Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

2,851 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,001–1,200.

RAMESH CHANDRA VAISHYAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 56919 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramesh Chandra Vaishya, was charged under sections 323, 504 IPC and section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act for allegedly assaulting and verbally abusing the complainant over a water‑drainage dispute. Two FIRs were filed – one by the complainant and a second by the appellant after the police initially refused t

PRAKASH NISHAD @ KEWAT ZINAK NISHADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 56119 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

A six‑year‑old girl was sexually assaulted, murdered and her body dumped in a drain. Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad was arrested on suspicion and convicted under IPC sections 376, 377, 302 and 201, receiving a death sentence for murder. On appeal, the Supreme Court found serious procedural lapses: the appellant’s

IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881versus.

2021 INSC 25719 May 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu writ concerning the massive pendency of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, noted that over 33 lakh complaints were pending, a sharp rise from 26 lakh five months earlier. An expert committee had recommended the creation of de novo special NI courts, but amic

ARNAB RANJAN GOSWAMIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 40019 May 2020Disposed off

The petitioners, a prominent journalist and media owner, challenged fourteen FIRs and complaints filed in various states arising from a single television broadcast on 21 April 2020, alleging that the FIRs violated their freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). The Supreme Court examined whether multiple FIRs on the sa

RAMAYAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 32319 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramayan Singh, filed an FIR alleging that Respondent No.2 (Vivek Pal) and co-accused Punit Pal violently assaulted his uncle, resulting in the uncle's death. Both accused were charged under multiple IPC sections, the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 and were initially denied bail by the trial court. The

INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIAversusSATYANARAYAN BANKATLAL MALU & ORS.

2024 INSC 31919 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) filed a criminal complaint under Sections 73(a) and 235A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against the former directors of SBM Paper Mills for non‑compliance with a One‑Time Settlement ordered by the NCLT. The Sessions Judge issued process, but the res

BABU SAHEBAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2024 INSC 32019 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted six accused, including A‑1, A‑2 and A‑3, for the alleged murder of Malagounda under sections 302 r/w s.34 IPC, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable and the complainant's testimony contradictory. The State appealed under s.378 CrPC, and the Karnataka High Court reversed the acquittal, co

PARTEEK BANSALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS

2024 INSC 32419 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chartered accountant, was accused of offences under Sections 498A, 406, 384, 420 and 120(B) of the IPC in two FIRs – the first lodged in Hisar, Haryana on 10 Oct 2015 and the second in Udaipur, Rajasthan on 15 Oct 2015, both based on the same allegations. The appellant sought quashing of the second FIR

MOHD. FIROZversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 42919 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mohd. Firoz, was convicted for the rape, sexual assault and murder of a four‑year‑old girl, under Sections 302, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m), 363, 366 IPC and Sections 5(i), 5(m), 6 POCSO. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, the "last seen together" theory, DNA evidence and the appellant's own adm

MS.YversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2022 INSC 43119 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant State of Rajasthan challenged a High Court order that granted regular bail to respondent No.2, who was accused of repeatedly raping his 19‑year‑old niece and was a habitual offender with nearly twenty pending cases. The High Court’s bail order was found to be cryptic, lacking any reference to the gravity

INDRAJEET YADAVversusSANTOSH SINGH AND ANR.

2022 INSC 44019 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Allahabad High Court allowed the appeals of the accused in a murder case, acquitting them and ordering their release, but it pronounced only the operative part of its order on the same day and delivered a reasoned judgment five months later. The original complainant filed a petition before the Supreme Court challen

VENKATESH @ CHANDRA & ANR. ETCversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2022 INSC 130219 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by four members of the Dandupalya gang convicted of murder and robbery. The trial court had relied on the accused’s voluntary statements recorded by police, shown on DVD, and a chart of gang activities to uphold death sentences under Section 396 IPC. The Court examined the admissibi

TEHSEEN POONAWALLAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2018 INSC 36919 April 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined petitions filed under Article 32 seeking an inquiry into the death of Judge Brijgopal Harkishan Loya, who died on 1 December 2014 while presiding over the Sohrabuddin case. The petitioners relied on media reports alleging foul play and questioned the conduct of the judges who accompanied the

KALYAN DEY CHOWDHURYversusRITA DEY CHOWDHURY NEE NANDY

2017 INSC 37019 April 2017Case Partly allowed

The husband Kalyan Dey Chowdhury and his wife Rita Dey Chowdhury (née Nandy) were married in 1995 and later divorced. The wife sought permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was initially set at Rs.16,000 per month in 2015. The husband’s net salary rose from Rs.63,842 to Rs.95,000, prompting

BALAKRAMversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

2017 INSC 36519 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Balakram, was charged with murder and attempted murder and, after the prosecution's witness (the investigating officer) was examined, sought to produce copies of pages from the police diary obtained under the Right to Information Act to confront the officer. The trial court rejected the application, the

VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2016 INSC 117719 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Videocon Industries Ltd. and its directors were penalised by the adjudicating authority under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) for alleged violations of sections 18(2) and 18(3). They appealed before the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, which held that the transactions (purchase of goods from Korea an

RAMESH RAJAGOPALversusDEVI POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED

2016 INSC 32719 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a director of Devi Polymers Private Limited, was prosecuted under IPC sections 409, 468 and 471 and IT Act sections 65 and 66 for allegedly forging a website that portrayed Devi Consultancy Services as a separate entity and for misappropriating funds. The High Court refused to quash the proceedings, hold

STATE OF HARYANAversusSHAKUNTLA AND ORS.

2012 INSC 17719 April 2012Dismissed

The State prosecuted nine accused for the armed assault and murder of Manohar Lal and his wife Sushila, resulting in 30 and 33 injuries respectively. The trial court convicted all nine under Sections 148, 302/149 and 325/149 IPC. The High Court upheld convictions of six accused but acquitted Shakuntla, Premwati and Sar

SIDHARTHA VASHISHT @ MANU SHARMAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2010 INSC 21919 April 2010Dismissed After

The case concerns the murder of Jessica Lal on 30 April 1999, for which Sidhartha Vashisht (Manu Sharma) and two co‑accused were initially acquitted by the trial court. The State appealed, alleging that the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt through ocular testimony, telephone call

RAM BABUversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 22019 April 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of dacoity under Section 395 IPC based on eyewitness identification in court and a test identification parade conducted under a magistrate's supervision. They challenged the admissibility of the parade evidence, arguing that the delay in conducting it rendered the identification unreliable

ABU THAKIR AND ORS.versusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

2010 INSC 22219 April 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder (Section 302 IPC) based largely on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses (PWs 2‑4) who claimed to have seen the assailants stabbing the deceased. The defence challenged the conviction, arguing that the presence of these witnesses at the scene was doubtful and that the statements r

SHAMIMA KAUSERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 22419 April 2010Disposed off

The petitioners, parents of victims of alleged police encounters in Gujarat, filed writ petitions seeking a CBI investigation into the deaths, alleging the encounters were staged. The Gujarat High Court constituted an Investigation Team and, after a Metropolitan Magistrate’s inquiry under Section 176 CrPC found the enc

GENERAL INSURANCE COUNCIL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

2010 INSC 22519 April 2010Disposed off

The General Insurance Council and several insurers filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that police and other agencies were not complying with Supreme Court directions concerning the disposal of vehicles seized in criminal investigations. They contended that non‑compliance of Sections 451

V. GANESANversusSTATE REP BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR.

2026 INSC 26519 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a movie producer, borrowed money from the complainant on the promise of a share in profits and later issued post‑dated cheques to repay the principal, which later bounced. The complainant filed a criminal complaint for cheating under Section 420 IPC and criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC. The

STATE (CBI)versusMOHD. SALIM ZARGAR @ FAYAZ & ORS.

2025 INSC 37619 March 2025Dismissed

The case arose from a 1990 kidnapping and murder of the Vice Chancellor of Kashmir University and his personal secretary, allegedly carried out by members of the JKSLF. The CBI charged several accused, including Mohd. Salim Zargar, under the Ranbir Penal Code and the now‑repealed TADA Act. The Special Court acquitted a

APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2024 INSC 22319 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who created and acted in the web‑series “College Romance”, were charged with publishing obscene and sexually explicit material under Sections 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act after a complaint that an episode titled “Happily F****d Up” contained vulgar expletives. The High Court upheld the F

THE STATE OF KERALAversusMAHESH

2021 INSC 19519 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed against a Kerala High Court order that granted bail to Mahesh, who was accused of brutally murdering a young doctor in the presence of her father. The Sessions Court had denied bail, citing the seriousness of the offence, the risk of witness tampering, and the accused's prior absconding. Th

AKSHAY KUMAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 31219 March 2020Dismissed

Akshay Kumar Singh, a convict in the Nirbhaya case, filed a mercy petition with the President of India, which was rejected on 19 March 2020. He subsequently filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the rejection, alleging miscarriage of justice, solitary confinement, torture, media influence, and a pending di

P. SREEKUMARversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2018 INSC 24619 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chief executive trustee of a charitable trust, was accused by a fellow trustee of defrauding the trust, leading to the registration of an FIR against the appellant, the trust treasurer and three bank officials. The appellant subsequently lodged a separate FIR against the treasurer alleging fraud and fo

HMT WATCHES LTD.versusM.A. ABIDA &ANR.

2015 INSC 24019 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

HMT Watches Ltd filed a series of criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M.A. Abida for the dishonour of 57 cheques, which were stopped by a stop‑payment instruction and for which a demand notice had been issued. The High Court of Kerala, invoking its powers under Section 482 of

MRS. PRIYANKASRIVASTAVAANDANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 23919 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a series of criminal complaints filed by borrower Prakash Kumar Bajaj against senior officials of Punjab National Bank Housing Finance Ltd. after the bank invoked the SARFAESI Act to recover a defaulted housing loan. The borrower, having settled the loan through a one‑time settlement, repeate

SUBODH NATH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TRIPURA

2013 INSC 17619 March 2013Disposed off

The appellants Subodh Nath and Paritosh were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for the murder of Ashutosh. Paritosh was 16 years old at the time of the offence, raising the question of whether the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, as amended, applied to an offence committed befo

STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.versusUJJAL KUMAR BURDHAN

2012 INSC 13919 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa directed its Vigilance Cell to investigate alleged irregularities in the procurement and milling of paddy by the respondent, a proprietary rice mill owner. The respondent filed multiple writ petitions; the High Court initially ordered the inquiry to be completed within twelve weeks, later stayed and

RAMESHBHAI PANDURAO HEDAUversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2010 INSC 15719 March 2010Dismissed

The appellant's brother was found dead and a post‑mortem concluded natural causes; the police investigation was closed. Dissatisfied, the appellant filed a complaint before a Metropolitan Magistrate alleging murder and sought a fresh police investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Th

DEEPAK KUMAR SHRIVAS & ANRversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2024 INSC 11719 February 2024

The appellant complained to the district collector in 2021 that respondent No.6 had demanded money to secure a job for his brother, leading to an inquiry that recorded mutual allegations of money‑extraction. Despite being aware of the complaint, respondent No.6 waited three years before lodging an FIR in July 2022 alle

SANJEEV KAPOORversusCHANDANA KAPOOR & ORS.

2020 INSC 21519 February 2020Dismissed

The husband and wife filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 of the CrPC, which the Family Court disposed of by a settlement order directing monthly maintenance and a mutual consent divorce. The husband paid only four months' maintenance; the wife filed an execution petition which was rejected as the order was d

KRISHNAVENI RAIversusPANKAJ RAI & ANR.

2020 INSC 21119 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Krishnaveni Rai, the appellant, obtained a decree of divorce from her first husband in 2005 and filed an appeal against that decree almost a year after the limitation period, which was later condoned. While the appeal was pending, she married Pankaj Rai in December 2014. The respondent sought a declaration that this se

BALVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 22619 February 2019Disposed off

The incident occurred on 11 March 1998 when the victim, Mohan Mehtar, was stopped by four accused; Bharat Singh beat him with a lathi, Balvir Singh and Bhav Singh held him, and Harnam Singh shot him at close range, causing instant death. The trial court convicted all four under sections 341, 302 and, for Harnam Singh,

SANJEEVversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 13619 February 2015Disposed off

The appellant Sanjeev was accused of killing his brother-in-law Raj Pal after a drunken altercation. Evidence included an eyewitness who saw Sanjeev fleeing with blood‑stained clothes, a medical injury on Sanjeev’s forearm, an extra‑judicial confession to a witness that he struck the victim with a brick, and forensic b

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusGIRIRAJ DUBEY

2013 INSC 10819 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that refused to grant leave to appeal an acquittal of Giriraj Dubey by the Sessions Court. The trial court had acquitted the accused on the ground of insufficient evidence under Sections 294 and 436 IPC. The High Court’s order merely resta

R. KUPPUSAMYversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBEILIGAI

2013 INSC 10919 February 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Kuppusamy, was accused of murdering his ten‑month‑old daughter by throwing her into a well, resulting in death by drowning. The prosecution's case rested on an extra‑judicial confession made by the appellant to the Village Administrative Officer (VAO), which was recorded and signed. The trial court and t

KUSHA DURUKAversusSTATE OF ODISHA

2024 INSC 4619 January 2024Dismissed

Kusha Duruka, accused under the NDPS Act, filed multiple bail applications after his arrest on 3 February 2022. The first bail request was rejected by the Sessions Court, and a subsequent application before the Odisha High Court was also dismissed, while his co‑accused was granted bail. During the pendency of a Special

JOHN ANTHONISAMY @ JOHNversusSTATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 5419 January 2023Dismissed

The appellant, John Anthonisamy, was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of a taxi driver and the subsequent concealment of the body. The prosecution’s case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the exhumation of the victim’s body from a location disclosed by the appellan

LAKHVIR SINGH ETCversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2021 INSC 3019 January 2021Disposed off

The appellants, aged 19 and 20, were convicted under Section 397 IPC for grievous hurt and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. While the State argued that the mandatory minimum sentence could not be reduced, the appellants sought release on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, citing their

ATUL THAKURversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ETC. ETC.

2018 INSC 3719 January 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Atul Thakur, attacked Hitesh Thakur with a knife during a sudden quarrel at a drink party, inflicting six injuries that later caused Hitesh's death. The trial court convicted him of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part‑II IPC and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonm

BOBBILI RAMAKRISHNA RAJU YADAV & ORSversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF A.P. HYDERABAD, A.P. & ANR.

2016 INSC 6019 January 2016Case Partly allowed

The wife of the first appellant died under suspicious circumstances and a FIR was lodged under Sections 304B and 498A IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The father of the deceased later filed a private complaint under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act alleging that dowry amount and articl

NANKAUNOOversusSTATE OF U.P.

2016 INSC 6519 January 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Nankunoo, visited the deceased barber's shop demanding preferential service, was rebuffed, and later shot the barber in the left thigh with a pistol, causing the victim to die of shock and hemorrhage. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC (murder) and sentenced him to life impriso

SHANMUGHANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2012 INSC 4319 January 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Shanmughan, was convicted of murder and causing hurt for allegedly administering cyanide to his wife, Raji, resulting in her death. The trial and High Courts upheld the conviction and life sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the circumstantial evidence—motive, injuries indicating forc

SUDEVANANDversusSTATE THROUGH CBI

2012 INSC 4119 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of Sudevanand and co‑accused for an attempted murder of the Chief Justice of India, based largely on the testimony of an approver, Vikram, who later retracted his earlier statements while in jail. The appellants filed three criminal miscellaneous applications after a delay of more than

MUSKAN ENTERPRISES & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2024 INSC 104618 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to pay a compensation of Rs.74,00,000, with the Sessions Court directing a 20% deposit of that amount. They challenged the deposit condition through a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which the High C

RINKU BAHETIversusSANDESH SHARDA

2024 INSC 101418 December 2024Disposed off

The petitioner-wife Rinku Baheti filed a transfer petition seeking to move a pending divorce suit to the Pune Family Court and opposed the respondent-husband Sandesh Sharda's application under Article 142(1) for a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. The parties had a brief marriage o

P. MANIKANDANversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.

2024 INSC 100718 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, P. Manikandan, was originally convicted of kidnapping and murdering a four‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death, but the Madras High Court acquitted him on the ground of reasonable doubt. The High Court, however, ordered the transfer of the case file to the CBI and directed a de‑novo reinvestigation and

AKSHAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2019 INSC 141118 December 2019Dismissed

The case concerns the conviction and death sentence of Akshay Kumar Singh, a bus cleaner, for his participation in the gang rape and murder of a young woman on a Delhi bus (the Nirbhaya case). Singh filed a criminal review petition challenging the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment that upheld his conviction and death penal

G H KANWAR PAL SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 140618 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a director of a mining company, was granted a lease to excavate sand in specific plots in Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, but was alleged to have mined sand outside the permitted area, leading to registration of an FIR under Section 379 IPC, the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the

G H KHAJA BILAL AHMEDversusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2019 INSC 140418 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Khaja Bilal Ahmed was detained under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 on 25 October 2018, with the order citing fourteen prior criminal cases from 2007‑2016 as his antecedent background. The appellant challenged the detention, arguing that the cited cases were stale, irrelevant, and that there

ANOKHILALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 139918 December 2019Disposed off

The appellant, Anokhilal, was convicted of kidnapping, rape and murder of a nine‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death along with several other terms of imprisonment. He was represented by an Amicus Curiae appointed by the Legal Services Authority on the same day that charges were framed, leaving the counsel no time to

.JAGMOHAN BAHL & ANR.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2014 INSC 104618 December 2014Disposed off

The appellants, Jagmohan Bahl and another, were charged under IPC sections 420 and 34 for alleged cheating in a property transaction. Their first anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the CrPC was rejected by Additional Sessions Judge‑6, but a second application was later allowed by a different Additional

RISHIPAL SINGH SOLANKIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2021 INSC 75218 November 2021Dismissed

The appellant alleged that respondent No.2, Nishant Solanki, who was charged with serious offences including murder, was not a juvenile and challenged the Juvenile Justice Board's (JJ Board) declaration that he was a juvenile delinquent based on his matriculation certificate. The appellant argued that the admission for

BAIJNATH & OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2016 INSC 104018 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Saroj Bai was found hanging in her matrimonial home within seven years of marriage. The State alleged that her husband’s family demanded a motorcycle as dowry, subjecting her to cruelty and harassment, thereby invoking Sections 304B and 498A of the IPC and the statutory presumption under Section 113B of th

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.versusFOOD INSPECTOR AND ANR.

2010 INSC 78618 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturer of sweetened carbonated water, was prosecuted after a public analyst reported the presence of the pesticide carbofuran (0.001 mg/L) in its product, alleging adulteration under Rule 65 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and Section 2(ia)(h) of the Preven

ASIM AKHTARversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2024 INSC 79418 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Asim Akhtar, was charged with kidnapping and related offences under the IPC and Arms Act. During trial, the victim and her parents were examined-in-chief, but their cross‑examination was delayed after the appellant filed an application under Section 319 CrPC to summon the appellant's parents. The prosecu

ABHISHEK SHARMAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2023 INSC 92418 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Abhishek Sharma was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly setting his colleague Mandeep Kaur on fire after a quarrel. The prosecution's case rested on four dying declarations made by the victim to various police officers, a doctor, and her mother. The Supreme Court examined the admissibility and relia

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusINDRAJIT KUNDU & ORS.

2019 INSC 116418 October 2019Dismissed

The victim, a young painter, was taught English by the first respondent and developed a romantic relationship with him. On 5 March 2004 she visited his house to finalize a marriage proposal, where the parents of the first respondent (respondents 2 and 3) shouted at her, calling her a "call‑girl". Distressed, she return

VIVEK BATRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 97118 October 2016Dismissed

Vivek Batra, an Indian Revenue Service officer, was investigated by the CBI for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. After a six‑year investigation, the Finance Ministry sought and eventually received a sanction for his prosecution on 9 October 2012, following advice from the Central Vigilance Commis

BAD SHAHversusSOU.URMILA BADSHAH GOOSE & ANR

2013 INSC 70318 October 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, Urmila Badshah Goose and her daughter Shivanjali, filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC seeking maintenance, claiming that Urmila was the wife of the petitioner Badshah and that Shivanjali was their illegitimate child. Badshah contended that he was already lawfully married to another woman

PUTCHALAPALLI NARESH REDDYversusSTATE OF A.P. AND ETC.

2013 INSC 70618 October 2013Disposed off

The case involved twenty accused charged with offences including murder, rioting and attempt to murder arising from a politically‑motivated land dispute that culminated in the killing of Mudi Parandhami Reddy. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court convicted accused Nos. 1‑12 under Sections 147, 148,

DEVINDER @ KALA RAM & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 48418 October 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellants Devinder @ Kala Ram, his mother and his brother's wife were convicted under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the IPC for dowry harassment and the death of Devinder's wife by burns. The Supreme Court examined the evidence, finding that witnesses PW‑2 to PW‑5 reliably proved continuous dowry harassment, thereby

IRFANversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 101218 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant alleged that Respondent No.2 and his two sons murdered his father and injured his brother, leading to an FIR under sections 147, 148, 302, 304 and 34 of the IPC. After the charge‑sheet, the trial proceeded to the stage of recording the accused's statement under Section 313 of the CrPC. Respondent No.2 app

ABHINAV MOHAN DELKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 99018 August 2025Dismissed

Seven‑time MP Abhinav Mohan Delkar died by suicide on 22 February 2021, leaving a note that accused several officials of defamation, harassment and extortion. An FIR was filed under Section 306 IPC (now Section 108 BNS) read with Section 107 (now Section 45 BNS) alleging abetment of suicide, and the accused sought quas

HARENDRA RAIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 73818 August 2023

The case involves a double murder in which accused Prabhunath Singh, a sitting MP, was originally acquitted along with other co‑accused. The Supreme Court, on appeal, took judicial notice of the Patna High Court's Habeas Corpus judgment, treating it as a public document, and considered the accused's subsequent conduct

M N G BHARATEESH REDDYversusRAMESH RANGANATHAN AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 84718 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a General Manager of BGS Apollo Hospital, appealed a High Court order that had taken cognizance of a complaint filed by former consultant neurosurgeon M.N.G. Bharateesh Reddy under Sections 120A, 405, 415, 420, 499 and 500 IPC. The complaint alleged that the hospital’s billing irregularities and the appe

MADHAVversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2021 INSC 41318 August 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

The case involved three accused (A‑1, A‑2 and A‑3) who were convicted under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the murder of A‑1’s brother. The prosecution alleged that the trio attacked the victim with a knife and lathis and that A‑2, after the killing, sent a false police report naming two other persons (PWs 6 and 7) as th

STATE OF GOAversusJOSE MARIA ALBERT VALES @ ROBERT VALES

2017 INSC 77618 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa filed a complaint under Section 340 of the CrPC alleging that a prosecution witness, Jose Maria Albert Vales, gave false testimony under oath in a Sessions trial, constituting an offence under Section 193 IPC. The trial magistrate, without conducting a full inquiry, framed a charge against Vales. The H

R.A.H. SIGURANversusSHANKARE GOWDA @ SHANKARA & ANR.

2017 INSC 77718 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, R.A.H. Siguran, was charged under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 for procuring minor girls for prostitution. The investigation was conducted by an officer who was not a Special Police Officer as required by the Act, leading the respondent to invoke Section 482 of the CrPC to have the proceedi

RAMVILASversusSTATE OF M.P.

2015 INSC 58118 August 2015Dismissed

The appellant Ramvilas and several co‑accused were convicted for the murder of Bansilal under Sections 302 read with 149 IPC, and for offences under Sections 324, 323 and 148 IPC. The prosecution case relied on six eye‑witnesses and two injured witnesses (the victim's sister and brother) who testified that the accused,

G. PARSHWANATHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2010 INSC 52518 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant, G. Parshwanath, was convicted for the murder of his wife and minor son and for causing the disappearance of evidence under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution's case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the victims' residence in the appellant's house, a telephone call report

MALA CHOUDHARY & ANR.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 87018 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a 70‑year‑old widow and her daughter, entered into an oral agreement to sell a plot of land in Telangana, receiving a large sum via bank transfers but later refusing to execute the sale deed. The complainant, an agent of a powerful builder, filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud and intimidation, lea

KAUSHAL SINGHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2025 INSC 87118 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a District Judge, was criticised by a Rajasthan High Court Single Judge for granting bail to an accused (Sethu @ Angrej) in a manner deemed cavalier and for ignoring the accused's criminal antecedents. The High Court's strictures labelled the appellant's conduct as indiscipline, negligence, and disobedie

SHEIKH JAVED IQBAL @ ASHFAQ ANSARI @ JAVED ANSARIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 53418 July 2024Disposed off

The appellant, a Nepalese national, was arrested in 2015 for allegedly supplying high‑quality counterfeit Indian currency and was charged under Sections 489B and 489C of the IPC and Section 16 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. After more than nine years of incarceration, only two prosecution witnesses

YASHODHAN SINGH & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 65218 July 2023Dismissed

The complainant filed an FIR for offences under the IPC and later applied under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to summon several persons whose names were not on the charge‑sheet. The trial court issued a summons, which the High Court affirmed. The appellants challenged the summons, arguing that, per

P. YUVAPRAKASHversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 67618 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Yuvaprakash was accused of kidnapping a 17‑year‑old girl M, solemnising a marriage with her and having sexual intercourse. The victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC claimed she eloped voluntarily and was in love with the appellant. The trial court convicted him under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, Sectio

N.C.V. AISHWARYAversusA.S. SARAVANA KARTHIK SHA

2022 INSC 131018 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 21‑year‑old wife residing in Chennai, sought the transfer of her husband’s petition for annulment of marriage filed in the Family Court at Vellore to the Family Court at Chennai under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. She also had two other matrimonial petitions – restitution of conjugal right

SONU@AMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2017 INSC 63418 July 2017Dismissed

The case concerned the abduction and murder of Ramesh Jain, for which six accused were convicted under sections 120B, 364A, 302, 328A and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on disclosure statements, recovered items, and Call Detail Records (CDRs) of the accused’s mobile phones. The principal issue was whether the C

DHARAM PAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2013 INSC 47918 July 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a magistrate, after receiving a police report under Section 173(3) CrPC, could disagree with the report, issue summons to persons listed in column 2 and either try them or commit the case to a Sessions Court, and whether the Sessions Court could, upon committal, take cognizance and su

MUSTAK @ KANIO AHMED SHAIKHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2020 INSC 43518 June 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Mustak @ Kanio Ahmed Shaikh, was convicted for attempting to murder Dr. Jaydeep Patel by shooting him from a motorcycle he was driving, with his accomplice as the pillion rider. The prosecution proved the case through eye‑witness identification (the victim and his driver), a test identification parade, f

D. DEVARAJAversusOWAIS SABEER HUSSAIN

2020 INSC 43618 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior police officer, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash a private complaint (PCR No.17214 of 2013) that alleged police excesses while the respondent was in custody during an investigation. The magistrate had taken cognizance of the complaint without obtaining prior sanction un

RANA NAHID @ RESHMA @ SANA & ANR.versusSAHIDUL HAQ CHISTI

2020 INSC 43218 June 2020Disposed off

A Muslim couple divorced; the wife filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance, which the Family Court converted into an application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and ordered maintenance. The High Court set aside the conversion, holding the Family Cou

SHAURABH KUMAR TRIPATHIversusVIDHI RAWAL

2025 INSC 73418 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, relatives of the respondent Vidhi Rawal, sought to quash a domestic‑violence application filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, by invoking the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (and Se

HAKIMversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

2025 INSC 72818 May 2025

The case involved an acid attack on a woman at a railway crossing, where accused Hakim (Accused No.1) and Umesh (Accused No.2) were convicted under Section 326A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants challenged the conviction on the grounds that the prosecution failed to prove the eye injury and

CAPTAIN MANJIT SINGH VIRDI (RETD.)versusHUSSAIN MOHAMMED SHATTAF & ORS.

2023 INSC 55518 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves the murder of Captain Manmohan Singh Virdi, whose body was discovered in a pool of blood. A chargesheet was filed against respondents 1 (Hussain Mohammed Shattaf) and 2 (Waheeda Hussain Shattaf) after an investigation that included statements, psychological profiling, polygraph and BEOS tests. The tri

CHANCHALPATI DASversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2023 INSC 55418 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Chanchalpati Das and Madhu Pandit Das, senior leaders of ISKCON Bengaluru, were charged under IPC sections 468, 471, 406 and 120B for alleged theft and criminal breach of trust of a luxury bus belonging to the ISKCON Kolkata branch. The complaint was filed in 2009, eight years after the alleged incident

RAVI MANDALversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 55218 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The father of the deceased lodged an FIR after finding his son's body in a forest, alleging that the deceased had been with two friends. The trial court convicted the two accused under Sections 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, relying mainly on the testimony of two chance witnesses who

STATE BY LOKAYUKTHA POLICEversusH. SRINIVAS

2018 INSC 54918 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The State by Lokayuktha Police appealed against the Karnataka High Court's order quashing FIRs filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act against H. Srinivas and others on the ground that the police had conducted a preliminary enquiry without recording it in the General Diary. The Supreme Court examined whether a pre

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusVINOD KUMAR

2012 INSC 24018 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the Rajasthan High Court’s order reducing the sentences of Vinod Kumar and Heera Lal for rape (s.376 IPC) from the trial court‑imposed seven years to five years and eleven months respectively. The High Court reduced the sentences without recording any "adequate and special reason

THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESHversusKAMAL AGARWAL & ORS. ETC

2024 INSC 31718 April 2024Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered an FIR (Case No.227 of 2017) registered in Arunachal Pradesh alleging cheating under sections 420, 120B and 34 IPC in connection with a Rs 1 crore payment for land situated in Rajasthan. The accused contended that the dispute was purely civil, involving a loan or advance for property purcha

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusJAYEETA DAS

2024 INSC 31318 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal appealed against a Calcutta High Court order that quashed the addition of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) offences to an IPC case and set aside extensions of remand. The investigation, conducted by the State police, led the Chief Judge of the City Sessions Court to permit inclusion

MUKHTAR ZAIDIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 31618 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was summoned after a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) in Aligarh rejected a police closure report under Section 173(2) CrPC and took cognizance of offences under Sections 147, 342, 323, 307 and 506 IPC as well as Section 190(1)(b) CrPC. The CJM based this decision not only on the protest petition filed by

KIRPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2024 INSC 31218 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kirpal Singh was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC for the murder of his brother‑in‑law Balwinder Singh. The prosecution’s case relied primarily on the testimony of the victim’s wife, Sharan Kaur (PW‑5), and her son Daljit Singh (PW‑6), who alleged that the appellant acted out of jealousy ov

ANSAR AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2023 INSC 72518 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ansar Ahmad, alleged that his son was killed in a contract murder orchestrated by two respondents, Subhash Yadav and Rajesh Vikram Singh. The High Court had granted regular bail to both respondents despite serious charges under multiple IPC sections and the Explosive Substances Act, and despite evidence

JAGJEET SINGH & ORSversusASHISH MISHRA @ MONU & ANR.

2022 INSC 42718 April 2022Disposed off

The case arose from the Lakhimpur Kheri incident on 3 October 2021, where the accused, Ashish Mishra, allegedly drove vehicles into a crowd of protesting farmers, resulting in multiple deaths. The accused was charged under several IPC sections (147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 326 r/w 34 and 120B) and Arms Act sections (3, 25,

SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH OF CLUNYversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2018 INSC 36318 April 2018Disposed off

The Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny, a society that had established Cluny Women’s College as a secular institution, later applied to the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI) for a minority status certificate, which was granted in 2007. The society and the college’s governing body subsequentl

SEEMA SINGHversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2018 INSC 36418 April 2018Dismissed

Seema Singh, the mother of Sara Singh, filed a criminal complaint alleging that her son‑in‑law (respondent No.2) murdered his wife and staged the incident as a road accident. The case was transferred to the CBI, which produced expert reports from CRRI, AIIMS, CFSL and IIT. The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to th

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusCDR. RAVINDRA V. DESAI

2018 INSC 36118 April 2018Dismissed

Commander Ravindra V. Desai was convicted by a court‑martial of making obscene telephone calls to the wives of three naval officers, resulting in dismissal from service and forfeiture of 24 months' seniority. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) upheld the conviction on seven charges but substituted the dismissal with loss

AYAN CHATTERJEEversusFUTURE TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION INC. & ORS.

2017 INSC 35818 April 2017Disposed off

The plaintiff filed a civil suit seeking declaration of tenancy and a permanent injunction, and during the suit applied for a temporary injunction under Order 39 of the CPC. The trial court granted the injunction, directing a status‑quo and finding the plaintiff prima facie in possession. On appeal, the High Court modi

SURAJSINH ALIAS SONU SURAJSINH COLLECTORSINH ALIAS SEVARAM RAJPUTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2017 INSC 36318 April 2017Dismissed

The appellant, Surajsinh alias Sonu Surajsinh, was convicted for kidnapping a seven‑year‑old boy from Ahmedabad and demanding a ransom of Rs 10 lakh, leading to the child's recovery in Dausa, Rajasthan. The trial court found the child’s testimony reliable and corroborated by police officers, other witnesses and call‑de

KUNAPAREDDY @ NOOKALA SHANKA BALAJIversusKUNAPAREDDY SWARNA KUMAR! & ANR.

2016 INSC 32318 April 2016Dismissed

The case concerned a petition filed by Kunapareddy @ Nookala Shanka Balaji (the wife) under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking protection, maintenance and other reliefs. After the petition was transferred to another magistrate, the wife sought to amend the prayer clause to increase maintenance, claim return of dow

RATTIRAM & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF M.P. THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2013 INSC 26918 April 2013Case Partly allowed

On 29 September 1995 the deceased Daulat was assaulted at Gorelal's shop by a group of accused, leading to his death. The trial court convicted several accused under IPC sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 and sentenced them to life imprisonment; the High Court upheld most convictions and acquitted one. The appellants chall

SAHIB HUSSAIN @ SAHIB JANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 27018 April 2013Dismissed

Sahib Hussain was convicted of murdering five persons, including three children, in a gruesome incident on 27 October 2006. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – post‑mortem reports, statements of two eyewitnesses who did not see the killings, an extra‑judicial confession, forensic recovery of a blood‑sta

MARIAPPANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 27318 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Mariappan, was convicted of murder and criminal intimidation for repeatedly assaulting his paternal aunt with an aruval, resulting in her death, amid a land dispute. He appealed, claiming he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia at the time of the offence and sought protection under Section 84 of the Indi

SOMNATHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 23218 March 2024Disposed off

The appellant was arrested for theft and granted bail, but a police officer (respondent No.2) allegedly paraded him half‑naked, verbally abused him on the basis of caste and physically assaulted him, illegally detaining him for four hours despite bail. An inquiry by the Sub‑Divisional Police Officer found the officer r

PERIYASAMYversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2024 INSC 21218 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of two persons in a wine shop in Tamil Nadu, for which appellants Periyasamy (A‑1) and R. Manoharan (A‑2) were convicted under sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, with A‑2 also under section 109. The trial court relied mainly on the testimonies of three injured witnesses, who we

NAVAS @ MULANAVASversusSTATE OF KERALA

2024 INSC 21518 March 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of murdering four members of a family, house‑trespass and attempted suicide, and was originally sentenced to death for the murder under s.302 IPC. The High Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment with a direction that the appellant could not be released for 30 years, invoking

MS. XversusMR. A AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 21618 March 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a minor at the time of the alleged incidents, accused the respondents of sexual intercourse based on a false promise of marriage, resulting in pregnancy and a forced termination. The FIR and subsequent restatement contained contradictory statements, and medical evidence disputed the claim of an abortion

APARNA BHAT & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 19218 March 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a bail order that required the accused, who was charged with sexual harassment and related offences, to visit the complainant’s house, tie a rakhi, and give gifts as a condition of bail. The Court held that such conditions amount to judicial overreach, compel contact with the survivor, and pe

EX-GUNNER VIRENDER PRASADversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2020 INSC 30518 March 2020Dismissed

Ex‑Gunner Virender Prasad was convicted by a Summary General Court Martial under Section 69 of the Army Act for murdering a fellow gunner while allegedly acting in a delusional state of a terrorist attack. The conviction and life sentence were affirmed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, and the appellant appealed to the Sup

STATE OF UTTARAKHANDversusYOGENDRA NATH ARORA

2013 INSC 17118 March 2013Dismissed

Yogendra Nath Arora, a Deputy General Manager of a Uttar Pradesh state undertaking, was on deputation to a Uttarakhand government undertaking when he was arrested for accepting a bribe. The Uttarakhand State Government repatriated him to his parent organization and granted sanction for prosecution under the Prevention

STATE OF M.P.versusRAMESH AND ANR.

2011 INSC 22118 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the High Court’s acquittal of Ramesh and Bhaggo Bai for the murder of Bhaggo’s husband, Chatra. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the testimony of an eight‑year‑old daughter, Ran nu Bai, who alleged that the accused beat the deceased, supported by medical findings o

IN RE: POLICY STRATEGY FOR GRANT OF BAIL versus

2025 INSC 23918 February 2025Directions issued

In a suo motu writ petition, the Supreme Court examined the statutory framework governing premature release (remission) of convicts under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 473 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court considered whether remission could be granted without a

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSURENDRA SINGH RATHORE

2025 INSC 24818 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the Rajasthan High Court’s order quashing FIR No.131 of 2022, which alleged that the respondent, Surendra Singh Rathore, demanded bribes for bio‑diesel sales and license renewals. A first FIR (No.123 of 2022) dealt with a specific bribe demand on 4 April 2022, while a second FIR,

LUCKOSE ZACHARIAH @ ZAK NEDUMCHIRA LUKE AND OTHERSversusJOSEPH JOSEPH AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 20518 February 2022Disposed off

An FIR was lodged in 2016 against the appellants for offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 34 of the IPC. The police submitted an initial report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC implicating the appellants, but after a further investigation a supplementary report under Section 173(8) recommended dropping the case

V. SRIHARAN @ MURUGANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 11018 February 2014Case Allowed

Three death‑row convicts (V. Sriharan @ Murugan, T. Suthendraraja @ Santhan and A.G. Perarivalan @ Arivu) filed mercy petitions under Articles 72/161 of the Constitution. The Governor of Tamil Nadu rejected the petitions in 2000 and the President finally rejected them in August 2011 after an inordinate delay of more th

RAMESHCHANDRA AMBALAL JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2014 INSC 10818 February 2014Dismissed

The appellant, Rameshchandra Ambalal Joshi, issued a cheque dated 31 December 2005 to repay a loan of Rs.1,00,000. The cheque was presented for payment on 30 June 2006 and was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds, leading to a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The appellant contended th

BHASKAR LAL SHARMA & ANR.versusMONICA & ORS.

2014 INSC 10518 February 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a criminal complaint filed by Monica under Sections 498A and 406 IPC against her parents‑in‑law and later her husband. The appellants sought quashing of the complaint under Section 482 CrPC, arguing that the allegations did not constitute cruelty or entrustment. The Court held that the compla

RAVIversusBADRINARAYAN AND ORS.

2011 INSC 13918 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ravi, a minor, was severely injured when a truck reversed and struck him, resulting in permanent 50% disability. His father lodged the FIR three months after the accident, citing the child's critical condition and lack of legal awareness as reasons for the delay. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and th

GEETA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 5418 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Court convicted the respondents under sections 452, 323/34 and 325/34 of the IPC but acquitted them of offences under sections 354, 504, 506 IPC and sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The victim, Geeta Devi, appealed the acquittal. The Allahabad High Court dismissed t

ISHWARJI NAGAJI MALIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 5718 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves an alleged murder of Daxaben, where the husband (respondent No.2) was accused of conspiring with co‑accused to kill her for insurance money and stage it as an accident. The investigation produced extensive material, including call records and a charge‑sheet linking the accused to the crime under Secti

BHAGWANIversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 5218 January 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of kidnapping, raping and murdering an 11‑year‑old girl after she disappeared from a village ceremony. Circumstantial and forensic evidence, including DNA matches to the co‑accused Satish and blood‑stained clothing recovered from the appellant's cowshed, linked the appellant to the crime, wh

NAND KISHOREversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 5818 January 2019Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a 50‑year‑old manhole worker, was convicted of raping and murdering an eight‑year‑old girl based on circumstantial evidence, including eyewitness identification and forensic findings. The trial court and High Court upheld the conviction and imposed the death penalty, deeming the crime "rarest of rare". O

REPUBLIC OF ITALY AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 4318 January 2013Disposed off

The case arose from an incident on 15 February 2012 when two Italian naval officers aboard the merchant vessel M.V. Enrica Lexie fired on an Indian fishing boat 20.5 nautical miles off the Kerala coast, killing two fishermen. The Kerala police lodged an FIR under the Indian Penal Code and arrested the officers, which t

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusVISHWESHWAR KOL

2011 INSC 5618 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Vishweshwar K. Kol was accused of pouring kerosene on his second wife and four daughters, resulting in their deaths. The eldest daughter, Jyoti, gave a dying declaration to the police after a doctor certified her fitness to testify. The trial court convicted Kol under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to death based on

ALAMELU & ANR.versusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2011 INSC 5518 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 366 and 376 IPC read with Section 109 for alleged abduction, forced marriage and rape of PW‑2, a girl claimed to be a minor. The High Court affirmed the trial court's convictions, but the Supreme Court, exercising its Article 136 jurisdiction, examined the evidentiary record

RAHNA JALALversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER

2020 INSC 70717 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a mother‑in‑law, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 498A IPC and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 alleging that her son had pronounced triple talaq on his wife. The Kerala High Court denied the bail application, prompting an appeal to the Supreme C

DR NARESH KUMAR MANGLAversusSMT. ANITA AGARWAL & ORS. ETC.

2020 INSC 70617 December 2020Disposed off

Dr. Naresh Kumar Mangla filed a criminal appeal challenging the Allahabad High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to his deceased daughter's in‑laws under Section 438 CrPC. The FIR alleged dowry harassment, assault in 2017, money demands and the unnatural death of the daughter within seven years of marriage, invo

MANJUversusSTATE OF DELHI

2019 INSC 138517 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a mother, gave birth to a baby girl in a Delhi hospital; the infant died shortly after being handed to her, and the prosecution alleged she strangulated the child because it was female. The trial court and the High Court convicted her of murder under Section 302 IPC based largely on circumstantial eviden

STATE OF PUNJABversusLABH SINGH

2014 INSC 87617 December 2014Case Partly allowed

The State of Punjab sought to prosecute two retired public servants, Sikandar Singh and Labh Singh, for alleged corruption and related offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Indian Penal Code. The department had refused sanction to prosecute them both before and after their retirements, yet a cha

STATE OF PUNJABversusJAGGA SINGH ETC

2014 INSC 87817 December 2014Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Satnam Singh in Ludhiana in 2002. Seven persons were charged; two (Charanjit Singh and Surjit Singh) were convicted under Section 302 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, while five others were acquitted by the High Court. The State appealed the acquittals and the two convicted appealed t

POOJA RAVINDER DEVIDASANIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA&ANR.

2014 INSC 88017 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a non‑executive director of M/S Elite International Pvt. Ltd., was charged under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of cheques issued by the company. She had resigned from the board on 17‑December‑2005, while the cheques were dishonoured in 2008. The com

GULABRAO BABURAO DEOKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2013 INSC 84217 December 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Gulabrao Baburao Deokar, was charged along with 56 others for a massive defalcation of public funds amounting to Rs.169.60 crore involving the Jalgaon Municipal Corporation. He was granted bail by the Sessions Court under Section 439(1) CrPC, but the High Court cancelled the bail on grounds of procedural

MANOHAR LAL SHARMAversusTHE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ORS.

2013 INSC 83917 December 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, which requires prior Central Government approval for CBI investigations into senior officials, applies when the investigation is being monitored by the Court itself. The Court noted that the CBI had initiated investigatio

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBHAGWAN DAS AGRAWAL & OTHERS

2013 INSC 84117 December 2013Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan appealed against a High Court order that had discontinued criminal proceedings in Dholpur under Section 186 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), on the ground that the same offence was already being tried in courts at Sagar and Chanderi, Madhya Pradesh. The three FIRs (No. 161/2010, 310/2010

ASHFAQ AHMED QUERESHI & ANR.versusNAMRATA CHOPRA & ORS.

2013 INSC 84317 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants entered into an agreement to purchase land that the respondents claimed to own exclusively, paying Rs. 50 lakh as earnest money. The respondents later sold the land to a third party, and the appellants discovered that the land had been shown as open parking in a municipal permission for a club house, ind

PAWAN KUMAR GOELversusSTATE OF U. P. & ANOTHER

2022 INSC 121217 November 2022Dismissed

The appellant, a machinery dealer, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that a cheque issued by a director of Ravi Organics Ltd. was dishonoured. The complaint named the director but did not name the company as an accused nor aver that the director was in charge of and responsi

KUNA@ SANJAYA BEHERAversusTHE STATE OF ODISHA

2017 INSC 112417 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant KUNA@ SANJAYA BEHERA and co‑accused Pravati Behera were convicted under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the murder of Santosh Behera, the prosecution alleging an extra‑marital relationship as motive. The sole eye‑witness, PW‑1 (Niranjan Behera), claimed to have seen the murder and to have disclosed the alleg

DR. RAM LAKHAN SINGHversusSTATE GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

2015 INSC 84117 November 2015Disposed off

Dr. Ram Lakhan Singh, a senior Indian Forest Service officer, was subjected to a vigilance enquiry, house raid and arrest without the prior approval of the Chief Secretary, as required by the State's procedural rules. The petitioner contended that the State violated his fundamental rights, unlawfully suspended him, and

VISHWAJEET KERBA MASALKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 78817 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vishwajeet Kerba Masalkar, was convicted and sentenced to death for the alleged murders of his wife, daughter and mother, based largely on the ocular testimony of a single injured neighbour (PW‑12) and circumstantial evidence such as a recovered hammer, blood‑stained clothes and CCTV footage. The Supreme

GURMAIL SINGH & ANRversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 109717 October 2022Dismissed

The case arose from a land dispute in Rampur, Uttar Pradesh, where the deceased Dalip Singh was attacked and killed by a group of ten men, including the appellant Gurmail Singh, who were armed with firearms and other weapons. The trial court convicted all ten under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC, and the

MD. JABBAR ALI & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2022 INSC 109617 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were convicted by a Fast Track Court and the conviction was upheld by the High Court for offences under IPC sections 302 r/w 149, 148, 123 and 447. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the testimony of ten prosecution witnesses, all of whom were related to the deceased and to each other, and found material

MANOJ KUMAR TIWARIversusMANISH SISODIA & ORS

2022 INSC 110417 October 2022Disposed off

The Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi filed a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging defamation against six persons, including Manoj Kumar Tiwari (A‑1) and Vijender Gupta (A‑5). The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons, but the two appellants challenged the order. The Supreme Court held that

HOOGHLY MILLS COMPANY LTD.versusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

2019 INSC 115917 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Hooghly Mills Company Ltd., a corporate entity, sought possession of a residential flat that had been occupied by its former director, Bal Binode Bajoria, after his retirement. The company filed a criminal complaint under Section 630(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 and an application under Section 630(2) for dispossessio

UTTAM RAMversusDEVINDER SINGH HUDAN & ANR.

2019 INSC 116017 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an apple orchard owner, supplied packing material on credit to the respondent, who later settled the account and issued a cheque for Rs.5,38,856 which was returned for insufficient funds. The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was dismissed by the

M. HARIHARASUDHANversusR. KARMEGAM AND ORS.

2019 INSC 116217 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Mr. M. Hariharasudhan, who runs a hotel, sued the respondents for damages after they damaged his property and stole cash. The trial court decreed damages, but the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court set aside the decree, holding that the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 implicitly barred

DR. LAKSHMANversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2019 INSC 115317 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Lakshman entered into agreements with several respondents to procure 70 acres of land for a payment of Rs 9 crore. The respondents allegedly sold the land before the agreement, issued cheques that later bounced, and forced the appellant to sign sale deeds, leading to complaints under the IPC for cheating, fraud and

MANI PUSHPAK JOSHIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2019 INSC 116117 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a six‑year‑old girl filed an FIR alleging sexual assault by a teacher at her school. The child’s statements, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the CrPC, later identified two men, one wearing spectacles, as perpetrators; the latter was the school manager, not a teaching staff. The trial court, and sub

N. SOUNDARAMversusP.K. POUNRAJ & ANR.

[2014] 10 S.C.R. 110817 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, N. Soundaram, lodged a complaint alleging that the accused, P.K. Pounraj, and a group of men forcibly entered her residence, confined her and her mother‑in‑law, and seized documents related to a monetary dispute. An FIR was registered under Sections 147, 447, 395 and 506(II) of the IPC, but the police la

GUNMALA SALES PRIVATE LTD.versusANU MEHTA & ORS.

2014 INSC 73617 October 2014Disposed off

The appellant, Gunmala Sales Private Ltd., challenged the Calcutta High Court’s order quashing criminal complaints under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against several directors of the accused company. The Supreme Court held that a complaint must specifically aver that a director wa

A.K. SINGHANIAversusGUJARAT STATE FERTILIZER CO. LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 70117 October 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Gujarat State Fertilizer Co. Ltd. and its directors, including A.K. Singhania and Vikram Prakash, for dishonour of cheques. The key issue was whether the complaints specifically alleged that the directors were "in ch

GEETA MEHROTRA & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2012 INSC 47817 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The wife filed an FIR in Allahabad alleging dowry harassment, physical and mental torture by her husband and his family, naming the husband, his parents, brother and sister. The brother and sister, who were unmarried, sought quashing of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC, claiming the FIR was filed

PRINCL. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST & ANR.versusJ.K. JOHNSON & ORS.

2011 INSC 77017 October 2011Disposed off

The case concerned a seizure of a jeep, rifles and wildlife by police under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The accused offered to compound the offence under Section 54(1) and the Conservator of Forests ordered forfeiture of the seized items. The appellants appealed, arguing that the amendment to Section 54 gave

THAMMINENI BHASKARversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 112417 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Thammineni Bhaskar, was convicted by the trial court and the High Court for kidnapping and murdering the son of an informant under IPC sections 302, 364 and 201. The prosecution's case relied on the allegation that the accused forcibly took the victim into an auto and that the victim was later found dead

KANCHAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 49617 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kanchan Sharma, was charged under Section 306 of the IPC for abetment of suicide and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act after the deceased, her brother-in-law, consumed poison at her house. The High Court rejected her application under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the proceed

RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusANIL KANWARIYA

2021 INSC 49017 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. appointed Anil Kanwariya as a Technical Helper on probation. The employee concealed a prior conviction under Sections 341 and 323 IPC and filed a false declaration stating no criminal case was pending or any conviction. After police verification revealed the conviction, the em

M/S. ESCORTS LIMITEDversusRAMA MUKHERJEE

2013 INSC 63017 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

M/S. Escorts Limited filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Rama Mukherjee for a dishonoured cheque. The Delhi High Court held that, because the cheque was presented and the notice was sent from Delhi, the Delhi courts lacked jurisdiction to try the offence. On appeal, the Supreme

AJOY ACHARYAversusSTATE BUREAU OF INV. AGAINST ECO. OFFENCE

2013 INSC 63217 September 2013Dismissed

The case concerned Ajoy Acharya, an IAS officer who was also a nominee Director of the Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (MPSIDC). He was charged for allowing the Board of MPSIDC to pass a resolution on 19‑April‑1995 that authorised short‑term loans, allegedly contrary to earlier government decisi

MS. ZversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 75617 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Ms. Z, a 35‑year‑old destitute woman with mild mental retardation and HIV‑positive status, alleged that she had been raped and sought termination of her 18‑week pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. The government hospital failed to perform the termination, involving the appellant’s father and

SUBHASH KRISHNANversusSTATE OF GOA

2012 INSC 33917 August 2012Dismissed

The appellant Subhash Krishnan was convicted for abduction, wrongful confinement and murder of Shanu Komarpant, alleged to have been assaulted with a talwar, knife and danda, rendered unconscious and later hanged. The prosecution relied on a complaint (Exhibit 96) by PW‑2, extensive eyewitness testimony, forensic repor

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusDR. RAJKUMAR AGARWAL & ANR.

2012 INSC 34117 August 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against a Rajasthan High Court order that quashed an FIR registered under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against Dr. Rajkumar Agarwal, a junior specialist surgeon, for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs.1,500 in a police‑led trap. The High Court had r

RANJAN DWIVEDIversusC.B.I., THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL

2012 INSC 34217 August 2012Dismissed

The petitioners, accused in the 1975 Samastipur bomb‑blast case, sought quashing of the trial on the ground that a 37‑year delay violated their right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court examined the jurisprudence on speedy trial, noting that the right is implicit in Article 21 and

MALOTH SOMARAJUversusSTATE OF AP.

2011 INSC 58717 August 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Maloth Somaraju, was accused of murdering his elder brother with an axe during the night of 15 May 1999. The trial court acquitted him, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the H

AMITAVA BANERJEE @ AMIT @ BAPPA BANERJEEversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2011 INSC 58417 August 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Amitava Banerjee, was accused of strangling and killing a ten‑year‑old boy, Snehasish Mondal, and burying the body in a jungle. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts – the victim’s last sighting with the accused, the accused’s bicycle and cap recovered near the burial site, a spade t

STATE NCT OF DELHIversusAJIT SETH @ AJJI

2010 INSC 52017 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant Ajit Seth was convicted for the brutal burning to death of two children, aged three and seven, and sentenced to death under IPC 302 and to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under IPC 364. The High Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, directing that the appellant not be released until he

MADAN MOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2010 INSC 52117 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior officer, was prosecuted under IPC sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 294(b) based on a FIR alleging that he harassed a driver who later was found dead, allegedly leaving a suicide note blaming the appellant. The Supreme Court examined the authenticity of the note and the FIR, finding the not

M SAMBASIVA RAOversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 86817 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Assistant Administrative Officer in an insurance company, was accused of demanding a bribe of Rs.40,000 to expedite a claim settlement and of conspiring with a regional manager and his brother in a demand‑and‑trap operation. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court reversed the acquit

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSHYAM BIHARI & OTHERS

2023 INSC 62317 July 2023Dismissed

In 1987 three police constables were alleged to have shot dead Raj Kumar Baliyan during a night patrol. The prosecution relied on three eyewitnesses, ballistic reports and an autopsy that indicated a .12 bore weapon, not the rifles issued to the accused. The trial court acquitted the accused because the eyewitnesses co

ARVIND KUMARversusSTATE OF NCT, DELHI

2023 INSC 62217 July 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a police guard, was carrying a semi‑automatic carbine when he was asked by a Sub‑Inspector to stop a constable from using the police telephone. During a scuffle the weapon became entangled in the appellant's belt chain, causing an accidental discharge of five rounds that struck the constable, who later d

THE STATE OF GUJARAT ETC.versusCHOODAMANI PARMESHWARAN IYER & ANR. ETC.

2023 INSC 97217 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat appealed against a Gujarat High Court order that had directed the GST authority to complete an adjudicatory process within eight weeks and had granted the respondents protection from arrest after they were served summons under Section 69 of the CGST Act, 2017 for interrogation. The respondents, fea

PYARE LALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2020 INSC 45717 July 2020Directions issued

The appellant, convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, was released in 2019 under a Haryana Government policy granting special remission to elderly convicts who had served a minimum period. The policy was implemented by the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution without placing the individual fa

TEHSEEN S. POONAWALLAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 61717 July 2018Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Art. 32 filed by a social activist seeking directions to curb cow‑vigilantism, lynching and mob violence. It held that such acts are unlawful, violate fundamental rights and the State has a constitutional duty to protect life and human dignity. The Court issued compre

PADMINI MAHENDRABHAI GADDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2017 INSC 62217 July 2017Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, Padmini Mahendrabhai Gadda, was convicted under Section 201 of the IPC for causing disappearance of evidence and giving false information to screen the offender in a murder case, while being acquitted of the murder charge itself. The trial court sentenced her to two years' rigorous imprisonment, which th

AJAY PANDIT @ JAGDISH DAYABHAI PATEL & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 28917 July 2012Case Partly allowed

The accused, a dentist, lured vulnerable individuals with false promises of sending them to America, extracted large sums of money and murdered two victims in separate incidents while attempting to murder two others. Conviction under sections 419, 420, 302, 307, 397, 342 and 328 IPC was upheld based on eyewitness testi

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusTALEVAR & ANR.

2011 INSC 41717 June 2011Dismissed

In December 1996 a dacoity with two murders was committed at a house in Rajasthan. Two of the accused, Kuniya and Talevar, were later arrested and, based on their disclosure statements, cash, silver items and a scooter were recovered, but the recoveries occurred several days after the incident and involved items that c

GHURELAL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2011 INSC 41817 June 2011Dismissed

The case involves a dacoity on 16-17 December 1996 in which two persons were murdered and movable property was looted. Six accused were identified through test identification parades and the stolen articles, weapons and a vehicle were recovered based on their disclosures. They were convicted under Sections 395, 396 and

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY NEW DELHIversusOWAIS AMIN @ CHERRY & ORS.

2024 INSC 44717 May 2024Case Partly allowed

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) investigated a terrorist plot in Jammu & Kashmir and filed a chargesheet on 25 September 2019 under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) 1989. The Special Judge, NIA, refused to take cognizance of the conspiracy charge under Section 120‑B of the Ranbir Penal Code because the req

AJWARversusWASEEM AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 43817 May 2024Disposed off

The case concerns a double murder alleged to have occurred on 19 May 2020 when the accused fired indiscriminately at the complainant’s house, killing his two sons and injuring his nephew. The complainant filed an FIR and the accused were charged under several IPC sections; the Allahabad High Court later granted regular

SUNITA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR

2024 INSC 44817 May 2024Dismissed

The case arose from a POCSO trial in which the Special Judge conducted the proceedings in extreme haste, denying the accused the opportunity to consult counsel, receive documents, and present a defence, and ultimately imposing a death sentence that was set aside by the Patna High Court and a de novo trial ordered. The

SATISH KUMAR JATAVversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 57717 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the original complainant, challenged a High Court order that had quashed criminal proceedings against the accused under Sections 307, 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3(10)(15) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The High Court, relying on a single paragraph stating that no useful purpose would

MS. XversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANR.

2018 INSC 52917 May 2018Disposed off

The accused, a film producer, was charged with rape, kidnapping, criminal intimidation, and related offences under the IPC. He had earlier obtained anticipatory bail, which was cancelled for not disclosing a pending 2G Spectrum case, but later secured regular bail under Section 439 of the CrPC by the High Court. The ap

THE KERALA ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTORS ASSOCIATIONversusTHE STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2018 INSC 52817 May 2018Dismissed

The Kerala Assistant Public Prosecutors Association appealed to the Supreme Court seeking parity in retirement age with Public Prosecutors, arguing that both categories perform similar duties and that the former should retire at 60 years like the latter. The High Court had rejected this claim, holding that the modes of

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusFIROZ KHAN @ ARIF KHAN

2016 INSC 42917 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Firoz Khan, who was charged with murdering an 11‑year‑old girl under Section 302 IPC. The Sessions Court had acquitted him on the basis of a benefit of doubt. The State filed an application for leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but the

AMAR PAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2012 INSC 23817 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

A complainant filed an application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) of Bulandshahar seeking a direction to the police to register an FIR for a shooting incident. The CJM dismissed the application. The complainant appealed to the Allahabad High Court, which set aside the CJM's

SHAHED KAMAL & ORS.versusM/S A. SURTI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2025 INSC 50217 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Homebuyers dissatisfied with the services of a builder erected a public banner listing various grievances, which the builder claimed was defamatory and filed a criminal complaint under Section 500 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The appellants argued that the banner was a peaceful protest made in good faith to protect

ANKIT MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 50117 April 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Ankit Mishra, alleged that respondent No.2, Abdul Razzak, a known gangster, hurled obscene abuses and death threats at him in a hospital, leading to FIR No.176 of 2023 under IPC sections 195A, 294 and 506. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh granted anticipatory bail to the respondent under Section 438 of t

SUBHASH AGGARWALversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 49917 April 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a father, was convicted of murdering his son under Section 302 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The central issue was whether the death was a homicide or a suicide, given the absence of a clear motive and reliance on circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court examined forensic evidence,

DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCEversusRAJ KUMAR ARORA & ORS.

2025 INSC 49817 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence investigated the illegal possession, manufacture and sale of Buprenorphine Hydrochloride, a psychotropic substance listed in the Schedule to the NDPS Act but not in Schedule I of the NDPS Rules, leading to charges under Sections 8(c), 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act against several res

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSANTOSH KARNANI & ANR

2023 INSC 38017 April 2023Disposed off

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated a trap operation in which Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Santosh Karnani allegedly demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs 30 lakhs to influence a tax assessment of Safal Construction. The complainant recorded the demand and the subsequent acknowledgment of paym

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