Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

2,851 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,201–1,400.

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusASHARAM @ ASHUMAL

2023 INSC 38317 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against a High Court order that allowed the respondent, Asharam, to summon Deputy Commissioner of Police Ajay Pal Lamba under Section 391 of the CrPC, based on a claim in his book that he had recorded a video of the crime scene a day before site maps were prepared. The Supreme Court held

SOUNDARAJANversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIGILANCE ANTICORRUPTION DINDIGUL

2023 INSC 37717 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sub‑Registrar, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding a Rs.500 gratification to release a registered sale deed. The prosecution relied on a trap operation and the testimony of a shadow witness, but the complainant, who was the key witness to the alleged demand, was declared

SIJU KURIANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 37817 April 2023Dismissed

The appellant Siju Kurian was convicted by the Karnataka High Court for murder, concealment of body, theft and cheating. The conviction rested on circumstantial evidence, the post‑mortem report establishing homicide, witnesses who saw the accused with the deceased, and a voluntary statement made by the accused that led

VIPULBHAI MANSINGBHAI CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHER

2017 INSC 35417 April 2017Disposed off

Vipulbhai Mansingbhai Chaudhary, who continued as Chairman of a district cooperative milk union beyond his three‑year term, was served a show‑cause notice under s.76B(1) and (2) of the Gujarat Co‑operative Societies Act, 1961. The Registrar removed him and disqualified him for three years; a later order extended the di

M.NARAYANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2015 INSC 33717 April 2015Dismissed

M. Narayan was convicted for dowry death and cruelty after his wife Ganga was found hanging within two years of marriage. The prosecution alleged that Narayan repeatedly demanded additional dowry, subjected her to physical and mental harassment, and threatened her, leading to her suicide. The trial court acquitted him,

MOHAN LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2015 INSC 33417 April 2015Dismissed

Mohan Lal was convicted for possession of 10 kg of opium under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and for theft under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC. He argued that the offence occurred before the NDPS Act came into force, that applying the Act was retrospective and violative of Art.20(1) of the Constitution, that the seizure

ANNAPURNAversusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 26317 April 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court reviewed an appeal by the mother‑in‑law convicted of murdering her daughter‑in‑law, who died within two months of marriage after being burnt with kerosene. The victim’s dying declaration alleged that the appellant poured kerosene on her because of dowry demands. The trial and High Courts had relied on

MOHAMMAD KALEEMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2026 INSC 25117 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a complaint by Mohammad Kaleem regarding the murder of Ammar, wherein the complainant sought to summon two additional persons, Rajendra and Mausam, as accused under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Trial Court and the Allahabad High Court rejected the application, holding that the evide

RANJIT SARKARversusRAVI GANESH BHARDWAJ AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 41517 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ranjit Sarkar, lodged a complaint under Section 304‑A IPC alleging medical negligence, which led to the issuance of summons against the respondents. The High Court stayed the proceedings, but the Judicial Magistrate, ignoring the stay and a COVID‑19 SOP, called the case on 6 January 2021 and later dismis

PARMINDER SINGHversusHONEY GOYAL AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 36117 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 21‑year‑old veterinary student and state‑level volleyball player, suffered quadriplegia and 100% disability after being hit by a car, and claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 5,16,000, which the High Court enhanced to Rs 15,25,600 by ass

CARDINAL MAR GEORGE ALENCHERRYversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2023 INSC 25017 March 2023Disposed off

The Archbishop of the Syro‑Malabar Church, Cardinal Mar George Alencherry, was charged in several complaints alleging conspiracy and fraud in the disposal of church immovable property. An earlier complaint filed in a different court was dismissed under Section 203 of the CrPC for non‑prosecution. The trial court in Kak

AFJAL ALI SHA @ ABJAL SHAUKAT SHAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

2023 INSC 25717 March 2023Directions issued

The petitioner, brother of a murder victim, sought transfer of the criminal trial from West Bengal to Assam, alleging bias, witness intimidation, and procedural irregularities including a state‑issued notification to withdraw prosecution. The High Court set aside the withdrawal order and directed the trial to continue,

MS. XversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 25217 March 2023Disposed off

Ms. X, a model, complained that the accused businessman lured her under the pretext of modelling work and raped her in a hotel room. The FIR was initially filed under Sections 354, 354‑B and 506 IPC, and later, after her supplementary statements and a medico‑legal report, Section 376 IPC (rape) was added. The High Cour

NEERAJ DUTTAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI)

2023 INSC 24517 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Electricity Inspector, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for allegedly demanding a bribe of Rs 10,000 to facilitate the installation of an electricity meter. The prosecution’s case rested mainly on the testimony of a shadow‑witness (PW‑5) and on the recovery of cash from the a

NAVAL KISHOREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2015 INSC 97217 March 2015Dismissed

Naval Kishore was convicted under IPC sections 498A (cruelty), 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) for the death of his wife Jyoti, who was found burned and asphyxiated. The prosecution proved that Jyoti had been subjected to repeated cruelty by Kishore and his in‑laws, and that she was suffocated

M. MAHENDAR KUMARversusM. MANI & ORS.

2015 INSC 23217 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

M. Mahendar Kumar, an accused in Crime No.147 of 2009, challenged a Madras High Court order that, under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., transferred the investigation to the CBCID, Chennai. The transfer was sought by the de facto complainant, M. Mani, who had previously applied under Section 173(8) for further investigation

VESA HOLDINGS P. LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2015 INSC 22817 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

VESA Holdings Ltd and its directors entered into a time‑bound settlement agreement with a former bank official who was to receive a consultancy fee for facilitating the settlement of a loan. The fee was to be paid in two instalments, the first upfront and the balance upon completion of the settlement, which was conditi

RAVINDRA PAL SINGHversusSANTOSH KUMAR JAISWAL & ORS.

2011 INSC 22017 March 2011Disposed off

The father of a deceased student filed a transfer petition under Section 46 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, alleging that his son was killed in a fake police encounter in Dehradun and that the local police continued to exert undue influence over the CBI investigation. The petitioner claimed threats from police offic

RAKESH MITTALversusAJAY PAL GUPTA @ SONU CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 16117 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a complainant, filed an FIR alleging that the accused, Ajay Pal Gupta (also known as Sonu Chaudhary), conspired with others to cheat him of over ₹11.5 crore by supplying foodgrains and using forged documents. The accused was arrested after a 1.5‑year abscondment and his bail application was rejected by t

PARAMESHWARIversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS

2026 INSC 16417 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court convicted two private respondents for offences under Sections 307, 324 and 326 of the IPC for stabbing a victim, sentencing them to three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹5,000 each. The High Court, on revision, upheld the conviction but reduced the custodial term to the two months already se

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusT.N. SUDHAKAR REDDY

2025 INSC 22917 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed against the Karnataka High Court’s order quashing FIR No. 56 of 2023, which had been registered against public servant T.N. Sudhakar Reddy for alleged disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court had held that a preliminary inquiry was mandatory be

SUBHELAL @ SUSHIL SAHUversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 24217 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Subhelal @ Sushil Sahu, was charged with offences under Sections 420, 201, 120‑B read with Section 34 of the IPC in a crypto‑currency scam involving about Rs.4 crore, of which Rs.35 lakh was attributed to him. He had been in custody since December 2023 while the trial, conducted before a Chief Judicial M

HITESH UMESHBHAI MASHRUversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2025 INSC 24617 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Hitesh Umeshbhai Mashru, was charged under Sections 493 and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code for cheating and a sexual offence, with an FIR lodged on 16 July 2022. The Gujarat High Court rejected his application for anticipatory bail, but the Supreme Court had earlier granted him protection against arr

JAIDEEP BOSEversusM/S BID AND HAMMER AUCTIONEERS PRIVATE LIMITED

2025 INSC 24117 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a private criminal defamation complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging that fourteen news articles published in various newspapers defamed the authenticity of paintings to be auctioned by the complainant. The trial magistrate took cognizance, registered the complaint and issued summons to the acc

RASHMI BEHLversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2015 INSC 13017 February 2015

The petitioner, a 22‑year‑old woman from Uttar Pradesh, filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that she was abducted, repeatedly assaulted and raped by her father and his accomplices, and that the police failed to record her statement under Section 164 CrPC or conduct a medical examination under Section 164A C

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

2012 INSC 9417 February 2012

The appellants were convicted by a Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for offences under the IPC. They challenged the conviction on the ground that the Special Court, being a Court of Session, had taken cognizance without a committal order as required by S

SHADAKSHARIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2024 INSC 4217 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed an FIR alleging that the Village Accountant (respondent No.2), a public servant, colluded to create fake land and death documents for illegal gain. The investigating officer sought sanction under Section 197 of the Cr.PC to prosecute the respondent, but the competent authority refused, leading the H

JABIR & ORSversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 4817 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The child H, aged about seven, went missing on 8 October 1999 and his body was discovered two days later in a sugarcane field. The father filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC on 19 November 1999, leading to an FIR on 21 November 1999. The trial court convicted the three accused under Sections 302, 364 and 201

YOGENDRA @ JOGENDRA SINGHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 5417 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Yogendra Singh, was convicted under IPC sections 302, 326A and 460 for throwing acid on his former lover, Smt. Ruby, resulting in her death and injuring her relatives. The trial court and High Court affirmed the conviction and imposed the death penalty, relying heavily on the victim's dying declaration a

HIMANSHUversusB. SHIVAMURTHY & ANR.

2019 INSC 5317 January 2019Disposed off

The appellant, a director of Lakshmi Cement and Ceramics Industries Ltd., borrowed Rs 4,15,000 from the respondent and issued a cheque on the company's behalf, which later bounced. A notice of demand was served only on the appellant, not on the company, and a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Ac

MAUVIN GODINHOversusSTATE OF GOA

2018 INSC 2817 January 2018Disposed off

The case arose from a series of power‑tariff rebate notifications issued by the Government of Goa, some of which were allegedly promulgated without Cabinet approval. The appellant‑Minister of Power, the Chief Electrical Engineer and senior officials of two private companies were accused of conspiring to grant a 25% reb

ANIL KUMARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2017 INSC 125617 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Anil Kumar was first convicted under Section 22 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1 lakh and a default two‑year term. He was later convicted under Sections 27(b)(ii) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and sentenced to one year' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs

VASANTI DUBEYversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2012 INSC 3617 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Block Development Officer, was accused by a contractor of demanding a bribe in connection with a road contract. The Lokayukta investigated, found the complaint to be false, and submitted a closure report to the Special Judge. The Special Judge rejected the closure report twice, directing the police to

ANKUSH VIPAN KAPOORversusNATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

2024 INSC 98616 December 2024Dismissed

The petitioner was arrested in Punjab for alleged NDNDPS offences and was granted bail, which was later cancelled by the High Court after the National Investigation Agency (NIA) took over the investigation of related scheduled offences under the UAPA. The Central Government, invoking Section 6(5) and Section 8 of the N

HASMUKHLAL D. VORA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

2022 INSC 129416 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of a chemical trading company, were accused of contravening the Drugs and Cosmetics Act by purchasing and allegedly repackaging pyridoxal‑5‑phosphate, a bulk food substance, for sale to drug manufacturers. The complaint was filed more than four years after the initial inspection, and the investig

IQRAMversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS

2022 INSC 129516 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted in nine separate sessions trials for theft of electricity equipment, each resulting in a two‑year simple imprisonment under Section 136 of the Electricity Act. The trial judge ordered that time spent as an under‑trial be set off against each sentence and that sentences for offences under Sec

SANJAI TIWARIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 70416 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sanjai Tiwari, was charged under several IPC offences and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. A third‑party advocate, calling himself a social activist, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking a High Court order directing the Special Judge to expedite the trial.

PUNEET DALMIAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, HYDERABAD

2019 INSC 137916 December 2019Disposed off

The appellant, accused No.3 in a CBI case involving offences under Sections 120‑B, 420, 409 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, was required to appear before the trial court in Hyderabad every Friday despite residing in Delhi. He applied under Section 205 of the CrPC to be exempted from personal appearance, citin

MANGU SINGHversusDHARMENDRA & ANR.

2015 INSC 93516 December 2015Dismissed

The accused, Mangusinh, was convicted by the trial court for murder of his wife and daughter under IPC s.302 and Arms Act s.25, based on a confessional FIR, a second FIR lodged by the victims' father (PW1), and the testimony of an alleged eye‑witness (PW4). The High Court acquitted him, holding that both FIRs were ante

BIMLA DEVIversusRAJESH SINGH &ANR.

2015 INSC 93016 December 2015Dismissed

The case involved the double murder of Kashi Nath Tiwary and Lallan Tiwary, allegedly committed by a group of accused including Rajesh Singh and four Tiwary brothers. The trial court convicted all six accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment, but the High Court acquitted Rajesh Singh on the ground that he was ne

RAJIV SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANOTHER

2015 INSC 93816 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rajiv Singh was convicted under Sections 304B, 201 and 498A for the alleged murder of his wife Archana during a honeymoon train journey, based on a dead body found near the railway tracks. The Supreme Court examined whether the body was indeed Archana's, whether the prosecution proved a homicidal death, a

MOHD. FEROZ KHAN@ FEROZversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2015 INSC 104416 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, Mohd. Feroz Khan, was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment for a crime committed on 2 August 1999. He contended that he was 17 years old at the time of the offence and therefore fell within the ambit of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The Supreme Court

GAUTAM KUNDUversusMANOJ KUMAR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, EASTERN REGION, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT(PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT) GOVT. OF INDIA

2015 INSC 93916 December 2015Dismissed

Gautam Kundu, chairman of Rose Valley, was arrested for alleged money‑laundering offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and related violations of the SEBI Act. He sought bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but the Calcutta High Court rejected the application, holding th

NEERU YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P AND ANOTHER

2014 INSC 84116 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against a High Court order that granted bail to Mitthan Yadav, a history‑sheeter accused of multiple serious offences including murder, under several IPC sections. The High Court had relied on the principle of parity, noting that a co‑accused, Ashok Kumar, had previously been releas

VIJAY PAL SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTIARAKHAND

2014 INSC 87016 December 2014Case Partly allowed

The case involves the death of Saroj, a married woman, within four months of her marriage. Her father alleged that the husband, his father, brother and brother‑in‑law demanded dowry, threatened her and subsequently murdered her and attempted to burn the body. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court co

P. MAHALINGAMversusMONICA KUMAR & ANR.

2011 INSC 84716 December 2011Disposed off

The appellants, medical students, alleged that they were brutally assaulted by police officers while serving a dasti summons issued by the Supreme Court to the SHO of Sector 39 Police Station, Noida. The High Court dismissed their petition for a CBI inquiry on the ground that no FIR had been registered and directed the

ABRARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2010 INSC 88516 December 2010Dismissed

Advocate A was attacked by four armed men on 3 April 1979; he was shot from behind and later died. The prosecution relied on three dying declarations—one forming the FIR, one recorded under Section 161 CrPC by a Sub‑Inspector, and a third recorded by the Tahsildar after a doctor certified the victim fit to speak—while

SUBHASHversusSLATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 88616 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Subhash was convicted under Sections 306 and 498A IPC for the death of his wife Anuradha, who suffered severe burns. The prosecution's case relied primarily on a dying declaration recorded by Sub‑Divisional Magistrate Ravi Malik, which alleged that the victim attempted suicide due to dowry harassment. The

HARI SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2010 INSC 88716 December 2010Dismissed

Hari Singh and his brother Mohar Singh, who ran a brick kiln, had a business rivalry with Guiab Singh, the deceased, over nearby kilns. On a moonless night, the brothers entered Guiab Singh's house; Mohar fired a country-made pistol at close range, killing him. The victim's son Prem Pal and two other villagers identifi

SANJAY KUMAR JAINversusSTATE OF DELHI

2010 INSC 89016 December 2010Case Partly allowed

The appellant Sanjay Kumar Jain was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for the death of his wife within fourteen months of marriage, based on circumstantial evidence and a post‑mortem indicating strangulation. The Supreme Court found serious inconsistencies in the prosecution’s version, including uncertain acces

SHER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 89116 December 2010Disposed off

The case involved a violent attack on a farming family in Haryana, resulting in the death of the husband (Urned Singh) and injuries to his wife and son. The accused were charged under Sections 302, 149, 323 and 148 of the IPC. The High Court reduced the murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Se

GULAB DAS & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2011 INSC 80416 November 2011Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a family dispute over a partition fence that led to a violent altercation in 1994, resulting in cross‑cases and convictions under IPC sections 307, 323 and 325 with accompanying fines. The appellants, who were related to the complainant, sought to have the offences compounded on the basis of an amic

LALU YADAVversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 78216 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Lalu Yadav, was charged under Sections 376 and 313 of the IPC for alleged rape on a false promise of marriage, based on an FIR filed in 2018 for incidents allegedly occurring between 2013 and 2018. The complainant claimed that Yadav had deceived her, established a physical relationship without consent, a

AMBALAL PARIHARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2023 INSC 94616 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ambalal Parihar, challenged eight FIRs registered against the second to fourth respondents. After two petitions under Section 482 of the CrPC were dismissed without interim relief, the respondents filed a civil writ petition seeking to club the eight FIRs and obtain a direction that no coercive action be

EBHA ARJUN JADEJA & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2019 INSC 114816 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were stopped by police in Gujarat and found in possession of prohibited firearms, leading to an FIR under the Arms Act and a concurrent charge under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA). The prosecution sought to add a TADA offence after obtaining sanction from the Distri

HARIBHAI MALAVIYA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2019 INSC 114616 October 2019Disposed off

An FIR alleging land‑grab and extortion was filed in 2009, leading to a police investigation and a charge‑sheet. After the magistrate took cognizance and issued summons, the accused applied under s.173(8) CrPC for further investigation and for the magistrate to order a fresh FIR; the magistrate rejected these applicati

SUBRATA CHATIORAJversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 103416 October 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) request to limit its investigation of numerous chit‑fund scam cases on the ground of alleged manpower shortage. The Court noted that the CBI had already taken over investigations of major scams, including the Saradha case, and that the right to a fa

J.V. BAHARUNI & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2014 INSC 73216 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing dishonoured cheques. The trial magistrate recorded evidence and a successor magistrate delivered the judgment, leading the Gujarat High Court to order a de novo trial on the ground that the case was a summary trial and Section

KANWAR SINGH MEENAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2012 INSC 47716 October 2012Disposed off

The appellant, brother of the murder victim, challenged the Rajasthan High Court’s order granting bail to the accused, Khushi Ram Meena, in a case involving murder and related offences (IPC ss.147,148,149,364,302). The Supreme Court examined the principles governing bail under Section 439(2) of the CrPC, emphasizing th

S. P. MANI AND MOHAN DAIRYversusDR.SNEHALATHA ELANGOVAN

2022 INSC 97016 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.P. Mani and Mohan Dairy, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against a partnership firm and its partners for a dishonoured cheque. The High Court, on a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC, quashed the criminal proceedings against one partner, Dr. Snehalatha Elangova

NEETU KUMAR NAGAICHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 54916 September 2020Case Allowed

Neetu Kumar Nagaich, the mother of a 21‑year‑old law student who died under suspicious circumstances, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a de novo investigation of the homicide after alleging serious deficiencies in the Rajasthan police investigation and the filing of a closure report. The Supreme Court not

TATTU LODHI@ PANCHAM LODHIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2016 INSC 87616 September 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Tattu Lodhi, was convicted of kidnapping, rape, and murder of a seven‑year‑old girl. The trial court relied on circumstantial evidence, including the victim's last seen with the accused, forensic evidence of blood on a gunny bag and clothing, and a post‑mortem report showing injuries consistent with sexu

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusNEELAM NAG

2016 INSC 87816 September 2016Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a senior assistant of State Bank of India, was alleged to have caused a loss of over Rs.44 lakh by facilitating fraudulent credit and misplacing clearing instruments in May 2006. A criminal case under Sections 409 and 34 of the IPC was filed in 2007, but the trial progressed slowly, with only three of e

STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI)versusNITIN GUNWANT SHAH

2015 INSC 66416 September 2015Dismissed

The State of NCT of Delhi appealed against the High Court's acquittal of Nitin Shah and Om Prakash Srivastava in the murder of Lalit Suneja (2 August 1992). The prosecution alleged that Shah, as Suneja's employer, conspired with Srivastava and others to kill Suneja, basing its case on a complaint (Ext. PW15/A1) purport

EDMUNDS LYNGDOHversusSTATE OF MEGHALAYA

2014 INSC 63616 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the procurement of Damp Proof Cement by North Eastern Hill University (NEHU) where the Chief Engineer (A‑1) and other officials were alleged to have colluded to obtain the material at an inflated price of Rs.42.75 per kg, far above the market rate of Rs.5‑10 per kg. The prosecution proved that A‑1, a

K. SARAVANAN KARUPPASAMY & ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2014 INSC 63516 September 2014Disposed off

The petitioners, leaders of a human‑rights NGO, filed a writ of mandamus under Article 32 seeking a CBI or SIT investigation into the violent clash between Dalit and Thevar students at Dr. Ambedkar Government Law College, Chennai on 12 November 2008, alleging police inaction and subsequent harassment. They also complai

DILAWAR SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 63416 September 2014Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Narinder Singh, for which nine persons were charged under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the IPC. The prosecution's case hinged on the testimony of the victim's father (PW‑6) and his brother (PW‑7), who identified Dilawar Singh (A‑1), Yash Pal (A‑3) and Shamsher Singh (A‑7) as the assailan

SUNDER SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2010 INSC 62116 September 2010Dismissed

The appellant Sunder Singh was convicted for the murder of six members of his cousin's family by setting their house on fire with petrol, closing the door, and slashing one victim with a sword. The prosecution relied on the surviving victim's eyewitness testimony, the dying declarations of two victims, and forensic evi

SURENDRA PAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2010 INSC 62216 September 2010Dismissed

The appellants, who had earlier demanded a compromise in a kidnapping case, allegedly opened fire with country‑made pistols and a rifle, killing three members of the victim's family and injuring three others. The first informant, PW‑1, lodged an FIR within five hours of the incident and identified the accused in both m

MAKHAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2022 INSC 83116 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Makhan Singh was convicted under Section 304‑B IPC for the death of his wife Manjit Kaur based on two dying declarations. The first declaration, recorded by Judicial Magistrate Vani Gopal Sharma, was made after a medical officer certified the deceased was fit and conscious, and the magistrate satisfied he

SANDEEP ALIAS KALAversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA

2022 INSC 83516 August 2022Disposed off

Sandeep alias Kala was acquitted of murder in the trial court, but the High Court reversed the acquittal and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 and Section 379 of the CrPC, and the appeal

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCEversusPRABODH KUMAR TEWARI

2022 INSC 83216 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Oriental Bank of Commerce filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that a cheque issued by the respondent, Prabodh Kumar Tewari, bounced due to insufficient funds. The respondent admitted signing a blank cheque and argued that the details filled in later were not in hi

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusP. RAVIKUMAR @ RAVI ETC.

2018 INSC 71616 August 2018Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed the acquittal of accused No.2 (P. Ravi Kumar) and accused No.3 (D.B. Savitha) in a murder case where the deceased, Mohan Kumar, was allegedly killed by a conspiracy involving accused No.1, accused No.2, and accused No.3, who were said to have an illicit relationship. The trial court had

MOHANLALversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2018 INSC 71416 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act for possession of 4 kg of opium seized by a police Sub‑Inspector (PW‑1) who also acted as the informant. The investigation was riddled with irregularities: the informant‑officer retained the seized narcotics in private custody, failed to deposit them in the p

RAKESH KUMAR PAULversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2017 INSC 75416 August 2017Disposed off

Rakesh Kumar Paul was arrested under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and remained in custody for more than 60 days without a charge‑sheet. The State argued that because the offence could attract imprisonment of up to ten years, the 90‑day period under clause (i) of proviso (a) to Section 167(2) CrPC applied, den

VIKASversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 54016 August 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Vikash, was implicated in an abduction case where a girl was allegedly kidnapped by several accused. The trial court, after taking cognizance under sections 363, 366(A), 1208 and 376 of the IPC, issued a non‑bailable warrant to secure his attendance under section 319 of the CrPC. Vikash applied to have t

RAVI KAPURversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 33316 August 2012Dismissed

The appellant Ravi Kapur was charged under IPC sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A for a bus accident that caused multiple deaths and injuries. The trial court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution failed to prove his identity as the driver and that procedural lapses, such as the absence of a test identification para

HARJINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2010 INSC 51416 August 2010Disposed off

Harjinder Singh was convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh. He appealed to the High Court, but his counsel was absent on the hearing date and no one appeared on his behalf; the High Court nevertheless affirmed the con

CHAKALI MADDILETY & ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2010 INSC 51716 August 2010Dismissed

The deceased Harijana Ayyanna was attacked and stabbed by a group of accused (A1‑A7) who were armed with daggers and a stick. The FIR was lodged promptly and named all the accused. Eye‑witnesses, the deceased's son (PW‑1) and wife (PW‑2), testified that the accused surrounded and stabbed the victim, and their statement

VIRENDER PRASAD SINGHversusRAJESH BHARDWAJ & ORS.

2010 INSC 51816 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Virender Prasad Singh filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking re‑investigation of offences (IPC ss. 302, 201, 120‑B) alleged against Rajesh Bhardwaj after a charge‑sheet had already been filed. The Patna High Court, instead of examining the charge‑sheet, directed that a Director General of Police exam

BALJINDER KUMAR @ KALAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 85616 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Baljinder Kumar, accused of murdering his wife, two children and sister‑in‑law, was convicted by the Trial Court and sentenced to death under Sections 302, 308 and 325 IPC. The High Court upheld the conviction, relying mainly on the testimonies of three witnesses despite contradictions and lack of forensic linkage. On

SATENDER KUMAR ANTILversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2025 INSC 90916 July 2025Dismissed

The State of Haryana filed an application seeking modification of a Supreme Court order that required police to serve notices under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, only through the mode prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and not via electronic means such as WhatsApp.

BYLURU THIPPAIAH @ BYALURU THIPPAIAH @ NAYAKARA THIPPAIAHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2025 INSC 86216 July 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Byluru Thippaiah, brutally murdered his wife, sister‑in‑law and three children on 25 February 2017, alleging that his wife and the children were not his and accusing them of promiscuity. He was tried under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted and sentenced to death by the trial court, a senten

SHIV BARANversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 86016 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shiv Baran filed a criminal appeal against the High Court's order quashing a summons issued under Section 319 of the CrPC against Rajendra Prasad Yadav, who was not charge-sheeted but named in the FIR. The trial court had earlier summoned Rajendra based on eyewitness statements that he was present at the

JAI PRAKASHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2025 INSC 86116 July 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Jai Prakash, was convicted of raping and murdering a 10‑year‑old girl. Evidence included the victim’s body recovered from his hut, the last‑seen testimony of child witnesses, and DNA matches linking the appellant to the victim’s underwear and hair. The trial and High Courts affirmed conviction under IPC

THE STATE OF MEGHALAYAversusLALRINTLUANGA SAILO & ANR.

2024 INSC 53716 July 2024Disposed off

The State of Meghalaya challenged two bail orders granted by the High Court to Smt. X, an HIV‑positive accused charged under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act for possession of heroin, including a commercial quantity of 1.040 kg. The High Court had released her on bail solely on the ground of her HIV status, withou

MIS. AJEET SEEDS LTD.versusK. GOPALA KRISHNAIAH

2014 INSC 49116 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that a cheque issued by the respondent bounced and that a demand notice had been sent by registered post. The High Court quashed the complaint on the ground that the complaint did not specifically state that the notice had be

ARATHI SANDIversusBANDI JAGADRAKSHAKA RAO AND ORS.

2013 INSC 47316 July 2013Dismissed

Arathi Sandi and Sandi Jagadrakshaka Rao, a married couple residing in the United States, fought a divorce and child‑custody dispute. The US Superior Court initially granted primary custody of their US‑citizen son to the mother, later modifying the order to make the father the custodial parent and issuing a writ of hab

SUBHASH POPATLAL DAVEversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2013 INSC 46716 July 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions challenging preventive detention orders issued under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) and the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioners, many of whom had absconded or evaded execution of the orders,

DILIP SUDHAKAR PENDSE & ANR.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 46916 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 420, 468, 471, 477-A and 120-B IPC for alleged offences. During the trial before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, one co‑accused turned approver and was granted pardon under Section 306 CrPC, after which the magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions.

MS. P XXXversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR

2022 INSC 64816 June 2022Dismissed

Ms. P (appellant) alleged that her fiancé, respondent No.2, raped her in Delhi in February‑March 2016 (IPC s.376) and later, in November 2016, threatened and abused her over telephone in Chamoli (IPC s.504, s.506). The Sessions Judge, Chamoli, discharged the accused of the rape charge for lack of territorial jurisdicti

MAJOR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2022 INSC 130616 June 2022Case Partly allowed

Major Singh, the appellant, struck his uncle Makhan Singh with a wooden cot leg ("bahi") after a quarrel the previous day, causing a head injury that led to the uncle's death a day later. The trial court acquitted Singh, but the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted him under Section 302 I

P KRISHNA MOHAN REDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 72516 May 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, former public servants, were charged in a large‑scale corruption case involving alleged manipulation of liquor allocations and kickbacks. They applied for anticipatory bail, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court denied relief, relying on confessional statements recorded from co‑accused under Section 161 of

RAGHUNATH SHARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 72316 May 2025Case Allowed

The appellants entered into a series of sale agreements and a compromise deed, after which an FIR (No.432/2014) for offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC was filed. The High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, quashed the FIR on the basis of the compromise. The complainant later applied

BALJINDER SINGH ALIAS AMANversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2025 INSC 79616 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Baljinder Singh, alleged that the respondents, Mandeep Singh and Narinder Kumar, attacked him and his driver with wooden sticks, leading to the driver’s death. The respondents were charged under Sections 302, 323, 34, 427, 120B (with 148 and 149 later deleted) of the IPC and sought regular bail under Sec

TARSEM LALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT JALANDHAR ZONAL OFFICE

2024 INSC 43416 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were accused under complaints filed under section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the Special Court took cognizance of the offence under section 4 of the Act without the Enforcement Directorate having arrested them. The Court examined whether the procedural provisions of the

Y. BALAJIversusKARTHIK DESARI & ANR. ETC.

2023 INSC 54216 May 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a large jobs‑for‑cash scam in Tamil Nadu where public servants allegedly accepted bribes for appointments, triggering investigations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court held that the bribe money itself constitutes "pr

VINUBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATELversusRAJIVBHAI DUDABHAI PATEL & OTHERS

2018 INSC 52116 May 2018Disposed off

The case concerned an attack in which three persons were killed and five injured, allegedly committed by a group of seventeen accused. The Sessions Court convicted four accused and acquitted the rest, but the charges were found to be improperly framed under CrPC sections 211‑213, lacking specific allegations for each d

ADAMBHAI SULEMANBHAI AJMERI & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 39916 May 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of six accused in the 2002 Akshardham temple terrorist attack, which were based largely on confessional statements recorded under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), testimony of accomplices, and two Urdu letters allegedly recovered from the terrorists' pockets. The Court

KRISHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 40016 May 2014Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code for raping and intimidating the prosecutrix. The trial court and the High Court upheld the conviction based on medical testimony that semen was found on the victim's underwear and that the accused sustained injuries consistent with a strugg

MOTI LAL SONGARAversusPREM PRAKASH @ PAPPU AND ANR.

2013 INSC 34616 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant lodged an FIR and later informed the magistrate that another person, Prem Prakash, had not been made an accused. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC and summoned the accused, leading to charges being framed by the Sessions Judge. Prem Prakash challenged th

RIKHAB BIRANI & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 51216 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Rikhab Birani and Sadhna Birani, entered into an oral agreement to sell a godown for Rs 1.35 crore, which the buyer, Shilpi Gupta, failed to fully pay, leading the sellers to re‑sell the property at a lower price. The buyer subsequently approached the Metropolitan Magistrate to register an FIR alleging

KAMAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2025 INSC 50416 April 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellants, comprising a husband and his parents-in-law, sought to quash an FIR filed by the wife shortly after divorce proceedings were initiated, alleging offences under Sections 498-A and 114 of the IPC. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the allegations, however vague, would be tested at trial.

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

2021 INSC 25716 April 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu under Article 32, examined the massive backlog of cases filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was impeding the disposal of other criminal matters. After hearing the Amicus Curiae, the Solicitor General, the Reserve Bank of India and various state repre

MANJU DEVIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2019 INSC 53816 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, mother of a woman who died in Nigeria, sought to summon Dr. I. Yusuf, the pathologist who performed the first post‑mortem, under Section 311 of the CrPC, either through the Nigerian High Commission or by video‑conferencing. The trial court rejected the application, citing the case's long pendency, and th

NAVANEETHAKRISHNANversusTHE STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2018 INSC 34316 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of a driver, John Bosco, and his companion Madhan, based largely on circumstantial evidence, including the testimony of a taxi driver who claimed to have last seen the accused with the victims, a retracted confession by one accused, and the recovery of a mobile phone and cam

ASHWANI KUMAR @ ASHU & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2015 INSC 32716 April 2015Disposed off

The case involved the murder and kidnapping of Jaswinder Kaur (Jassi) and the assault on her husband Sukhwinder Singh. The prosecution alleged that Ashwani Kumar, Anil Kumar, Joginder Singh, and others conspired to kill Jassi because her marriage was opposed by her family. The trial court convicted seven accused, inclu

BIVASH CHANDRA DEBNATH @ BIVASH D & OTHERSversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 29716 April 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Ajit Nath during a dispute over land excavation, with the trial court finding them guilty under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The Supreme Court examined whether an unlawful assembly of at least five persons existed, given that 27 co‑accused were acquitted,

KIRITI PALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 32916 April 2015Disposed off

Kiriti Pal was accused of murdering Anjali Goswami, a widow who was last seen alive with him on the evening of 11 November 2008 before being found dead the next morning in a jungle 25 km away. The trial court convicted Pal and three co‑accused (Siddique Mia, Mustaque Mia, and Durga Sutradhar) under sections 302, 120B,

VINAY&ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA&ANR.

2015 INSC 32816 April 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellants, brothers of the complainant, were convicted for assaulting the complainant and his associates with sickles and talwars, causing grievous injuries. The trial court sentenced them under Sections 307 and 427 IPC read with Section 34, which the High Court modified to Section 326 IPC with reduced imprisonmen

SHAMIM SANOversusASRAF KHAN

2014 INSC 28216 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Shamim Bano, a Muslim wife, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for maintenance before her divorce. While the application was pending, the divorce was finalized on 5 May 1997, after which she also filed an application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 27816 April 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of seven accused under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Prabhu Dayal. The appellants argued that the FIR was unduly delayed, that there was no proof that Om Prakash ran over the victim with a tractor, and that no specific ove

DILIPversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2013 INSC 25916 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant was convicted for raping a girl who was later found to be 14 years old at the time of the offence. The trial court had acquitted him on the basis that the girl was not below 16 years and had allegedly consented, but the High Court reversed this finding and sentenced him to seven years imprisonment. On app

BHOLA MAHTOversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 25716 March 2026Case Partly allowed

Bhola Mahto was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC in 2002 and appealed the conviction in 2003. The appeal remained pending for over two decades while he was on bail, and when it was finally listed, no counsel appeared on his behalf, prompting the High Court to appoint an amicus curiae without informing the appe

PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2025 INSC 35016 March 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a retired IAS officer, challenged the registration of multiple FIRs relating to alleged land allotment irregularities during his tenure as Collector of Kachchh. He sought a writ of mandamus directing the police to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering any further FIRs, relying on Lalita Kumari

VISHNOO MITTALversusM/S SHAKTI TRADING COMPANY

2025 INSC 34616 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former director of a corporate debtor, was served a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoured cheques drawn before the commencement of insolvency proceedings. While the insolvency process and a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC were imposed on 25 July 2018, the dem

PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR.

2025 INSC 34916 March 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a former collector, was charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) for alleged financial transactions involving proceeds of crime arising from land allotments, bribery and hawala. He sought discharge at the pre‑trial stage, arguing that the PMLA could not be applied retrospectively

NAHAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 31416 March 2022Dismissed

The victim of a rape alleged that, besides the two persons named in the FIR, a third individual, Nahar Singh, participated in the offence; his name appeared only in the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, taking cognizance of the offence under Section 190(1)(b) of t

SRI RAMESHWAR YADAV & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2018 INSC 23916 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent lodged a complaint under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband and his parents. The accused filed an application under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking exemption from personal appearance, citing the 1,750 km distance between their resi

TARAMANI PARAKHversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2015 INSC 22116 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Taramani Parakh, filed a criminal complaint under Sections 498A and 34 IPC alleging dowry harassment and cruelty by her husband and his parents. The husband and his parents moved the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the proceedings, claiming the allegations were vague, omnibus and amount

RAMDEV FOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2015 INSC 21816 March 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Ramdev Food Products, complained that accused partners had forged partnership documents and sought a direction under CrPC s.156(3) for police investigation. The magistrate instead ordered a report under s.202(1), deeming the matter primarily civil and lacking clear material for a cognizable offence. The

R. DINESHKUMAR @ DEENAversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE & OTHERS

2015 INSC 22216 March 2015Disposed off

The appellant, one of seven accused in a murder case, sought to have PW64, a prosecution witness who had earlier given statements implicating himself in the conspiracy, summoned as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that PW64’s testimony was protected b

N. MANOGAR & ANR.versusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS.

2024 INSC 13016 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed an application under Sections 216 and 319 of the CrPC seeking the summoning and impleadment of two appellants as accused in a case involving offences under Sections 452, 294(b), 323 and 506(1) IPC. The trial court rejected the application, finding no sufficient evidence against the appellants, but

KRISHNAMURTHY @ GUNODU AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2022 INSC 19016 February 2022Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Venkatarama, where Krishnamurthy, Gopala and Thimmappa were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Evidence showed Krishnamurthy brutally assaulted the victim after he fell, causing fatal injuries, establishing his liability for murder. The Court held that Gopala

T. A. KATHIRU KUNJUversusJACOB MATHAI & ANR.

2017 INSC 126516 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an advocate, was charged by his client for failing to return a cheque handed over for filing a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and for not obtaining an acknowledgment of its return. The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India found him guilty of gross neg

AJAY KUMAR CHOUDHARYversusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ANR.

2015 INSC 12016 February 2015Disposed off

Ajay Kumar Choudhary, a Defence Estate Officer, was suspended on 30 September 2011 for allegedly issuing incorrect NOCs on land records. The suspension was extended four times, totalling several years, without a charge sheet for most of the period. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) directed that the suspension

OM PRAKASH AMBADKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 13916 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a police officer, was ordered by a Judicial Magistrate to register an FIR under Sections 323, 294, 500, 504 and 506 IPC after a complainant filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC alleging humiliation and assault. The Magistrate, relying on the complainant’s narrative, directed police investigatio

IRFAN ALIAS BHAYU MEVATIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 15016 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Irfan and Asif Mevati were convicted of kidnapping, rape, and related offences and sentenced to death based largely on a DNA profiling report (Exhibit‑157). The trial court and the High Court relied on the report without examining any of the scientific experts who prepared it, and the appellants were giv

RAKESH KUMAR RAGHUVANSHIversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 9616 January 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Rakesh Kumar Raghuvanshi, was intercepted on a train carrying three cartons later found to contain 50 kg of opium poppy husk. He claimed he was unaware of the cartons and had only complied with police directions to exit the coach. The trial court, relying on the seizure and the appellant's inability to e

VIJAY @ VIJAYAKUMARversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2025 INSC 9016 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant Vijayakumar, together with friends, was returning from a movie late at night when they encountered the deceased, who was allegedly drunk and slapped the appellant. In a sudden altercation, the appellant picked up a cement brick and struck the deceased on the head, causing death, and later set the body on

NARA CHANDRABABU NAIDUversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 4116 January 2024Matter referred to larger bench

The former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, N. Chandrababu Naidu, was added as accused No.37 in FIR No.29/2021 alleging massive misappropriation of funds related to skill development projects, invoking offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the IPC. He sought quashing of the FIR and the remand order

BIMLA TIWARIversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 4516 January 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, Bimla Tiwari (informant), challenged a Patna High Court order that granted pre‑arrest bail to the accused in a dowry‑related case (IPC §§406, 420; Dowry Act §§3, 4) subject to the accused’s payment of Rs 75,000. The Supreme Court examined whether bail can be conditioned on monetary payment and whether

THE STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusT. GANGI REDDY @ YERRA GANGI REDDY

2023 INSC 4416 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the CBI, sought cancellation of the default bail granted to T. Gangi Reddy under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. after the CBI filed a chargesheet for the murder of former MLA Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy. The High Court dismissed the application, holding that bail granted on default could not be canc

SANJAYSINH RAMRAO CHAVANversusDATTATRAY GULABRAO PHALKE AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 4816 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved an alleged bribe demand recorded during a police‑run trap under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The investigating officer submitted a closure report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC, which the magistrate accepted, finding no case against the appellant, Sanjaysinh Ramrao Chavan. The High Court,

NAGARAJA RAOversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2015 INSC 95416 January 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a postal sorting assistant, was convicted of theft of a registered insured parcel containing a gold chain under Section 381 IPC and of a breach of duty under Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act. Both offences arose from the same incident and were tried together, resulting in separate six‑month simpl

KM. HEMA MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 3116 January 2014Dismissed

The appellant, KM Hema Mishra, was named in an FIR under Sections 419 and 420 IPC and sought quashing of the FIR and pre‑arrest protection by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court dismissed the petition, refusing to grant anticipatory bail because Section 438 of the CrPC, which pr

VARINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2014 INSC 3316 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a visitor to a central prison in Punjab, was searched and found carrying a mobile phone and charger, leading to an FIR under Sections 42 and 45 of the Prisons Act, 1894. The High Court dismissed his petition under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the FIR, holding that the possession of the phone indicate

C. SHAKUNTHALA & ORS.versusH.P. UDAYAKUMAR & ANR.

2012 INSC 2816 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, children and legal representatives of the deceased landlord, filed a contempt petition under Section 11(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that the respondents had abused the process of the court by filing a second application in execution proceedings. The High Court Division Bench on 9 Ju

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusSANDIP OMPRAKASH GUPTA

2022 INSC 128815 December 2022Disposed off

The State of Gujarat appealed against the High Court’s order granting bail to Sandip Omprakash Gupta under the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 (the 2015 Act). The key issue was whether an FIR under the 2015 Act could be maintained when no FIR had been registered against the accused after the

JAIKAM KHANversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 89615 December 2021Disposed off

Six members of a family were murdered in a house on 23 January 2014. The prosecution relied primarily on the ocular testimony of two interested witnesses, PW‑1 (Ali Sher Khan) and PW‑2 (Jaan Mohammad), who were closely related to both the deceased and the accused. The Supreme Court held that because the witnesses were

SMT. S. VANITHAversusTHE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT & ORS.

2020 INSC 70115 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Smt. S. Vanitha, sought to remain in a house that she claimed was her matrimonial home and a "shared household" under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act). Her parents‑in‑law, invoking the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Senior Citizens Act

TEESTA ATUL SETALVADversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2017 INSC 123915 December 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the police could lawfully freeze the bank accounts of Teesta Atul Setalvad, Javed Anand and related trusts under Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) without prior notice to the account holders. The investigation, stemming from an FIR alleging misappropriation of donation

H.D. SIKAND (D) THROUGH LRS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR.

2016 INSC 114615 December 2016Dismissed

The case concerned the death of Kishan Sikand, who was killed by a parcel bomb on 2 October 1982. The prosecution alleged that Lt. Col. S.J. Chaudhary, the ex‑husband of Rani Chaudhary, manufactured the bomb out of motive to prevent her living with Sikand. The trial court convicted Chaudhary under Section 302 IPC and S

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusSANJAY KUMAR @ SUNNY

2016 INSC 114915 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Sanjay Kumar, the paternal uncle of a nine‑year‑old girl, who was convicted by a trial court for raping the girl under IPC s.376(2)(j) and for criminal intimidation under s.506. The High Court set aside the conviction, relying on the three‑year delay in filing the

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.versusBRIJLAL SADASUKH MODANI

2015 INSC 104315 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Brijlal Sadashuk Modani, was a senior employee of Osmanabad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd., a multi‑state cooperative bank. While in service he received notices from the Anti‑Corruption Bureau demanding details of his assets, which he contested on the ground that the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA)

ANAND KUMAR MOHATTA AND ANR.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) DEPARTMENT OF HOME AND ANR.

2018 INSC 106015 November 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

Anand Kumar Mohatta and his wife entered into a 1993 development agreement with Ansal Properties, under which the developer deposited Rs.1 crore as a security to be refunded upon handing over possession. The agreement became impossible to perform due to new building regulations, and the Mohattas retained the security w

CHIRAG M. PATHAK & ORS. ETC.ETC.versusDOLLYBEN KANTILAL & ORS.

2017 INSC 111415 November 2017Disposed off

Six FIRs were lodged in different police stations in Gujarat against five cooperative housing societies and the accused family members for alleged offences under the IPC. The accused filed criminal applications under Section 482 of the CrPC in the Gujarat High Court, which quashed five of the FIRs on the ground that th

SATISH CHANDER AHUJAversusSNEHA AHUJA

2020 INSC 59915 October 2020Dismissed

Satish Chander Ahuja, the father‑in‑law, owned a house in New Delhi and sued his daughter‑in‑law Sneha Ahuja for mandatory and permanent injunction to remove her from the first floor. Sneha had earlier filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, obtaining an interi

SARAVANANversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2020 INSC 60015 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Saravanan, was arrested for an offence under Section 420 IPC and remanded to judicial custody. He obtained regular bail under Section 437 CrPC on the condition that his wife would deposit Rs.7,00,000, a condition he failed to fulfil. After more than 101 days in jail without a charge‑sheet, he applied for

G H STATE OF PUNJABversusBALJINDER SINGH & ANR.

2019 INSC 114515 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State prosecuted Baljinder Singh, the driver of a vehicle, and Khushi Khan, his companion, for possession of poppy husk under Section 15 of the NDPS Act after police stopped their vehicle and recovered seven bags of poppy husk weighing 34 kg each. The accused were personally searched after arrest, but the search wa

K.A. KOTRAPPA REDDY AND ANR.versusRAYARA MANJUNATHA REDDY@N.R. MANJUNATHA & ORS.

2015 INSC 77615 October 2015Dismissed

The case arose from a quarrel on 13 September 2005 between the President of Nandigavi Village Panchayat and several villagers over alleged road‑repair work, which led to the formation of an unlawful assembly that beat the deceased to death. The accused were charged under multiple IPC sections including murder, unlawful

KRISHIKA LULLA & ORS.versusSHYAM VITHALRAO DEVKATIA & ANR.

2015 INSC 78115 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta filed a criminal complaint under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 alleging that the film "Desi Boyz" infringed the copyright in the title of his story synopsis "Desi Boys". The accused filed applications under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the complaint; the Bombay High Court dismissed

KHUMBARAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 103215 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Khumbha Ram, sought to challenge the acquittal of his daughter’s husband and others for the death of his daughter Kamla, which occurred within seven years of marriage and was alleged to involve dowry harassment. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding insufficient evidence of harassment and no med

KAILAS S/O BAJIRAO PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 111715 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kailas and co-accused were convicted under the NDNDPS Act for possession of 39 kg of ganja seized during a police raid, with the trial court relying on a video recording of the raid and a chemical examiner's report. The High Court set aside the convictions and ordered a re‑trial, holding that the video wa

YASHPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR

2022 INSC 96615 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Yashpal Singh alleged that a land dispute led the accused, including respondent No.2 Mehtab, to drive a tractor over standing crops and attack him and his family, resulting in the death of his brother and serious injuries to others. The FIR named the accused and they were arrested; the trial court denied

ABHILASHAversusPARKASH & ORS.

2020 INSC 54615 September 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Abhilasha, a Hindu daughter, challenged a lower court order that limited her maintenance from her father, Parkash, to the period until she attained majority, arguing that under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 she could claim maintenance until she marries. The Supreme Court

JEET RAMversusTHE NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, CHANDIGARH

2020 INSC 54515 September 2020Case Partly allowed

The appellant Jeet Ram was charged under Section 20 of the NDPS Act for possession of 13 kg of charas seized from a dhaba he managed. The trial court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution lacked independent witnesses, that Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not complied with, and that the evidence of possession was u

RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONSversusI.A. NO. 68248 OF 2017

2017 INSC 95515 September 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a public‑interest writ petition (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013) on the inhuman conditions in 1,382 Indian prisons, examined the high incidence of unnatural deaths, especially suicides, in custodial settings. Relying on the International Committee of the Red Cross guidelines, the Court

RATANLALversusPRAHLAD JAT & ORS.

2017 INSC 95415 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a murder trial where the charge sheet under IPC sections 302, 201, 342 and 120B was filed against two accused. Twenty‑eight witnesses, including PW4 (Sawarmal) and PW5 (Chandri), had given statements that supported the prosecution. After about fourteen months, PW4 and PW5 filed applications under Se

STATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCHversusR. VASANTHI STANLEY &ANR.

2015 INSC 102215 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the Inspector of Police (Central Crime Branch), appealed against the Madras High Court's order quashing criminal proceedings against R. Vasanti Stanley and her husband for allegedly forging documents to obtain loans from several banks. The High Court had set aside the charges on the basis that

ABDUL BASIT @ RAJU & ORS. ETC.versusMD. ABDUL KADIR CHAUDHARY & ANR.

2014 INSC 100515 September 2014Disposed off

The petitioners were granted bail by the Gauhati High Court under the default bail provision of Section 167(2) CrPC. The respondent sought cancellation of that bail alleging misrepresentation and that the direction to the CID under Section 173(8) did not render the charge‑sheet infructuous. The High Court entertained a

SRI SAMBHU DAS @ BIJOY DAS & ANR.versusSTATE OF ASSAM

2010 INSC 61315 September 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC based primarily on the testimony of the deceased's wife, corroborated by the investigating officer and a post‑mortem report. They challenged the conviction on several grounds, including that the FIR was lodged after the inquest report and ther

M/S. SUSHI LA CHEMICALS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.versusBHARAT COKING COAL LTD. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 61415 September 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals by M/s. Sushi La Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and another appellant challenging the suspension of coal supplies by Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL) under a Fuel Supply Agreement (FSA). The suspension was based on a CBI FIR alleging that the appellants were diverting allotted coal to the open ma

SURENDERA PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 61615 September 2010Case Allowed

Surendra Pratap Singh filed an FIR alleging that his brother was murdered by four persons, including MLA Brijesh Mishra. While three accused were arrested, the MLA evaded arrest and later secured a transfer of the investigation to the CBI, after which the Uttar Pradesh government withdrew eight cases against him. The p

PRADEEP BHARDWAJversusPRIYA

2025 INSC 85215 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty, but the Family Court dismissed it and the High Court upheld that dismissal. The parties had been living separately since October 2009, amounting to over sixteen years of estrangement, and the appellant

G. MOHANDASversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS

2025 INSC 85415 July 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a building owner, conspired with officials of the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation and an architect to obtain a spurious renovation permit and then demolish an existing structure to erect a four‑storeyed commercial building in a zone where such construction is prohibited. A vigilance enquiry esta

KATTAVELLAI @ DEVAKARversusSTATE OF TAMILNADU

2025 INSC 84515 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death for murder, rape and robbery based on circumstantial evidence, a last‑seen theory, confessions, recovered items and DNA evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether these evidentiary pillars were proved beyond reasonable doubt and whether the investigation complied wit

RAM PRAKASH CHADHAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 52215 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Prakash Chadha, was charged in a custodial death case (FIR No.371/1993) with offences including murder and criminal conspiracy, and he sought discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.PC. The trial court rejected his discharge application, relying on alleged suspicions that he had facilitated the police’

BABA NATARAJAN PRASADversusM. REVATHI

2024 INSC 52315 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, husband of the first accused, filed a private complaint alleging that his wife, while still married to him, contracted a second marriage and bore a child, constituting bigamy under s.494 IPC. The trial court convicted the two accused and sentenced them to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a Rs.2,000

SHAILENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 52915 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a double murder in 1994 for which ten persons were charged under several IPC sections. One accused, Chhote Singh, was elected MLA in 2007 and the trial court allowed his prosecution to be withdrawn under Section 321 CrPC, citing his good public image, while rejecting similar applications of the other

KIRAN JYOT MAINIversusANISH PRAMOD PATEL

2024 INSC 53015 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-wife filed criminal and civil proceedings alleging cruelty, hurt and dowry demands by her husband, leading to multiple interim maintenance orders. After nine years of separation, failed reconciliations and pending litigations, the parties mutually agreed that the marriage was irretrievably broken. The Sup

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusGAURAV VARSHNEY & ANR.

2016 INSC 53515 July 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the directors of Gaurav Agrigenetics Ltd. violated Section 12(1B) of the SEBI Act by operating a collective investment scheme without a registration certificate. It held that Section 12(1B) creates an absolute, mandatory bar for new operators from 25‑Jan‑1995 until they obtain a certi

JOGENDRA YADAV & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR &ANR.

2015 INSC 49615 July 2015Dismissed

The appellants were added as accused under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a murder trial and were later discharged by the trial court under Section 227. The High Court set aside the discharge, prompting a Supreme Court appeal. The Court examined whether a person summoned as an accused under Section 31

C.K. DASEGOWDA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 48815 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a group of ten accused, were charged with offences including voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC, among other sections. The trial court acquitted them, finding reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses and lack of corrobo

BHUWAN MOHAN SINGHversusMEENA & ORS.

2014 INSC 49015 July 2014Dismissed

The husband appealed against a High Court order directing that maintenance to his wife and child be payable from the date of the application under Section 125 of the CrPC, rather than from the date of the Family Court's order. The Supreme Court observed that the wife’s application had remained pending for nine years du

STATE OF A.P.versusGOURISHETIY MAHESH & ORS.

2010 INSC 40515 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed against the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s order quashing a criminal proceeding for the alleged transport of 5,040 kg of black jaggery intended for illicit liquor production. The police seized the jaggery, and a chemical examiner reported it was fit for fermentation producing alcohol u

SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENTversusKAMTA PRASAD MISHRA AND OTHERS

2026 INSC 64415 June 2026Dismissed

The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, constituted under the 1947 Act to investigate corruption‑related offences, was directed by the High Court to disclose information sought by a Town Inspector under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI). The appellant argued that a 2011 State Government notific

A. SRINIVASULUversusTHE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 97115 June 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved senior officials of BHEL and private individuals accused of conspiring to award a contract for a desalination plant through a restricted tender, allegedly causing a loss of Rs.4.32 crore to the PSU. The prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of an approver who had been granted pardon under Sectio

ROHIT CHATURVEDIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

2026 INSC 49015 May 2026Disposed off

The petitioner, Rohit Chaturvedi, was convicted for murder under Sections 120B and 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2007. After serving more than twenty‑two years, he sought premature release, which was recommended by the Uttarakhand State Government but rejected by the Ministry of Home Affairs in a letter

VIRENDER PAL @ VIPINversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 71015 May 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Virender Pal, was convicted under Section 304‑B of the IPC for the dowry death of his wife, Punita, who allegedly died after being harassed for dowry demands. The prosecution presented testimony that the husband and his relatives repeatedly demanded money, subjected the victim to physical and mental crue

C. SUBBIAH @ KADAMBUR JAYARAJ AND OTHERSversusTHE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 41615 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a government teacher, alleged that the accused induced him to invest in benami land deals and later failed to deliver the promised plots and profits, leading him to file both a civil suit and a criminal FIR. The accused sought quashing of the FIR and charge sheet, arguing that the dispute was purely ci

PRABIR PURKAYASTHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2024 INSC 41415 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on 3 October 2023 without the arrest memo containing the specific grounds of arrest, only generic reasons. He was presented before a Remand Judge on 4 October 2023 and remanded to police custody, but the copy of the remand application and

KHURSHID AHMEDversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

2018 INSC 51815 May 2018Dismissed

The appellant, Khurshid Ahmed, was accused of assaulting Arshad Sajad with an iron rod, causing a fatal head injury. The victim’s father (PW‑9) testified that the assault stemmed from a payment dispute in which the accused acted as guarantor. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the sole eyewitness testimony

RUPINDER SINGH SANDHUversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS

2018 INSC 51415 May 2018Disposed off

In 1988 a road‑rage incident in Patiala resulted in the death of Gurnam Singh after alleged fist blows by Navjot Singh Sidhu (A‑1). Rupinder Singh Sandhu (A‑2) was also alleged to have been present. The Sessions Court acquitted both accused; the Punjab & Haryana High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting them under

SELVIversusGOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR (D) THR. LRS. AND ORS.

2018 INSC 51315 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a suit for redemption of mortgaged lands where the plaintiffs sought partition of the mortgaged properties. The second defendant, Gopalakrishnan Nair, claimed ownership of an adjoining parcel identified as old Survey No. 988 and repeatedly objected that it should be excluded from the suit property. T

RANJEET KUMAR RAM@ RANJEET KUMAR DASversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2015 INSC 42615 May 2015Disposed off

The case involved the kidnapping of a five‑year‑old boy, Vicky, for ransom and his subsequent murder. The child’s sister, a seven‑year‑old witness, identified the primary kidnappers (A‑3 and A‑5) and testified consistently, while the father’s testimony corroborated her account. The Supreme Court held that the child’s t

SHABNAMversusSTATE OF U. P.

2015 INSC 99915 May 2015Dismissed

The appellants, Shabnam and Saleem, were convicted under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the pre‑planned murder of seven members of Shabnam's family, including a ten‑month‑old infant. The trial court sentenced them to death, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the case qual

SHYAM NARAINversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2013 INSC 34515 May 2013Dismissed

Shyam Narain was convicted under IPC s.376(2)(f) for raping an eight‑year‑old girl. The trial court relied on the child's testimony, corroborating medical evidence of genital injuries, and the accused's conduct, and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Delhi High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. On appeal

SURESH KUMAR AGARWALversusM/S HALDIA STEELS LIMITED & ANR

2025 INSC 63615 April 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, Suresh Kumar Agarwal, was accused by M/s Haldia Steels Ltd. of fraud and criminal misappropriation relating to a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the transfer of a mining lease and share transfer. The complaint, filed six years after the alleged breach, alleged that an advance of Rs.50 lakh was paid

SUSHILA & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2025 INSC 50515 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who are relatives of a husband, were summoned in a complaint under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and Dowry Act s.4 after the husband’s marriage had been dissolved by an ex‑parte divorce decree on 31‑05‑2012. The complaint, filed three years after the divorce, alleged that the appellants had visited t

S.C. GARGversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 49315 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.C. Garg, Managing Director of Ruchira Papers Ltd., was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating respondent R.N. Tyagi after the parties had already resolved a dispute over seven dishonoured cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The earlier NI Act case resulted in Tyag

MD. ALLAUDDIN KHANversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2019 INSC 53115 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a criminal complaint under Sections 323, 327, 379 read with Section 34 of the IPC alleging assault and theft by the respondents, who were also parties to a pending civil landlord‑tenant dispute. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the complaint, but the High Court quashed it on the ground tha

K. ANBAZHAGANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA& ORS.

2015 INSC 32315 April 2015Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined whether a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) appointed under s.24(8) CrPC to conduct the trial of a corruption case transferred from Tamil Nadu to Karnataka could continue to represent the prosecution in the appeals before the Karnataka High Court. The Court considered the scope of s.301(1) CrPC

PRASAD SHRIKANT PUROHITversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR

2015 INSC 32515 April 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) applied to a series of bomb blasts in Parbhani (2003), Jalna (2004) and Malegaon (2008) and whether bail could be denied under Section 21(4) of MCOCA. It held that cognizance of an offence taken by a Judicial Magistrate under Sect

RAKESH RANJAN SHRIVASTAVAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2024 INSC 20515 March 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant was ordered by a Judicial Magistrate to deposit Rs.10,00,000 as interim compensation under s.143A(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a complaint under s.138 for a dishonoured cheque. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that s.143A(1) uses the word "may" and is therefore discretionary, not man

SUSELA PADMAVATHY AMMAversusM/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED

2024 INSC 20615 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Bharti Airtel Ltd. filed complaints under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Fibtel Telecom Solutions and its two directors, Manju Sukumaran Lalitha and Susela Padmavathy Amma, after several post‑dated cheques were dishonoured. The appellant, Susela, a director but not the authorized signato

SHANKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 23415 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Rahul Pundlik Meshram was last seen with the accused at the house of PW‑8 and later found dead with multiple stab wounds. The trial court convicted the three surviving accused under IPC sections 302 and 34 based solely on circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory, recovery of a weapon, and

S. ATHILAKSHMIversusTHE STATE REP. BY THE DRUGS INSPECTOR

2023 INSC 23715 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. S. Athilakshmi, a registered medical practitioner and associate professor of dermatology, was inspected by a Drugs Inspector who seized a small quantity of lotions and ointments from her private practice premises. The Inspector alleged that she had "stocked" and sold the drugs without a valid licence, invoking Sect

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