Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

2,851 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 401–600.

RAM CHARAN SINGH PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

2015 INSC 104026 November 2015Dismissed

The appeal filed by Ram Charan Singh Prajapati against the State of U.P. and others concerned the validity of a judgment rendered under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the applicability of the Uttar Pradesh Government Legal Remembrance's Manual. The appellant challenged the impugned judgment, se

VASANT SAMPAT DUPAREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2014 INSC 103326 November 2014Dismissed

Vasant Sampat Dupare was convicted of raping and murdering a four‑year‑old girl. The prosecution relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence – eyewitnesses who saw the accused with the child, forensic matches of blood on the stones and the accused’s clothing, and the accused’s own disclosure leading police to the body

INDRA SARMAversusV.K.V. SARMA

2013 INSC 78626 November 2013Dismissed

The appellant, an unmarried woman, lived with the respondent, a married man, for about 14 years and claimed that his failure to maintain her constituted domestic violence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The respondent argued that their relationship was a mere live‑in arrangement, not a "

CHIRRA SHIVRAJversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2010 INSC 82426 November 2010Dismissed

The deceased, Chirra Shantha, had a strained relationship with her brother‑in‑law, the appellant, who allegedly abused her. On 21 April 1999 she poured kerosene on herself and the appellant threw a lit match, causing severe burns. She later died of septicemia; a dying declaration was recorded by a judicial magistrate a

SHANTABEN BHURABHAI BHURIYAversusANAND ATHABHAI CHAUDHARI & ORS.

2021 INSC 67426 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a criminal complaint in 2013 alleging offences under the IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. A magistrate took cognizance of the offences and committed the case to a Special Court constituted under Section 14 of the Atrocities Act. The High Court q

MITESH KUMAR J. SHAversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2021 INSC 67526 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-builder company entered into a Joint Development Agreement and a subsequent MoU with Respondent No.2 to develop a property and sell flats, but a dispute arose over the alleged sale of four excess flats beyond the agreed share. Respondent No.2 filed a criminal complaint alleging cheating and criminal breac

M. RAVINDRANversusTHE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE

2020 INSC 60826 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, accused under the NDPS Act, was remanded to judicial custody on 4 August 2018. After the statutory period of 180 days elapsed on 31 January 2019, he filed an application for default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC on 1 February 2019, offering to furnish bail. While the bail application was being he

RAVEEN KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2020 INSC 60626 October 2020Dismissed

The appellant Raveen Kumar was stopped by police near the HP‑J&K border and charas weighing 1 kg 230 g was seized from his van. The trial court acquitted him, relying on a prosecution reply to a bail application that suggested prior knowledge of the appellant, deeming the seizure not a "chance recovery". The High Court

RAJESH DHIMANversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2020 INSC 60726 October 2020Dismissed

The appellants, Rajesh Dhiman and Gulshan Rana, were stopped by police while riding a motorcycle and a search of a backpack on Dhiman yielded 3.1 kg of charas. The trial court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution had not proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt, especially because the complainant (PW‑8) was al

BRAHM SWAROOP & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 73426 October 2010Dismissed

The case involved six accused who were alleged to have fired on four persons, resulting in four deaths. The trial court acquitted Brahm Swaroop and Jagdish Baggar on the ground that the informant could not name their fathers and the weapon recovery was doubtful, while convicting the others. On appeal, the High Court re

V. SENTHIL BALAJIversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 73926 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The former Tamil Nadu Transport Minister V. Senthil Balaji was arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for alleged involvement in a large‑scale job‑racketeering scheme, with the Enforcement Directorate filing a complaint under Section 3 of the PMLA punishable under Section 4. The High Court rejecte

H. D. SUNDARA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 85826 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a group of accused who were originally acquitted by the Sessions Court for offences arising from a violent property dispute that resulted in death and injuries. The State appealed under Section 378 of the CrPC, and the Karnataka High Court set aside the acquittal, convicting the accused under IPC Sect

KRISHNA PRASAD VERMA (D) THR. LRS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2019 INSC 108926 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined disciplinary proceedings against a district judge who was charged with granting bail without noticing a High Court order and for closing evidence in an NDPS case without ensuring witness production. The Court held that Article 235 vests control of subordinate courts in the High Courts, but di

SWAPNIL TRIPATHIversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA

2018 INSC 88626 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners filed a writ under Article 32 seeking a declaration that Supreme Court proceedings of constitutional and national importance be live‑streamed and that a regulatory framework be established. The Court examined whether live‑streaming is compatible with the constitutional mandate of open courts, the rights

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusCHHAAKKI LAL AND ANOTHER

2018 INSC 88926 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Chhaakki Lal and his son Akhilesh for the murder of four persons, including a three‑year‑old child, based primarily on the testimony of the sole eye‑witness Kesar Bai (PW‑1). The trial court convicted them under Section 302 IPC and imposed death sentences, deeming the case "rarest

JAGDISH NARAIN SHUKLAversusSTATE OF U. P. AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 91126 September 2016Disposed off

Jagdish Narain Shukla filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the implementation of a Lokayukta report that alleged corruption by former minister Naseemuddin Siddiqui and former MLC Husna Siddiqui, claiming they had purchased assets at undervalued prices using income from unknown sources. The Lokayukta, under S

PATEL MAHESHBHAI RANCHODBHAI AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 68726 September 2014Dismissed

The case involved the suicide of Renukaben Patel, a married woman, who alleged severe physical and mental cruelty by her husband and in‑laws before setting herself on fire in her matrimonial home. The trial court, after a hurried nine‑day trial, acquitted all accused except the husband (convicted under s.498A IPC with

ANUP LAL YADAV & ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2014 INSC 68626 September 2014Dismissed

In 1974 a mob of 300‑400 persons, led by Surang Lal Yadav, attacked the Muslim Badhya community in Singhimari village, killing 14 people, burning 47 houses and looting property. The appellants, including Anup Lal Yadav, were identified by multiple eye‑witnesses as part of the mob and were convicted under Sections 302,

LIYAKAT AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2014 INSC 68926 September 2014Disposed off

The case arose from the alleged murder of Jumila in a dowry dispute, for which Liyakat, Ajeem Khan and others were convicted under Sections 302, 498A and 201 of the IPC. The High Court set aside the conviction, holding that material incriminating the accused had not been put to them under Section 313 of the CrPC, and r

KAMLESH KUMAR AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

2013 INSC 65426 September 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, children of a former Director of Animal Husbandry, were charged under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) for receiving foreign exchange. While the cases were pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the State Government, with the High Court's resolution, transferred them to a

ASHRAFKHAN @ BABU MUNNEKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 42526 September 2012Disposed off

The case involved 60 accused charged under TADA, the Arms Act and the Explosive Substances Act, of whom 11 were convicted by a Designated Court. The appellants contended that the FIR under TADA was registered without the mandatory prior approval of the District Superintendent of Police under s.20‑A(1) of TADA, renderin

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSURENDRA KORI

2012 INSC 42726 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh alleged that Surendra Kori, a Deputy Registrar, facilitated the registration of over one hundred forged sale deeds to enable fictitious buyers to claim benefits under a Special Rehabilitation Package for the Sardar Sarovar Project. FIRs and charge‑sheets were filed under IPC sections 420, 46

PUTAIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 104226 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of two accused, Putai and Dileep, for the rape and murder of a 12‑year‑old girl, based solely on circumstantial evidence and forensic material. The trial and High Courts had upheld the death penalty for Putai and life imprisonment for Dileep, relying on recovered items, a sniff

SAMSUL HAQUEversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2019 INSC 95326 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The incident occurred on 17 March 1997 at a tea stall in Kalia Hotel where the deceased, Keramat Ali, was allegedly attacked by a group of nine accused. The trial court acquitted accused No.9 (Samsul Haque) and accused Nos.2 and 3 (Abdul Rashid and Imdadul Islam) citing lack of incriminating evidence, while convicting

GHANSHYAM SHARMAversusSURENDRA KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.

2014 INSC 56626 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant withdrew Rs 16.68 lakh from a bank, left the cash in the first respondent's car, and later claimed the money was stolen when the car's glass was broken. A police investigation resulted in a chargesheet under IPC sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating). The respondents sought quashing of

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusBABLU

2014 INSC 99626 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order that reduced the six‑month rigorous imprisonment awarded to Bablu for offences under Sections 323 and 354 IPC to the 21 days he had already served, on the ground that he was a first‑time offender. The Supreme Court held that sentencing must reflect the gravity of

ECON ANTRI LTD.versusROM INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 56126 August 2013Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be filed within one month of the cause of action arising, and specifically whether the day the cause of action arose should be counted in the 30‑day period prescribed by Section 142(b). Relying on Section 9 of the Ge

GURVAIL SINGH @ GALAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 56726 August 2013

Gurvail Singh was convicted of murdering four persons under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and was sentenced to death. The High Court upheld the death sentence, but the Supreme Court commuted it to life imprisonment with a direction that the petitioner serve 30 years without remission. The petitioner filed a writ petit

KAMLESH PRABHUDAS TANNA & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2013 INSC 56226 August 2013Disposed off

The appellant Kamlesh Prabhudas Tanna and his mother were convicted for dowry harassment, abetment of suicide and culpable homicide after the death of Sandhya, the sister of the informant, who allegedly committed suicide. The trial court found the prosecution evidence sufficient under IPC sections 304‑8, 306, 498A, 34

MOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 61426 August 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Mohan Singh, was accused of extorting money from an informant by telephone and threatening the informant's brother, who was subsequently killed. The prosecution presented voice identification by the informant, call‑record printouts linking Singh to co‑conspirator Laxmi Singh, and testimony that the infor

BABUBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ETC.

2010 INSC 54126 August 2010Disposed off

Two FIRs (CR No.1‑154/2008 and CR No.1‑155/2008) were lodged for communal clashes in Dhedhal village. The High Court quashed the second FIR, merged the investigations, and transferred the case to the State CID, also directing that the charge‑sheet of the quashed FIR be read into the surviving case. The Supreme Court he

GHULAM HASSAN BEIGHversusMOHAMMAD MAQBOOL MAGREY & ORS.

2022 INSC 75026 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Ghulam Hassan Beigh alleged that seven accused formed an unlawful assembly, assaulted him and his family, and caused the death of his wife, whose post‑mortem reported cardio‑respiratory failure. The trial court, after reviewing the medical report and limited oral evidence, discharged the accused of murder

ARVINDKUMAR ANUPALAL PODDARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 30426 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Arvindkumar, was charged with murdering his first wife, Sita Devi, under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence, including the last sighting of the appellant with the victim, blood‑stained clothes, recovery of a knife, post‑mortem fi

BIPIN KUMAR MONDALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 43026 July 2010Dismissed

Bipin Kumar Mondal was convicted for the murder of his wife and son and for causing hurt to another son under IPC sections 302 and 323. The prosecution’s case rested on the eyewitness testimony of the surviving son, Sujit Mondal, who lodged an Ejahar stating that his father attacked the family with a knife, and on corr

ANIRUDDHA KHANWALKARversusSHARMILA DAS & OTHERS

2024 INSC 34226 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant married respondent No.1, who had previously concealed her existing marriage and presented a forged divorce decree, inducing the appellant to part with Rs. 2 lakh and later discover her pregnancy. The appellant filed a criminal complaint alleging cheating and criminal conspiracy under Sections 420 and 120‑

THE STATE OF ODISHAversusNIRJHARINI PATNAIK @ MOHANTY & ANR.

2024 INSC 34626 April 2024

The State of Odisha appealed against the High Court’s order that quashed the cognizance taken by the Special District Judge, Bhubaneswar, of offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A), 120(B) and 34 of the IPC relating to a conspiracy to forge documents and illegally transfer government land. The FIR, lodged in

RITU CHHABARIAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 43626 April 2023Disposed off

The petitioner sought the release of her husband, who had been repeatedly remanded in custody despite the filing of multiple supplementary chargesheets that did not complete the investigation. The core issue was whether a chargesheet can be filed piecemeal before the investigation is finished and whether such filing ex

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ETC.versusDR. P. A. BHATT & ORS. ETC.

2023 INSC 43426 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Non‑MBBS medical officers (Ayurveda, Unani, etc.) filed writ petitions seeking parity in pay with MBBS doctors, invoking the Tikku Pay Commission recommendations. The State of Gujarat, after initially extending higher pay scales to these officers, withdrew the benefit, leading to appeals before the High Court, which gr

SHRADDHA GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 48126 April 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Shraddha Gupta, was added as an accused in a murder case after call recordings linked her to the crime. A gang chart was prepared and she was charged under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. She filed a writ petition under Section 482 of the

RATHISH BABU UNNIKRISHNANversusTHE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2022 INSC 48026 April 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan, challenged a summoning order issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that the cheques were security instruments for a share buy‑back and not payable on a legally enforceable debt. The Delhi High Court dismissed his petition under Section 482 of

THE STATE BANK OF INDIA & OTHERSversusP. SOUPRAMANIANE

2019 INSC 57926 April 2019Dismissed

P. Soupramian, a messenger employed by State Bank of India, stabbed two individuals with a broken soda bottle and was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, receiving a three‑month imprisonment. The bank discharged him under Section 10(1)(b)(i) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, which bars persons conv

N. RAMAMURTHYversusSTATE BY CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, A.C.B., BENGALURU

2019 INSC 58226 April 2019Disposed off

N. Ramamurthy was convicted under several IPC provisions and the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to multiple terms, the trial court directing that all sentences run concurrently, resulting in a maximum imprisonment of seven years. He filed applications under Section 389 of the CrPC seeking suspension of the

VIKRAM JOHARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2019 INSC 58326 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a certified surveyor, was appointed by an insurance company to assess a fire insurance claim of M/s. Ram Company. After submitting a final survey report that led the insurer to repudiate the claim, the complainant filed a criminal complaint alleging that the appellant, with armed accomplices, threatened

AMAL KUMAR J HAversusSTATE OF CHHATISGARH & ANR.

2016 INSC 34026 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Amal Kumar Jha, the doctor-in-charge of a Primary Health Centre, was charged under IPC 304A for the death of a patient after he allegedly refused to provide a government jeep to transfer her to a district hospital. He sought discharge of the criminal proceedings under Section 197 of the CrPC, arguing that the omission

STATE THROUGH CBL/ACB, HYDERABAD A.P.versusDHARMANA PRASED RAO

2016 INSC 34326 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State (CBI) filed a charge‑sheet against fourteen accused, including the respondent, under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and several provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The Special Court initially deferred taking cognizance of the respondent, directing the investigating officer to obtain a sanction order

REKHA SHARAD USHIRversusSAPTASHRUNGI MAHILA NAGARI SAHKARI PATSANSTA LTD.

2025 INSC 39926 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rekha Sharad Ushir, was accused of dishonouring a cheque issued to Saptashrungi Mahila Nagari Sahkari Patsansta Ltd., a credit co‑operative society, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The society filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, alleging default on a loan and the non‑pa

YADWINDER SINGHversusLAKHI ALIAS LAKHWINDER SINGH & ANR. ETC.

2025 INSC 42026 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Yadwinder Singh, complained that his brother was murdered in a politically motivated incident and that the private respondents were present at the scene, as testified by eye‑witnesses. The trial court issued summons against the private respondents under Section 319 of the CrPC, but the High Court set asi

RAJENDRA @ RAJAPPA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2021 INSC 21926 March 2021Dismissed

The deceased was attacked with weapons by his relatives while returning from work, resulting in his death. The trial court acquitted accused A‑2 to A‑6, but the High Court convicted A‑2 to A‑5 under s.302 read with s.149 IPC, finding the witnesses’ testimony credible despite minor inconsistencies. The appellants challe

MLA FROM MAU DISTRICT, UPversusJAIL SUPERINTENDENT (ROPAR) & ORS.

2021 INSC 22326 March 2021

The State of Uttar Pradesh filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution and Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking the transfer of criminal proceedings against sitting MLA Mukhtar Ansari from a Punjab court to a Special Court in Allahabad and the hand‑over of his custody from Roopnagar Jail

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusUDAY SINGH

2019 INSC 40126 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh seized a tractor and trolley used for illegal sand excavation from the Chambal river under Section 52 of the Forest Act, 1927 (as amended by MP Act 25 of 1983) and initiated confiscation proceedings under Section 52(3). The respondent sought interim release of the seized vehicle under CrPC S

BHARATKUMAR RAMESHCHANDRA BAROTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2018 INSC 26326 March 2018Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced by the Sessions Court to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, which the State appealed under Section 377 of the CrPC for enhancement. The High Court, after serving notice and appointing an amicus curiae, enhanced the sentence to life imprisonment. T

S. SATYANARAYANAversusENERGO MASCH POWER ENGINEERING & CONSULTING PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 26626 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a promoter‑director of a biomass power company, filed a private complaint alleging conspiracy, false declarations and cheating under Section 628 of the Companies Act, 1956 and Sections 1208 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The Special Judge for Economic Offences took cognizance, but the Andhra Pradesh

SHAILESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. (NOW STATE OF UTTARAKHAND)

2024 INSC 14326 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based on a dying declaration, eyewitness testimony, and the recovery of a weapon, despite serious irregularities in the investigation. The Supreme Court examined the purpose of criminal investigation, the role of the investigating officer, and the interplay be

AARISH ASGAR QURESHIversusFAREED AHMED QURESHI & ANR.

2019 INSC 27026 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from matrimonial proceedings where the husband alleged his wife had an extramarital affair and made those averments in anticipatory bail applications before the Sessions Court and the High Court. The High Court held that the statements were false, found a prima facie case of perjury under Section 340 o

GAJANAN DASHRATH KHARATEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2016 INSC 21926 February 2016Dismissed

Gajanan Dashrath Kharate was convicted of murdering his father, Dashrath, after the father was found dead in a pool of blood following a night of frequent quarrels. Two neighbours, PW‑1 and PW‑2, heard the altercation but did not intervene and later learned of the death from a third witness. The prosecution presented t

AMRUTLAL LILADHARBHAI KOTAK & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2015 INSC 16726 February 2015Dismissed

The deceased, Truptiben, married in 1996 and allegedly faced repeated dowry demands and mental harassment by her husband and his relatives, leading her to commit suicide by hanging in 2000, within seven years of marriage. A criminal complaint was filed under Sections 498A, 304B, 306 and 114 of the IPC; the trial court

DHIRENDRA KUMAR @ DHIROOversusSTATE OF UTIARAKHAND

2015 INSC 14826 February 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Dhirendra Kumar, was convicted of murdering Surat Singh by striking him on the head with a stone. The prosecution presented eye‑witnesses, the widow of the deceased, and corroborative testimony establishing prior enmity and a motive. The accused claimed he was falsely implicated and that the incident was

NANAK RAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2014 INSC 14226 February 2014Disposed off

The case arose from a violent clash between two rival groups over a land dispute in Rajasthan, during which Shivji Ram was killed and several others injured. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, while the High Court later reduced the charge to culpable homicide not amountin

VIJAYA SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2024 INSC 90525 November 2024Dismissed

The appellants, Vijaya Singh and his mother Basanti Devi, were convicted for the murder of Devaki, the appellant's wife, based largely on circumstantial evidence and statements recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the FIR was delayed, the circumstantial evidence

ANJAN DASGUPTAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2016 INSC 106225 November 2016Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Debo! Kumar Ghosh on 16 June 2000, for which Anjan Dasgupta and Biswanath Paul were alleged to have directed shooters. The trial court acquitted them, citing alleged ante‑dating and ante‑timing of the FIR and discarding eye‑witness testimony. The Calcutta High Court reversed the acquitta

SARASWATHYversusBABU

2013 INSC 78225 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Saraswathy, married to Babu in 2000, was subjected to dowry demands and was thrown out of the matrimonial home. She filed a petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking protection, residence and maintenance orders. Although the trial magistrate granted these orders, Babu repeatedly re

STATE OF GUJARATversusGIRISH RADHAKRISHNAN VARDE

2013 INSC 78325 November 2013Disposed off

The State of Gujarat appealed against the High Court’s order upholding the quashing of a magistrate’s permission to add Sections 364, 394 and 398 IPC to a charge‑sheet that had already been filed after investigation of an FIR under Section 154 CrPC. The dispute centered on whether a magistrate exercising jurisdiction u

DEVENDRA KISHANLAL DAGALIAversusDWARKESH DIAMONDS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2013 INSC 78025 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a Mumbai magistrate’s court, alleging that cheques were drawn and handed over in Mumbai, dishonoured in Delhi, and a legal notice was issued from Mumbai. The respondents sought to have the complaints returned under Section 201 of the

STATE OF HARYANAversusRAJMAL AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 82125 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana prosecuted Rajmal and another under Section 8 of the Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 for slaughtering cows in their house. The trial court and the Additional Sessions Judge convicted them based on seizure of beef, cow skins, and weapons, and eyewitness identification by the investigat

ABBAS AHMAD CHOUDHARYversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2009 INSC 126225 November 2009Disposed off

On 15 September 1997 three accused—Md. Mizazul Haq, Abbas Ahmad Choudhary and an absconding Ranju Das—kidnapped, gagged and raped a girl aged about 13‑15 years. The trial court convicted both appellants under Sections 376 and 336 of the Indian Penal Code, a decision upheld by the Gauhati High Court. On appeal before th

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAMJAN KHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 82325 October 2024Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged Ramjan Khan, Musab Khan and Habib Khan with murder of Naseem Khan under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 IPC. The trial court convicted them based largely on oral testimonies of the deceased’s mother (PW‑8) and his two minor brothers (PW‑5, PW‑9), treating an alleged oral dying declaration

RAMAWATARversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2021 INSC 66425 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Ramawatar, a resident of a Madhya Pradesh village, was convicted under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act for allegedly insulting his neighbour Prembai, a Scheduled Caste woman, during a property dispute. The parties later entered into a voluntary compromise and the complainant sought to withdraw the criminal case. The S

MISS XYZversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR

2019 INSC 119925 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Miss XYZ, a personal assistant to the managing director of a company, filed a complaint alleging that the director repeatedly blackmailed her with nude photographs, threatened her employment, and raped her on several occasions. An FIR was lodged under Sections 376, 499 and 506(2) of the IPC. The director filed a specia

JITENDRA @ KALLAversusSTATE OF GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2018 INSC 99725 October 2018Disposed off

The appellant Jitendra Kalla was convicted in two FIRs for murder and related offences, receiving rigorous life imprisonment in each case with a 30‑year cap on remission for the first and a consecutive life term for the second. The High Court, despite a statement that the appellant would not challenge the conviction, e

SUDAM CHARAN DASHversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ANR.

2013 INSC 72325 October 2013Disposed off

The appellant Sudam Charan Dash sought justice for his son’s murder, leading to a non‑bailable warrant against accused Sweekar Nayak (respondent 2). Respondent 2 applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which the Orissa High Court rejected but simultaneously directed that if he surrendered within fo

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusKISHORE SINGH & OTHERS

2010 INSC 73225 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI prosecuted three police officers for grievously injuring a detainee, Jugta Ram, in police custody, including the amputation of his penis using a razor. The trial court convicted all three under sections 326, 308, 323, 342, 343 and 120B of the IPC, but the Rajasthan High Court acquitted the ASI and SHO and reduc

KAILASHBEN MAHENDRABHAI PATEL & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2024 INSC 73725 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a wife, filed a criminal complaint in 2013 alleging dowry demand, threats, and cruelty by her step‑mother‑in‑law, step‑brother‑in‑law, father‑in‑law and a munim, leading to an FIR under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 IPC and a subsequent chargesheet. The appellants sought quashing of the FIR

MANIK & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 73425 September 2024

The case involved police officers accused of torturing a suspect, Shama @ Kalya, while in custody, leading to his death and alleged tampering with evidence. The prosecution relied on witness testimony, a fingerprint test linking an unidentified burnt body to the victim, and claims of a staged escape, while the defence

ANWAR ALI AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2020 INSC 56325 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Anwar Ali and another were convicted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court for murder and related offences based on circumstantial evidence, overturning a trial court acquittal. The trial court had found material contradictions in the prosecution's version of the recovery of a knife, rope, and other items,

PUBLIC INTEREST FOUNDATION & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2018 INSC 86225 September 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether it could compel Parliament to enact a law disqualifying candidates against whom serious criminal charges have been framed and whether it could direct the Election Commission to deny such candidates the use of a party's reserved symbol. The Court held that disqualification is a matter

REEMA SALKANversusSUMER SINGH SALKAN

2018 INSC 86725 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-wife filed a Section 125 CrPC maintenance petition in 2003 after her husband, a Canadian permanent resident, failed to bring her to Canada and allegedly obstructed her visa. The Family Court awarded Rs.10,000 per month from July 2003 to December 2010 and denied maintenance thereafter, finding the husband

RAJO @ RAJWA @ RAJENDRA MANDALversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 77125 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, serving a life sentence for murder and a weapons offence, applied for premature release after 24 years of incarceration, claiming denial of remission and parole. The Remission Board rejected his applications twice, relying heavily on adverse opinions of the presiding judge, despite favorable reports fro

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusNAROTTAM DHAKAD & ANR.

2023 INSC 77025 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation filed charge sheets in English in Vyapam scam cases, and the accused, who claimed they could not understand English, sought Hindi translations. The lower courts rejected the applications, but the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that Hindi, being the language of the criminal courts und

RAHMAT KHAN @ RAMMU BISMILLAHversusDEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

2021 INSC 42425 August 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

Rahmat Khan, a journalist and social worker, exposed alleged misappropriation of government grants to madrasas in Amravati district and filed RTI applications and complaints against officials. In retaliation, three FIRs were lodged against him under various IPC sections, and the Deputy Commissioner of Police issued an

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusJAINUDEEN SHEKHANDANR.

2015 INSC 61025 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against a Special Judge's order granting Rs.1,50,000 compensation to two accused persons, Jainudeen and Shabbir, who were acquitted under the NDNDPS Act after a forensic report, delayed by two years, showed no contraband. The trial judge had based the compensation on alleged malice and t

GURDEEP SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2011 INSC 61025 August 2011Dismissed

The appellant Gurdeep Singh was convicted under IPC sections 3048 (dowry death) and 498A for allegedly poisoning his wife Rajinder Kaur after a dowry demand. The prosecution alleged that the accused administered poison, that a dowry demand of Rs 25,000 was made shortly before death, and that the body was cremated hasti

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusSANYAM LODHA

2011 INSC 61125 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a legislator and social activist, filed a writ petition alleging that the Rajasthan Chief Minister's Relief Fund was being distributed arbitrarily and discriminatorily among minor rape victims, seeking a uniform grant of Rs.5 lakh to each victim. The High Court ordered that Rule 5 of the Relief Fund Rul

SUKDEB SAHAversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS

2025 INSC 89325 July 2025Disposed off

The appellant, Sukdeb Saha, challenged the Andhra Pradesh High Court's refusal to transfer the investigation of his 17‑year‑old daughter's suspicious death at a coaching institute to the CBI. He alleged that the local police investigation was biased, incomplete, and that crucial forensic evidence and CCTV footage were

ANURAG BHATNAGAR & ANR.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2025 INSC 89525 July 2025Dismissed

The dispute arose between Sunair Hotels Ltd (SHL) and VLS Finance Ltd over a failed Memorandum of Understanding for a hotel project, leading to multiple FIRs and arbitration. SHL filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC on 1 July 2005, prompting a Metropolitan Magistrate to order registration of FIR No.380/2005 f

BANSAL MILK CHILLING CENTREversusRANA MILK FOOD PRIVATE LTD. & ANR.

2025 INSC 89925 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that the respondents had purchased Desi Ghee and that three cheques totalling Rs. 14 lakh were dishonoured. After summons were issued and before the complainant's cross‑examination, the appellant sought to amend the complaint t

DHANRAJ N ASAWANIversusAMARJEET SINGH MOHINDER SINGH BASI AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 71025 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a shareholder and former director of Seva Vikas Co-operative Bank, filed FIR No. 806 of 2019 alleging financial fraud by the bank's chief executive and former chairperson based on a forensic audit report. The Bombay High Court quashed the FIR, holding that Section 81(5B) of the Maharashtra Co-operative S

KANCHAN KUMARIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2022 INSC 74625 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent filed an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail for alleged offences under IPC sections 406, 420, 467 and 468. The Patna High Court granted the bail but, in the same order, directed the cancellation of the licence of Kanchan Kumari, the appellant,

SANJEEV KUMAR GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2019 INSC 81625 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sanjeev Kumar Gupta, alleged that his son was murdered and that the accused, the second respondent, was a juvenile at the time of the offence. The accused claimed juvenility based on a CBSE matriculation certificate showing a birth date of 17‑12‑1998, while school records, a transfer certificate, Aadhaar

SUKHRAMversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2016 INSC 55325 July 2016Dismissed

The case concerned Sukh Ram, a Gram Sewak, who was alleged to have forged loan applications and misappropriated government funds between 1983 and 1986. During the investigation, an executive magistrate obtained specimen signatures of two witnesses, which were later compared by a handwriting expert who testified that th

NARINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2014 INSC 50925 July 2014Dismissed

The appellant, Narinder Singh, was accused of offering a bribe of Rs.10,000 to the Additional District Magistrate of Bharmour to obtain supply orders for double‑decker beds. The trial court acquitted him, but the High Court set aside that judgment, convicted him under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 198

KANTILAL MARTAJI PANDORversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 49425 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kantilal Martaji Pandor, was married to two women; his second wife, Amriben, wrote a letter to the police alleging financial exploitation, starvation and threats, and subsequently died by jumping into a well. An FIR was lodged under Sections 498A and 306 IPC, leading to his conviction on both counts by t

GOUR ACHARJEversusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA & ORS.

2026 INSC 53525 May 2026Dismissed

The appellant, Gour Acharjee, was convicted for the murder of his wife Soma Acharjee, who died after being subjected to severe dowry-related torture. The prosecution alleged that Soma was beaten, sustaining head and chest injuries, and subsequently hanged to simulate suicide, while the defence claimed a voluntary suici

AMOL BHAGWAN NEHULversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2025 INSC 78225 May 2025

The appellant, a 25‑year‑old student, was charged under IPC sections 376, 376(2)(n), 377, 504 and 506 for allegedly forcing sexual intercourse on a promise of marriage. The complainant, a previously married woman with a four‑year‑old child, claimed the appellant entered her house and had sexual relations after assuring

SUNIL KUMAR @ SUDHIR KUMAR & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 29825 May 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellants Sunil Kumar and others were convicted under IPC sections 363, 366 and 376(1) and sentenced to separate terms of rigorous imprisonment without any indication whether the sentences should run concurrently or consecutively. Both the trial court and the High Court failed to specify the mode of running of the

NARENDER KUMARversusSTATE (NCT) OF DELHI

2012 INSC 24925 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of rape under IPC s.376 based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix, Indira, whose statement was recorded under Section 164 CrPC. The appellant appealed, arguing that the prosecutrix's evidence contained material contradictions, lacked corroboration, and was unreliable, especially given

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSURENDRA PATWA & ORS

2025 INSC 57225 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Reserve Bank of India issued Master Directions on Frauds to enable banks to detect and report fraudulent accounts, leading the appellant banks to declare the respondents' accounts fraudulent (an administrative action) and to refer the matter to the CBI, resulting in FIRs and criminal proceedings. The High Courts qu

RAHUL KUMAR YADAVversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2024 INSC 35925 April 2024

Rahul Kumar Yadav was convicted under Sections 302 and 394 of the IPC and Section 27(2) of the Arms Act, receiving a death sentence which was later commuted to life imprisonment. He claimed that he was a juvenile at the time of the alleged offence (27 July 2011) and filed applications under Section 7‑A of the Juvenile

HARBHAJAN SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 42425 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Harbhajan Singh, the registered owner of a truck that overturned and was found with narcotic powder, was convicted under Section 25 of the NDNDPS Act for allegedly permitting the vehicle's use in a drug offence. The prosecution relied on two witnesses who initially identified the driver and cleaner and named the owner,

RAVINDER SINGHversusTHE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2023 INSC 42625 April 2023Disposed off

The appellant was convicted of raping his nine‑year‑old daughter under Sections 376, 377 and 506 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, with the trial judge adding a rider that no clemency could be granted before he served twenty years. The Delhi High Court affirmed the conviction and the same rider, and the ap

RAJANversusTHE HOME SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

2019 INSC 57425 April 2019Disposed off

The petitioner, Rajan, was convicted of multiple offences including dacoity, murder, and illegal possession of arms, receiving seven years' rigorous imprisonment for IPC 395, five years' rigorous imprisonment under the Arms Act, and life imprisonment for three counts of IPC 302 and four counts of IPC 307. He sought pre

BALIRAJ SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2017 INSC 39525 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Baliraj Singh and co‑accused were convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC based on the testimony of three eyewitnesses who were relatives of the deceased and on a post‑mortem report indicating a fatal wound caused by a sharp object. The Supreme Court found serious contradictions among th

STATE OF M.P. & ANR.versusRAJVEER SINGH & ORS.

2016 INSC 33725 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the High Court's order quashing an FIR registered under Sections 307 and 34 of the IPC against Assistant Sub‑Inspector Rajveer Singh and others for allegedly shooting and beating a complainant. Rajveer Singh had filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash

DEVINDER SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB THROUGH CBI

2016 INSC 33525 April 2016Disposed off

The appellants, police officers, challenged the prosecution for alleged fake encounters and custodial deaths, arguing that under Section 6 of the Punjab Disturbed Areas Act, 1983 (as amended 1989) and Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, prior sanction from the Central Government was required. The Court

POOJA ABHISHEK GOYALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2014 INSC 34625 April 2014Dismissed

The petitioner, a wife, filed a dowry complaint against her husband and his family and later sought further investigation of her stridhan property and a palmtop communicator under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. The magistrate ordered the investigating officer to conduct this additional inquiry under the supervision of a

UNION OF INDIAversusV. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN & ORS.

2014 INSC 34725 April 2014Matter referred to larger bench

The Union of India moved a writ petition under Art. 32 seeking to quash a Tamil Nadu Government letter proposing remission of life sentences for seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, after the Supreme Court had earlier commuted death sentences of three of them to life imprisonment. The Court examined w

VIJAY RANGLAL CHORASIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 33025 April 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of three accused in a kidnapping‑for‑ransom case. It upheld the life‑sentence convictions of Gautam Kumar (A2) and Vijay Ranglal Chorasiya (A5), finding that eyewitness testimony, telephone‑booth records and voice‑spectrography reliably proved their guilt beyond reasonable dou

MANJEET SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2014 INSC 32525 April 2014Disposed off

Manjeet Singh and two companions were charged with murder (Sec. 302 IPC), attempted murder, and offences under the Arms Act after firing a carbine in a hotel hall, killing Rajnish (Rintu) and injuring others. The trial court convicted Singh under Sec. 302, Sec. 324 IPC and Sec. 27 of the Arms Act; the High Court affirm

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NONAVINAKERE POLICEversusSHIVANNA @ TARKARI SHIVANNA

2014 INSC 34525 April 2014Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court, hearing Special Leave Petition (Cr.) No. 5073 of 2011 filed by the State of Karnataka against Shivanna, observed the persistent incidence of rape and the inadequacy of existing procedural mechanisms. It noted the absence of a fast‑track procedure for rape cases despite the existence of Fast‑Track Cou

LAUT KUMAR YADAV @ KURIversusSTATE OF UTIAR PRADESH

2014 INSC 32725 April 2014Case Partly allowed

Laut Kumar Yadav alias Kuri was convicted for murdering an 18‑year‑old girl and attempting to rape her. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: a sniffer‑dog trail, recovery of a blood‑stained sickle and the accused’s clothes, and prior eve‑teasing of the victim. The trial court sentenced him to death under

PREM KAURversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2013 INSC 28025 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Prem Kaur, a labourer, was abducted, beaten and allegedly raped by a father, his son and others. She was hospitalized, but the FIR was lodged three days later. The trial court acquitted the accused, citing the delay in filing the FIR and the improbability of a father and son raping together, without providing reasoned

SHANKAR KISANRAO KHADEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 28125 April 2013Disposed off

Shankar Kisanrao Khade, aged about 52, and his wife abducted an 11‑year‑old girl with moderate intellectual disability, repeatedly raped her and later strangulated her to death. The trial court and the High Court convicted Khade under IPC sections 302, 376, 366‑A, 363 r/w s.34 and sentenced him to death, while his wife

PATRICIA MUKHIMversusSTATE OF MEGHALAYA & ORS.

2021 INSC 21325 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

In July 2020, a group of tribal youths attacked non‑tribal youngsters playing basketball in Lawsohtun, Meghalaya. Journalist Patricia Mukhim posted a Facebook message condemning the attack and urging the state government and police to act, which was complained about as hate speech. An FIR was lodged under Sections 153A

KUNGA NIMA LEPCHA & ORS.versusSTATE OF SIKKIM & ORS.

2010 INSC 16625 March 2010Dismissed

Four members of a political party filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that the Chief Minister of Sikkim had amassed assets disproportionate to his known income and misappropriated public funds. They sought a mandamus directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to launch

MD. SHAHABUDDINversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 17125 March 2010Dismissed After

Md. Shahabuddin, a sitting MP, was in custody with more than forty criminal cases pending. Because of serious threats to public order, the Patna High Court, exercising its power under s.9(6) of the CrPC, issued a notification that the Court of Session would hold its sittings inside Siwan District Jail, and the Bihar Go

RAVICHANDRANversusSTATE BY DY. SUPERIN. OF POLICE, MADRAS

2010 INSC 16925 March 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for conspiracy, cheating, forgery of a palmolein oil permit and offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Essential Commodities Act. The prosecution alleged that accused A1, A2 and A4 had interpolated and forged the permit, relying mainly on handwriting identification by witnesse

NKGSB COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITEDversusSUBIR CHAKRAVARTY & ORS.

2022 INSC 23825 February 2022Disposed off

The NKGSB Cooperative Bank, a secured creditor, sought possession of a mortgaged flat after the borrowers defaulted on a loan, invoking Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) appointed an advocate commissioner to take possession of the asset, a move upheld by several High Courts but str

WAHEED-UR-REHMAN PARRAversusUNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

2022 INSC 24025 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under the UAPA and related statutes, and the trial court declared five prosecution witnesses as protected under Section 44 of the UAPA and Section 173(6) of the CrPC, sealing their statements. The appellant later sought, under Section 207 of the CrPC, redacted copies of those statements so tha

PANKAJAKSHI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & OTHERSversusCHANDRIKA & OTHERS

2016 INSC 21225 February 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 23 of the Travancore‑Cochin High Court Act, which provides that a Chief Justice must refer a matter to a third judge when two judges of a division bench disagree, survives the repealing provision of Section 9 of the Kerala High Court Act and whether it is a special provision t

RAJ KUMARversusSTATE OF M.P.

2014 INSC 13625 February 2014Disposed off

Raj Kumar, a 32‑year‑old who was a regular visitor to a neighbour's house, was asked to stay overnight while the parents irrigated fields. He raped the 14‑year‑old girl Gounjhi, caused grievous injuries and she died of asphyxia by strangulation. A 10‑year‑old brother witnessed the assault; DNA analysis linked the appel

JUSTICE RIPUSUDAN DAYAL (RETD ) & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2014 INSC 12525 February 2014Case Allowed

A complaint alleging irregularities in construction works at the Madhya Pradesh Vidhan Sabha was investigated by the Lokayukt, which referred the matter to the Special Police Establishment (SPE) under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Vidhan Sabha Secretary issued letters claiming a breach of legislative privilege

DINUBHAI BOGHABHAI SOLANKIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2017 INSC 106325 February 2014Disposed off

The father of a slain environmental activist filed a writ petition seeking transfer of the investigation into his son’s murder from the Gujarat police to an independent agency, alleging bias and protection of the accused, who was a sitting MP. The Gujarat High Court, after finding the state investigation unfair, partia

ASHOK TSHERING BHUTIAversusSTATE OF SIKKIM

2011 INSC 16225 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior police officer in Sikkim, was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. He submitted a detailed statement of his assets (Exhibit D‑4) after the FIR, but the prosecution alleged a much larger unexplained amount and

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusAJAY AGARWAL

2010 INSC 12325 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued a show‑cause notice and later a restraining order under Sections 11, 11(4)(b) and 11‑B of the SEBI Act, 1992, prohibiting Ajay Agarwal from associating with any corporate body and from dealing in securities for five years, based on alleged mis‑statements in a 199

MANNO LAL JAISWALversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 9725 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, Manno Lal Jaiswal, filed an FIR alleging that his son was murdered by a group of accused who were named in the FIR and whose statements were recorded on the same day. The Sessions Court rejected the accused's bail applications, but the Allahabad High Court granted bail, erroneously stating that the acc

JOSEPH STEPHEN AND OTHERSversusSANTHANASAMY AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 9625 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a High Court, exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, can set aside an acquittal and convert it into a conviction. It held that Section 401(3) expressly bars such conversion; the High Court may only remit the case for retrial or rehearin

BRIG. SUKHJEET SINGH (RETD.) MVCversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 9125 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a retired Brigadier and trustee of a regimental welfare trust, was convicted for cheating in the sale of trust agricultural land. He sought to introduce a 1989 trust deed and a resolution authorising the sale as additional evidence under Section 391 of the CrPC during his appeal, but the trial and appell

KESHAV PRASAD SHARMAversusINDIAN OIL CORPORATION & ORS.

2011 INSC 7125 January 2011Dismissed

The petitioner, Keshav Prasad Sharma, was tried for a criminal offence when the public prosecutor sought to implead respondents No.3‑9 as co‑accused under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The trial court allowed the impleadment, but the Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside that order. The petitioner filed S

KANAKA REKHA NAIKversusMANOJ KUMAR PRADHAN & ANR.

2011 INSC 7225 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Manoj Kumar Pradhan, a sitting MLA, was convicted under IPC sections 147, 326 read with 149 and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. He and another convict appealed, and the Orissa High Court granted him bail on the same day, citing his status as an MLA. The appellant, Kanaka Rekha Naik, the wife of the dec

MANJIT SINGH @ MANGEversusCBI, THROUGH ITS S.P.

2011 INSC 7325 January 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals against a Designated Court (TADA) judgment that convicted three men for the murder of Additional Collector L.D. Arora under the IPC and acquitted them of TADA charges. The key issues were the admissibility of confessional statements made by co‑accused under TADA s.15 against an accuse

VIKRAM SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2010 INSC 5825 January 2010Disposed off

The appellants Vikram Singh, Jasvir Singh and Sonia were convicted for kidnapping a 16‑year‑old boy, Abhi Verma, for ransom, administering chloroform and pentazocine which caused his death, and for conspiracy under Sections 302, 364A, 201 and 120‑8 IPC. The Supreme Court examined the sufficiency of circumstantial and e

SURESH CHANDRA TIWARI & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2024 INSC 90724 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted of murder based on circumstantial evidence that they had last seen the deceased alive, were seen walking near the crime scene, purchased meat, and allegedly pointed out the spot where a blood‑stained stone was recovered. The Supreme Court examined whether each circumstance was proved beyon

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBABLU @ OM PRAKASH

2021 INSC 78224 November 2021Case Partly allowed

The case involved a violent assault on the house of an informant during Holi, resulting in the death of Dhanpal. Thirteen persons were charged under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 450, 452, 302 and 307. The trial court convicted all of them, but the High Court upheld convictions only of two accused and acquitted the remai

STATE OF BIHARversusRAJBALLAV PRASAD@ RAJBALLAV PP. YADAV@ RAJBALLABH YADAV

2016 INSC 106124 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar appealed against the High Court’s order granting bail to Rajballav Prasad, an under‑trial accused charged with multiple serious offences under the IPC, POCSO Act and Immoral Traffic Act. The accused had initially evaded arrest, later surrendered, and his bail application was rejected by the trial cou

SHAMSHER SINGH VERMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 86024 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Shamsher Singh Verma was charged under IPC 354 and the POCSO Act for allegedly molesting his nine‑year‑old niece. The accused filed an application under Section 294 of the CrPC to have a compact disc containing a recorded conversation between the victim's father, the accused's son and his wife played in court and sent

M/S BRIDGESTONE INDIAPVT. LTDversusINDERPAL SINGH

2015 INSC 86124 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. presented a cheque drawn by Inderpal Singh on Union Bank of India, Chandigarh, at IDBI Bank, Indore, which was later dishonoured. The company served a legal notice and filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indor

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusASHOK SIRPAL

2024 INSC 81924 October 2024Disposed off

Ashok Sirpal was convicted under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act for embezzling Rs 46 lakhs and was sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment (concurrent) and a fine of Rs 95 lakhs, with a default term of simple imprisonment for non‑payment of the fine. He appealed to the Delhi High Court, which suspe

IMRAT SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 119024 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Imrat Singh and others were convicted by the trial court and the High Court for offences under Sections 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code based primarily on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses, PW‑10 and PW‑11. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the statements of these witnesses and found numer

ASAR MOHAMMAD AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF U.P.

2018 INSC 98524 October 2018Disposed off

The case involved the murder of Zahida Begum and her son Ishlam, whose bodies were recovered from a septic tank after appellant No.1, Asar Mohammad, confessed and led police to the site. The trial court convicted all three accused under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, sentencing them to death (later commuted to life). On app

KAMALA AND OTHERSversusM.R. MOHAN KUMAR

2018 INSC 98424 October 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Kamala and her two children, claimed maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, asserting that Kamala was the legally wedded wife of the respondent, M.R. Mohan Kumar. The respondent denied any marriage and argued that without a valid marriage, maintenance could not be granted. The fam

L. KRISHNA REDDYversusSTATE BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER & ORS.

2013 INSC 72024 October 2013Dismissed

The husband, Ramachandra Reddy, murdered his wife Sujatha in a hotel in Pondicherry and subsequently committed suicide. Charges under IPC sections 302, 498A read with 34 were framed against him and his parents, Vidyasagar and Narasamma Reddy. After the husband's death, the charge against him abated, and the parents sou

JOGINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 71824 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Joginder Singh was tried along with two others for murder, attempted murder and offences under the Arms Act arising from a land dispute that escalated into a shooting. The trial court acquitted all three accused, finding contradictions between eyewitness testimony, the ballistic report and the fact that t

ANUKUL SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2025 INSC 115324 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Anukul Singh, challenged a FIR and charge sheet filed under Sections 420, 467 and 468 IPC alleging cheating and forgery arising from a dispute over a loan and property ownership. He contended that the FIR was a retaliatory measure linked to a civil dispute over land possession and that the complainant ha

NEVADA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTORversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2019 INSC 107724 September 2019Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether the phrase “any property” in Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 includes immovable property. It held that the provision confers power only to seize movable property, as the word “seize” implies taking physical custody, which is impossible for immovable assets. The Cou

ACHPAL @ RAMSWAROOP & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2018 INSC 85624 September 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellants were arrested in connection with a multi‑offence FIR and remanded to police/magisterial custody on 8 April 2018. The High Court, on 3 July 2018, ordered that the investigation be conducted by a gazetted officer of at least the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police and that a report be filed within

GEORGE BHAKTANversusRABINDRA LELE & ORS.

2014 INSC 67524 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging forgery and fraud in connection with a machinery supply contract, leading the magistrate to take cognizance of offences under Sections 425, 468 and 471 IPC. The respondents obtained a stay of the cognizance by invoking Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC, a

SUSHILA DEVIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2013 INSC 65124 September 2013Disposed off

The petitioners sought Supreme Court monitoring of a CBI investigation into the alleged police encounter killing of Dara Singh, claiming the investigation was incomplete. The CBI had completed its inquiry, filed a charge‑sheet against 16 accused, and the trial had commenced in the Sessions Court. The respondents argued

GIAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER

2012 INSC 41924 September 2012Reference answered

The petitioner, convicted under Sections 420 and 120‑B IPC, sought quashing of the FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC on the ground that the dispute with the victim had been settled, although the offences were non‑compoundable under Section 320. The larger Bench examined the scope of the High Court's inherent power unde

V.P. SHRIVASTAVAversusINDIAN EXPLOSIVES LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 64624 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a tripartite agreement between the Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd (FCIL), Indian Explosives Ltd (IEL) and Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) for the supply of ammonium nitrate. IEL later filed a criminal complaint alleging that senior FCIL officials (the appellants) and a third party suppressed the

MUKESH SINGHversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2023 INSC 76524 August 2023Dismissed

The appellant Mukesh Singh was convicted of murder, robbery and related offences based primarily on the identification of the injured eyewitness Sushil Kumar, who identified him in court after the accused had refused to attend a test identification parade (TIP). The accused argued that his refusal to participate in the

PUSHPENDRA KUMAR SINHAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2022 INSC 86024 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Executive Engineer of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB), was accused of financial irregularities and fraud in connection with the implementation of an arbitration award favoring Ramjee Power Construction Limited (RPCL). The prosecution alleged that he prepared an agenda for appointing an ar

RAJBIR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 85824 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajbir Singh, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly poisoning his neighbour's wife by mixing organophosphorus into milk he supplied. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including a loan motive, alleged pronote, and chemical reports indicating poison in milk and viscera. The Sup

MANJEET SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2021 INSC 41924 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR (No.477) recorded the death of Amarjit Singh and injuries to his nephew Manjeet Singh, naming five persons as perpetrators. Only one accused, Sartaj Singh, was charge‑sheeted; the other four private respondents were placed in column‑2. During trial, the victim (PW1) reiterated the allegations against the private

GUNASEKARANversusTHE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER NATIONAL HIGHWAYS & ORS.

2021 INSC 42024 August 2021

The appellants were served with show‑cause notices alleging encroachment on land forming part of a National Highway. The notices were issued under Section 28(2)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu State Highway Act, 2001 and were said to be backed by a notification issued under Section 5 of the National Highways Act, 1956. The appe

HARJIT SINGHversusINDERPREET SINGH @ INDER AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 41824 August 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

Harjit Singh filed an FIR alleging that his father was murdered by a group of accused, including Inderpreet Singh (respondent No.1), who was alleged to have orchestrated the conspiracy from jail using a mobile phone. The High Court granted bail to Inderpreet Singh, reasoning that he was not physically present at the cr

LALA @ANURAG PRAKASH AASREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2021 INSC 41524 August 2021Dismissed

The appellant, Lala @ Anurag Prakash Aasre, was convicted for murder, unlawful assembly and related offences after a group assault with sharp weapons that resulted in the death of Balu Mandpe and injuries to several witnesses. The key dispute was that the appellant’s name was absent from the FIR, though he was identifi

SARANYAversusBHARATHI AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 41624 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Saranya appealed the Madras High Court's order that quashed the chargesheet against Bharathi (respondent No.1) for offences under Sections 420, 302 r/w 109 IPC. The High Court had examined the evidence and concluded that the accused was likely to be convicted, thereby exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC to dism

STATE OF HARYANAversusRAM MEHAR & OTHERS ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 61624 August 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana prosecuted 148 workers for offences including murder arising from a factory fire. After the prosecution examined 102 witnesses and the accused gave statements under Section 313 CrPC, the defence sought recall of several prosecution witnesses under Section 311 CrPC, alleging that the lead counsel ha

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusA. RAJA

2012 INSC 35224 August 2012Rejected

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a criminal complaint alleging that former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram conspired with Telecom Minister A. Raja in the 2G spectrum scam, seeking to make Chidambaram an accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Judge, after examining the material, found no evidence of Chid

M/S RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

2025 INSC 90124 July 2025Dismissed

The appellants, M/s Rimjhim Ispat Ltd. and related companies, were investigated for alleged illegal manufacture and removal of excisable goods, leading to departmental adjudication orders imposing large duties and penalties under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Departmental order dated 31‑03‑2011 was set aside by the

SHRI GURUDATTA SUGARS MARKETING PVT. LTD.versusPRITHVIRAJ SAYAJIRAO DESHMUKH & ORS.

2024 INSC 55124 July 2024Dismissed

Shri Gurudatta Sugars Marketing Pvt. Ltd. entered into agreements with Cane Agro Energy Ltd., which failed to supply sugar and issued two cheques that were later dishonoured for insufficient funds. The appellant filed a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act and obtained an order of interim compensation under S

ROHIT BISHNOIversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR

2023 INSC 64224 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves an alleged honour killing where the victim, Vikash Panwar, was shot dead by three accused who were related to his live-in partner. The accused were charged under Sections 302 and 120B of the IPC and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The High Court of Rajasthan granted bail to all three accused in

BHIM RAO BASWANTH RAO PATILversusK. MADAN MOHAN RAO AND ORS.

2023 INSC 64124 July 2023Dismissed

Bhima Rao Baswanth Rao Patil, a successful Lok Sabha candidate, was challenged by K. Madan Mohan Rao through an election petition under Sections 81 and 84 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging false information, non‑disclosure of pending criminal cases and convictions, and non‑compliance with Election

NANJAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2015 INSC 52124 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Nanjappa, a bill collector in a Karnataka gram panchayat, was accused of demanding a Rs 500 bribe for a resolution copy. The trial court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the charge and that the sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was invalid. Th

KAILASHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2013 INSC 49224 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant was accused of raping a 15‑year‑old girl who later died by suicide. An eye‑witness, a cousin aged about 13‑14, testified that he saw the appellant committing the assault, and his testimony was supported by another witness and by medical and forensic reports that showed evidence of sexual intercourse. The

ANUJ KUMAR GUPTA @ SETHI GUPTAversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 49124 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Anuj Kumar Gupta, was convicted for the murder of Chhotu Kumar Das based largely on a confessional statement he gave to the investigating officer (PW‑9) that led police to the victim’s body in a river. The trial court sentenced him to death, which the High Court later commuted to life imprisonment. The a

M. SARVANA @ K.D. SARAVANAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2012 INSC 30324 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing and further assaulting the deceased, who later died. The prosecution relied on a dying declaration recorded by a police officer after medical certification of fitness, corroborated by an eye‑witness, forensic blood‑group evidence, the recovered kn

SHUDHAKARversusSTATE OF M.P.

2012 INSC 30124 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant Shudhakar was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly setting his wife on fire. The deceased gave three dying declarations: the first, recorded by a Naib Tehsildar, exonerated the husband and claimed the fire originated from a stove; the second and third, recorded later by a Tehsildar and

MANOJ PRATAP SINGHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2022 INSC 65224 June 2022Dismissed

Manoj Pratap Singh was convicted of kidnapping, raping and murdering a seven-and-a-half-year-old mentally and physically disabled girl. The prosecution proved its case through a complete chain of circumstantial evidence, including DNA matches, blood‑stained clothing, the victim’s body recovered at the appellant’s direc

MAMTA & ANRversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR

2022 INSC 62624 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent was charged with kidnapping and murdering a 13‑year‑old child for ransom, with the trial ongoing since 2014. The Delhi High Court granted him bail, a decision challenged by the parents of the deceased and the State. The Supreme Court examined whether bail under Section 439 of the CrPC was appropri

RUMI BORA DUTTAversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 35424 May 2013Dismissed

The appellant aunt and nephew were convicted for murdering the deceased husband, an Upper Division Clerk, based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution proved that the death occurred at 1.30 a.m., the victims were found dead in bed, the accused were present, and the nephew’s statement under Section 27 led to the re

RAJPUT JABBARSINGH MALAJIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2011 INSC 40924 May 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Rajput Jabbarsingh Malaji, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering his brother Jethusing by striking him on the face with an axe. The prosecution relied on the dying victim's wife (PW‑3) who identified the appellant, corroborated by two brothers (PW‑5, PW‑6) whose statements were recorded under

ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE GOVERNMENT OF INDIAversusKAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR. ETC

2023 INSC 109024 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed an interlocutory application seeking clarification of paragraph 51 of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 27 March 2023 in Criminal Appeals Nos. 701‑702 of 2020, which had upheld a default bail order granted by the Bombay High Court under proviso (a)(ii) of Section 167(2) of the CrPC. The Court exami

SUNEETHA NARREDDYversusY S AVINASH REDDY & ANR

2023 INSC 42224 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy was murdered in March 2019 and the case was transferred to the CBI, which filed charge sheets naming several accused including the first respondent Y.S. Avinash Reddy. The first respondent sought anticipatory bail and filed a writ petition, prompting the Telangana High Court to grant

MAGHAVENDRA PRATAP SINGH @ PANKAJ SINGHversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 41524 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Maghavendra Pratap Singh (Pankaj Singh), was convicted for the murder of businessman Goverdhan Aggarwal and related offences under Sections 302, 201, 120B of the IPC and the Arms Act, based largely on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution’s case lacked any eyewitnesses, direct forensic linkage, or rel

DIPAKBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 56824 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel, was implicated in a counterfeit currency case after co‑accused 1‑3 claimed the fake notes originated from his residence. No counterfeit notes were actually recovered from his home and the only incriminating material was the co‑accused statements recorded by police under Se

HARI STEEL AND GENERAL INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.versusDALJIT SINGH & ORS.

2019 INSC 56924 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants had entered into an agreement to sell a Delhi property and associated business for Rs 55.50 crore, receiving Rs 5 crore as part consideration, and sued for specific performance. The defendants contested the agreement, claiming the document was forged, the signatures on pages 3

DELHI ADMINISTRATIONversusVIDYA GUPTA

2018 INSC 40424 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Administration appealed the acquittal of Vidya Gupta, a sweet shop vendor, who was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for storing adulterated ghee used to make jalebis. The Supreme Court held that Section 7, read with its explanation, deems any person who stores adulterated food for t

NANDA GOPALANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2015 INSC 35724 April 2015Disposed off

The appellant was convicted under Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC for assaulting his cousin with a bat made of coconut leaf stem and a stone, causing grievous injuries. The High Court reduced his sentence, but the parties later reached a settlement and sought to compound the offences. The Supreme Court held that the qu

VUTUKURU LAKSHMAIAHversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2015 INSC 35224 April 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Patrangi Ramanaiah, who was stabbed by a group of accused during an unlawful assembly. The trial court and High Court had convicted most of the accused under Sections 302, 148 and 324 IPC, relying on eyewitness testimony, a dying declaration, and forensic evidence, while acquitt

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTDversusRAKESH KUMAR SINGH & ANR.

2015 INSC 35524 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Rakesh Kumar Singh and another before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta. The issue was whether that magistrate retained jurisdiction after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State

RAJAT PRASADversusC.B.I

2014 INSC 31824 April 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a criminal appeal filed by Rajat Prasad and Arvind Vijay Mohan, who were charged under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120‑B of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly conspiring to conduct a sting operation that exposed a Union Minister taking a bribe. The

AMIT KUMAR & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 38424 March 2025Directions issued

The parents of two IIT Delhi students who died under suspicious circumstances filed complaints alleging caste-based discrimination and murder, but the police only conducted an inquest under Section 174 of the CrPC and concluded suicide without registering a First Information Report (FIR). The petitioners sought a writ

FIROZ KHAN AKBARKHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 38724 March 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Firoz Khan Akbarkhan, was convicted along with a co‑accused for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, based on eyewitness testimony that he stabbed the deceased with a knife. He challenged the conviction, arguing that the delay of two to three days in recording witness statements unde

JOTHIRAGAWANversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR.

2025 INSC 38624 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of raping the complainant three times, allegedly after promising to marry her. The complainant claimed she was coerced into sexual intercourse under threat and that the promise of marriage was a false inducement. The High Court rejected the appellant's application to quash the proceedings unde

CHARANSINGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 20724 March 2021Dismissed

A complaint was lodged alleging that Charansinh, then President of a municipal council, had amassed assets disproportionate to his known income, invoking Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Anti‑Corruption Bureau (ACB) issued a notice directing him to appear for an "open enquiry" and to furnish de

MANJU DEVIversusONKARJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA @ OMKARJEET SINGH & OTHERS

2017 INSC 127624 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Manju Devi, a Scheduled Caste woman, complained that the respondents assaulted her, outraged her modesty and insulted her caste, invoking Sections 323, 354, 452 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act. The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the respondents under Section 438 of the CrPC. The appellant chal

MANMEET SINGH ALIAS GOLDIEversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2015 INSC 25324 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Manmeet Singh (alias Goldie) was convicted under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code for dacoity with murder, based on an alleged robbery of a large sum of money and the killing of Mohinder Singh. The prosecution alleged that five or more persons participated in the dacoity, but only the appellant was id

SHREYA SINGHALversusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 25724 March 2015Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, alleging that it infringes the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and is not saved by the reasonable restrictions of Article 19(2). They also contested the validity of Section 69A

MD. BANI ALAM MAZID @ DHANversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2025 INSC 26024 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused, along with a co‑accused, of kidnapping and murdering a 16‑year‑old girl in Assam. The prosecution relied on three circumstantial links: the victim was last seen with the appellant, the appellant’s extra‑judicial confessions to several villagers, and the recovery of the dead body after those c

SUNEETI TOTEJAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANOTHER

2025 INSC 26724 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior BIS officer deputed as Director of FSSAI, acted as Presiding Officer of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) investigating a sexual harassment complaint. She filed a counter‑affidavit on behalf of the complainant without the complainant’s consent, and later amended it when the complainant wis

ANANT THANUR KARMUSEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS

2023 INSC 16824 February 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a civil engineer, posted a viral picture of a sitting cabinet minister on Facebook and alleged that police, at the minister’s behest, forcibly took him to the minister’s residence, beat him and threatened him. He filed FIRs (Nos. 119 and 120 of 2020) but the minister was not named in the initial chargesh

THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusM. GOPAL REDDY & ANR

2023 INSC 16324 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) appealed against a Telangana High Court order that granted anticipatory bail to M. Gopal Reddy (respondent No.1) under Section 438 of the CrPC in connection with a money‑laundering case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The Supreme Court examined whether the

SHYAMAL SAHA & ANR.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2014 INSC 12324 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The State alleged that Shyamal Saha and Prosanta (Kalu Kabiraj) abducted and murdered Paritosh Saha after taking him across the Ganges River. The trial court acquitted them, finding the prosecution's witnesses inconsistent and the basic fact of the victim boarding the boat doubtful, thereby granting the benefit of doub

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