Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Penal Code, 1860

6,144 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 3,401–3,600.

STATE OF U.P.versusRAMESH PRASAD MISRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 88113 August 1996Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the murder of Urmila Devi, aged 19, who was strangulated and her body subsequently burnt. The trial court convicted her husband, Ramesh Prasad Misra, under IPC sections 302, 201 and 498‑A and sentenced him to death, while his mother was convicted under sections 201 and 498‑A; the Allahabad High Court

CHHETRIYA PARDUSHAN MUKTI SANGHARSH SAMITIversusSTATE OF U.P AND ORS.

1990 INSC 23013 August 1990Dismissed

The Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti Sangharsh Samiti filed a letter alleging that an oil mill and a refinery in the Sarnath area were causing severe air and water pollution, leading to health hazards and ecological damage, and treated the letter as a writ petition under Article 32. The respondents, including the State of U.P

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusLALLOO & OTHERS.

1985 INSC 17413 August 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh charged Laloo and three others with the murder of Babu Jaleshwar Singh on 24 September 1974. The prosecution relied on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses (PW1‑3), corroborative statements of PW5 and PW6, medical evidence of a fatal neck wound, and a First Information Report (FIR) prepared b

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusSURENDER KOTIANKAR

1984 INSC 13913 August 1984Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed to the Supreme Court under Article 136 for special leave to challenge the Karnataka High Court's dismissal of its appeals against the conviction of Surender Kotiankar under Sections 408 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court had rejected the State's request for enhanced senten

SAGARversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2026 INSC 69213 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a minor of 16½ years at the time, was charged with murder (IPC s.302) and related offences. The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) conducted a preliminary assessment under JJ Act 2015 s.15 and ordered that the case be transferred to the Children’s Court as an adult trial under s.18(3). The Children’s Court tri

MATHEW ALEXANDERversusMOHAMMED SHAFI AND ANR.

2023 INSC 62113 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's son was driving a Maruti Alto that collided with a gas tanker lorry, killing him and five passengers. The police filed an FIR under IPC sections 279 and 304A, but the charges against the son abated due to his death. After a further investigation, the police submitted a final report stating the accident

RAKESH KUMAR & ETC. ETC.versusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 52513 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a fatal road accident in 2008 where a three-wheeler was struck by a truck. The victims' representatives filed claims under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the truck's owner, driver, and insurer. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held the insurer liable, finding that the truck driver p

AJAY KUMAR SINGHversusTHE FLAG OFFICER COMMANDING-IN-CHIEF & ORS.

2016 INSC 52213 July 2016Dismissed

Three naval personnel (AK Singh, UK Singh and DK Singh) were accused of a bank robbery at the Andhra Bank counter in INS Virbahu. The Court Martial convicted AK and UK, dismissing them with disgrace, while the Armed Forces Tribunal later affirmed their convictions based on eyewitness testimony of the bank manager (PW‑1

VIJAY MALLYAversusENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, MIN. OF FINANCE

2015 INSC 49313 July 2015Dismissed

Vijay Mallya, Chairman of United Breweries Ltd., was summoned under Section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) to appear before the Enforcement Directorate regarding alleged violations of foreign exchange rules in a Benetton advertising agreement. He failed to appear on several summons, leading to a

SAYAJI HANMANT BANKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2011 INSC 48813 July 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Sayaji Hanmat Sankar, returned home intoxicated and, during a sudden quarrel, struck his wife with a brass pot and threw a burning kerosene lamp at her, causing severe burns. The victim, wearing a nylon sari, caught fire and later died; her dying declaration stated that the accused attempted to douse the

MUSTKEEM @ SIRAJUDEENversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2011 INSC 48713 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Mustkeem, Nandu and Arun were convicted for the murder of Ram Pal Yadav under IPC s.302/34 and the Arms Act based largely on circumstantial evidence, hostile eyewitnesses, and weapons recovered after the accused’s disclosure. The Supreme Court found that key witnesses had turned hostile, statements were ret

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusANNEGOWDA

2006 INSC 42513 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka filed an appeal against a High Court order that allowed the accused, Annegowda, to defer the recording of his statement under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) until the trials of ten other related cases were completed. The accused faced eleven charge sheets for alleged misappropr

BHUPINDER SINGH AND ORS.versusJARNAIL SINGH AND ANR.

2006 INSC 42713 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were arrested for a dowry death under Section 304B(8) of the IPC and applied for bail, contending that the police challan had not been filed within the statutory period. The trial magistrate rejected bail, holding that the challan was filed within 90 days, while the Sessions Judge granted bail, interpret

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSALEEM@ CHAMARU AND ANR.

2005 INSC 29113 July 2005Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Saleem@Chamaru and another accused for assaulting a police constable with a knife, invoking IPC sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 333 (voluntarily causing hurt to a public servant). The trial court sentenced them to five years for the 307 charge and four years for the 333 charg

BRIJLALA PD. SINHA ETC .versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1998 INSC 24913 July 1998Disposed off

The case involved six police officers who were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for the killing of three civilians in a purported police encounter. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence, chiefly the testimony of two constables (PW 7 and PW 8), forensic reports and the recovery of the vi

INDERJIT SINGH AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1995 INSC 39613 July 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of several government officers accused of embezzling funds allocated for a rural employment scheme in Punjab. The prosecution relied on the report of a Superintending Engineer, thumb‑impression comparisons, alleged extra‑judicial confessions and circumstantial evidence to prov

A. JAYARAM AND ANR. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH BY CBI

1995 INSC 39713 July 1995Disposed off

The case concerned a large‑scale fraud in which imported fertilisers were allegedly lifted from ports but not delivered to government godowns, with dealers and government officials accused of colluding to obtain false transport‑charge certificates. The trial court acquitted the accused, but the Andhra Pradesh High Cour

SURESH CHANDRA BAHRI ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1994 INSC 24613 July 1994Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Urshia Bahri and her two children, for which Suresh Chandra Bahri, Gurbachan Singh and Raj Pal Sharma were convicted under Sections 302, 120B and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on the testimony of an approver, Ram Sagar Vishwakarma, whose statement was found trustworthy

STATE OF HARYANAversusANGOORI DEVI & ANR.

2019 INSC 69313 June 2019Dismissed

The State of Haryana appealed against the High Court’s order acquitting Angoori Devi and others for the death of Babli, who died from burns within three and a half years of marriage. The prosecution alleged that the in‑laws demanded dowry and subjected the victim to cruelty, culminating in her being set on fire. The tr

STATE OF U. P.versusMOHD .. IQRAM & ANR.

2011 INSC 41313 June 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against the Allahabad High Court’s acquittal of two accused (Mohd Iqram and another) in the murder of Rashmi. Police, on routine patrol, heard shrieks, saw three persons scaling a wall, apprehended two, and were led to the victim who later died of strangulation. The trial court convi

SYED PEDA AOWLIAversusPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF AP., HYDERABAD

2008 INSC 75213 June 2008Dismissed

Five persons were tried for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted all, finding the prosecution’s case unproved. The State appealed under Section 378(1) and (3) of the CrPC. The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the acquittal of four accused but convicted the appellant, Syed

MD. KALAMversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2008 INSC 75313 June 2008Case Partly allowed

The case arose from an FIR lodged by the mother of a six‑year‑old girl alleging that the appellant had taken the child to a secluded place and raped her on 25 November 1997. The trial court and the Patna High Court convicted the appellant under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC and sentenced him to ten years

SHRI SHANKAR PRASAD GHOSH (DEAD)versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2008 INSC 75413 June 2008Disposed off

Shankar Prasad Ghosh was convicted under several provisions of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, and his conviction was upheld by the High Court with altered sentences. He filed a special leave appeal before the Supreme Court, but died while the appeal was pending. Five years after his death, his relatives

HEMCHAND JHAversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2008 INSC 75513 June 2008Dismissed

The appellant Hemchand Jha and two co‑accused approached a jeep at a petrol pump; Kripal Singh fired a pistol, killing Krishna Singh. Hemchand Jha was driving the motorcycle and was present at the scene but did not fire the weapon. He was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. On appeal, he conten

NEHRU @ JAWAHARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2008 INSC 75713 June 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Nehru @ Jawahar, was convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for raping a girl who initially claimed to be 14 years old, later found to be about 16. The appellant argued that the prosecution case was inconsistent because the medical examination was recorded at 9:15 AM while the FIR was lodge

KATTA SURENDERAversusSTATE OF A.P.

2008 INSC 75813 June 2008Case Partly allowed

A dispute over a road between two villages escalated into violence, during which the accused A‑1 stabbed a villager (D‑1) who later died. The accused claimed he acted in private defence. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC (murder) with life imprisonment; the High Court upheld this conviction. On appeal

STATE OF RAJAS THANversusOM PRAKASH

2007 INSC 69313 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the acquittal of Om Prakash, who had been convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC by the trial court based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness who was the younger brother of the deceased. The Rajasthan High Court set aside the conviction, holding that a solitary

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSEWA SINGH

2007 INSC 69513 June 2007Dismissed

The deceased was in police custody and was alleged to have been slapped and kicked on his testicles by the Sub‑Inspector, resulting in his death. The trial court convicted the Sub‑Inspector under Section 304 Part II of the IPC based on the testimony of a witness (PW‑6). The High Court acquitted, finding the witness’s s

TALARI NARESHversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA

2026 INSC 48613 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 323 of the IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act for allegedly killing Shiva Shankar after a dispute arising from an elopement involving the appellant's sister. The prosecution's case relied mainly on the testimony of the victim's mother (an interested

TUKESH SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 68313 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder, attempted murder and related offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 of the IPC based on the testimony of several injured eyewitnesses. The eyewitnesses either knew some of the accused before the incident or did not, but none of them positively identified the accused

VEERENDRAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 56513 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Veerendra, a cousin of the victim’s mother, was found to have raped and strangled to death an eight‑year‑old girl, the daughter of his cousin sister. While in police custody he disclosed the location of the body, which was recovered from a dilapidated building. Post‑mortem and forensic reports confirmed

MEENA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 56813 May 2022Disposed off

The case concerned an appeal by Meena Devi, the wife of a murder victim, against the Allahabad High Court’s order granting bail to the convicted accused, Shivraj Singh alias Lalla Babu, under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court had exercised its discretionary power judiciously,

SURENDRANversusSTATE OF KERELA

2022 INSC 56613 May 2022Dismissed

The appellant was married to the deceased who, within months of marriage, faced severe dowry harassment by him and his family, leading to a first suicide attempt and later a settlement that failed to stop the abuse. The wife eventually committed suicide by hanging, and the husband, his mother, and two brothers were cha

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusUNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW & ORS.

2016 INSC 42713 May 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (criminal defamation) and Section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners argued that criminal defamation infringes the freedom of speech guaranteed under Article

PRAKASH KADAM AND ETC. ETC.versusRAMPRASAD VISHWANATH GUPTA AND ANR.

2011 INSC 39613 May 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of several police officers who had been granted bail by a Sessions Court in a murder case involving a alleged fake police encounter and contract killing. The prosecution alleged that the accused police abducted and murdered the victim, fabricated an encounter, and acted as contract

RUCHI MAJOOversusSANJEEV MAJOO

2011 INSC 39513 May 2011Disposed off

The mother, Ruchi Majoo, filed a petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 seeking interim custody of her 11‑year‑old son who had been residing in Delhi for three years, while the father, Sanjeev Majoo, contested jurisdiction, claiming the child’s ordinary residence was in the United States and invoking the prin

ARUN RAJversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 32013 May 2010Dismissed

The appellant, an army signalman, stabbed a fellow soldier to death with a concealed kitchen knife after alleging verbal abuse. He was tried by a General Court Martial under Section 302 IPC read with Section 69 of the Army Act, convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment and dismissal from service, a sentenc

PURAN CHANDversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 32113 May 2010Dismissed

Santosh, a married woman, died from severe burns after allegedly being set alight with kerosene by her husband, brother‑in‑law (Puran Chand) and aunt‑in‑law. A dying declaration was recorded by a First Class Judicial Magistrate after a doctor certified her mental fitness. The trial court convicted all three under IPC s

S.P. GUPTAversusASHUTOSH GUPTA

2010 INSC 32213 May 2010Dismissed

A criminal complaint under Section 420 read with Section 120‑B IPC was filed by the father of the respondent alleging that the petitioner, S.P. Gupta, as the attorney of accused No.1, misrepresented the ownership of a property, assuring it was free of encumbrances and that accused No.1 was the sole owner. The trial cou

SUCHA SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2009 INSC 80613 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The incident occurred on 16 February 1991 when the deceased Sakander and his brothers were allegedly attacked by appellant Sucha Singh and his accomplice Manga. The prosecution relied on the testimony of the first informant, Gurdev Chand, whose FIR and later supplementary statement contained material contradictions reg

KEKI HORMUSJI GHARDA AND ORS.versusMEHERVAN RUSTOM IRANI AND ANR.

2009 INSC 80213 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a practising advocate, filed a complaint alleging that the construction and tarring of a road by an architect (appellant No.6) at the direction of the managing director and other directors of a company (appellants No.1‑5) caused wrongful restraint to him and his parents in accessing their house. The tri

SUBRAMANIAMversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

2009 INSC 80513 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Subramaniam was charged with murder (s.302 IPC), dowry harassment (s.498A IPC) and a dowry prohibition offence (s.4 DP Act) after his wife was found dead in their home. The trial court acquitted him, but the High Court convicted him for murder, relying on the fact that the couple lived together, the alleg

SANTOSH KUMAR SATISHBHUSHAN BARIYARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 80813 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death, while his co‑accused received life imprisonment. The appellant challenged the legality of the Sessions Judge's grant of pardon to the approver (PW‑1) under Sections 306 and 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and argue

FATMA BIBI AHMED PATELversusSTATE. OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2008 INSC 64513 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a citizen of Mauritius, was served with a summons after a complaint by her daughter‑in‑law alleging physical and mental torture, allegedly committed in Kuwait. All parties were residents of Kuwait and were in India on visitor visas when the complaint was filed. The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizan

NARAYANAMURTHYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.

2008 INSC 64613 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Narayanamurthy was convicted by the Karnataka High Court under Sections 498A and 3048 of the IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife Jagadeshwari. The prosecution alleged that the accused and his parents harassed the deceased for not providing dowry and that she committed suicide by self‑immolation. T

SIRIYA@ SHRI LALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2008 INSC 64713 May 2008Dismissed

The appellant, a father, was convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for raping his minor daughter, with the prosecution relying on three eyewitnesses, medical examination reports, and age verification by X‑ray. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine, a sentence affirmed by the High

RAMACHANDRANversusR. UDHAYAKUMAR & ORS.

2008 INSC 64913 May 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted in a murder case and sought, through a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC, to have the investigation transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation for a fresh probe. The Madras High Court ordered the case to be re‑investigated afresh by the CBI. The appellant challenged this directi

B. NAGABHUSHANAMversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2008 INSC 65013 May 2008Dismissed

The appellant, a bus driver, was prosecuted for causing the death of a seven‑year‑old child by allegedly driving rashly and negligently, offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court convicted him and sentenced him to one year’s simple imprisonment with a fine for 304A and on

TULSIRAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2008 INSC 65113 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 325 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly assaulting two passengers with lethal weapons. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the credibility of the prosecution's key witnesses, noting that the star witness (PW5) was declared hostile and gave inconsistent st

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusAJAY SINHA AND ANOTHER

2008 INSC 65413 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, owners of insured goods, claimed insurance reimbursement after a burglary, which the insurer denied. The dispute was taken to the Permanent Lok Adalat (PLA) under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, despite a pending criminal case for the alleged non‑compoundable offence of burglary. The PLA held

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusBABBU BARKARE @ DALAP SINGH

2005 INSC 28213 May 2005Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the High Court's reduction of a seven‑year rigorous imprisonment awarded to Babbu Barkare @ Dalap Singh for rape under Section 376 IPC to the eleven months already served, on the ground that the accused was an illiterate labourer from a rural area. The Supreme Court held tha

SREE VIJAYAKUMAR AND ANR. ,versusSTATE, BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANYAKUMARI

2005 INSC 28313 May 2005Case Partly allowed

Four brothers were tried for the murder of Rajeswaran by setting him on fire and for the attempted murder of his brother (PW‑1). The prosecution alleged that A‑1 struck Rajeswaran on the head with a bottle, after which A‑2 threw a burning kerosene lamp, causing the victim to catch fire; A‑2 also stabbed PW‑1. The trial

MARY ANGEL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

1999 INSC 25113 May 1999Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by accused A3‑A6 challenging a Madras High Court order that imposed Rs 10,000 costs on each of them for filing a frivolous revision under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The High Court had imposed the costs to deter abuse of process after the appellants suppressed

A.K. SINGH AND ORS.versusUTTARAKHAND JAN MORCHA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 24713 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the Allahabad High Court’s extensive directions issued in the wake of the 1994 Uttarakhand agitation, which ordered massive compensation to victims, large fund allocations for regional development, and pre‑emptive rulings on the need for sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC, the composition

SH. MANI RAM AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UITAR PRADESH

1994 INSC 21113 May 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted of murder and related offences under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code based solely on the testimony of the deceased's brother, an interested witness. The brother claimed the accused fired at the victim from behind while he was running, but the post‑mortem report show

RAMJI SURJYA & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1983 INSC 6913 May 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Ramji Surjya Padvi and Bhikji Surjya Padvi were charged under sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for the murder of Prabhat Singh. The trial court acquitted them, finding the sole eye‑witness, the victim's wife (PW‑2), unreliable due to contradictions, lack of corroboration, a 24‑hour delay in filing the FIR,

ANOSH EKKAversusSTATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2026 INSC 35713 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The former Jharkhand minister Anosh Ekka was convicted in two separate cases arising from the same set of allegations of acquiring disproportionate assets and misusing his office. The High Court rejected his application for suspension of sentence and bail during the pendency of the appeal, prompting a special leave pet

NEEHARIKA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 25313 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt Ltd lodged an FIR alleging forgery and fraud against three respondents under several IPC sections. The respondents filed a petition under Article 226 and Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashment of the FIR and obtained a blanket interim order from the Bombay High Court directing the po

K. K. MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2018 INSC 34113 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

K.K. Mishra, a Congress spokesperson, allegedly made three statements about the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh during a press conference. The State Government sanctioned the public prosecutor to file a complaint under Section 199(2) of the CrPC on the same day, leading to Mishra's conviction under Section 500 IPC for

VANEET MAHAJANversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2017 INSC 127913 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vaneet Mahajan, alleged that he, his brother and an employee were brutally attacked by 10‑12 persons armed with swords, baseball bats and other deadly weapons, allegedly at the behest of a cabinet minister. The attack caused grievous and simple injuries, leading to an FIR and charge‑sheet that included S

SUDHA RENUKAIAH & ORS.versusSTATE OF A. P.

2017 INSC 34713 April 2017Dismissed

The case involved a violent incident in which two persons were killed and an injured witness (PW.5) was assaulted; the trial court acquitted 19 accused, finding inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony and doubting medical evidence. The State appealed, and the High Court convicted the surviving accused, relying on the i

SHELKH SINTHA MADHAR @ JAFFER @ SINTHA ETCversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2016 INSC 31413 April 2016Disposed off

After the Coimbatore serial blasts, a conspiracy by thirteen accused in two groups was hatched to murder Dr. Sridhar, a BJP town secretary. Six accused (A1‑A6) formed one group and attacked the doctor on 2 February 1999, while A7 stood nearby unarmed; the doctor’s daughter (PW I) and neighbour PW 65 witnessed the assau

GANGA DHAR KALITAversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 32113 April 2015Dismissed

The appellant Ganga Dhar Kalita was accused of forging signatures of three persons, including a minor, to execute a power of attorney for the sale of land, leading to an FIR under several IPC sections. The appellant filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quash of the criminal proce

INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHERversusBATIENAPATLA VEN KATA RATNAM AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 31913 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Inspector of Police filed a criminal appeal after the High Court quashed proceedings against several Sub‑Registrars on the ground that no sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) had been obtained. The respondents were alleged to have conspired with stamp vendors and fabricated records to

VIJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2012 INSC 17313 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sub‑Inspector of Uttar Pradesh Police, was ordered to withhold his integrity certificate for 2010 on the ground that he failed to record the past criminal history of an accused in a bailable offence. He challenged the order, arguing that withholding the certificate was not a punishment contemplated und

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2012 INSC 17213 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a 13½‑year‑old girl (appellant) appealed against the trial and High Court orders that allowed the accused, Vijay Kumar (respondent No.2), to be tried as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The courts had relied on school records showing a birth date of 30‑06‑

VEERAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2011 INSC 29713 April 2011Case Partly allowed

The case involved an altercation between two rival groups in which appellant No.1, Veeran, struck the deceased, Daddu, on the head with a gandasa, causing his death, while the other accused inflicted injuries on witnesses. The trial courts convicted all four surviving accused under Section 302/149 (murder) along with S

BABULAL SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATISGARH

2011 INSC 29813 April 2011Dismissed

Babulal Sahu was convicted under Section 302 IPC for strangling his wife Basanti Bai after she refused his demand for sexual intercourse. The appellant argued that the killing fell within Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, which would reduce the offence to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304. The C

M.C. ALI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2010 INSC 20713 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by six accused who had been acquitted by the trial court but later convicted by the High Court for murder, attempted murder and offences under sections 149 and 34 of the IPC. The trial court had found the prosecution's evidence unreliable, noting the darkness of the night, lack of tor

MAHTAB SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2009 INSC 48213 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The accused Mahtab Singh and his son were acquitted by the trial court of murder under s.302 r/w s.34 IPC and of an offence under the Arms Act, on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court reversed the acquittal, relying on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses despit

RAVINDRA KUMAR MADHANLAL GOENKA & ANR.versusM/S. RUGMINI RAM RAGHAV SPINNERS P. LTD.

2009 INSC 48513 April 2009Dismissed

The appellants, commission agents dealing in cotton, were sued by the respondent for criminal breach of trust, cheating, dishonest misappropriation and conspiracy under IPC sections 406, 420, 384 and 120‑B. They filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the criminal proceedings, arguing that the d

RAMA PASWAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2007 INSC 42113 April 2007Dismissed

The case arose from an FIR alleging that the accused raped PW4 on 30 May 1992. After a protracted trial (1994‑2004), the accused sought to recall the victim for further cross‑examination under Section 311 of the CrPC, claiming that the parties had settled the dispute outside court and that the informant could not ident

GOMTIversusTHAKURDAS AND ORS.

2007 INSC 42213 April 2007Case Partly allowed

The complainant appealed against the Allahabad High Court's orders granting bail to five convicted respondents under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, while their appeals against convictions for murder and related offences were pending. The High Court had justified the bail on the ground that the acc

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusSURESH PANDURANG DARVAKAR

2006 INSC 22713 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed against a Bombay High Court order that released convicted rapist Suresh Pandurang Darvakar on furlough. Darvakar, sentenced to seven years for offences under Sections 376 and 354 IPC, applied for furlough but his sister refused to stand surety, and police reports indicated no recommend

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBIRAM LAL

2005 INSC 20713 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Biram Lal for the offence of rape under Section 376 IPC. The trial court had convicted him under Sections 376 and 450 IPC based on the testimony of the prosecutrix and four witnesses. The High Court upheld the conviction for house‑trespass (Section 450) but set aside the

DAROGA SINGH AND ORS.versusB.K. PANDEY

2004 INSC 26313 April 2004Dismissed

The case arose from an incident on 18 November 1997 in Bhagalpur where police officers, not in uniform and armed with lathis, forcibly entered the courtroom and chambers of Additional District and Sessions Judge D.N. Barai, assaulting him, court staff and lawyers while demanding the unconditional release of an investig

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusDEVENDRA SINGH

2004 INSC 26513 April 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Devendra Singh, who was charged under IPC sections 302, 376 and 201 for the rape and murder of a ten‑year‑old girl. The victim was last seen with the accused in his sugarcane field, and her body was later discovered buried there after the accused initially refused a

R.SARALAversusT.S.VELU

2000 INSC 21613 April 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from the suicide of a young bride, Selvi, after which the police investigated and filed a charge‑sheet against her husband and his mother under Sections 304B and 498A IPC. Dissatisfied that the sister‑in‑law and her father were not named, the deceased's father approached the Madras High Court under Secti

AHMED BIN SALEMversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1999 INSC 18113 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of throwing bombs that injured a shopkeeper and caused the deaths of two persons. His name did not appear in the FIR or in the initial police statements recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC, but was later added during trial. The prosecution’s case relied on three eye‑witnesses whose statemen

JASHUBA BHARATSINH GOHIL AND ORS .versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1994 INSC 15313 April 1994Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the murder‑conspiracy case of 20 September 1984 in which twelve persons were tried for offences including murder, unlawful assembly and illegal possession of arms. The trial court convicted all accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment; the Gujarat High Court upheld the convictions, acq

MEESALA RAMAKRISHANversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1994 INSC 15513 April 1994Dismissed

Meesala Ramakrishnan was convicted of murdering his wife by setting her on fire. The principal evidence was the victim's dying declaration, which she could not speak and therefore communicated through nods and gestures recorded by a magistrate. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether such a declaration, made by

HARI SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1993 INSC 15013 April 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved six accused, including Hari Singh, Satbir and Gulbir, who were convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the death of Mange Ram. The trial court and High Court upheld the convictions, but the Supreme Court was asked to consider whether the earlier rejection of Special

ALLAUDDIN MIAN & ORS. SHARIF MIAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1989 INSC 13113 April 1989Case Partly allowed

The appellants, six members of an unlawful assembly, were convicted for the murder of two infant girls while attempting to kill the father, Baharan Mian. The trial court sentenced the two principal assailants (Accused Nos. 1 and 2) to death and the others to life imprisonment, later altering some convictions under Sect

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusDEEPAK

2019 INSC 36013 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The victim, Jyoti Sharma, an employee of Central Bank, alleged repeated harassment by Deepak Bhamawat, including a fraudulent loan taken in her name, termination from her job, and eviction from her residence. She committed suicide by consuming poison and, in her dying declaration, blamed Deepak for her harassment. The

TUKARAM DNYANESHWAR PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2015 INSC 21713 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Dnyaneshwar Patil was attacked by three accused over a field boundary dispute, sustaining fatal injuries; his brother intervened and was also assaulted. The trial court convicted the accused of murder under s.302 IPC read with s.34, but the High Court reduced the conviction to culpable homicide not amounti

KANHAIYA LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2014 INSC 19013 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kanhaiya Lal was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC for the murder of Kala, whose body was recovered from a well belonging to the appellant. The prosecution's case rested on the fact that the deceased and the appellant were last seen together at a neighbour's house and on an alleged motive of

BHAGWAN TUKARAM DANGEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2014 INSC 18813 March 2014Disposed off

The appellant, Bhagwan Tukaram Dange, and his father were convicted of murdering Dange's wife by beating, dousing her with kerosene and setting her on fire while intoxicated. The prosecution's case relied on two dying declarations recorded by a head constable and a special judicial magistrate, both corroborated by the

VIPIN JAISWAL(A-1)versusSTATE OF A.P. REP.BY PUB.PROSECUTOR

2013 INSC 15913 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vipin Jaiswal was convicted under Sections 3048 and 498A of the IPC for the death of his wife, who died from burn injuries. The prosecution alleged that the wife was subjected to cruelty and dowry harassment, citing a demand of Rs.50,000 for a computer six months after marriage. The appellant claimed the

SATYA PALversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2013 INSC 16013 March 2013Dismissed

The appellant was accused of murdering his wife after she resisted repeated dowry demands for a television, fridge and cooler, which were accompanied by beatings and harassment. The trial court acquitted the accused, citing a 51‑hour delay in filing the FIR and inconsistencies in the witnesses' statements. On appeal, t

DINESH BORTHAKURversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2008 INSC 35513 March 2008Case Allowed

The appellant, Dinesh Borthakur, was convicted by the trial court and the High Court for the murder of his wife Mala Borthakur and adopted daughter Munni under Section 302 IPC, based largely on circumstantial evidence such as a sniffer dog’s proximity to him, the presence of a pesticide bottle, and his alleged lack of

KHILARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2008 INSC 35613 March 2008Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the High Court's order granting bail to a convicted murderer (respondent No.2) under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure while his appeal was pending. The conviction was based on three eye‑witnesses and the trial court had held that the injuries could have been caused by iron rods.

P.K. CHOUDHURYversusCOMMANDER, 48 BRTF (GREF)

2008 INSC 36113 March 2008Case Allowed

The appellant, a Commandant of the 48 BRTF (GREF), was alleged to have committed offences under IPC sections 166 and 167 between 5 January 1989 and 11 February 1992. A complaint petition was filed only in November 2000, based on a 1996 report, and the Judicial Magistrate took cognizance on 7 November 2000. The appellan

THUKARAM AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2008 INSC 35113 March 2008Dismissed

The appellants were convicted under Section 304(II) of the Indian Penal Code for murder, based largely on the testimony of witnesses who were relatives of the deceased (PWs 1, 2 and 5). They appealed, arguing that the evidence of these related witnesses should be excluded as biased. The Supreme Court held that a witnes

NAMDEOversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 28313 March 2007Dismissed

Namdeo, who had a long-standing dispute with his neighbour Ninaji over livestock, attacked Ninaji with an axe on the night of 25 October 2000, inflicting a fatal head wound. Ninaji’s son Sopan, who was present in the courtyard, witnessed the assault in electric light, chased the assailant and later gave testimony; a ne

B.S. JOSHI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 17913 March 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The husband and his relatives filed a petition to quash an FIR registered by the wife under Sections 498A, 323 and 406 IPC after the parties had settled their matrimonial dispute and were proceeding towards divorce. The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the offences were non‑compoundabl

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2001 INSC 14213 March 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of Pawan Kumar and co‑accused for abetment of suicide, dowry harassment and related offences under Sections 306, 498A, 201 and 193 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and a statutory presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act, while the defence

ALLAHABAD BANK AND ANR.versusDEEPAK KUMAR BHOLA

1997 INSC 26613 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Allahabad Bank suspended clerk Deepak Kumar Bhola under clause 19.3(a) of the First Bipartite Settlement after a CBI investigation and charge‑sheet alleging forgery, cheating and other offences involving moral turpitude. Bhola challenged the suspension before the Allahabad High Court, which quashed it on the ground tha

RAGHUBIR SINGH AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB ETC.

1996 INSC 37913 March 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Balwant Singh and the assault on Santokh Singh (PW‑6) by five accused who formed an unlawful assembly armed with weapons. The trial court had convicted all five under Section 148 IPC for the assault, while Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh were also convicted under Section 302 I

SMT. PANIBENversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1992 INSC 7813 March 1992Dismissed

The appellant, the mother‑in‑law of the deceased, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly burning her daughter‑in‑law. The prosecution's case rested on four dying declarations made by the victim, three of which identified the appellant as the assailant. The trial court dismissed these statements, de

MANOJversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2026 INSC 15213 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for allegedly possessing and diverting government‑quota cement in 1994. The prosecution relied on the Maharashtra Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973 and the Cement Control Order, 1967, but the Supreme Court

RAMESH A. NAIKAversusTHE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ETC.

2025 INSC 30313 February 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a bank manager, was convicted of murdering his two minor children, his sister‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law in June 2010, motivated by his disapproval of his sister‑in‑law’s relationship. The trial court sentenced him to death, a judgment affirmed by the Karnataka High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court exam

TAPAS KUMAR PALITversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 22213 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was arrested in March 2020 after his vehicle was intercepted and items allegedly linked to Naxalite activities were recovered. He has been in judicial custody for five years, with the trial still ongoing and only 42 of the planned 100 witnesses examined, some of whom have turned hostile. The central issue

VINOD @ NASMULLAversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 22013 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vinod @ Nasmulla was convicted under IPC sections 395 and 397 and Arms Act section 25 for a dacoity involving a bus robbery on 28 September 1993. The prosecution's case rested on a dock identification by a police constable (PW‑9) and the alleged recovery of a country‑made pistol at the time of his arrest,

PADMA MISHRAversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2020 INSC 17913 February 2020Dismissed

The petitioner, Padma Mishra, challenged an FIR (No.179/2009) lodged under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, alleging that she and others used threats, coercion and violence to silence witnesses and were involved in various IPC offences. She filed a writ

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSURENDRA PUNDLIK GADLING & ORS.

2019 INSC 18813 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra sought to detain six accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) beyond the statutory 90‑day period, filing an application for a further 90‑day extension. The respondents claimed default bail, arguing that the public prosecutor’s report did not satisfy the proviso to Section 4

PUNI DEVI & ORS.versusTULSI RAM

2019 INSC 19313 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 379, 427, 447, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly trespassing onto land claimed by the complainant, cutting and stealing wheat, and assaulting him and his family. The trial court, after examining the testimonies of the complainant and his rel

STATE OF M.P.versusMEHTAAB

2015 INSC 11513 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order that reduced the imprisonment of Mehtaab, convicted under IPC sections 304A (causing death by negligence) and 337 (causing hurt), from one year and three months to merely ten days, the period already served. The incident involved Mehtaab laying a naked high‑voltag

BASTIRAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2014 INSC 9713 February 2014Dismissed

The case involved four appellants who, armed with pistols, attacked the complainant’s party, causing three deaths and one injury. They were convicted under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC. On appeal, the appellants argued that one of them, Bastiram, was not present at the scene and that medical (po

SURESH KUMAR BHIKAMCHAND JAINversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2013 INSC 9713 February 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, a former minister and MLA, were arrested for alleged misappropriation of funds and charged under several IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act provisions. Although the charge‑sheet and a supplementary charge‑sheet were filed within the 90‑day period prescribed by Section 167(2) of the CrPC, the prosecut

LIFE CONVICT BENGAL @ KHOKA @ PRASANTA SENversusB.K. SRIVASTAVA & ORS.

2013 INSC 10113 February 2013Dismissed

The petitioner, a life convict sentenced under IPC s.302/34, filed a contempt petition claiming that, having served over 20 years with remission, he was entitled to release under the West Bengal Correctional Services Act and a Supreme Court order. The State of West Bengal, through its Sentence Review Board, declined to

RAM PAL SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2009 INSC 18413 February 2009Dismissed

The incident on 1 October 2006 resulted in the death of Brijesh Kumar Singh and injuries to Manvender Singh. The FIR named Ram Pal Singh, Deepak Singh, Ajai Kumar Singh and Anil Kumar Singh, but they were not listed as accused in the charge‑sheet. During trial, PW‑1 (Kamlesh Singh) identified the appellants as particip

GOPALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 18613 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gopal was charged under Sections 498A and 306 IPC for allegedly subjecting his wife to cruelty that led to her death by asphyxia 22 years after their marriage. The trial court acquitted him on both counts, but the Rajasthan High Court convicted him under Section 498A, holding that the cruelty provision ap

STATE OF M.P.versusABDUL KADIR & ANR.

2009 INSC 18713 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against a High Court judgment that granted Abdul Kadir, a life convict for murder, release on probation under the Madhya Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act, 1954. Although the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police recommended release, the Probation Board rejecte

B. VISHWANATHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2008 INSC 18413 February 2008Appeal(s) allowed

B. Vishwanath was convicted by a trial court for offences under Sections 307, 427 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting his sister‑in‑law and mother with a sickle. He appealed to the Karnataka High Court, which on 1 July 2006 disposed of the appeal without indicating whether it was allowed or dismissed, merel

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusLALIT SOMDATTA NAGPAL AND ANR.

2007 INSC 12913 February 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether offences under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (including those committed during the period of the Essential Commodities (Special Provisions) Act, 1981) fall within the ambit of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA). It held that the 1955 Act’s Section 7 sti

SHIVU AND ANR.versusR.G. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 13613 February 2007Dismissed

The accused were convicted of raping and murdering a young woman, Shivamma, under IPC sections 376 and 302 read with section 34, based solely on circumstantial evidence. The trial court sentenced them to death, which the Karnataka High Court confirmed under Section 366 of the CrPC. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined

NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS & ORS.versusDR. RAJESH KUMAR & ORS.

2020 INSC 3513 January 2020Disposed off

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) took cognizance of media reports of large‑scale child trafficking in Jalpaiguri, West Bengal, and sought information from the state police and the West Bengal Commission for Protection of Child Rights (WBCPCR). The Additional Director General of Police (ADG

STATE OF U.P.versusOM PRAKASH

2015 INSC 2813 January 2015Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted a group of 35 accused for the brutal murder of five villagers and grievous injuries to several others during a Holi celebration, allegedly as revenge for an electoral defeat of the accused's wife. The trial court convicted all accused under Sections 302, 149, 148, 307, 506 IPC and

MADHUversusSTATE OF KERALA

2012 INSC 2713 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Madhu and his co-accused Sibi were convicted for robbery and murder of Padmini Devi based largely on confessional statements to police and circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court held that the confessions were inadmissible because they did not lead to the discovery of any unknown fact, violating Sectio

VIJAY KUMAR ARORAversusSTATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2010 INSC 4013 January 2010Dismissed

Vijay Kumar Arora was convicted of murdering his wife, who died from over 90% burn injuries. The prosecution proved that the death was homicidal, not suicidal or accidental, through medical evidence, the victim’s verbal dying declaration before six witnesses, and evidence of physical and mental cruelty and extra‑marita

UMESH KAMATversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 3313 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Umesh Kamat was convicted under Section 396 IPC for a night dacoity in which an inmate was killed. The conviction rested solely on the testimony of three eyewitnesses (PW1, PW3, PW4) who identified him in a test identification parade held seven weeks after the incident, despite the dacoits wearing masks. The Supreme Co

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBHUP RAM

1997 INSC 1613 January 1997

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Bhup Singh, who was convicted of murdering his wife, Chawli, based on her dying declaration and ballistic evidence. The High Court had set aside the conviction, holding that the dying declaration was invalid because it was recorded in Hindi rather than the Bagri language

STATE OF RAIASTHANversusANI @ HANIF AND ORS.

1997 INSC 1713 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by the State of Rajasthan against the acquittal of six accused in a double murder case. The trial judge had interjected during the cross‑examination of an injured eyewitness (PW‑3) to clarify a confusion, which the High Court held improper. The Supreme Court held that under Section

AMAR SARDARversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2024 INSC 104012 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Amar Sardar was convicted by a Fast Track Court for offences under Sections 376, 511 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment. He appealed to the Calcutta High Court, which upheld the conviction and sentence. The appellant contended that the High Court had merely reiterated the trial cour

CHANDI PULIYAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2022 INSC 127612 December 2022

The appellant was acquitted in 2010 of offences under Sections 148, 149, 448, 364 and 506 IPC arising from FIR No. 61/2002. In 2011 a second FIR was lodged alleging that the appellant and co‑accused caused the death of the informant's father, a matter discovered only after a skeleton was identified. The appellant sough

RAJENDRA PRALHADRAO WASNIKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 119412 December 2018Disposed off

The appellant was convicted of raping and murdering a three‑year‑old girl and was sentenced to death, a sentence confirmed by the High Court and upheld by the Supreme Court. The appellant filed review petitions, which were initially dismissed but later restored after the Supreme Court’s decision in Mohd. Arif alias Ash

KASHMIR KAUR & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2012 INSC 58512 December 2012Dismissed

Kashmir Kaur and another were convicted under Section 3048 IPC (dowry death) read with Section 34 IPC and Section 498A IPC for the death of the deceased woman, which occurred 11 months after her marriage. The prosecution proved that the victim was repeatedly harassed and tortured by her mother‑in‑law, brother‑in‑law an

DEOKI PANJHIYARAversusSHASHI BHUSHAN NARAYAN AZAD & ANR.

2012 INSC 58612 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The husband filed a writ petition challenging the interim maintenance granted to his wife under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, alleging that she was already married to another man, as evidenced by a marriage certificate under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The trial court rejec

DR. MOHAMMAD KHALIL CHISTIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 58412 December 2012Disposed off

The case arose from a 1992 altercation in Ajmer that resulted in the death of Idris and injuries to several persons, leading to two FIRs (cross‑FIRs). The trial court convicted four accused (Yasir, Khalil, Akil and Farukh) under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonmen

VAMAN NARAIN GHIYAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2008 INSC 142012 December 2008Dismissed

Vaman Narain Ghiya, accused of smuggling antiques, was charged under IPC sections 413, 457, 380 and 411. He argued that he should be released on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, relying on the fact that he had obtained bail in six of ten cases, had been in custody for over two and a half

TARSEM SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2008 INSC 142112 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Tarsem Singh was convicted under Section 3048 of the IPC for the death of his wife Amriko, alleged to have been caused by dowry‑related cruelty. The prosecution alleged harassment for insufficient dowry and childlessness, but the FIR and evidence did not show any demand for dowry made "soon before" her death. The Supre

RANGAIAHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2008 INSC 142212 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rangaiah was charged with murder and causing hurt after a quarrel in his village resulted in the death of Maruchhaiah. The trial court acquitted him, finding material discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence, including inconsistencies between the dying declaration and witness testimonies, and noting th

RAVISHWAR MANJHI & ORS.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2008 INSC 142312 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved two cross‑FIRs arising from a violent clash in Simultand village where the deceased Nagender Nath Das was killed and several others injured. The complainant alleged that the accused assaulted him and his relatives, while the accused claimed they acted in self‑defence against the deceased’s alleged att

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2008 INSC 142612 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The incident occurred on 15 August 1979 when Om Prakash and six others, armed with firearms, entered the house of Mewa Ram during a Janamashtami puja and fired shots, resulting in the death of Ram Rakshpal. The trial court convicted all seven accused of murder, but the Allahabad High Court upheld conviction only of Om

KESHAVversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 126712 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Keshav was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly murdering his brother‑in‑law, based on motive, the fact that they were last seen together, an extra‑judicial confession to the victim’s wife, discovery of blood‑stained clothes and a knife. The Supreme Court examined whether these circumstances sati

UMAR MOHAMMAD & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 126812 December 2007Disposed off

The case arose from a night‑time attack on three brothers (Jharmal, Juhru and Mubin) allegedly over a property and personal dispute, in which twelve armed men assaulted the victims, killing the two brothers and injuring Mubin. The prosecution relied on three eyewitnesses, medical autopsy reports and a First Information

GENERAL MANAGER, UCO BANK & ANR.versusM. VENURANGANATH

2007 INSC 127412 December 2007Dismissed

M. Venurangnanath, a branch manager of UCO Bank, was charged with offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act and was acquitted with benefit of doubt. He had been suspended from service during the criminal proceedings and, after reinstatement, faced departmental enquiry which found him guilty, resulting

ALOKE NATH DUTTA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2006 INSC 99112 December 2006Disposed off

The case involved the murder of Biswanath Dutta, allegedly committed by his brother Aloke Nath Dutta to facilitate the sale of family property. Aloke Nath made an extra‑judicial confession admitting to the killing, while co‑accused Mrinal Dutta gave a judicial confession that was later retracted, alleging police tortur

AJAY GOSWAMIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 99512 December 2006Dismissed

Ajay Goswami filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking court‑issued guidelines for newspapers to prevent minors from being exposed to sexually explicit material, and to set up a committee for regulating such content. The petition argued that existing statutes were inadequate to protect children. The Supreme Court

BABLU @ MUBARIK HUSSAINversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2006 INSC 99812 December 2006Dismissed

The appellant, Bablu (Mubarik Hussain), was convicted of murdering his wife, three minor daughters and a minor son by strangulation. The trial court relied on an extrajudicial confession, the appellant's presence at the crime scene and the recovery of the wife's earring to uphold a conviction under Section 302 IPC and

SUSHIL MURMUversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2003 INSC 70812 December 2003Dismissed

The appellant, Sushil Murmu, a tribal and illiterate man, sacrificed a nine‑year‑old child before Goddess Kali, severed the child's head and disposed of it in a pond. He was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to death for murder and seven years’ rigorous imprisonment for the oth

ARUN PASWAN, S.I.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2003 INSC 71012 December 2003Dismissed

The District and Sessions Judge of Sasaram ordered a police officer, S.I. Arun Paswan, to produce a case diary, which he failed to do, leading to a show‑cause notice under Section 349 CrPC. While the judge was hearing another matter, a group of police officers in plain clothes and uniform shouted abusive slogans outsid

PRAKASH DHAWAL KHAIRNAR (PATIL)versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2001 INSC 60612 December 2001Disposed off

The case involved a dispute over agricultural land that led Prakash Dhawal Khairnar (Patil) to murder his brother, mother, sister‑in‑law and five other relatives. The prosecution relied on strong circumstantial evidence—motive, blood‑stained clothing, a shoulder injury, eyewitness identification, and the confessional s

PIPAL SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2000 INSC 58912 December 2000Dismissed

Pipal Singh and Mukhtiar Singh were convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34, along with several others, for causing two fatal injuries to the deceased. Some co‑accused were acquitted. On appeal, the appellants argued that the acquittal of other accused barred their conviction under Section 302 wi

STATE OF U.P.versusZAKAULLAH

1997 INSC 81412 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State appealed the acquittal of Revenue Inspector Zakaullah, who was convicted by a trial court for taking a Rs 400 bribe under IPC Sec 161 and the Prevention of Corruption Act Sec 5(2). The bribe was given by Satpal Singh (PW‑5) after a trap was arranged by the Anti‑Corruption Bureau, and the seized notes tested p

MAHENDRA SINGH CHOTELAL BHARGADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 81512 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mahendra Singh, received Rs.3,000 from a guest house manager after two police officers, Uttamrao Baburao Raut and Abdul Kadar, demanded the money as gratification to drop a criminal case. The prosecution alleged that the appellant was part of a corrupt arrangement and convicted him under Section 163 of t

JITUL JENTILAL KOTECHAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. ETC

2021 INSC 71812 November 2021Disposed off

The appellant filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud and extortion in a land‑title dispute, leading to an FIR under Sections 465, 467, 468 and 120B IPC. The respondents filed petitions under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashment of the FIR; the High Court allowed the petitions, quashing the FIR except for the ex

SADAKAT KOTWAR AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2021 INSC 71912 November 2021Dismissed

The appellants, Sadakat Kotwar and another, were convicted for stabbing two victims, PW7 and PW8, with a dagger, causing grievous injuries to vital parts of the body. The prosecution presented ten witnesses, including the injured eye‑witnesses PW7 and PW8, whose testimonies were found reliable. The appellants argued th

ALI AHMADversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2021 INSC 72312 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, were released on bail by the High Court under Section 389 of the CrPC while their appeals were pending. The complainant challenged this release, contending that the High Court failed to comply with the first proviso o

SUKHWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 75112 November 2013Dismissed

The appellant, husband of Karnail Kaur, was charged under Section 304B of the IPC for dowry death after his wife died of poisoning within seven years of marriage. The prosecution proved that the wife had complained of dowry demands for a scooter and refrigerator on 25 June 1991, and she died on 30 June 1991, establishi

LALITA KUMARIversusGOVT. OF U.P. AND ORS.

2013 INSC 74812 November 2013Reference answered

The Constitution Bench examined whether a police officer must register a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) upon receiving information of a cognizable offence, or may first conduct a preliminary inquiry to test its veracity. Relying on the literal meaning of

ANJANAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2013 INSC 75312 November 2013Dismissed

Gowramma, a married woman, died from severe burns after allegedly being doused with kerosene by her husband Anjanappa. She gave a dying declaration implicating him, which was recorded by a police officer and endorsed by the attending doctor, who testified that she was conscious and fit to speak. The trial court acquitt

BHIM @ UTTAM GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 77412 November 2010Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted under Section 307 of the IPC for an offence committed on 6 March 1983, when he was about 15 years old. After serving part of his sentence, he challenged the conviction on the ground that he should be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

R.P. TYAGIversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2009 INSC 122912 November 2009Dismissed

In 1987 a police constable was stabbed by Mahender and Ram Kumar. The SHO, R.P. Tyagi, detained the accused's family members and beat them, leading to Mahender's death. Tyagi was initially convicted of murder under IPC s.302 and sentenced to death, but the Delhi High Court modified the conviction to culpable homicide n

STATE OF U.P.versusILYAS

2008 INSC 129312 November 2008Case Partly allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted Ilyas and a co-accused for robbery committed with a country-made pistol and knife, during which injuries were inflicted on victims. The trial court, relying on three eye‑witnesses and a test identification parade, convicted both under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and

DASARI PEDA GONDIYYAversusSTATION HOUSE OFFICER, JANGREDDYGUDEM

2008 INSC 129412 November 2008Dismissed

The appellant, who kept the deceased as his mistress, allegedly poured kerosene on her and set her alight, causing fatal burns. The prosecution relied on three dying declarations recorded by the deceased’s mother, a Mandal Revenue Officer and a Sub‑Inspector of Police, all of which consistently identified the appellant

RAGHBIR SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2008 INSC 129612 November 2008Disposed off

The appellants and a co‑accused were charged with offences including murder (s.302 IPC) arising from a violent dispute in which the deceased was attacked with lathis. The accused claimed they acted in private defence, asserting that the victim and his brother had assaulted them first. The Supreme Court examined the sta

GALI VENKATAIAHversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2007 INSC 113412 November 2007Case Partly allowed

Gali Venkatiah was convicted of murder for stabbing his brother Gali Krishnaiah, based on the testimony of the deceased's wife and sons. The appellant argued that the witnesses were interested parties and that the killing occurred in a sudden quarrel, invoking Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. The Supreme Court held that

ANTRAMversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 114312 November 2007Dismissed

The appellant Antram was convicted for murdering his wife Shobha, who alleged he assaulted her with an axe. Shobha gave four dying declarations—two oral and two recorded—to her daughter, a cousin, a medical officer, and a private doctor before dying a day after discharge from hospital. The prosecution relied on these d

NARESH GIRIversusSTATE OF M.P.

2007 INSC 114412 November 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a bus driver, was charged under Section 302 IPC for the death of two passengers when a train struck his bus at an unmanned railway crossing. He contended that the train hit the rear of the bus and that there was no negligence on his part, so the murder charge was inappropriate. The High Court rejected hi

SITARAM SAO@MUNGERIversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2007 INSC 114512 November 2007Dismissed

The accused were convicted for the abduction, murder and dacoity of Gayatri Devi based largely on the testimony of an approver, Lalit Sanga, whose statement was recorded under Section 306 of the CrPC after he was granted pardon. The High Court had earlier remanded the case, finding procedural lapses in the recording of

SUBHASH RAMKUMAR BIND @ VAKIL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2002 INSC 46612 November 2002Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for murder of Harish Bhatia using a 9 mm pistol and a .38 calibre revolver, and were sentenced to death under IPC sections 302/34 and Arms Act section 27(3). The High Court upheld the death sentence, treating the weapons as prohibited arms under the Arms Act based on a government note. The

ALAMGIRversusSTATE (NCT. DELHI)

2002 INSC 46712 November 2002Dismissed

Alamgir, a Pakistani national, travelled to Delhi with his wife Halima and stayed at a hotel. He left her locked in the room on 19 September 1991 and failed to return; her body was later found strangulated. Two slips of paper near the body bore handwriting identified by an expert as Alamgir's. He was arrested in Bombay

SHOBHA RANIversusMADHUKAR REDDI

1987 INSC 32912 November 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Shobha Rani, a postgraduate, filed for divorce from her husband Madhukar Reddi on the ground of cruelty, alleging repeated dowry demands by the husband and his parents. The trial court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed her petition, holding that the demands did not amount to harassment and that she was hypers

KAMALAKARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 98912 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was married to the deceased for four and a half years during which she alleged continuous cruelty and assault by him and his parents. After being left at her parents' house, the deceased poured kerosene on herself and died, leading to charges under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC. The trial court convict

MARIANO ANTO BRUNO & ANR.versusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2022 INSC 107312 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The husband (Appellant No.1) and his mother-in-law were convicted under IPC sections 498A (dowry harassment) and 306 (abetment of suicide) for the death of Dr. Amali Victoria, who allegedly suffered mental torture and was compelled to have a child, leading to her suicide in 2014. The prosecution's case relied mainly on

DEVENDRA NATH SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2022 INSC 107112 October 2022Dismissed

The appellant, a former District Manager, challenged a High Court order that directed the magistrate to order further investigation into his alleged role in the misappropriation of foodgrains, despite the magistrate having taken cognizance only against a lower‑level employee. The Supreme Court examined whether the High

BIKRAMJIT SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 58912 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

A hand grenade attack at a public gathering in Amritsar resulted in three deaths and 22 serious injuries. Bikramjit Singh was arrested, remanded to custody, and after 90 days (which expired on 21‑02‑2019) he applied for default bail; the Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application, claiming he had alre

AMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2020 INSC 58712 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Devinder Singh, who was allegedly attacked by three accused wielding hockey sticks and a knife. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the testimony of Parminder Singh (PW‑1), a brother of the deceased, while the other two eye‑witnesses turned hostile. The Supreme Court examined the

MURUGESAN AND ORS.versusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2012 INSC 46712 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted 23 accused of charges including criminal conspiracy (s.120B IPC) and murder (s.302 IPC) based on inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony, a doubtful dying declaration, and lack of corroborative evidence. The Madras High Court reversed the acquittal of 19 accused, convicting them on the same ch

STATE OF U.P.versusMUNESH

2012 INSC 47012 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Munesh, who was charged with raping and murdering an 11‑year‑old girl. The trial court had convicted him under Sections 302 and 376 of the IPC, but the High Court set aside the conviction, citing contradictions in the statements of two eye‑witnesses (PWs 2 and 3) and

PRATAPBHAI HAMIRBHAI SOLANKIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 47112 October 2012Disposed off

The appellant, Pratapbhai Hamirbai Solanki, was accused of conspiring to murder an RTI activist and was charged under Sections 302, 201 and 120‑B IPC and Sections 25(1)(b) and 27 of the Arms Act. Bail applications before the Sessions Court and the Gujarat High Court were rejected. After the High Court reserved its judg

KISHAN SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2007 INSC 105112 October 2007Disposed off

Reeta Kumari married Manmohan Singh in February 1999 and was repeatedly harassed by her in‑laws for a scooter and a golden bangle as dowry. She died by consuming aluminium phosphide in June 1999 while pregnant. The trial court convicted the father‑in‑law (Kishan Singh) and mother‑in‑law (Bachni Rani) under Sections 304

GOPALversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 105212 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Gopal, the husband, assaulted his wife with a wooden log during a quarrel witnessed by their children, causing fatal head injuries. He was initially convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder and sentenced accordingly, a decision upheld by the High Court. Gopal appealed, contending that the killing occurred in a sudden

RAMESH BABURAO DEVASKAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 105612 October 2007

The case arose from the murder of Shivaji Patil and Baburao Patil in a village where two rival groups were at loggerheads. The FIR was lodged at the spot four days after the incident, and the copy reached the magistrate after an unexplained delay, raising questions about its validity. The trial court convicted several

DEVI LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 105812 October 2007Dismissed

Devi Lal and his mother were convicted under Section 304B IPC for the dowry death of Pushpa Devi, whose body was cremated without informing relatives. The prosecution alleged that Pushpa was repeatedly harassed and subjected to cruelty by her husband and in‑laws for not providing sufficient dowry, both before and after

PRAKASH CHANDRA YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2007 INSC 105912 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

On 3 February 1994, the informant Prakash Chandra Yadav and a pillion rider were attacked by the accused who hurled bombs at them and later pursued them with a licensed gun. Although one bomb exploded, the informant sustained no injury. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 307 (attempt to murder) and Sec

B. SURESH Y ADA VversusSHARIF BEE AND ANR.

2007 INSC 106012 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, B. Suresh Yadav, sold a parcel of land to the respondents, Sharifa Bee and Anr, and executed the sale deed on 30 September 2005. On 29 September 2005, two rooms on the land were demolished, leading to a civil suit to determine whether the demolished portion formed part of the sale. While the civil suit w

RAJINDER SINGH KATOCHversusCHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION & ORS.

2007 INSC 106112 October 2007

The appellant, a co‑sharer of a joint family property, alleged that his brother (respondent No.4) unlawfully restrained him from occupying the first floor of the house and complained to the police, but no FIR was registered. He filed an application under Section 482 of the CrPC before the High Court seeking a direction

ALL CARGO MOVERS (I) PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusDHANESH BADARMAL JAIN AND ANR.

2007 INSC 106312 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

All Cargo Movers (I) Pvt. Ltd. and related companies entered into a contract of carriage to deliver consignments to Kenya. The goods were allegedly delivered without the original Bills of Lading, leading the consignee to claim breach of contract and file a civil suit in the Bombay High Court. More than a year later, th

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusMUNSHI

2007 INSC 106412 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan charged Munshi with rape of a minor girl, Rajkumari, on 18 September 1994. The victim reported the incident immediately, and a medical examination revealed fresh injuries, a ruptured hymen and blood oozing from the vagina; a torn piece of her underwear was recovered from the scene and matched her

SARVESH NARAIN SHUKLAversusDAROGA SINGH & ORS.

2007 INSC 106612 October 2007Dismissed

The case concerned a triple murder that occurred on 4 April 1999, where three persons were shot dead from a car that had allegedly collided with a bus. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑5), who were described as chance witnesses, and on medical and forensic evidence linking the i

R. RADHAKRISHNANversusTHE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND ORS.

2007 INSC 108112 October 2007

R. Radhakrishnan applied for the post of Fireman and, after provisional selection, submitted a verification roll stating he had never been involved in any criminal case. In fact, he had been arrested under Section 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code for an incident on 15 April 2000, though he was later acquitted on 25 Sept

STATE THROUGH SPE & CBI, APversusM. KRISHNA MOHAN AND ANR.

2007 INSC 108912 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the Special Police Establishment and the CBI, appealed against the High Court's acquittal of a bank manager (M. Krishna Mohan) and a field officer for forging loan documents, forging thumb impressions and misappropriating loan proceeds. The trial court had convicted both, but the High Court se

LALLAN CHAUDHARY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2006 INSC 69612 October 2006Dismissed

The complainant filed a complaint before a Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate alleging offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 452, 323 and 395 IPC. The magistrate endorsed the complaint to the police, but the SHO registered an FIR only under Sections 452, 380 and 323/34, omitting several cognizable offences, espec

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSHAMBHOOGIRI

2004 INSC 59412 October 2004Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Constable Shambhoogiri for accepting a bribe of Rs.200 from a complainant, PW‑1, after the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate (SDM) had taken a written complaint and the currency notes. The SDM noted the serial numbers of the notes, recovered them from the accused, prepared a recovery memo and

RANDHIR SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2004 INSC 59612 October 2004Disposed off

Randhir Singh and another were convicted under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC for abetting the suicide of their wife, who allegedly died by self‑immolation within seven years of marriage. The prosecution proved that the accused repeatedly demanded additional dowry, threatened a second marriage, and harasse

NARINDERJIT SINGH SAHNI AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 50312 October 2001Dismissed

The petitioners, directors of several finance companies accused of large‑scale cheating, filed writ petitions under Article 32 claiming that their personal liberty under Article 21 was violated because they were detained in various jails despite obtaining bail in some cases. The Court held that while a petition under A

SHEELAM RAMESH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1999 INSC 47112 October 1999Dismissed

The appellants, members of the Peoples War Group, were convicted for firing at two ex‑members of the group at a hair‑cutting salon, resulting in the death of one victim. The trial court relied on the testimony of four eye‑witnesses who identified the accused under street‑light and shop‑light illumination, and the FIR w

BAKHSHISH SINGH BRARversusSMT. GURMEJ KAUR AND ANR.

1987 INSC 27912 October 1987Dismissed

The petitioner, a police officer, was charged with several offences including murder and grievous hurt arising from a raid. He argued that under Section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code the court could not take cognizance or proceed with trial without a sanction under Section 197, which protects public servants actin

RAM PRASAD SAHU AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1979 INSC 20512 October 1979Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by several accused convicted under IPC s.302 read with s.149 and s.325 for a murder. The High Court had reduced both convictions and sentences, but the appellants challenged the convictions and argued that the sentences were excessive. The Court held that, under Article 136, it would

MAMMAN KHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 111312 September 2025Disposed off

Mamman Khan, a sitting MLA, was charged in two FIRs relating to large‑scale communal violence in Nuh district. The trial court, citing the need for speedy disposal of cases involving legislators, ordered a separate charge‑sheet and segregated his trial from the co‑accused, a decision affirmed by the High Court. The app

MANIKLAL SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 110712 September 2025Dismissed

The appellant Maniklal Sahu and three co‑accused were convicted of murder under s.302 IPC for throwing the victim Rekhchand Verma from a terrace and assaulting him, resulting in injuries that led to septic shock, pneumonia and paraplegia, and the victim died nine months later. The High Court reduced the conviction to a

ANNA WAMAN BHALERAOversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 111412 September 2025Dismissed

The appellants, a former Circle Officer and Talathi, were accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents that facilitated an illegal property transfer between 1996 and 1998. An FIR was lodged in 2019 and the appellants filed anticipatory bail applications, which received intermittent interim protectio

RABBU @ SARVESHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 72012 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rabbu @ Sarvesh, was convicted of rape, murder and related offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A, 302 IPC and Section 5(g)/6 POCSO, receiving the death penalty for Sections 376A and 302. The defence argued that the three dying declarations were inconsistent and that DNA evidence suggested a

RAVINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2024 INSC 68412 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a radiologist, was raided on 27 April 2017 after a decoy patient alleged that his clinic performed illegal sex‑determination ultrasounds. The raid was conducted by a team authorized only by the Civil Surgeon, who was the Chairman of the district Appropriate Authority, without the consent of the other mem

DARBARA SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2012 INSC 38912 September 2012Dismissed

The appellant Darbara Singh was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering Mukhtiar Singh, based on eye‑witness testimony that he struck the victim's head with a kirpan while the victim was attempting to run. The appellant challenged the conviction on several grounds, including alleged inconsistency between medical

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