‑accused. The High Court later set aside Ramphal’s conviction and acquitted all accused, dismissing Indresh Ku

RABINDRA MAHTO AND ANR.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2006 INSC 166 January 2006Dismissed

The appellants, members of a Mahto clan, attacked two men who were ploughing a field they claimed as their own, using swords, knives and lathis, resulting in the deaths of Sohrai Puran and Ram Mohan Puran and injuries to others. An FIR was lodged the next day and sent to the magistrate a day later; the defence argued t

SUKHPAL SINGH KHAIRAversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 12525 December 2022

The appellant was summoned as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code after the trial of the original co‑accused had concluded with a conviction and sentence on the same day. The Supreme Court examined whether the power to summon under s.319 could be exercised after a judgment of convicti

RATNAMBAR KAUSHIKversusUNION OF INDIA

2022 INSC 12545 December 2022Case Allowed

Petitioner Ratnambar Kaushik was arrested for allegedly transporting 90,520 kg of raw unmanufactured tobacco in seven trucks for clandestine manufacture of zarda, thereby evading GST under Sections 132(1)(a), (h), (k), (l) and 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The investigation was completed and a

STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CBI/ACB/BANGALOREversusB.A. SRINIVASAN AND ANR.

2019 INSC 13225 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

B.A. Srinivasan, a former Assistant General Manager of Vijaya Bank who retired on 31‑Oct‑2012, was alleged to have conspired with others to fraudulently sanction and disburse loans, violating bank rules. An FIR was lodged in 2013 and a charge‑sheet filed in 2014, charging him under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,

MAHIPALversusRAJESH KUMAR @ POLIA & ANR.

2019 INSC 13255 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Mahipal filed a criminal appeal challenging the Rajasthan High Court's order granting bail to five accused in the murder of his nephew, Akhilesh. The FIR alleged that the accused assaulted the victim with rods, causing fatal head injuries, as corroborated by a post‑mortem report and a Section 161 statement of an eyewit

STATE OF NCT OF DELHIversusSHIV CHARAN BANSAL & ORS.

2019 INSC 13215 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the State’s appeal against the discharge of several accused in the murder of S.N. Gupta. The prosecution alleged a pre‑planned criminal conspiracy involving Shiv Charan Bansal, his son, and others, supported by call‑detail records, recovered weapon, ballistic reports and statements. The Court

MAHENDER CHAWLA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 11535 December 2018Disposed off

The petitioners, who were witnesses or relatives of witnesses in the Asaram rape cases, alleged that they faced threats, attacks and even murders, and that the State failed to provide any protection, violating their right to a fair trial under Art. 21. They sought a court‑monitored witness‑protection programme and the

JOHN K. ABRAHAMversusSIMON C. ABRAHAM & ANOTHER

2013 INSC 8035 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent alleged that the appellant borrowed Rs.1,50,000 and issued a cheque which later bounced, invoking Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court acquitted the appellant, finding the complainant's evidence riddled with contradictions and gaps, particularly regarding the loan amount, date,

SISTER MINA LALITA BARUWAversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 8045 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Sister Mina Lalita Baruwa, a Catholic nun, alleged assault, molestation and gang rape during communal violence in Kandhamal. During the trial, PW‑18, a Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate who conducted the test identification parade, gave a statement that conflicted with the official parade record (Exhibit‑8). The victi

ARUN BHAKTA @ THULUversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2008 INSC 14055 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Arun Bhakta (Thulu) was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife Jyotsna, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the "last seen" theory that the couple were together the night before her death. The prosecution's case relied on statements of witnesses that were later contradicted: the sister clai

DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE & ANR.versusMOHAMMED NISAR HOLIA

2007 INSC 12265 December 2007Dismissed

The Directorate of Revenue received a fax alleging that a guest in a Mumbai hotel possessed Mandrex tablets and cash. Officers searched the guest's hotel room, seized cash and a fax copy of a consignment note, and recorded the accused's statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The trial court convicted the accused u

HORI LAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P

2006 INSC 9575 December 2006Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a land‑dispute‑related shooting in which members of an unlawful assembly opened fire, killing Hori Lal and Smt Ram Shree and injuring others. The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds that the FIR was ante‑timed, the prosecution failed to prove a common object, the medical evidence

KULWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2006 INSC 9585 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant, Kulwinder Singh, was convicted along with three others for the murder of Rajbir Singh, allegedly hired by Nirpal Singh, Nardev Singh and their father Pargat Singh in a land‑dispute motive. The prosecution’s case rested on the statements of eyewitness PW‑3, the extra‑judicial confession recorded by PW‑7,

GOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS.versusM.T. KHAN

2003 INSC 6915 December 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued a Government Order granting remission of sentences to certain categories of prisoners, expressly excluding those convicted by courts of other States but serving their sentences in Andhra Pradesh. Two convicts, S. Appala Swamy (convicted in Madhya Pradesh) and Rajender (convicted

OM PRAKASH @ RAJAversusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2002 INSC 5205 December 2002Dismissed

The appellant, a domestic servant employed by retired Brigadier Shyam Lal Khanna, was convicted of murdering three members of the Khanna family and attempting to murder the wife. The prosecution proved the offences through the testimony of the surviving wife (PW‑1), corroborated by a sweeper and forensic evidence, show

SATISH SHARMA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2002 INSC 5215 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were charged with offences under IPC sections 114 and 302 and the Arms Act. Their applications for anticipatory bail were rejected by the Sessions Court and the Gujarat High Court. While the bail matter was pending, two police officers (the appellants) filed a report under Section 169 of the Criminal Proced

STATE OF TAMIL NADU ETC.versusSURESH (A-2) AND ANR.

1997 INSC 7915 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

A pregnant housewife fell from the fourth floor of her apartment and died. The prosecution alleged that the husband, his brother (A‑2 Suresh) and two employees conspired to murder her; the husband was abroad. The only direct evidence was the testimony of an approver (PW‑1) who confessed and implicated A‑2 and A‑3, supp

BEHARILAL AND ANR.versusSMT. BHURI DEVI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14395 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Government’s Mandi Committee allotted two plots to Beharilal in 1953, issued a patta and delivered possession in 1954. After the patta was cancelled in 1956, the same plots were re‑allotted to Ram Gopal (husband of Bhuri Devi) and possession was handed over to him. Criminal proceedings under S. 145 Cr.P.C

STATE OF ORISSAversusBANSIDHAR SINGH

1995 INSC 8435 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Santush Kumar Nayak was admitted with severe burns and, on his deathbed, gave a dying declaration to Dr. P.K. Sahu that his brother‑in‑law Bansidhar Singh had poured kerosene on him. The police initially registered a case under Section 309 IPC (attempted suicide) based on an FIR from the respondent's son, but after the

ABDUL MANNAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

1995 INSC 8375 December 1995Dismissed

The appellants, eleven persons charged with offences including murder under s.302 IPC, were juveniles at the time of the alleged crime and were therefore required to be tried by a Juvenile Court under the West Bengal Children Act, 1959. No Juvenile Court had been constituted, and the trial was conducted by an Additiona

R. BALAKRISHNA PILLAIversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 8455 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

R. Balakrishna Pillai, a former Kerala Minister for Electricity, was charged with criminal conspiracy (IPC s.120‑B) and an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act for supplying electricity to a private firm in Karnataka without the Kerala Government's consent. The Kerala High Court held that sanction under CrPC

RAJPUT RUDA MAHA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1979 INSC 2595 December 1979Dismissed

Three accused were acquitted by a Sessions Judge for murder and related offences, but the State appealed and the Gujarat High Court convicted them. The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court under section 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. The Supreme Court dism

XYZversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2024 INSC 8695 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, an illiterate woman, filed an FIR alleging serious offences including rape (IPC s.376(2)(N)), criminal intimidation (IPC s.506) and caste-based atrocities (SC/ST Act s.3(1)(R), s.3(1)(w), s.3(2)(5)). The accused sought quashing of the charge sheet on the basis of a purported settlement, and the Gujarat H

SUBRATA CHOUDHURY @ SANTOSH CHOUDHURY & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2024 INSC 8345 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed an original complaint on 11.11.2010 alleging offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 IPC, which led to a police investigation and a negative final report accepted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) on 06.06.2011 after rejecting the complainant's protest (narazi) petition. Dissatisfied, the comp

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 6345 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint was lodged in 1989 alleging adulteration of Dalda Vanaspati Ghee manufactured by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL). The trial magistrate initially absolved the company’s directors and continued prosecution against the nominated officer, Nirmal Sen, who was later convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulter

HITESH VERMAversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2020 INSC 6365 November 2020Disposed off

The appellant, Hitesh Verma, challenged a charge‑sheet filed under Sections 452, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(e) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleging that the FIR was based on a property dispute and was false. The High Court dismissed his petition under Sec

MANJUNATH GANESH HEGDE & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2008 INSC 12465 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with offences under Sections 341, 324, 326, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC for an assault that injured three witnesses. The trial court acquitted them, finding the prosecution evidence insufficient. The High Court, acting as the first appellate court, partially set aside the acquit

DHARAM CHANDversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2008 INSC 12475 November 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant, brother of the deceased Anju Devi, challenged the High Court's order that acquitted three accused who lived separately and released the husband on the ground that he had already served his sentence. The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal of the three accused, finding that the evidence did not prove their

MOHD. AZAD @ SAMINversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2008 INSC 12485 November 2008Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of a young man whose body was found half‑dug in a cemetery after the accused allegedly scaled the wall, consumed wine and later assaulted a worker. The prosecution relied on extensive circumstantial evidence, including eyewitnesses who last saw the accused with the deceased,

MADHYA PRADESH SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENTversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6425 November 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Governor of Madhya Pradesh could, in his own discretion, grant sanction for the prosecution of two former ministers despite the Council of Ministers' refusal to do so. A Lokayukta report had found prima facie evidence of corruption and conspiracy under the Prevention of Corruption

JAYAWANT DATTATRAY SURYARAOversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2001 INSC 5585 November 2001Dismissed

The case involved a shoot‑out at J.J. Hospital in Mumbai on 12 September 1992, resulting in the murder of a prisoner and two police constables and injuries to several others. The accused – A‑2 (Jayawant Dattatray Suryarao), A‑6 (Subhashsingh Thakur) and A‑7 (Shamkishore Garikapatti) – were convicted under the Terrorist

IN RE: AJAY KUMAR PANDEY...CONTEMNERversus.

1996 INSC 12835 November 1996Disposed off

Advocate Ajay Kumar Pandey filed petitions and letters containing intemperate, insulting language against two Supreme Court judges, demanded apologies and compensation, and threatened to prosecute them, also filing a criminal complaint in a magistrate's court. The Supreme Court, after giving him opportunities to delete

S.K. NAIRversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1996 INSC 12855 November 1996Dismissed

The appellant, an army personnel, was convicted of murder and causing injuries with a khukri in a barracks. He appealed, asserting that he was a diagnosed paranoid and therefore incapable of understanding his acts, seeking protection under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code. The Supreme Court examined whether the ment

M/S IVECO MAGIRUS BRANDSCHUTZTECHNIK GMBHversusNIRMAL KISHORE BHARTIYA & ANR

2023 INSC 8805 October 2023Dismissed

The German company Iveco Magirus Brandschutztechnik GmbH (appellant) challenged a summons issued by an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi after a private complaint of defamation was filed by Nirmal Kishore Bhartiya (respondent). The complaint alleged that letters written by the appellant’s authorised age

GEO VARGHESEversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2021 INSC 6185 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Physical Training Teacher, was charged under Section 306 IPC for alleged abetment of his student’s suicide, based on an FIR alleging harassment and insult. The High Court dismissed the appellant’s petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR, holding that the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence. On

M/S. METERS AND INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.versusKANCHAN MEHTA

2017 INSC 10095 October 2017Disposed off

The appellants, M/s. Meters and Instruments Private Ltd. and others, were charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a dishonoured cheque to the complainant, Kanchan Mehta. The complainant refused to accept a demand draft, while the accused offered to pay the cheque amount with interest and

SHAHEJADKHAN MAHEBUBKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 4535 October 2012Disposed off

The appellants were arrested for transporting 500 grams of brown sugar, a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, and were convicted under Sections 8(c), 21 and 29, receiving 15 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1.5 lakh with a default imprisonment of three years for non‑payment. They appealed, seeking redu

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYAM ANSARI AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6715 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed a decision that allowed a co‑accused to cross‑examine an approver whose pardon, granted under Section 307 of the CrPC, was later forfeited by a certificate under Section 308. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme of Sections 306, 307 and 308, holding that forfeiture of the pa

KANWAR NATWAR SINGHversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR

2010 INSC 6765 October 2010Dismissed

Kanwar Natwar Singh and others appealed against the Directorate of Enforcement after a show‑cause notice was issued under Rule 4(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal) Rules, 2000. The appellants demanded that the adjudicating authority furnish copies of all documents in its possess

ARUN KUMAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2009 INSC 11625 October 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder conviction of Arun Kumar Sharma under Section 302 IPC for the death of his wife Sushma Devi. The prosecution's case rested on the testimony of a single eye‑witness, PW‑1, whose statements were found to be casual, contradictory and unexplained, especially his failure to report the i

C.B.I., A.H.D., PATNAversusBRAJ BHUSHAN PRASAD AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4855 October 2001Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether 36 fodder‑scam cases, originally filed before the Special Court in Patna, were transferred to courts in the newly created State of Jharkhand under Section 89 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000. The Court held that the word “exclusively” in that provision means “substantially all or

UMASHANKARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2001 INSC 4885 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Umashankar, was charged with circulating counterfeit currency after paying for mangoes with a fake Rs 100 note and police recovered additional counterfeit notes and related items from his possession. He was convicted under IPC sections 489‑B (using counterfeit notes as genuine) and 489‑C (possession of c

SATVINDER KAURversusSTATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI) AND ANR.

1999 INSC 4555 October 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Satvinder Kaur filed a complaint alleging dowry harassment and torture by her husband Rajinder Singh and his parents in Patiala. An FIR under IPC sections 406 and 498A was later lodged in Delhi. The husband sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that the Delhi police officer lacked territorial jurisdiction to investi

SUKHPALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1994 INSC 4435 October 1994Dismissed

The appellant Sukhpal was apprehended in a notified area with a .315 bore rifle and 109 live cartridges, without any licence, and was charged under Section 5 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. The prosecution relied on the testimony of police of

HARILAL ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2023 INSC 8015 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Harilal and Parasram were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under Section 302 IPC based on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses and the seizure of a lathi and clothes allegedly belonging to them. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the witnesses, noting that the FIR was lodg

PUSHPALATAversusVIJAY KUMAR (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.

2022 INSC 9105 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The father, Laxmi Prasad, the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family, bought several parcels of land using his own funds but registered them in the names of his minor sons, Vijay Kumar and Rajendra Kumar. The sons later sold one of the parcels, prompting the father’s widow and daughters to sue for declaration of title and s

STATE THROUGH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEversusR. SOUNDIRARASU ETC.

2022 INSC 9155 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu, through a Deputy Superintendent of Police, appealed against the High Court’s order discharging a public servant (R. Soundirarasu) and his wife from prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and IPC s.109 for possessing assets disproportionate to the servant’s known sources of inc

P. CHIDAMBARAMversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2019 INSC 10105 September 2019Dismissed

The appellant, former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, was charged with alleged irregularities in a foreign investment clearance and money‑laundering offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA). The Enforcement Directorate (ED) produced a sealed cover containing doc

R.S. SEHRAWATversusRAJEEV MALHOTRA & ORS.

2018 INSC 7795 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, R.S. Sehrawat, a junior engineer of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, was convicted by the Delhi High Court for contempt of court for allegedly filing a false affidavit concerning the demolition of unauthorised structures in Sainik Farms. He appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 19(1)(b) of the C

S. K. RAJU @ ABDUL HAQUE @ JAGGAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2018 INSC 7805 September 2018Dismissed

The appellant was intercepted on a public road near a club and, after being informed of his right to be searched before a gazetted officer or magistrate, consented to a search by a gazetted officer. A bag containing 1.5 kg of charas and cash was recovered from him. The appellant challenged the conviction on the grounds

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.versusTASNEEM RIZWAN SIDDIQUEE

2018 INSC 7835 September 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The police, investigating a case involving illegal sale of call detail records, arrested Rizwan Alam Siddique and obtained a magistrate's order remanding him to police custody until 23 March 2018. His wife, Tasneem Rizwan Siddiquee, filed a writ of habeas corpus in the High Court alleging unlawful detention; the High C

PRABHU CHAWLAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 8515 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard appeals by Prabhu Chawla and Jagdish Upasane challenging a Rajasthan High Court order that dismissed their petitions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., on the ground that the same relief could be obtained through a revision petition under Section 397. The Court examined a conflict between two ear

PARGAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2014 INSC 6095 September 2014Dismissed

In 1999, two men withdrew Rs. 4 lakh from a bank, were ambushed, shot, and robbed of the money bag. One victim, Varun Kumar, died; another, Kamaljit Singh (PW‑2), was injured. After a seven‑year investigation, the accused were arrested and tried. The trial court, affirmed by the High Court, convicted them under IPC sec

MRINAL DAS & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA

2011 INSC 6505 September 2011Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Tapan Chakraborty on 31 August 2000, for which thirteen persons were charged. One accused, Ratan Sukladas (A‑12), applied for and was granted pardon, becoming an approver whose testimony formed the core of the prosecution's case. The trial court convicted only two accused (A‑5 and A‑11)

RAVIversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2008 INSC 10165 September 2008Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for the killing of Albert Walter, based primarily on the testimony of PW‑1, the deceased's brother, who identified the accused and asserted that sufficient street lighting enabled him to see the incident. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing tha

FAKHRUDDIN AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANR.

2008 INSC 10185 September 2008Disposed off

The appellant, a poultry farmer, was accused by a complainant of forging a cheque and was charged under IPC sections 420, 467, 468 and 471. The complainant claimed the cheque was a blank cheque misplaced by a third party, while the appellant alleged the cheque was fraudulently used. The Judicial Magistrate, instead of

SHIVAJI @ DADYA SHANKAR ALHATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 10195 September 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Shivaji @ Dadya Shankar Alhat, was convicted of raping and murdering a nine‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death under Sections 302 and 376(2)(5) IPC. The prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including eyewitnesses who saw the accused with the victim, the recovery of the victim’s

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusRAM VEER SINGH AND ORS.

2007 INSC 8925 September 2007Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the Allahabad High Court's acquittal of three accused who had been convicted for murder under Sections 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution's case relied on the identification of a decomposed body recovered a month after the incident, based solely on the clothes worn, and on t

DILAWAR SINGHversusSTATE OF DELHI

2007 INSC 8935 September 2007Disposed off

The appellant Dilawar Singh was accused of robbing a temple priest on 8 August 1984, allegedly with accomplices who tied the priest and stole cash. The prosecution relied solely on the priest's testimony, claiming the accused carried weapons, but no injury was inflicted. The FIR was lodged only on 31 August 1984, creat

SURINDER SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2003 INSC 4555 September 2003Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the killing of Hamam Singh. The trial court had acquitted them, relying on the alleged unreliability of witnesses who were relatives of the deceased, the absence of independent shop‑keeper witnesses, a site‑plan omission, and a perceived conflic

NARAYAN CHETANRAM CHAUDHARY AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2000 INSC 4325 September 2000Dismissed

The appellants, Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary and Jitu, along with Raju, murdered seven members of a family, including two children and a pregnant woman, to conceal a robbery. Raju later became an approver after the trial court granted him pardon and recorded his confession. Both the trial court and the High Court convic

P.P. UNIKRISHNAN AND ANR.versusPUTTIYOTTIL ALIKUTTY AND ANR.

2000 INSC 4335 September 2000Dismissed

The petitioners, a Sub‑Inspector and a Constable of the Kerala Police, were charged with offences of assault, grievous hurt, attempt to murder and criminal intimidation under the IPC for illegally confining and beating a shop‑keeper in a police lock‑up. They argued that the trial court should not have taken cognizance

BADRI PRAKASH SONIversusPRAHALAD SONI AND ORS.

1994 INSC 3525 September 1994Disposed off

The dispute concerned possession of a property housing a Cork Splitting Machine. An Executive Magistrate, invoking Section 145(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, could not determine which party was in possession and therefore attached the property, directing the parties to resolve their rights in a civil court. While a

GOPALAKRISHNA MENON AND ANOTHERversusD. RAJA REDDY AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 1135 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a father and son, entered into a printing‑press agreement with the first respondent and later filed a civil suit for recovery of a deposit and damages, producing the original contract and a money receipt. The respondent complained that the signature on the receipt was forged, alleging offences under Sec

SHAIL KUMARIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 9365 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Shail Kumari was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly drowning her two children after taking them to a pond. The trial court and the Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the conviction primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑2, while other potential witnesses were not examined. On appeal, the Supreme C

KALLU NAT ALIAS MAYANK KUMAR NAGARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2025 INSC 9305 August 2025Dismissed

The petition challenged the order of the trial court and the High Court that summoned Kallu Nat alias Mayank Kumar Nagar as an accused under Section 193 of the CrPC in a murder‑rape case, despite his name being omitted from the charge‑sheet. The core issue was whether a Court of Session, after a case is committed to it

NADEEM AHAMEDversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2025 INSC 9935 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Nadee m Ahamed was seized with approximately 125 g of heroin while a co‑accused was found with about 130 g, leading the trial court to treat the combined 255 g as a commercial quantity and convict both under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds that the

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 7965 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) filed a criminal complaint against Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) alleging violation of Section 77 of the Companies Act, 1956 for alleged fraudulent allotment of shares. SEBI’s investigation report of 2005 was inconclusive, prompting SEBI to obtain two opinions from reti

XYZversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS

2022 INSC 7995 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a yoga instructor, alleged that the Vice‑Chancellor of her institute sexually harassed her in March 2019 and repeatedly complained to the police, which failed to register an FIR. She then approached a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, seeking a police investigation;

KATHI DAVID RAJUversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2019 INSC 8615 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under the IPC for allegedly obtaining a false Scheduled Caste certificate by misrepresenting his parentage and caste. The police, shortly after his arrest, applied to a civil court under Section 53 of the CrPC for a DNA test of the appellant, his mother and brothers, and the Additional Junior

M/S APEX DISTRIBUTORS & ANR.versusM/S TIMEX GROUP INDIA LTD.

2014 INSC 5235 August 2014Case Allowed

Apex Distributors and another issued a cheque on Vyasa Bank, Vellore, to Timex Group India Ltd., which was later dishonoured at Vellore. Timex sent statutory demand notices from Delhi and filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a Delhi court. The petitioners filed a transfer pe

SREE MAHESH STATIONARIES & ANR.versusINDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES. LTD.

2014 INSC 5245 August 2014Case Allowed

The petitioners borrowed Rs.15 lakh from the respondent company and issued a cheque for partial repayment, drawn on a Bangalore bank but presented for encashment in Gurgaon, where it was dishonoured. The respondent served statutory notices from Gurgaon and filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrumen

ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYYUM ANSARIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2013 INSC 5125 August 2013Disposed off

Abu Salem, an accused in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, was extradited from Portugal to India in 2005 on the assurance that he would not face the death penalty or imprisonment beyond 25 years. After his return, the Designated Court framed additional charges beyond those covered by the extradition, which Abu Salem argued

SADANANDA MONDALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 5165 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sadananda Mondal, was charged along with 13 others for the murder of Bharat Mondal, who died from a gunshot wound during a picnic dispute. The trial court convicted eight accused, including the appellant, under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, while the High Court acquitted all but the appellant. On appea

PRIYA VRAT SINGH & ORS.versusSHYAM JI SAHAI

2008 INSC 9065 August 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Priya Vrat Singh and others, sought to quash criminal proceedings filed under Sections 494, 120B and 109 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for alleged dowry harassment and bigamy. The High Court had dismissed their Section 482 CrPC application, but the Supreme Court examined w

BANGARU VENKATA RAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2008 INSC 9095 August 2008Case Partly allowed

Bangaru Venkata Rao was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing his wife Polamma, who later died. He appealed, claiming the act was in private defence and that only a single blow was given in a sudden quarrel, invoking Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC. The Supreme Court examined the elements of Exception 4

SURJIT SINGHversusNAHARA RAM AND ANR.

2004 INSC 4235 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The informant, Surjit Singh, alleged that the accused, Nahara Ram and another, fired shots at him while he was spraying his paddy field, causing injuries. The trial court convicted them under Section 326 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, sentencing them to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,0

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)versusPREM RAJ

2003 INSC 3675 August 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Prem Raj was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500, and an additional three years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000, to run concurrently. He appealed to the Delhi High Court seeking a reduction in the term of impri

ARVINDER VIR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR

1998 INSC 2875 August 1998Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a criminal proceeding for the abduction and murder of an advocate and his family. The CBI, after a Supreme Court direction, filed a charge‑sheet against the appellant SI Avindervir Singh and three other police officers for offences under Sections 193, 194, 211 and 218 IPC, alleging false implication

DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANR.versusP.V. PRABHAKAR RAO

1997 INSC 5945 August 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, P.V. Prabhakar Rao, feared arrest in connection with a massive urea‑related foreign exchange fraud and sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court granted an interim order, later making it absolute, relying on the responde

SUKALU RAM GONDversusSTATE OF MP AND ORS.

1994 INSC 3005 August 1994Disposed off

In a criminal petition, the parties consented to refer a dispute between the petitioner and Respondent No.3 to an arbitrator, limiting the reference to those two parties. The arbitrator, however, issued an award holding Respondent No.5 liable for a sum, despite Respondent No.5 not being a party to the reference. Respon

NAVAL KISHORE MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2019 INSC 7255 July 2019

The victim, the brother and legal heir of a deceased murder victim, challenged the trial court's acquittal of the accused under Sections 452, 302/34 IPC. The State sought leave to appeal under Section 372 read with Section 378 of the CrPC, which was denied. The victim filed an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 (i

MAHIPAL SINGH RANA, ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2016 INSC 4925 July 2016Disposed off

Advocate Mahipal Singh Rana threatened a civil judge in Etah on two occasions, leading the Allahabad High Court to convict him of criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and impose two months' imprisonment, a fine, and a ban on appearing in Etah courts until he purged the contempt. The High Court also

SURINDERJIT SINGH MAND & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2016 INSC 4935 July 2016Dismissed

The case concerned the arrest and alleged illegal detention of Neeraj Kumar between 24‑06‑1999 and 28‑06‑1999 by two Deputy Superintendents of Police, Surinderjit Singh Mand and P.S. Parmar. The prosecution, after obtaining sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC for the later arrest on 28‑06‑1999, sought to take cogniz

V. K. .BANSALversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2013 INSC 4425 July 2013Case Partly allowed

V.K. Bansal, a director of several companies, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing cheques that were dishonoured while repaying loans from Haryana Financial Corporation. He received multiple imprisonment terms and fines and sought a direction under Sections 427 and 482 of the Co

ELAVARASANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2011 INSC 4545 July 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a government watchman, assaulted his wife and mother with a sharp weapon and caused the death of his one‑year‑old daughter during a sudden quarrel. He pleaded insanity under Section 84 of the IPC, but the trial and High Courts rejected the plea due to lack of credible medical or behavioural evidence. The

SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICERversusJUGAL KISHORE SAMRA

2011 INSC 4595 July 2011Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a NDPS investigation where Jugal Kishore Samra (respondent) was summoned by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for interrogation. He alleged torture and a heart attack during the summons and obtained anticipatory bail. He then sought modification of the bail order to have his lawyer and a cardi

CHUNNI LALversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 3465 July 2010Dismissed

Chunni Lal was convicted of murdering his uncle Heera Lal by firing a gun, and the Supreme Court upheld the life sentence. The appellant argued there was no motive, that only interested witnesses were examined, and that the delay in lodging the FIR and commencing investigation tainted the case. The Court found a clear

SHRI BALASAHEB K. THACKERAY AND ANR.versusSHRL VENKAT @ BABRU AND ANR.

2006 INSC 4015 July 2006

The complainant filed a private defamation complaint under IPC s.500 read with s.34 against the editor, printer and publisher of a newspaper. The trial court issued process, but a petition under CrPC s.482 was dismissed by the High Court. While the appeal was pending before this Court, the complainant died. The appella

KANTI BHADRA SHAH AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

1999 INSC 2685 July 1999Dismissed

A charge sheet under IPC sections 454, 380 and 120B was filed against the appellants before a Metropolitan Magistrate who, after hearing them, framed charges and dismissed their petition for discharge. The appellants approached the Calcutta High Court seeking quash of the charge; the High Court set aside the charge but

M/S BALAJI TRADERSversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 8065 June 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a betel nut trader, was threatened at gunpoint by the accused and his associates, who demanded a monthly payment of five lakh rupees and attempted to kidnap him. The trial court issued a summons under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for putting the complainant in fear of death to commit exto

IQBALBANOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 6855 June 2007Disposed off

Iqbalbano, married in 1959, filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1992 seeking maintenance from her husband, who claimed that he had divorced her by pronouncing "Talaq" three times, had paid the Mehr and that the Iddat period had ended. The Judicial Magistrate granted maintenance, but

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE (NCT) OF DELHI

2007 INSC 6865 June 2007Disposed off

Om Prakash was convicted under Section 7(1) read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling 'Khoya' whose milk‑fat content was 19.07% instead of the prescribed minimum of 20%. The trial court sentenced him to six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000. After the conviction was uph

HARJINDER SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2025 INSC 6345 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, father of the deceased Dharminder Singh, challenged the High Court's order quashing a summons issued by the trial court under Section 319 of the CrPC against respondent No.2 (Varinder Singh) for alleged abetment to suicide. The incident involved a confrontation on 10 May 2016 where the deceased was taunt

RAJENDRA ANANT VARIKversusGOVIND B. PRABHUGAONKAR

2025 INSC 6335 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajendra Anant Varik, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a dishonoured cheque and was ordered to pay compensation. He appealed, and the First Appellate Court acquitted him, holding that the complainant was an unlicensed money‑lender under the Goa Money‑Lenders Act, whic

J. SEKAR @SEKAR REDDYversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2022 INSC 5195 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

J. Sekar Reddy, managing partner of SRS Mining, was searched by the Income Tax Department in December 2016, leading to the seizure of about Rs 107 crore in cash and gold. The CBI registered FIRs for scheduled offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) attached the

MS. PversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 5145 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Ms. P filed a criminal appeal against the State of Madhya Pradesh and the accused (respondent No.2) challenging the High Court's order granting regular bail under Section 439 of the CrPC in a case involving offences of rape (IPC s.376(2)(n)) and criminal intimidation (IPC s.506). The High Court had granted bail on the

KUMARANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2017 INSC 4475 May 2017Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and was ordered to pay Rs.2.75 lakh as compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a default imprisonment of one month for non‑payment. He served both the principal sentence and the default imprisonment, after

MUKESH & ANR.versusSTATE FOR NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

2017 INSC 4485 May 2017Dismissed

On 16 December 2012, a 23-year-old paramedical student and her male friend boarded a bus in Delhi. Six men, including the appellants, gang-raped her, inserted an iron rod into her private parts causing severe internal injuries, and threw both victims out of the moving bus. The woman died from her injuries. The appellan

R. RACHAIAHversusHOME SECRETARY, BANGALORE

2016 INSC 11825 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, including R. Rachaiah, were originally charged under Section 306 IPC for abetting suicide and later, at the close of trial, the prosecution sought and the trial court framed an alternative charge of murder under Section 302 IPC. The court failed to follow the mandatory procedures of Sections 216 and 217

SUMER SINGHversusSURAJBHAN SINGH AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 9695 May 2014Case Partly allowed

The case concerns a criminal appeal filed by the injured party, Sumer Singh, under Article 136 of the Constitution seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on Surajbhan Singh and others for grievous hurt (IPC s.326) and related offences arising from a land dispute. The High Court had reduced the sentence to the seve

DEVENDER KUMAR & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC.

2010 INSC 2735 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were arrested in a dowry‑related case under IPC sections 498‑A, 406, 506, 323 and 34 and produced before a magistrate. Their first application for police remand was dismissed and they were placed in judicial custody, after which they were granted bail. The investigating officer later filed a second appli

MUNNAWAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. ETC.

2010 INSC 2745 May 2010Dismissed

The victim, Fateh Mohammad, was shot by the accused and died five days later from septicemia. Two dying declarations were recorded—one by a police officer and another by an Executive Magistrate, both endorsed by a doctor who certified the victim's lucidity. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 307 IPC bu

S.K. DASGUPTA & ORS.versusVIJAY SINGH SENGAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 2755 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Vijay Singh Sengar filed a public interest writ petition alleging that power cuts in Madhya Pradesh were endangering patients in government hospitals and disrupting street lighting. The Madhya Pradesh High Court issued interim orders directing the State Electricity Board to provide round‑the‑clock electricity to hospit

VIJAYANversusSADANANDAN K. & ANR.

2009 INSC 6805 May 2009Dismissed

Vijayan was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to one year imprisonment with a direction to pay Rs.8.25 lakh as compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), with a default term of six months’ imprisonment for non‑payment. The Kerala High Court uphe

DHARMESHBHAI VASUDEVBHAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2009 INSC 6815 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The City Co-operative Bank filed a complaint alleging several offences and the Judicial Magistrate ordered an investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC. The complainant later applied to withdraw the inquiry on the ground of a compromise, and the Magistrate recalled his earlier order. Depositors in the bank challenged the

BIMLA DEVI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

2009 INSC 6825 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 498-A (dowry harassment) of the Ranbir Penal Code, although the charge originally framed was only under Section 302 IPC (murder) read with Section 34. The High Court upheld the conviction, reducing the sentence fo

RADHEY SHYAM GARGversusNARESH KUMAR GUPTA

2009 INSC 6845 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the complainant's evidence was recorded by affidavit. The appellant later sought to have the complainant summoned again for examination in chief, invoking Section 145(2) of the Act, despite the affidavit already constituting

AKBAR SHEIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2009 INSC 6855 May 2009Disposed off

The case arose from a night-time mob attack on 16 May 1982 in Bujung, West Bengal, where several persons were killed and many were accused of being part of an unlawful assembly. The trial court convicted twenty persons under Sections 141, 142, 143 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, despite some appellants not being name

HARMANPREET SINGH AHLUWALIA & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

2009 INSC 6885 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Harmanpreet Singh Ahluwalia and his parents, sought to quash an FIR filed in Jalandhar under IPC sections 406 and 420 alleging dowry demand and criminal breach of trust. The FIR was lodged after the parties had been residing in Canada for several years and the alleged demand was made five years after ma

NARENDRAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2009 INSC 6895 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Narendra, was charged with murder and cruelty under Sections 302 and 498A IPC for the death of his wife Mythradevi in February 1994. The trial court acquitted him, accepting his alibi that he was away buying milk and finding the prosecution evidence insufficient. On appeal, the Karnataka High Court set a

BALA BAINE LINGA RAJUversusSTATE OF A.P.

2009 INSC 6915 May 2009Disposed off

The appellant stabbed the husband of PW‑2 with scissors, causing fatal injuries to the lung and heart. The trial court convicted him under IPC s.304 Part I and sentenced him to seven years' imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction but released the appellant under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, ordering

RANVIR YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2009 INSC 6945 May 2009Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of Ranvir Yadav under Section 302 of the IPC for murder, arising from a 1982 incident on the Ganges. The appellant contended that the trial court failed to put any incriminating material before him during the examination under Section 313 of the CrPC, thereby denying him a fair

VISHNU DUTT SHARMAversusDAYA SAPRA

2009 INSC 7025 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Vishnu Dutt Sharma sued Daya Sapra for recovery of a loan, while simultaneously filing a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a dishonoured cheque. The criminal trial resulted in an acquittal of Sapra. Sapra then sought to have the civil suit dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC,

MOTILAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 6765 May 2009Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of Gyan Chand on 11 November 1993, for which eight persons were tried and several were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The appellants challenged their convictions on the grounds that the First Information Report (FIR) was ante‑dated, showing a discrepancy with

STATE OF U.P.versusPARAS NATH SINGH

2009 INSC 6695 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Paras Nath Singh, a public servant, was convicted by a trial court under IPC sections 409 and 468. The Sessions Judge acquitted him, holding that the sanction for prosecution was not given by an authorized authority, that the charges were improperly framed, and that the examination under Section 313 CrPC was defective.

STATE OF M.P.versusDEVENDRA

2009 INSC 6705 May 2009Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against directions issued by the Indore Bench of the High Court that mandated the State Government to amend police regulations to require photographs of complainants, material witnesses and accused persons to be taken and attached to charge sheets in all criminal cases except minor

MADHUBANversusSTATE OF U.P.

2008 INSC 5825 May 2008Case Allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder and related offences under Sections 302, 323, 394 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the killing of a father and son. The High Court affirmed the conviction but, according to the appellant, decided the appeal without hearing his counsel, who was unable to make oral submissions due

SMT. SELVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 5205 May 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered whether the involuntary administration of narcoanalysis, polygraph, and Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) tests for investigative purposes violates fundamental rights. The Court held that compulsory administration of these techniques violates Article 20(3) of the Constitution, whic

ANIL KUMAR TULSIYANIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 2975 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the State of Uttar Pradesh, challenged the Allahabad High Court's order granting bail to the respondent, an advocate charged with murder under IPC s.302 read with s.201. The High Court had allowed bail despite the offence being non‑bailable and the gravity of the crime, which involved the shooting of a c

LT. GOVERNOR, NCT AND ORS .versusVED PRAKASH @ VEDU

2006 INSC 2985 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Lt. Governor of the NCT and other officials initiated externment proceedings against Ved Prakash @ Vedu under Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, alleging that his movements caused alarm and danger and that witnesses were unwilling to testify due to fear. An order directing his removal from Delhi for two year

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ORS. ETC.versusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ORS. ETC.

2005 INSC 2595 May 2005

The Supreme Court examined whether a company, being a juristic person, can be prosecuted under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 when the statute mandates both imprisonment and fine. The appellants argued that because a company cannot be imprisoned, the provision could not apply to them. The Court

STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ORS.versusN.M.T. JOY IMMACULATE

2004 INSC 3345 May 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a criminal revision petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging a Metropolitan Magistrate’s order granting one‑day police custody to the accused, Joy Immaculate. The Court held that such a remand order is a pure interlocutory order

ABDUL NAZAR MADANI ETCversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2000 INSC 2905 May 2000Dismissed

The petitioners, among 181 accused in the Coimbatore serial bomb blast case, filed a transfer petition under Sections 406 and 407 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to move the trial from Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu to Kerala, alleging that communal tension in the state would prevent a fair and impartial trial and that

JAI MANGAL ORAONversusSMT. MIRA NAYAK AND ORS. ETC.

2000 INSC 2955 May 2000Dismissed

The appellant, a member of a Scheduled Tribe, claimed title to land that had been surrendered by his predecessor Nanda Oraon in 1942 to a landlord. He alleged that he was the adopted son of Sukhi Oraon and therefore succeeded to the land, filing a complaint that led the Special Officer under the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Ac

MOHD. ZAHIDversusTHE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

1998 INSC 2195 May 1998Case Allowed

Mohd. Zahid was arrested by ISBT police on 8 March 1990 and charged under TADA for possessing three country‑made pistols and twelve cartridges. He contended that he had actually been detained on 6 March 1990, that no weapons were seized, and his father filed a complaint with the magistrate. The Designated Court relied

STATE OF U.P.versusABDUL AND ORS.

1997 INSC 4735 May 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of U.P. appealed the Allahabad High Court’s acquittal of four accused who had been convicted for the murder of Shanker Lal under IPC sections 302 and 34. The High Court had set aside the trial court’s conviction, relying on an inquest report under Section 174 CrPC that omitted mention of a ‘banka’ weapon, and

AJAY AGARWALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS

1993 INSC 1815 May 1993Dismissed

The appellant, an NRI businessman, was charged with criminal conspiracy, cheating and forgery for a scheme hatched in Chandigarh that involved the issuance of foreign letters of credit and forged shipping documents in Dubai, resulting in a loss to Punjab National Bank. The trial court discharged the accused on the grou

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusFALGUNI DUTTA AND ANOTHER

1993 INSC 1825 May 1993Case Partly allowed

The State of West Bengal prosecuted Falguni Dutta and another for contravening orders under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The respondents were arrested on 16 March 1984, but the charge‑sheet was filed after the statutory six‑month period, and the Special Court under Section 12A took cognizance on 13 March 1987.

RAM ASREYversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1993 INSC 1835 May 1993Case Partly allowed

The appellant Ram Asrey, along with Munni Lal and the now‑deceased Radhey Shyam, were charged with the murder of Gokaran Prasad on 24 November 1975. The trial court acquitted them for lack of proof, but the Allahabad High Court convicted Asrey and Munni Lal under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, sentencing them to

SHOMA KANTI SENversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2024 INSC 2695 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Shoma Kanti Sen was arrested in June 2018 in connection with the Elgar Parishad event and charged under the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). The High Court dismissed her bail application, directing her to approach the trial court, after the investigation was transferred to th

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSHILPA JAIN & ORS.

2024 INSC 2785 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh filed a criminal appeal challenging the High Court's order that quashed FIR No. 551 of 2015, which alleged offences under Sections 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC relating to fraudulent sale of government land. The dispute originated from a civil suit over possession of the suit propert

SHIVANI TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2024 INSC 3435 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Shivani Tyagi, a 31‑year‑old woman, suffered 30‑40% burns and permanent facial disfigurement after an acid attack. Five accused were convicted under Sections 307/149 and 326A/149 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Allahabad High Court suspended their sentences and released them on bail, conditioning the

SONUversusSONU YADAV AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 2255 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a criminal appeal against the grant of bail to his brother-in-law, the first respondent, who was charged under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for the unnatural death of his sister within a year of marriage. The Sessions Judge had denied bail, bu

HARI SHANKAR SHUKLAversusSTATE OF U.P.

2017 INSC 3135 April 2017Case Partly allowed

A land dispute in Mamkhor village led to a scuffle on 11 July 1992 during which accused Hari Shankar Shukla retrieved a country-made pistol and fired a bullet that killed Umesh Shukla and attempted to kill Savitri Devi. The trial court acquitted all three accused, finding the eyewitness accounts contradictory and quest

ASHOK @ DANGRA JAISWALversusSTATE OF M.P.

2011 INSC 2695 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a cinema hall owner, and his two employees were subjected to personal searches during which police claimed to have recovered heroin (smack powder) from their possession. Samples of the seized powder were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, which reported the presence of diacetylmorphine, leading to

BANARSI DASSversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 1935 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a patwari, was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs.400 for correcting land records, leading to his conviction under Section 161 of the IPC and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The prosecution's case relied on the recovery of the money from the appellant's pocket and th

SUVARNALATAversusMOHAN ANANDRAO DESHMUKH & ANR.

2010 INSC 1945 April 2010Hearing Adjourned

The husband filed a petition for divorce on the ground that his wife suffered from schizophrenia. The Family Court granted the decree of divorce, which was affirmed by the High Court. The wife appealed only to challenge the findings on her alleged mental disorder and to claim a lump‑sum permanent alimony of Rs 75 lakhs

RAGHU LAKSHMINARAYANANversusM/S. FINE TUBES

2007 INSC 3795 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a registered partnership firm, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that a cheque issued by a business concern named Fine Tubes was dishonoured. The complaint named several persons, including the appellant who was described as "in charge, Manager, Director" of

BHAGUBHAI DHANABHAI KHALASI AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2007 INSC 3815 April 2007Case Partly allowed

Bhagubhai Dhanabhai Khalasi was detained under the COFEPOSA Act and his properties were forfeited under SAFEMA. After the forfeiture order was cancelled, the immovable property was not returned, and respondent No.4 claimed a sale deed in his favour. The Gujarat High Court dismissed Khalasi's writ petition under Article

T. ARUNTPERUNJOTHIversusSTATE THROUGH S.H.O., PONDICHERRY

2006 INSC 2035 April 2006

The Supreme Court considered the appeal of T. Arunthperunjothi, who had been convicted under Section 304B of the IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife Davamani, who committed suicide in 1994. The prosecution alleged that the husband or his relatives had demanded dowry and harassed the deceased, relying on stateme

NAGARATHINAM AND ORS.versusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2006 INSC 2065 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of a brick kiln, were charged with murder, rioting and related offences after a violent clash at a village panchayat meeting that left two persons dead. The trial court convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, while the High Court acquitted them of the 149 charge and convicted

DHANESHWAR MAHAKUD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA

2006 INSC 2075 April 2006Dismissed

Six Mahakud family members were tried for murder, rioting and causing hurt under IPC sections 148, 149, 302 and 323. The High Court acquitted two of them but upheld the conviction of the remaining four for murder. The appellants argued that, because the prosecution could not show that each of them individually caused t

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NEW DELHIversusNARENDER SINGH

2006 INSC 2095 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved Constable Narender Singh, who confessed to theft of firearms while in police custody and was later discharged in the criminal trial due to lack of other evidence. He was dismissed from service in a departmental proceeding based on that confession. The Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High

KAMALANANTHA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2005 INSC 1835 April 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of a swami and his associates for the systematic rape of thirteen orphaned girls in an ashram and the murder of a male inmate. The Court held that the victims' consent was obtained by deceit and threat, rendering it invalid under Section 375 IPC, and that the rape charges were

HASANBHAI VALIBHAI QUERESHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2004 INSC 2355 April 2004Disposed off

The appellant, Hasanbai Valibhai Qureshi, filed a writ petition alleging that the FIR in a communal clash originally listed offences under Sections 395 and 120‑B IPC, but these were later deleted by the police, enabling the accused to obtain bail. He claimed the investigating agency was biased, influenced by a local ML

MAIN PAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 2365 April 2004Dismissed

The accused Main Pal and others were charged with murder of Hans Raj and offences under the Arms Act. The prosecution relied on eye‑witnesses PW‑1 (Ram Sarup) and PW‑2 (Devi Lal), who were relatives of the deceased, and on firearms recovered at the behest of the accused. The trial court acquitted, holding that motive w

ASOKANversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS

2000 INSC 1905 April 2000Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Porkodi, who was manually strangulated in her in-laws' house, and the related dowry death allegations. The trial court had acquitted Balasubramaniam (A-2) for lack of evidence of his participation, while convicting Rajammal (A-1) and Murugesan (A-3) for murder and dowry offences

MANOJversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1999 INSC 1545 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Manoj was arrested in a Rajasthan NDNDPS case and bail was granted, but he remained in custody because he was subsequently arrested in a separate Madhya Pradesh NDNDPS case. The Madhya Pradesh authorities failed to produce him before a magistrate within the constitutionally mandated 24‑hour period and did not file a ch

R. S. NAYAKversusA.R. ANTULAY

1984 INSC 765 April 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court dealt with two criminal matters transferred from the Special Judge, Greater Bombay, to a sitting High Court Judge. The issues were the procedural law to be applied to the trial after transfer and who would act as public prosecutor when cognizance was taken under Section 8(1) of the Criminal Law (Amend

HANUMANT DASSversusVINAY KUMAR & ORS.

1982 INSC 455 April 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Hanumant Dass, the father of the deceased Asha, against the acquittal of Vinay Kumar and his mother Chhano Devi by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The case arose from a murder allegedly committed in Himachal Pradesh but tried in Punjab after a Supreme Court‑ordered transfer. T

PRABHAT KUMAR MISHRA @ PRABHAT MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2024 INSC 1725 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a District Savings Officer, was charged under Section 306 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act for the suicide of a senior clerk who left a suicide note blaming work pressure and harassment. The charge sheet was based solely on that note, and the investigating agency had initially filed a clos

RAVURI KRISHNA MURTHYversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 1535 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ravuri Krishna Murthy, alleged that the second and third respondents fabricated a judgment and decree in a civil suit (OS No. 274 of 2014) to obtain an injunction over his land. The High Court, after an enquiry by the District Collector confirming the fabrication, stayed the suit and later dismissed a pe

MANOJ SURYAVANSHIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2020 INSC 2755 March 2020Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Manoj Suryavanshi, was accused of kidnapping and murdering three minor children of Shivlal after a personal enmity arising from his wife's elopement. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: the children were last seen with the appellant, the bodies were recovered from locations he disclosed, a

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusLAXMI NARAYAN AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 3075 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against two orders of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that quashed FIRs relating to offences of attempt to murder (Sec. 307 IPC) and other offences (Secs. 323, 294, 308, 34 IPC) on the ground that the complainant had reached a compromise with the accused. The Supreme Court held that t

KHUSHWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2019 INSC 3065 March 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Khushwinder Singh, was convicted of murdering six members of a family by kidnapping, drugging them with sleeping tablets and drowning them in a canal, motivated by a desire to steal Rs.37 lakh and ornaments. The prosecution relied on the eye‑witness testimony of the surviving victim (PW‑5), independent w

ANKUSH MARUTI SHINDE AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 3055 March 2019Disposed off

The case involved six accused who were convicted of murder, robbery and rape of a woman in a hut robbery in 2003, based primarily on the identification of two eye‑witnesses (PW1 and PW8) in a test identification parade (TIP) and in court. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved guilt beyond reason

SUSHIL ANSALversusSTATE THROUGH CBI

2014 INSC 1685 March 2014Case Partly allowed

The Uphaar Cinema tragedy in Delhi on 13 June 1997 resulted in 59 deaths and over 100 injuries due to asphyxiation from smoke. The Ansal brothers, as occupiers and licensees of the cinema, were convicted under Sections 304A, 337, 338 read with Section 36 IPC and Section 14 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. The High Court

RAMESHWAR PRASADversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 3155 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a branch manager of a cooperative bank, was convicted under IPC sections 408 and 462 and sentenced by the trial court. The Sessions Court, on appeal, remanded the case to the trial court under Section 368(8) of the CrPC, citing lacunae in the prosecution case, without deciding the appeal on its merits. T

STATE OF PUNJABversusMADAN LAL

2009 INSC 3165 March 2009Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that allowed the three convictions of Madan Lal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, to run concurrently. The High Court had observed that the offences arose from the same family transaction involving different cheques and directed

GOWRISHANKARA SWAMIGALUversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2008 INSC 3055 March 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a junior Swamiji of a religious mutt that ran a school, was accused of repeatedly committing an unnatural sexual offence against a 13‑year‑old student over seven days in July 1986. The FIR was lodged more than a month later and the prosecution’s case lacked medical corroboration and contained several inc

R. RAJESHWARIversusH.N. JAGADISH .

2008 INSC 3065 March 2008Dismissed

R. Rajeshwari filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging a dishonoured cheque of Rs 1 lakh. The trial court convicted H.N. Jagadish, sentenced him to one month imprisonment and ordered compensation of Rs 2 lakh, of which Rs 1.75 lakh was to be paid to the complainant; the Sessions Co

ANIMIREDDY VENKATA RAMANA & ORS.versusPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, H.C. OF A.P.

2008 INSC 3075 March 2008Dismissed

The case involves a murder on a bus where the deceased was killed and his son injured. The trial court acquitted all accused, disbelieving the injured witness and other eye‑witnesses, while the High Court convicted nine of the accused and acquitted the rest. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether an appellate co

DY. CHIEF CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTSversusROSHANLAL AGARWAL AND ORS.

2003 INSC 1465 March 2003Disposed off

The Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports filed complaints against Roshanlal Agarwal and others under several IPC sections and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The complaints were tried before a Special Court (Economic Offences) constituted by a Karnataka notification that created a Ju

RONNY@RONALD JAMES ALWARIS ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1998 INSC 1355 March 1998Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted of murder, robbery and rape for the killings of a family in Pune in July 1992. They challenged the admissibility of witness identifications made for the first time in court without a test identification parade, the legality of the search and seizure of articles, and the doctor’s testimony

VINOD CHATURVEDI ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1984 INSC 545 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the alleged kidnapping and murder of Brindaban, son of PW‑1. Five persons were tried in 1973 and acquitted; a fresh investigation in 1977 led to the prosecution of Vinod Chaturvedi and co‑accused. The trial court again acquitted them, finding the eye‑witness testimony unreliable and the investigation

WING COMMANDER J. KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 335 March 1982Dismissed

Wing Commander J. Kumar, an Air Force officer permanently seconded to the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) in 1971, challenged Rule 16 (promulgated in 1979 under Article 309) which fixed seniority of permanently seconded officers based on the date they attained the substantive rank of Major/equivale

P.M. LOKANATH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 2025 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of a property in Bangalore, filed two civil suits to protect their possession and claim ownership. Respondent No.2, a rival heir, lodged an FIR under IPC sections 448 and 506 alleging threats by the appellants to withdraw the suits, leading to a criminal case. The appellants sought quashing of th

BHAGGI @ BHAGIRATH @ NARANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 825 February 2024Case Partly allowed

The petitioner was convicted under Section 376AB of the IPC for raping a seven‑year‑old girl in a temple and also under various provisions of the POCSO Act. The trial court awarded death penalty, which the High Court commuted to life imprisonment. The petitioner challenged whether the commuted life sentence required fu

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