Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Penal Code, 1860

6,144 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 4,001–4,200.

RAJAversusSTATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2019 INSC 134610 December 2019Dismissed

The case involved seven accused of a dacoity during which five eye‑witnesses were seriously injured. All six of the accused (Nos.1‑6) were identified by the injured witnesses in a Test Identification Parade (TIP) and were convicted under Sections 394, 395, 396 and 449 of the IPC; accused No.7 was acquitted. On appeal,

GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusM/S. VISAKHA INDUSTRIES

2019 INSC 135210 December 2019Disposed off

The appellant, Google India Private Limited, was summoned under a criminal complaint alleging defamation (IPC ss.120B, 500, 501 r/w s.34) for articles posted in a Google Group hosted by it. It filed a petition under CrPC s.482 seeking to quash the summons, arguing it was not an intermediary and that Section 79 of the I

SHANTHAMALLESHAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2018 INSC 118310 December 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were charged under Section 436 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly throwing kerosene on a thatched shed and setting it alight. The trial court convicted all four accused and imposed fines; the High Court enhanced the sentence of accused No.1 and set aside the convictions of the others. On appeal,

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusWASIF HAIDER ETC.

2018 INSC 118110 December 2018Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the High Court’s acquittal of Wasif Haider and others for murder, attempted murder and related offences arising from a riot at a temple. The Supreme Court examined whether the appellate court could disturb an acquittal and whether the prosecution had established the identity of the a

YOGENDRA KUMAR JAISWAL ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 104110 December 2015Disposed off

The petitioners, senior public servants accused of possessing assets disproportionate to their known income under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, challenged the constitutionality of the Orissa Special Courts Act, 2006 and the Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009, which created special courts for s

SHLOK BHARDWAJversusRUNIKABHARDWAJ & ORS.

2014 INSC 85410 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The husband and wife married in 1996; the husband filed for divorce in 1997 and the wife filed a criminal case alleging cruelty under Sections 498‑A, 406, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial magistrate acquitted all accused in 2002. While the parties later settled their differences and obta

VEER SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 81810 December 2013Dismissed

The appellants Veer Singh and others were convicted for the murder of twelve persons and the attempted murder of a family member, based primarily on the testimony of a severely injured eye‑witness, Harshan Kaur, supported by medical reports, a hostile witness, and forensic material. The appellants challenged the reliab

DILIP PREMNARAYAN TIWARI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 129510 December 2009Dismissed

The appellants Dilip Premnarayan Tiwari, Manoj Paswan and Sunil Ramashray Yadav were convicted for the brutal murder of three persons and the grievous injury of others during an attack motivated by opposition to an inter‑caste marriage. The prosecution relied mainly on the testimony of two injured eye‑witnesses, who id

RAMRAJ @ NANHOO @ BIHNUversusSTATE OF CHHATIISGARH

2009 INSC 129710 December 2009Dismissed

Ramraj, convicted under IPC sections 302 and 201 for murdering his wife, was sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction, and the petitioner sought release after serving 14 years, arguing that remission had effectively reduced his term to about 17 years. The Supreme Court examined the statutory

KAILASH NATHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2009 INSC 129810 December 2009Dismissed

The case involved a night‑time shooting in which Deep Singh was killed and his wife Chhoti was injured; eight persons were alleged to have participated. The trial court convicted all seven surviving accused under Sections 302, 149 and 307 of the IPC. The Allahabad High Court acquitted four accused who had not caused an

ASHFAQversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2003 INSC 70110 December 2003Dismissed

Four accused entered the complainant's house, threatened the occupants with a pistol and knives, and stole cash, a gold chain and a Sten gun. The victims identified the accused in court, but no test identification parade was conducted. The trial court convicted them under Sections 452, 392 and 397 IPC read with Section

MR. "X"versusHOSPITAL "Z"

2002 INSC 52610 December 2002Disposed off

The appellant, a medical practitioner, was found HIV‑positive when his blood was tested at Hospital Z during a donation for a relative. The hospital disclosed his HIV status to the relatives of his fiancée, leading to the cancellation of his marriage and social ostracism. The appellant sought compensation for breach of

V. VIJAY KUMARversusSTATE OF KERALA

1999 INSC 55010 December 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State alleged that a watchman was murdered after a quarrel with accused No.1 and that five accused conspired to kill and hang him. The trial court convicted them under IPC sections 302, 34, 201 and 120‑B based solely on circumstantial evidence, including alleged presence of blood in the guard room, a lungi used as

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSURESH

1999 INSC 55110 December 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra charged Suresh with the rape and murder of a four‑year‑old girl, Sneha, alleging that he abducted her, sexually assaulted her and concealed her body in a farm. The trial court convicted him on the basis of circumstantial evidence, including eyewitnesses who saw the accused with the child, a tes

BALARAM PRASAD AGRAWALversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1996 INSC 145610 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, father of Kiran Devi, alleged that his daughter was subjected to continuous cruelty by her husband, mother‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law, culminating in her suicide by jumping into a well. The trial court acquitted the accused of murder (Sec. 302) and the High Court upheld that acquittal. On appeal, the Supr

R. RAJENDRANversusKAMAR NISHA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 130410 November 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, a doctor, was alleged to have had an extramarital affair with respondent No.1, resulting in the birth of a child in 2007 while she was married to Abdul Latheef. Respondent No.1 filed criminal complaints for cheating and harassment and sought a DNA test to establish the appellant as the biological father,

ROHIT TANDONversusTHE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

2017 INSC 109610 November 2017

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of Rohit Tandon challenging the denial of regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Court held that the threshold conditions of Section 45 of the PMLA were not satisfied, as the prosecution presented substantial evidence of the appellant’s involvement

GAJULA SURYA PRAKASARAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2009 INSC 122610 November 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gajula Surya Prakasa Rao was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 IPC for murdering a farmer and attempting to kill his wife, based primarily on the testimony of the deceased’s wife (PW‑3) and daughter (PW‑4). The Supreme Court examined the credibility of these eye‑witnesses, noting that their statements

B.K. CHANNAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2006 INSC 82210 November 2006Disposed off

The case arose from a politically motivated attack in 1995 in which Basavarajaiah was killed and four others were injured. Twenty‑three persons were tried; the trial court convicted several under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149, while others were acquitted. The High Court affirmed the murder convictions of A‑1 an

STATE OF A.P.versusV. SARMA RAO AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2006 INSC 82710 November 2006Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh alleged a large‑scale fraud in the award of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act and sought a criminal inquiry under Section 340 of the CrPC. A District Judge conducted the inquiry, but the High Court held that the Subordinate Judge appointed under the Act was not subordinate to the D

AMRIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2006 INSC 82910 November 2006Case Partly allowed

Amrit Singh was convicted of raping and murdering a 7‑8‑year‑old girl, Rajpreet Kaur, whose body was found bleeding profusely in his cotton field. The trial court and High Court sentenced him to death under IPC Sections 376 and 302, relying primarily on the "last seen together" testimony and circumstantial evidence. On

RAJAN RAIversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 55910 November 2005Dismissed

The appellant Rajan Rai was convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act for allegedly throwing a bomb that killed his brother. Four co‑accused were earlier acquitted by the High Court, while a fifth co‑accused had died before trial. Th

CHAUDHARI RAMJI BHAI NARASANGBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2003 INSC 62010 November 2003Dismissed

The appellant Chaudhary Ramji Narsang and two co‑accused were alleged to have assaulted the appellant's father and brothers in an agricultural field, resulting in the father's death. The trial court acquitted them, finding contradictions among witnesses and questioning the medical evidence. The Gujarat High Court set a

BALBIR SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1994 INSC 51010 November 1994Dismissed

The appellants Balbir Singh and Nachhattar Singh were convicted of murder under IPC sections 302 and 34 for inflicting fatal blows with a gandasa. They challenged the conviction on two grounds: that the offence should be culpable homicide under section 325, and that the criminal court lacked jurisdiction to try Air For

ALIJAN NANHE PEHALWAN QURESHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1980 INSC 21110 November 1980Dismissed

Alijan Nanhe Pehalwan Qureshi was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court. The High Court affirmed the conviction but issued a judgment without any reasoning. A Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court, which held that in serious offences like murder, t

KAMAL PRASAD & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF CHHATTISGARH)

2023 INSC 89510 October 2023Dismissed

The appellants Kamal Prasad, Shersingh and Bhavdas were convicted for murder, attempted murder and offences under the Explosive Substance Act based on the testimony of three eyewitnesses who identified them at the scene where bombs and weapons were used, resulting in the deaths of Chetram and his son Kapildeo. The appe

N. S. MADHANAGOPAL & ANR.versusK. LALITHA

2022 INSC 132310 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a society treasurer, alleged that the appellant, N.S. Madhanagopal, hurled unparliamentary words during a dispute over waste‑water flow, and claimed offences under IPC sections 294(b) (obscene words) and 341 (wrongful restraint). The High Court refused to quash the proceedings, but the Supreme Court ex

GALI JANARDHAN REDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2022 INSC 105910 October 2022Disposed off

Gali Janardhan Reddy, accused of several serious offences under the IPC, Indian Forest Act and the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, was granted bail by the Supreme Court in 2015 with a condition that he not visit Bellary (Karnataka) and Ananthapuram and Cuddapah (Andhra Pradesh). He later applied to

BILAL HAJAR @ ABDUL HAMEEDversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2018 INSC 94510 October 2018Dismissed

The appellant, A-6, was convicted under Section 120-B of the IPC for participating in a criminal conspiracy to murder Siva. The prosecution alleged that nine accused met at A-6's house on 1 September 1991, decided to kill Siva, and the murder was carried out on 5 September 1991 by some of the accused. The conviction re

PRADEEP BISOI @ RANJIT BISOIversusTHE STATE OF ODISHA

2018 INSC 95010 October 2018Dismissed

The appellant, Pradeep BisoI, was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC for causing the death of Bhaskar Sahu through a bomb and acid attack. The victim had given a detailed statement to the investigating officer on 5 December 1990 under Section 161 of the CrPC, but died on 25 March 1991, more than three months later

SANTOSH S/O DWARKADAS FAFATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2017 INSC 102710 October 2017

Santosh was accused under Section 408 IPC read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for receiving misappropriated food grains. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the trial court and the Nagpur High Court. After depositing the alleged amount, he obtained interim protection, but the

MD. JAMILUDIN NASIRversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2014 INSC 70710 October 2014Case Allowed

The Supreme Court delivered a judgment on 21 May 2014 in MD Jamiluddin Nasir v. State of West Bengal concerning an alleged offence of waging war against the State under IPC 121. Subsequent to that judgment, the parties filed criminal miscellaneous petitions seeking correction of typographical and factual errors in the

AVTAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 46210 October 2012Dismissed

The case arose from a violent clash on 9 April 2003 between two groups over a disputed piece of land in Marori, Punjab. The accused, armed with gandasis, kirpans and swords, attacked members of the complainant’s family, killing Amarjit Singh (father of PW‑10) and injuring several others. The appellants pleaded self‑def

MOHD. IMRAN KHANversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2011 INSC 73610 October 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by Mohd. Imran Khan and Jamal Ahmed against their conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC. The Court held that the prosecutrix, Monika, was a minor (under 16) at the time of the offence, based on her birth certificate and the acknowledged margin of error in radiological age estimate

KISHAN CHAND AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2007 INSC 103010 October 2007Dismissed

The case arose from a dispute over a plot of land allotted to Phool Chand, who attempted to raise construction despite an undertaking not to do so. Villagers gathered to oppose the construction; the accused, armed with guns and lathis, proceeded anyway and, after verbal abuse, opened fire, killing two villagers and inj

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusMOHD. SAJID HUSAIN MOHD. S. HUSAIN ETC.

2007 INSC 103510 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal appeal against the Bombay High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to eight accused—including police officers, politicians and a businessman—who were alleged to have raped a girl who was a minor at the time of the offence. The girl, identified as Puja, was medically examin

ALLA CHINA APPARAO AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2002 INSC 43210 October 2002Dismissed

The appellants, six convicted accused, appealed against their life sentences for murder under Sections 302, 149, 148 and 506 IPC, arguing that the prosecution's case relied on partisan eyewitnesses, lacked independent witnesses, showed no dragging injuries, and suffered an alleged delay in forwarding the FIR to the mag

GANGADHAR BEHERA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA

2002 INSC 43310 October 2002Dismissed

The case arose from a violent clash over the construction of a shed that resulted in the death of a man. The prosecution alleged that a group of accused formed an unlawful assembly, assaulted the victims and caused the murder. The trial court convicted fifteen accused under Sections 302, 148, 149 and 307 IPC; the High

MUNSHI PRASAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2001 INSC 49710 October 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Munshi Prasad and others for murder, finding the prosecution’s evidence trustworthy and the defence’s alibi unsubstantiated because the alleged distance of 400‑500 yards did not render the accused’s presence at the crime scene impossible. The Court held that discrepancies betw

STATE OF BIHARversusMURAD ALI KHAN, FARUKH SALAUDDIN & VIKRAM SINGH

1988 INSC 31610 October 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar filed a complaint under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 alleging that the accused killed an elephant and removed its tusks. A Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and issued summons, while a parallel police investigation under the Indian Penal Code was ongoing. The accused invoked

JUPALLY LAKSHMIKANTHA REDDYversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 109610 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, JVRR Education Society, was accused of cheating and forgery for allegedly submitting a forged fire No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) to obtain recognition and renewal of affiliation for its college, which operated from a building 14.20 metres high. The charge sheet under sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC c

VINOD KUMAR PANDEY & ANR.versusSEESH RAM SAINI & ORS.

2025 INSC 109510 September 2025Disposed off

The case concerned two Central Bureau of Investigation officers, Vinod Kumar Pandey and Neeraj Kumar, who were alleged to have committed a series of cognizable offences under the IPC, prompting writ petitions seeking registration of FIRs against them. The Delhi High Court, after examining the complaints and a prelimina

AKHTAR ALI @ ALI AKHTAR @ SHAMIM @ RAJA USTADversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2025 INSC 109710 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the rape and murder of a minor girl based on circumstantial evidence, a disputed 'last seen' theory, alleged motive of lust, and DNA forensic reports. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the motive, the reliability of the last seen testimony, and the integrity of the forensic

PRAVIN KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 54210 September 2020Dismissed

Pravin Kumar, a CISF Sub‑Inspector, was accused of fabricating a General Diary entry, intimidating a subordinate to give false testimony, and collecting bribes from BPCL contractors. An enquiry under CISF Rules found him guilty and recommended dismissal; the disciplinary authority dismissed him, and the appellate autho

DR. (SMT.) MANORAMA TIWARI AND OTHERSversusSURENDRA NATH RAI

2015 INSC 102010 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the death of a 14‑year‑old girl who underwent surgery in a government hospital performed by three medical officers. The girl's father filed a criminal complaint alleging murder under Section 304A of the IPC. The doctors filed an application under Section 197 of the CrPC seeking a sanction from the Sta

MAHAMADKHAN NATHEKHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 100210 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Three accused were tried for the murder of Firozbhai under Sections 302, 120(8), 201 of the IPC and Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act. The trial court acquitted them, finding that the prosecution's circumstantial case did not establish a homicidal death and that the injury could have been accidental. The Gujarat High Co

SANGILI @ SANGANATHANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2014 INSC 62010 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sangili, was convicted of murdering a schoolboy, Muthuramaligam, on the basis of circumstantial evidence that included a phone call, alleged motive, and the recovery of a bicycle and knives. The prosecution failed to produce any eyewitnesses, did not establish a motive, and could not prove the last seen

SUNIL DAMODAR GAIKWADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 60110 September 2013Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Sunil Damodar Gaikwad, murdered his wife and two sons and attempted to kill his daughter, later reporting the incident to police. He was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 307 and sentenced to death for the murder and life imprisonment for the attempt. The appeal centered on whether the death sentence

VILAS PANDURANG PAWAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 38610 September 2012Dismissed

The complainant, Savita Madhav Akhade, alleged that she and her family were insulted and assaulted on caste grounds by Vilas Pandurang Pawar and others, leading to an FIR under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The accused applied for anticipatory

ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYOOM ANSARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2010 INSC 60210 September 2010Dismissed

Abu Salem, an absconding accused in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, was arrested in Portugal and extradited to India under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the Indian Extradition Act, 1962 (applied to Portugal by a 2002 notification). Portugal granted extradition for certain offen

INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADUversusMUTHUSAMY AND ANR.

2008 INSC 102710 September 2008Dismissed

The deceased was alleged to have been throttled and poisoned by his father and brother, who were the accused. The forensic laboratory report found no poison, leading the prosecution to abandon the poison allegation and rely on purported extra‑judicial confessions for conviction under IPC s.302 read with s.34. The trial

M. SRINIVASULUversusSTATE OF A.P.

2007 INSC 90510 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M. Srinivasulu, was convicted under Sections 304B (dowry death) and 498A (cruelty) of the IPC for the self‑immolation death of his wife. The prosecution relied on three letters written by the deceased, alleging they demonstrated a dowry demand and cruelty. The Supreme Court examined whether the letters a

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusMAST RAM

2004 INSC 50910 September 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State prosecuted Mast Ram for murder under IPC 302, alleging he shot the deceased Uttam Chand with a double‑barrel muzzle‑loaded gun. The trial court, relying on eyewitness accounts, a post‑mortem report, a ballistic expert report and a spot‑inspection that placed the victim within firing range, convicted the accus

RAM KISHAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2004 INSC 51110 September 2004Dismissed

The deceased Shiv Shankar Singh was attacked and killed with lathis fitted with iron rings after being intercepted on a motorcycle by the appellants. Three eye‑witnesses, who were friends of the deceased, testified to the assault, and a post‑mortem showed head injuries and an empty stomach. The appellants challenged th

LAXMAN SINGHversusPOONAM SINGH AND ORS.

2003 INSC 46410 September 2003Dismissed

A long-standing land dispute led to a violent confrontation on 10 June 1984 when the deceased Mohan Singh and his relatives were ploughing the contested field. The respondents, claiming ownership, assaulted them with sticks, causing Mohan Singh's death. The trial court held the land was in the complainants' possession,

GURSHARAM SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1996 INSC 102510 September 1996

Gursharan Singh demanded Rs. 2 lakh from Nirmal Singh for terrorist activities, threatening death. After a meeting where a revolver‑wielding accomplice threatened the victim, a reduced sum of Rs. 70,000 was agreed, of which only Rs. 50,000 was paid. The trial court convicted Singh under IPC Sections 387 (extortion) and

SHATRUGHNA PRASAD SINHAversusRAJBHAU SURAJMAL RATHI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 102010 September 1996Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Shatrughna Prasad Sinha, was charged after an interview published in Stardust magazine allegedly outraged the religious feelings of the Marwari community and defamed them as a class. Complaints were filed in the magistrate courts of Pune and Nasik. The High Court held that the Pune complaint did not disc

KHEMA @ KHEM CHANDRA ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 81010 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder, attempted murder and rioting under Sections 302, 307 and 148 of the IPC based primarily on the testimonies of two relatives of the deceased, one an alleged eye‑witness (PW‑1) and the other an injured witness (PW‑2). The Supreme Court examined the credibility of these witnesses,

RAMABORA @ RAMABORAIAH & ANRversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2022 INSC 80910 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants (A‑1 and A‑2) were convicted by the Karnataka High Court for murder under Section 302 IPC, overturning their acquittal by the Sessions Court, while the other 20 accused remained acquitted. The prosecution alleged that 22 persons formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, trespassed into the

PARUBAIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2021 INSC 39310 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Parubai, the second wife of Gulab, was convicted under Sections 302 and 436 of the IPC for allegedly setting fire to the house that killed her husband's first wife Mandabai and two children. The prosecution's case relied on the fact that Parubai emerged uninjured, kerosene residues on a child's frock, and a motive infe

MOHD. ARIF @ ASHFAQversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2011 INSC 57110 August 2011Dismissed

The appellant, a Pakistani national and member of Lashkar‑e‑Toiba, was convicted for planning and executing a terrorist attack on the Red Fort on 22 December 2000, which killed three Indian Army soldiers. The prosecution proved the conspiracy and the murders through extensive circumstantial evidence, forensic links bet

SAROJBEN ASHWINKUMAR SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2011 INSC 57010 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed against a partnership firm and its two partners. The complainant later applied under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to join two additional partners as co‑accused, relying solely on the firm's registration document that listed them

BHERU LAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 103910 August 2009

The case involved the murder of two brothers, sons of PW‑7, and the arson of her property by a group of accused persons. The trial court convicted all seven accused under sections of the IPC including 302 and 436, but the High Court acquitted one accused (A‑6) and upheld the convictions of the remaining. The appellants

CHITRESH KUMAR CHOPRAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2009 INSC 104010 August 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Chitresh Kumar Chopra, was charged under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly abetting the suicide of his business partner, Jitendra Sharma, by mental harassment over a profit dispute. The trial court framed charges, finding sufficient material to presume that the appellant had insti

STATE OF U.PversusGOVIND DAS@ GUDDA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 82510 August 2007Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the Allahabad High Court’s order acquitting Govind Das and others, which had set aside convictions under IPC s.302 r/w s.34 and rejected a death‑sentence confirmation. The High Court had relied mainly on the acquittal of a co‑accused and a claim o

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusRAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAVA, IAS AND ANR.

2006 INSC 50510 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered an FIR under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 against an IAS officer. The respondent filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of the FIR, alleging that the State of Rajasthan had withdrawn its consent for

SHRI S.K. ZUTSHI AND ANR.versusSHRI BIMAL DEBNATH AND ANR.

2004 INSC 43010 August 2004Dismissed

The complainant alleged that Border Security Force personnel, including the appellants, entered his shop, demanded Rs 10,000 as illegal gratification, ransacked the premises, seized goods and documents, and threatened him, constituting offences under IPC sections 395, 447 and 506. The appellants claimed that their acti

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusR.B. SHARMA

2004 INSC 43210 August 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The employee R.B. Sharma, a manager of State Bank of India, was suspended and faced both a departmental inquiry under the SBI Officers Service Rules and a criminal prosecution under the IPC for alleged fraud involving large sums. The employee obtained a stay of the departmental proceedings from the Delhi High Court, wh

DHAIN SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2004 INSC 43510 August 2004Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Dhian Singh and his paternal uncle against convictions for dowry death and concealment of evidence. The first appellant was found guilty under Sections 304‑B and 201 of the IPC for causing the death of his wife, Shinder Kaur, by burning her after demanding dowry, with the court a

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusKUTTY @ LAKSHMI NARASIMHAN

2001 INSC 35610 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a watchman, was convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and sentenced to death, but the High Court acquitted him on the ground that his judicial confession was retracted and that victim's articles were recovered before the confession. The Supreme Court held that a retracted confession is

AMRUTLAL SOMESHWAR JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1994 INSC 31010 August 1994

Amrutlal Someshwar Joshi, a domestic servant, was convicted of murdering three members of his employer's family and an infant in their Bombay flat and stealing valuables. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts, including eyewitness testimony that Joshi was present in the flat until early afternoon,

ROHINI SUDARSHAN GANGURDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2024 INSC 51910 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rohini Sudarshan Gangurde, was charged under Section 306 of the IPC for allegedly abetting her husband’s suicide by harassing him over money and property. The husband was found hanged in their jointly owned house, and the mother filed an FIR alleging physical and mental abuse by the wife. The trial court

MOTIRAM PADU JOSHI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 59410 July 2018Dismissed

The case arose from a factional clash in which the deceased, Machindra Joshi, was attacked with swords, knives and a motorcycle chain by the appellants Motiram Padu Joshi, Ratan Maruti Vaskar, Devidas Maruti Vaskar and Ramnath Joshi, leading to his death. The trial court acquitted all accused, holding that the eyewitne

JITENDRA SINGH @ BABBOO SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 45810 July 2013Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted under IPC sections 304B (dowry death) and 498A (cruelty) and sentenced to imprisonment and a fine. He later claimed to have been a juvenile at the time of the offence, asserting an age of 13 years 8 months, but documentary and medical evidence established his age as about 17 years, making hi

ANAND MOHANversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2012 INSC 27710 July 2012Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of a District Magistrate during a funeral procession of a political leader, where 36 persons were charged. The trial court convicted A‑1 (Anand Mohan) and six others under sections 147, 302/149, 307/149 and 302/109, sentencing A‑1, A‑3 and A‑4 to death. The High Court acquitted A‑2 to A‑7

BABLE @ GURDEEP SINGHversusSTATE OF CHATTISGARH TR.P.S.O.P. KURSIPUR

2012 INSC 27810 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant Bable @ Gurdeep Singh was convicted under IPC s.302 r.w. s.34 for the murder of Ishwari Verma. He challenged the conviction on the grounds that the FIR lost its relevance because the informant turned hostile, the oral dying declaration was not corroborated, his injuries were unexplained, and the acquittal

SAVITRI AGARWAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2009 INSC 90310 July 2009Disposed off

The appellants, accused of dowry death and related offences under Sections 498A, 304B (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 (Dowry Prohibition Act), obtained anticipatory bail from an Additional Sessions Judge under Section 438 of the CrPC after the court considered two dying declarations that made no allegation against them. The

KURIACHAN CHACKO & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2008 INSC 79510 July 2008Dismissed

The appellants, partners of a firm selling lotteries and magazines, floated a scheme promising investors a double return after the enrolment of 14 additional members. The police charged them under the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 (sections 2(c), 3, 4, 5), the Reserve Bank of India Act, 193

BALJ NATHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2008 INSC 79610 July 2008Dismissed

Baijnath and his cousin Kalika Prasad were involved in a land dispute that was being settled by a village Panchayat. During the meeting Baijnath struck Kalika on the head with a lathi, causing severe head injury; Kalika later died from the injury. The trial court convicted Baijnath under Section 304 Part I of the India

BHUPINDER SINGHversusUNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH .

2008 INSC 79710 July 2008Dismissed

Bhupinder Singh, already married, concealed his first marriage and married Manjit Kaur, who later discovered his prior marriage, gave birth, and filed a complaint. He was convicted by the trial court under Sections 376 and 417 IPC and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusGULAB SINGH AND ORS.

2008 INSC 79810 July 2008Case Allowed

The deceased, Jyoti, was found dead with her hands and face tied and twelve ante‑mortem injuries on her body. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder. On appeal, the Rajasthan High Court altered the conviction to Section 307 IPC (attempt to

SATISH SITOLEversusSMT. GANGA

2008 INSC 80610 July 2008Disposed off

Satish Sitole and Smt. Ganga were married on 22 May 1992. The wife left the matrimonial home in August 1994 and the parties lived apart for 14 years, during which they filed multiple suits including a dowry complaint under IPC 498‑A and a petition for divorce under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

GADE LAKSHMI MANGRAJU @ RAMESHversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2001 INSC 28710 July 2001Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder and criminal breach of trust under IPC Sections 302, 34 and 404, based largely on circumstantial evidence, including a sniffer dog tracking, fingerprint evidence, and identification of stolen ornaments. The defence challenged the reliability of the sniffer dog evidence, the absence

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusANIRUDHSING AND ANR.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 23410 July 1997

The State of Gujarat appealed the acquittal of Anirudhsing Mahipatsingh Jadeja (Accused No.1) and Nilesh Kumar (Accused No.2) for the murder of MLA Popatbhai Sorathiya during an Independence Day ceremony. The trial court had held that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's presence, the weapon used, and the conf

ASHOK KUMAR ALIAS GOLUversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 14510 July 1991Dismissed

Ashok Kumar was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He sought premature release under the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 1958, arguing that Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – which imposes a 14‑year minimum before any release for life convicts of capital offen

ARVIND KEJRIWALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 40010 May 2024

Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested on 21 March 2024 by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with alleged offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and related statutes. He challenged the arrest before the Supreme Court, arguing that the legality of his detention was sub judic

SRI GULAM MUSTAFAversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2023 INSC 51110 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gulam Mustafa, Managing Director of GM Infinite Dwelling, was named as Accused No.18 in an FIR filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several IPC provisions, arising from a long‑standing land ownership dispute that had been litigated in civil courts for o

REKHA JAINversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2022 INSC 54910 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The original complainant lodged a complaint against her husband, Kamalesh Mulchand Jain, alleging that he cheated her and took 2 kg of gold jewellery, leading to an FIR under Section 420 of the IPC. During investigation, the gold jewellery was found in the possession of the husband’s wife, Rekha Jain, who was also char

A. SLVAPRAKASHversusSTATE OF KERALA

2016 INSC 39710 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, issued a letter dated 9 June 1992 that the prosecution termed a "stage certificate" for a Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) construction project. Payments amounting to 50% of the contract value were subsequently released to the contractor, A‑3. The trial co

GURNAIB SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 33910 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gurnaib Singh was convicted for the death of his young wife Amarjeet Kaur, who allegedly committed suicide after being harassed for a dowry demand of Rs 50,000. The trial court and the Punjab High Court upheld a conviction under Section 3048 IPC (dowry death) and sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imp

STATE OF HARYANAversusJANAK SINGH & ETC.

2013 INSC 33610 May 2013Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana appealed against a Punjab & Haryana High Court order that reduced the imprisonment terms of two accused, Joginder Singh and Janak Singh, for rape and related offences to the time they had already served. The trial court had convicted them under IPC Sections 376, 506 and, for Janak Singh, also 511,

ATMARAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2012 INSC 22210 May 2012Dismissed

The five accused, Atmaram and four others, attacked two brothers and their sister with farsi, dharia and lathis, resulting in the death of one brother. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two injured eye‑witnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑2) and medical evidence showing ten injuries, including fatal head wounds. The appella

RAJESH BHATNAGARversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2012 INSC 22510 May 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Ms. Renu, who was burnt to death after her husband, brother‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law allegedly poured kerosene on her for refusing to meet dowry demands for a refrigerator, television and cooler. The trial and High Courts had convicted all three accused under Section 304B of the

MRUDUL M. DAMLE & ANR.versusC.B.I. NEW DELHI

2012 INSC 22610 May 2012Case Allowed

The petitioners, a husband and wife accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, sought transfer of their criminal trial from the Special Judge, CBI Cases, Rohini Court, New Delhi to the Special Judge, CBI Cases, Court of Sessions at Thane, Maharashtra, arguing that most of the 92 witnesses (88) were located in Maha

SALIM GULAB PATHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SHO

2012 INSC 22710 May 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Salim Gulab Pathan, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly setting his wife on fire. The prosecution's case rested on the victim's dying declaration, recorded by a police constable after being certified by a doctor as conscious and fit, and corroborated by eyewitnesses who heard the victim imp

PARA SEENAIAH & ANR.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2012 INSC 22810 May 2012Dismissed

The accused were charged with offences including assault (ss.324, 326 IPC) and murder (s.302 IPC) arising from a village feud. Four eyewitnesses saw the attack and the deceased gave a statement to the police implicating the accused. The trial court acquitted them of murder but convicted three of them under s.326, later

DHARMATMA SINGHversusHARMINDER SINGH & ORS.

2011 INSC 37110 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under several IPC offences based on a FIR filed by respondent No.1, while a cross‑case was filed against respondents No.1 and 2. After the magistrate permitted further investigation, the Superintendent of Police submitted a further report stating that respondent No.1 had acted in self‑defence

GURU DEV SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2011 INSC 37710 May 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Guru Dev Singh, was one of three accused who attacked Bhola Singh and another man with a kirpan, lohangi and lathi, causing Bhola Singh's death. Eye‑witnesses PW‑1 and PW‑2 testified that the accused surrounded the victims, struck them on vital parts and threw the dead body into a nala; a post‑mortem sho

BALRAJE @ TRIMBAKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 30210 May 2010Dismissed

Balraje (appellant) was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for inflicting a knife blow to the chest of Kailas, resulting in his death. The prosecution relied on eye‑witness testimony of the deceased's son (PW‑1), wife (PW‑2) and a neighbour (PW‑4), who identified Balraje as the assailant. The defence argued that

MONIRUDDIN AHMED @ LALU DEALER & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 30310 May 2010Dismissed

On 21 October 1982, the appellants, armed with spears, axes and bombs, attacked an informant and his associates, chasing them through paddy fields. Eye‑witnesses PW7, PW8, PW9 and PW12 testified that the appellants threw bombs and that appellant No.1 (Moniruddin Ahmed @ Lalu Dealer) struck the deceased with a spear, ca

SOMA CHAKRAVARTYversusSTATE THROUGH CBI

2007 INSC 55110 May 2007Dismissed

The appellant, Soma Chakravarty, a Deputy Manager in the publicity division of ITPO, was charged by a Special Judge under IPC sections 420 r/w 120-B, 429, 468, 471 and the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly signing bogus advertisement bills that led to a loss of Rs.30,30,057 to the government. She contended tha

ANILversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2007 INSC 55410 May 2007Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and for a firearms offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act after he shot the deceased, Dinesh, who was unarmed and opening his door during a family wedding. The prosecution proved that the appellant alone was armed, fired a shot that caus

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKISHAN LAL

2002 INSC 27910 May 2002Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Kishan Lal for rape under Section 376 IPC; the trial court sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine, which the Rajasthan High Court reduced to the period already served without recording adequate and special reasons. The State appealed to the Supreme Court under A

SHRI BHAGWANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2001 INSC 27410 May 2001Disposed off

Shri Bhagwan, a 20‑year‑old apprentice goldsmith, was convicted of murdering five members of Shiv Pratap's family and committing robbery and dacoity. The conviction was based on circumstantial evidence: he was seen with one of the deceased, sustained injuries, possessed blood‑stained clothing and stolen jewellery, and

RAMDEO CHAUHAN@ RAJ NATHversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2001 INSC 27210 May 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a review petition filed by R.D. Chauhan, who claimed he was a juvenile at the time of committing murder under Section 302 IPC and therefore could not be sentenced to death. The petition argued that the trial and appellate courts failed to apply the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, and that the c

ARVIND @ PAPPUversusSTATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

1999 INSC 23310 May 1999Dismissed

Arvind @ Pappu (appellant) killed his co‑villager Ajaib Singh (deceased) by luring him with a promised job, taking him to his tailoring factory, and leaving him alone on a cutter's table where he was later found dead with a neck wound, scissors and blood stains. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence,

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATIONversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 67510 May 1996

The case arose from the abduction and alleged murder of Advocate Kulwant Singh, his wife and their two‑year‑old child, for which the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association sought an independent inquiry. The High Court declined to intervene, prompting a civil appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dir

NARINDRA KUMAR JAINversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1996 INSC 67910 May 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Narindra Kumar Jain, served as manager of Kisan Rice Mills and was responsible for large stocks of paddy. During his tenure, 1,500 quintals of paddy were found missing, leading to charges under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted him, but the Madhya Pradesh High Court

SMT. SARLA MUDGAL, PRESIDENT, KALYANI AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 36310 May 1995Disposed off

The petitioners, Hindu wives, challenged the validity of their husbands' second marriages after the husbands converted to Islam without dissolving the first Hindu marriage. The Court examined whether conversion to Islam permits a Hindu husband to contract a second marriage, whether such a marriage is valid under the Hi

STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIRversusSUDERSHAN CHAKKAR AND ANR.

1995 INSC 36510 May 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir prosecuted Sudershan Chakkar and others, alleging criminal conspiracy and misappropriation of foodgrains and empty bags worth Rs. 3,22,119.36, involving forged documents. The trial judge discharged two respondents, holding that the evidence showed only negligence, not a conspiratorial desig

MINAKSHI BALA SUDHIR KUMAR AND ORS.versusSUDHIR KUMAR AND ORS.

1994 INSC 20110 May 1994

The appellant filed an FIR alleging offences under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC against her husband, his parents and other relatives. The police investigated, filed a charge sheet and the magistrate took cognizance, framed charges under Sections 239 and 240 of the CrPC and fixed a date for recording evidence. Before tria

STATE OF PUNJABversusIQBAL SINGH AND ORS.

1991 INSC 13910 May 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The wife of Iqbal Singh set herself and her three children on fire on 7 June 1983 after prolonged dowry harassment by her husband, his mother and sister. She had previously complained to police and written letters detailing the abuse and her fear for her life. The husband, his mother and sister were charged under Secti

MS. JORDAN DIENGDEHversusS.S, CHOPRA

1985 INSC 13810 May 1985Disposed off

The wife, a Christian from the Khasi tribe and an Indian Foreign Service officer, married a Sikh husband under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. She filed a petition under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking a declaration of nullity or judicial separation on the ground of her husband's impotence. The Delhi High

MILIND S/O ASHRUBA DHANVE AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2026 INSC 35510 April 2026Disposed off

The appellants were convicted under IPC sections 323 and 324 read with section 34 for assaulting a victim's family and were sentenced only to pay fines of Rs.500 and Rs.2,000 respectively. They appealed, seeking the benefit of sections 3 and 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, arguing that the Act should apply e

BHUPATBHAI BACHUBHAI CHAVDA & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 29510 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The father and son appellants were acquitted by the Sessions Court of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34. The State appealed, and the Gujarat High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting them of murder and assault under s.323. The Supreme Court examined whether an appellate court can overturn an acquittal and held

SUBHASH @ SUBANNA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

2024 INSC 29410 April 2024Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Mahadevappa after he went to their house to inquire about a blocked pathway and was brutally assaulted with a stick, chopper and stones, leading to his death. The appellants argued that they acted in private defence, claiming the victim had provoked them, and contended th

RAVISHANKAR TANDONversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 29910 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder under Sections 302, 34, 120B and 201 of the IPC based largely on their statements recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and the subsequent recovery of the victim's body from a pond. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt tha

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusARYAN SINGH ETC.

2023 INSC 33810 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed appeals after the Punjab & Haryana High Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, quashed the criminal proceedings against Aryan Singh and Gautam Cheema, holding that the charges were not proved and the prosecution was malicious. The ac

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusVIKAS MISHRA @ VIKASH MISHRA

2023 INSC 34510 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI arrested Vikas Mishra for offences under sections 409 and 120B of the IPC and obtained a seven‑day police‑custody remand on 16 April 2021. Mishra was hospitalized on 18 April and subsequently released on interim bail on 21 April, which was later cancelled on 8 December 2021 for non‑cooperation. He filed an appl

THE STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKANHAIYA LAL

2019 INSC 51010 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Raju was attacked on the head with an axe by the accused Kanhaiya Lal and died from the injuries. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court reduced the conviction to Section 304 Part I, r

VIJAY MOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2019 INSC 50910 April 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Vijay Mohan Singh, was accused of pouring kerosene on his wife, causing fatal burns, and was charged under Sections 302 r/w 34, 498A, 304B r/w 34 of the IPC and Sections 3, 4, 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial court acquitted him, discarding the victim's dying declaration and other material evide

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusNIRMALA DEVI

2017 INSC 32510 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against the Himachal High Court’s order that replaced the trial court’s imprisonment sentences for Nirmala Devi with a fine of Rs.30,000. The trial court had convicted her under IPC sections 307 (attempt to murder), 328 (causing hurt by poison) and 392 (robbery) and sentenced her

SURAIN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2017 INSC 32310 April 2017Disposed off

Surain Singh was convicted of murder (Sec. 302 IPC) for killing two men during a violent clash between rival factions in a court of the Executive Magistrate. The clash erupted when Singh, objecting to the presence of a rival, drew his kirpan and struck several persons, resulting in two deaths. He appealed to the Suprem

CHARANDAS SWAMIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2017 INSC 32210 April 2017Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Gadadharanandji, the newly elected Chairman of the Vadtal Temple Board of Trustees, who was allegedly kidnapped, strangled and his body burnt and dumped in Rajasthan by a group of temple functionaries. The prosecution proved the accused's motive—fear of losing control over temple finance

MD. JAMILUDIN NASIRversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 31610 April 2015Case Allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code for waging war against the State in a trial court in West Bengal. They appealed the conviction to the Calcutta High Court, which upheld the judgment. Subsequently, the appellants filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions before the Supreme Court seek

RAJA @ RAJINDERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 31210 April 2015Dismissed

The appellant Raja Rajinder was convicted of murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34, based primarily on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution established that the deceased was last seen with the appellant, that a knife, blood‑stained clothes and burnt blanket were rec

LAXMIversusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 31710 April 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing a writ petition filed by acid‑attack victims, examined the implementation of its earlier directions in Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) requiring a minimum compensation of Rs.3 lakh per victim and full medical assistance. The Court noted that several states and Union Territories had not fixed t

MS.SversusSUNIL KUMAR & ANR.

2015 INSC 31110 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Ms S, a minor, was raped by Sunil Kumar while guarding her crops. She reported the incident immediately, and a medical examination corroborated her account; three eyewitnesses also attested to the rape. The trial court acquitted the accused because no test identification parade had been conducted, despite the victim id

SWAROOP SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2013 INSC 23410 April 2013Dismissed

In 1992, a 17‑18‑year‑old girl (PW2) was allegedly forced at knife point by Swaroop Singh to have sexual intercourse in a sugarcane field. She reported the incident immediately, and medical examination revealed a torn hymen; other witnesses corroborated her account and broken bangles were recovered from the scene. The

KAILASH @ TANTI BANJARAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2013 INSC 23710 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC for raping P.W.4, an agricultural labourer, and under Section 506B IPC for criminal intimidation. The trial court, after medical examination, concluded that the victim was about 14 years old and that the intercourse, though allegedly consensual, fell within the offence

RAM DHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2012 INSC 16810 April 2012Dismissed

Petitioner Ram Dhan filed a complaint alleging his son had been kidnapped, leading to the conviction of Balraj and others under IPC 364 r/w 149. The son later testified that he had left voluntarily, prompting Balraj to file an FIR against the petitioner for false information under IPC sections 177, 181, 182, 195 and 42

MAHESH S/O.JANARDHAN GONNADEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 47610 April 2008Dismissed

Mahesh was accused of murdering his former lover Sunita and injuring her husband Sanjay and mother‑in‑law Nirmalabai. The trial court acquitted him, disbelieving the testimony of several relatives who were eye‑witnesses, on the ground that they were interested and lacked independent corroboration. The State appealed un

PONNUSAMYversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2008 INSC 48210 April 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Ponnusamy, was married to Selvi and after a dispute over land she disappeared. He made extra‑judicial confessions to several villagers, admitting that he had murdered her and thrown her body into a canal. Following his confession, the police recovered the decomposed body, which was identified by jeweller

RAITANLALversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

2007 INSC 39410 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rattanlal was charged with murder of Santosh Kumar along with two co‑accused. The trial court acquitted them, citing serious inconsistencies in witness statements, medical evidence, the recovery of weapons and the non‑examination of the investigating officer, which created reasonable doubt. The High Court

NARESH KUMAR MADANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2007 INSC 39510 April 2007Dismissed

Naresh Kumar Madan, a civil engineer employed by the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, was caught accepting a bribe of Rs.1,000 for granting an electrical connection and was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He contended that he was not a "public servant" within the meaning of the Act because the de

MAGANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2007 INSC 39610 April 2007Dismissed

On 27 November 1990, the appellant Magan and four others attacked Indar Singh in Theka Kund village, with Magan shooting an arrow that pierced Indar's chest, leading to his death; Indar's brother Hari Singh was also injured. The trial court convicted all five accused under Sections 148, 302/149 and 323/149 of the IPC,

NARAVAN @ NARANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 40210 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted by the trial court and the Rajasthan High Court for raping the prosecutrix three times and for robbery, under Sections 376 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the prosecutrix’s testimony and found it riddled with contradictions – differing accounts of the

LOK RAMversusNIHAL SINGH AND ANR

2006 INSC 21810 April 2006Dismissed

The appellant Lok Ram was not originally named as an accused in a dowry‑death case in which his sons were convicted. The complainant applied under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to summon Lok Ram as an accused; the trial court rejected the application on the ground that the complainant was an interested

UKARAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2001 INSC 19710 April 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Ukaram was convicted for the murder of his wife and minor daughter based solely on the wife's dying declaration. The wife, Parveena, was alleged to have suffered from mental illness, raising doubts about her capacity to make a reliable statement. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved beyond reas

CAMILO VAZversusSTATE OF GOA

2000 INSC 20610 April 2000Case Partly allowed

Camilo Vaz was part of a gang of seventeen accused tried for the murder of Sub‑Inspector Simon Fernandez and the attempted murder of his brothers during a violent clash between rival village groups. The Sessions Court convicted five, including Vaz, of murder under Section 302 read with Sections 120‑B and 149 IPC and se

RAM NATH MAHTOversusSTATE OF BIHAR

1996 INSC 50310 April 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Ram Nath Mahato, was alleged to have participated in a night robbery on a train, during which a passenger was killed and others injured. A witness (PW 6) identified Mahato in a test identification parade conducted by Judicial Magistrate PW 7, but at trial PW 6 refused to recognize him, claiming fear. The

MULAKH RAJ ETC.versusSATISH KUMAR AND OTHERS

1992 INSC 10610 April 1992Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the death of Shashi Bala, wife of Satish Kumar, who was alleged to have been strangled and her body burnt to destroy evidence. The trial court convicted Kumar under Sections 302 and 201 IPC based on the post‑mortem report, medical testimony and circumstantial evidence, while acquitting his relatives.

GANESHLALversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1992 INSC 10710 April 1992Dismissed

The appellant Ganeshlal was charged, along with his parents, sister, maternal uncle and the uncle's daughter, for the murder of his wife Kanchana, whose body was found severely burnt on the third floor of their house. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) convicted Ganeshlal al

MALKIAT SINGH AND ORSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1991 INSC 9810 April 1991Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the murder of four liquor‑shop workers and the attempted murder of a fifth person. The prosecution relied mainly on the ocular testimony of two injured witnesses (PW‑3 and PW‑4), ballistic evidence linking a rifle owned by the accused A‑1, and circumstantial evidence. The appellants challenged the ad

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANRversusRAM DIYA

1990 INSC 13310 April 1990Dismissed

The State of Haryana appealed against High Court orders directing it to consider premature release of two convicts whose death sentences had been commuted to life imprisonment. The convicts were sentenced before the 1978 amendment introducing Section 433A of the CrPC, which mandates a minimum of 14 years’ actual impris

RAMESH LAXMAN PARDESHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1987 INSC 10310 April 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Laxman Pardeshi and others were convicted of murder (s.302 IPC) for stabbing Sheroo Lala after a heated verbal exchange near Badshah's hand‑cart. The appellant argued that the stabbing was done in the heat of passion, provoked by vulgar words, without pre‑meditation or intention to cause death, and that the appr

POORANMALversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2026 INSC 21710 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Pooranmal was convicted along with co‑accused Ladu Lal for the murder of Ladu Lal’s wife, Aruna, under Sections 302/34 and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution’s case against Pooranmal rested solely on three pieces of circumstantial evidence: call detail records showing frequent communication with Ladu Lal, a

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusBALJEET SINGH

2026 INSC 22110 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI laid a trap after a complaint that Income Tax Inspector Baljeet Singh (A2) demanded a bribe of Rs 5 lakhs on behalf of Assessing Officer Arun Kumar Gurjar (A1). During the trap, marked notes smeared with phenolphthalein were recovered from A2's coat pocket and his hands turned pink in a sodium carbonate test, c

PURAN MALversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2022 INSC 29710 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the State of Haryana, challenged the High Court's order granting bail to Mahesh Kumar, accused of murder under Section 302 IPC, on the ground that the High Court failed to provide cogent reasons despite two prior bail rejections by the Trial Court. The Supreme Court examined the principles governing bail

PRITI SARAF & ANR.versusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2021 INSC 17710 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a criminal complaint alleging that the second respondent, a property owner, cheated them in a commercial transaction involving the sale of a mortgaged plot, breaching the agreement and misappropriating funds, leading to FIRs under Sections 420, 406 and 34 IPC. The Delhi High Court, invoking its inh

CHARANJIT KAURversusBIKRAM SINGH & ANR.

2016 INSC 25710 March 2016Disposed off

Charanjit Kaur filed a criminal complaint under Sections 498A, 406 and 1208 of the IPC alleging dowry harassment and criminal conspiracy by her husband, Bikram Singh. The trial court convicted the husband and sentenced him to one year imprisonment for each offence, with a fine of Rs.1,000. The Sessions Court dismissed

SATISH KUMAR JAYANTI LAL DABGARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2015 INSC 19310 March 2015Dismissed

Satish Kumar Jayanti Lal Dabgar was convicted under IPC sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping for marriage) and 376 (rape) for abducting and raping a girl who was under sixteen years of age. The trial court sentenced him to three years for kidnapping, five years for kidnapping for marriage and seven years rigorous

GURJIT SINGH ALIAS GORA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 18910 March 2015Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of Jagsir Singh on 17 October 1998. The prosecution alleged that Gurjit Singh alias Gora and Surjit Singh alias Sukha, armed with spades (kassi), struck the victim on the head and face after being urged by their parents, Gurdial Singh and Surjit Kaur, to teach the victim a lesson. The accu

VIJAYPALversusSTATE (GNCT) OF DELHI

2015 INSC 19410 March 2015Dismissed

Vijay Pal was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly setting his wife Savitri on fire with kerosene after a domestic quarrel. The prosecution relied on the oral dying declaration of the deceased to her brother, corroborative medical evidence showing 100% burns and kerosene residues, and eyewitness testimony of r

MD.ALL @ GUDDUversusSTATE OF U.P.

2015 INSC 19010 March 2015Dismissed

The appellants were convicted by the trial court and the Allahabad High Court for kidnapping and rape under IPC sections 363, 366 and 376 based largely on the testimony of the prosecutrix and her mother. The FIR was lodged eleven days after the alleged kidnapping, and the mother failed to file a missing report, raising

D. VELAYUTHAMversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SALEM TOWN, CHENNAI

2015 INSC 19110 March 2015Dismissed

The case involved two excise officers, a superintendent (Accused 1) and his subordinate (Accused 2), who demanded bribes from a manufacturer after issuing an illegal show‑cause notice. The complainant reported the demand, and a police‑led trap was set up; the bribe money was handed to Accused 2, who was caught and the

POOJA BHATIAversusVISHNU NARAIN SHIVPURI & ANR.

2014 INSC 17910 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Vishnu Narayan Shivpuri was charged under IPC sections 342, 326‑8 and 506 for allegedly throwing sulphuric acid on his wife, Pooja Bhatia. The Sessions Court denied his bail, but the High Court later released him on bail. After his release, the Superintendent of Police submitted a counter‑affidavit stating that Shivpur

PHOOL CHANDRA & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2014 INSC 93810 March 2014Dismissed

The petitioners, convicted under Sections 363, 366 and 506 of the IPC for a kidnapping case, appealed to the Allahabad High Court, were granted bail and sought an early hearing of their criminal appeal. The High Court ordered the case to be released and listed before an appropriate bench, prompting the petitioners to f

JITEN BESRAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 14110 March 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Jiten Besra was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his parents‑in‑law based on three circumstantial points: his presence in the village on the night of the killings, a strained relationship with the victims, and alleged blood stains on his clothing. The Supreme Court examined the evidence a

SHEIKH MEHEBOOB @ HETAK AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2005 INSC 12710 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for allegedly setting a 20‑year‑old victim on fire. The prosecution’s case rested on the victim’s dying declaration and the testimony of the victim’s father (PW‑2). The Supreme Court found that the father’s written report to police was suppressed, that his eyewit

CHARAN SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2004 INSC 15310 March 2004Disposed off

The case arose from a violent clash over a disputed passage construction in Uttar Pradesh, resulting in three deaths and several injuries. Twenty‑four persons were charged; the trial court convicted seven under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC, while the High Court affirmed those convictions, acquitted fi

DHANAJ SINGH @ SHERA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2004 INSC 15410 March 2004Dismissed

The appellants, Dhanaj Singh @ Shera and others, were convicted for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. They contended that the police investigation was defective – forensic samples were not sent for chemical or ballistic analysis and several potential witnesses were not examined – and that the ey

KOPPULA VENKAT RAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2004 INSC 15510 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Koppula Venkat Rao, was convicted of rape for allegedly forcing a teenage girl into a cattle shed, dragging her onto his bicycle, and ejaculating before any penetration occurred. The trial court and High Court upheld the conviction under Section 376 IPC, treating ejaculation as the consummating act of se

ASHOK HURRAversusRUPA BIPIN ZAVERI

1997 INSC 24510 March 1997Disposed off

The husband and wife, married in 1970, lived separately from 1983 and filed a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act in 1984. The husband later moved a sole application for decree, while the wife withdrew her consent after the statutory 18‑month period, and the husband

SHEIKH ISHAQUE AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1995 INSC 18310 March 1995Dismissed

In July 1990 a bomb attack and arson resulted in the death of three members of the Bhagat family. Four accused were convicted of murder under IPC sections 302/34 and sentenced to death, while seven co‑accused were sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court upheld the death sentences and acquitted the seven co‑accus

SUK DAS & ANR.versusUNION TERRITORY OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

1986 INSC 3110 March 1986Appeal(s) allowed

Suk Das and others were charged under IPC sections 506 and 34 for threatening a public servant. The appellant, being impoverished, could not afford a lawyer and was not informed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner that he was entitled to free legal aid at State expense. He was convicted and sentenced to two years' im

RAM MANORATHversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 6210 March 1981Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a December 5, 1973 incident in Bhawanipur where four persons were killed during a clash involving an alleged unlawful assembly of about twelve men. Twelve accused were charged under IPC sections 302 and 149; the trial court convicted eight, sentencing two (Chhotey and Ram Manorath) to death and the

NIRANJAN SINGH & ANR.versusPRABHAKAR RAJARAM KHAROTE & ORS.

1980 INSC 4410 March 1980Disposed off

The petitioner, a complainant, alleged that police officers abducted and murdered his brother. A private complaint led to an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., after which non‑bailable warrants were issued. The accused police applied for bail; the Sessions Court granted bail with conditions, and the High Court added fu

DR. ANAND RAIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2026 INSC 14110 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, Dr. Anand Rai, was charged under several IPC provisions and the SC/ST Act for allegedly taking part in a stone‑throwing scuffle at a public event. He sought discharge under s.227 CrPC, arguing that the SC/ST charges lacked essential ingredients such as the victim’s caste status and his knowledge of it. The

VASANT @ GIRISH AKBARASAB SANAVALE & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

2025 INSC 22110 February 2025Case Partly allowed

The deceased Geetha was allegedly set on fire by her mother‑in‑law, leading to her death. The trial court acquitted both the husband (appellant No.1) and the mother‑in‑law (appellant No.2) for offences under Sections 498A, 302, 504 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The High Court reversed th

NAUSHEY ALI & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 18210 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, residents of Barwara Khas village, were charged in 1991 with offences including Section 307 IPC for allegedly assaulting Mahmood with lathis and iron bars, leading to a fracture of his finger. After a police closure report deeming the complaint false, the trial court summoned the appellants, and the cas

SHARAFAT ALIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 17310 February 2022Disposed off

Sharafat Ali, convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 and sentenced to life imprisonment, applied for premature release after serving 17 years, 9 months and 26 days. The Uttar Pradesh government rejected his application on vague grounds of possible victim resentment and alleged extremist nature, without examining his p

RAJESHBHAI MULJIBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER ETC.

2020 INSC 16010 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, brothers residing in the UK, sought recovery of Rs.1.20 crore from their maternal uncle (appellant No.3) after the uncle advanced the sum for a land sale and later demanded repayment. The uncle issued four cheques, two of which were dishonoured; a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable I

ARUN SINGH & OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ANOTHER

2020 INSC 16310 February 2020Disposed off

The appellants were charged under Section 493 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for allegedly demanding dowry and for deceitful cohabitation. The complainant filed an FIR after a purported compromise between the parties, and the High Court dismissed the appellants' petition under Section 482

SHARAD KUMAR SANGHIversusSANGITA RANE

2015 INSC 96110 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sharad Kumar Sanghi, Managing Director of Sanghi Brothers (Indore) Ltd., was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating a buyer by delivering a vehicle with a replaced engine after an accident. The complaint, filed under Section 200 of the CrPC, primarily alleged wrongdoing by the company but d

LOKESH SHIVAKUMARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2012 INSC 8610 February 2012Dismissed

The deceased, a money lender, was lured out by accused No.1 who owed him money. He was later found surrounded by four accused, including the appellant (accused No.2). The appellant picked up a piece of gobbaly tree wood and struck the victim on the head, causing fatal injuries; accused No.1 also threw a stone. All four

V.S. ACHUTHANANDANversusR. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI & ORS.

2011 INSC 11610 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the award of a hydro‑electric project contract by the Kerala State Electricity Board to K.P. Poulose at rates far above the probable amount, allegedly facilitated by Minister R. Balakrishna Pillai, a Board member and a close associate. The prosecution proved that the Minister, the Board member and an

RAJU & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 9410 February 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of two appellants, Raju and Mangli, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Ishwar. The incident arose after the deceased misbehaved with women at a marriage ceremony, leading the accused to assault him; the co‑accused were armed with k

KUSUM SHARMA & OTHERSversusBATRA HOSPITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE & OTHERS

2010 INSC 9510 February 2010Dismissed

The appellants filed a complaint under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service and medical negligence after the death of the husband who underwent adrenal surgery at Batra Hospital. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissed the complaint, finding no negligence.

AMAN KUMAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2004 INSC 9310 February 2004Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted of rape under Section 376(2)(g) IPC based largely on the testimony of the prosecutrix, a minor girl, while other witnesses turned hostile. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether a prosecutrix's testimony can be relied upon without corroboration and whether the evidence established t

SASHI JENA AND ORS.versusKHADAL SWAIN AND ANR.

2004 INSC 9510 February 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The father of the deceased filed a complaint alleging that the appellants demanded additional dowry, tortured the victim and caused her death. A magistrate conducted an inquiry under Section 202 CrPC, during which an eye‑witness (PW 1) gave a statement that was later recorded. At trial PW 1 was declared hostile and the

K. CH. PRASADversusSMT. J.VANALATHA DEVI AND ORS.

1987 INSC 4010 February 1987Dismissed

A complaint was filed against K. Ch. Prasad, an officer of a nationalised bank, under IPC sections 120(b), 467 and 471. The appellant objected that the prosecution could not proceed without prior sanction under CrPC section 197, arguing that he was a public servant whose removal required government sanction. The Metrop

JAWAHAR LAL SINGHversusNARESH SINGH & ORS.

1987 INSC 4110 February 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Twenty‑five accused were tried for dacoity and murder under Section 396 of the IPC. Eye‑witnesses claimed to have identified the accused in lantern light, and the prosecution evidence was attributed to different accused. The Sessions Judge discarded the prosecution evidence and acquitted all accused. The State of Bihar

JAYABENversusTEJAS KANUBHAI ZALA & ANR

2022 INSC 2810 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves the murder of Mukeshbhai, the husband of complainant Jayaben, who was brutally beaten and tied to a gate by five accused persons. The accused were identified in a Test Identification Parade, and the incident was captured on CCTV and a mobile phone. The High Court had released the principal accused, Te

SANKATH PRASADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2020 INSC 2810 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sankath Prasad, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for shooting the complainant's son during an altercation over a disputed plot. The incident occurred when the appellant retrieved a country-made pistol from his house and fired at the complainant, but the son intervened and was shot, later dyi

LAVGHANBHAI DEVJIBHAI VASAVAversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2018 INSC 2010 January 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Lavghanbhai Devjibhai Vasava, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for striking his wife, Shakuben, with a wooden object during a sudden altercation over delayed lunch preparation, leading to her death ten days later. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the facts warranted a convictio

SALONI ARORAversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2017 INSC 4310 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was prosecuted under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code for making a false complaint to a public servant. The prosecution failed to follow the mandatory procedure under Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires a written complaint by the public servant before a prosecution can be lau

STATE OF GUJARATversusRATANSINGH @ CHINUBHAL ANOPSINH CHAUHAN

2014 INSC 2010 January 2014Dismissed

The State of Gujarat charged Ratansingh under sections 376, 302 and 201 of the IPC for the alleged rape and murder of a seven‑year‑old girl. The trial court convicted him, awarding a death sentence for murder and life imprisonment for rape. On appeal, the Gujarat High Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution’s

CHINNAM KAMESWARA RAO AND ORS.versusSTATE OF AP. REP. BY HOME SECRETARY

2013 INSC 2810 January 2013Dismissed

The appellants were accused of murdering a man and injuring another after a prior confrontation. The trial court acquitted them, but the High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted them under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC, imposing life imprisonment. The appellants challenged the High Court's

ARUN BHANDARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 2910 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Arun Bhandari, an NRI, paid Rs.1.05 crore as part payment for a plot in Greater Noida on the basis of an agreement with respondents Savita Singh and Raghuvinder Singh, who later transferred the property to a third party. When the property was not delivered, Bhandari filed an FIR alleging cheating and criminal breach of

BIJA & ORSversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2008 INSC 3410 January 2008Case Partly allowed

The deceased Santro, after a forced second marriage (Karewa) arranged by the village Panchayat, was found dead in her in-laws' house. Medical evidence established that she died from asphyxia due to smothering, not from epilepsy or electrocution as the defence claimed. The trial court and High Court convicted all four a

PURAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2008 INSC 3510 January 2008Case Allowed

Puran Singh was charged with murdering his brother Rajpal Singh by firing a licensed 12‑bore gun. The trial court acquitted him, citing benefit of doubt, but the High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted him under IPC s.302. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the appellant raised a new plea that the cartridge which

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusBACCHUDAS@ BALARAM AND ORS.

2007 INSC 2510 January 2007Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order acquitting Bacchudas and others, who had been convicted by a trial court for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under IPC Section 304 Part II read with Section 34. The prosecution relied on the testimony of the deceased's widow (PW‑1), his son (PW‑2) and a

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusDEVENDRA NATH RAI

2006 INSC 1810 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, Devendra Nath Rai, while on quarter‑guard duty, refused to let three army personnel in civilian attire make a "lights out" entry, claimed they were terrorists, and opened fire, killing two soldiers and grievously injuring two others. He was tried by a General Court Martial under the Army Act and sentenced

SURESH CHAND JAINversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR.

2001 INSC 1910 January 2001Dismissed

The appellant was named in a private complaint alleging offences under the Prizes, Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Prohibition) Act and IPC 420. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, without examining the complainant on oath, ordered the police to register an FIR and investigate under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. The appel

SURENDER KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2025 INSC 14129 December 2025Dismissed

Surender Kumar was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the IPC for stabbing the deceased with four knife blows to vital parts, causing fatal injuries. The appellant argued that the incident fell under one of the four exceptions to Section 300 IPC, seeking a conviction for a lesser offence. The Supreme Court examin

M/S SUVARNA COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.

2021 INSC 8549 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka filed a criminal complaint against a private respondent (original accused No.1) and others for offences under Sections 120B, 408, 409, 420 and 149 of the IPC. A charge‑sheet was filed only against accused No.1 after a thorough investigation. The High Court of Karnataka quashed the proceedings on

GULABversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 8529 December 2021Dismissed

Gulab was convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly exhorting his co‑accused Idrish to shoot the deceased. The prosecution relied on three eyewitnesses, all relatives of the victim, who consistently testified that Gulab arrived with a lathi, urged Idrish to kill, and that Idris

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