Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Penal Code, 1860

3,190 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,201–1,400.

ABHISHEK SHARMAversusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2023 INSC 92418 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusINDRAJIT KUNDU & ORS.

2019 INSC 116418 October 2019Dismissed

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

PUTCHALAPALLI NARESH REDDYversusSTATE OF A.P. AND ETC.

2013 INSC 70618 October 2013Disposed off

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

SATBIR @ LAKHAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 48118 October 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Satbir (also identified as A‑2), was in charge of collecting donations for a temple festival. After the festival, members of the complainant party questioned the use of the remaining funds, leading to a heated quarrel in a tailor's shop. The appellant and other accused restrained the complainants, after

KISHORE SAMRITEversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2012 INSC 48318 October 2012Disposed off

Kishore Samrite, a former MLA, filed writ petition No.111/2011 in the Allahabad High Court as a next friend of three residents of Amethi, alleging their illegal detention and a rape by Rahul Gandhi (respondent No.6). A second writ petition No.125/2011 was filed by Gajendra Pal Singh as a next friend of the same three p

DEVINDER @ KALA RAM & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 48418 October 2012Case Partly allowed

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

JUVERIA ABDUL MAJID PATNIversusATIF IQBAL MANSOORI AND ANR.

2014 INSC 101118 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Juveria Abdul Majid Patni, married Atif Iqbal Mansoori under Muslim rites in 2005 and alleged physical abuse and cruelty, leading her to file an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC in 2007. She obtained an ex parte Khula (divorce) from a Mufti on 9 May 2008, which the respondent contested in family court

PUSHPANJALI SAHUversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ANR.

2012 INSC 40818 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a matron employed at a government women’s college hostel who alleged that the hostel night‑watchman raped her. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to seven years’ imprisonment; the Sessions Court affirmed this sentence. The High Court, exe

IRFANversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 101218 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

ABHINAV MOHAN DELKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 99018 August 2025Dismissed

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

HARENDRA RAIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 73818 August 2023

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

M N G BHARATEESH REDDYversusRAMESH RANGANATHAN AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 84718 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

MADHAVversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2021 INSC 41318 August 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

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

STATE OF GOAversusJOSE MARIA ALBERT VALES @ ROBERT VALES

2017 INSC 77618 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAJ BALAversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2015 INSC 58318 August 2015Disposed off

The accused were convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code for abetment of suicide and sentenced by the trial court to three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine. On appeal, the High Court upheld the conviction but reduced the term to the period already served (four months and twenty days), citing lack o

RAMVILASversusSTATE OF M.P.

2015 INSC 58118 August 2015Dismissed

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

G. PARSHWANATHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2010 INSC 52518 August 2010Dismissed

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

SHIVANNAversusSTATE BY HUNSUR TOWN POLICE

2010 INSC 52618 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a truck driver, was charged with causing death and injuries when his stone‑laden truck overturned on a state highway, leading to convictions under IPC sections 304‑A, 279, 337 and 338. The prosecution relied primarily on the testimony of three injured witnesses who were in the vehicle, alleging that the

MALA CHOUDHARY & ANR.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 87018 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

KAUSHAL SINGHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2025 INSC 87118 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2024 INSC 53418 July 2024Disposed off

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

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

2023 INSC 65218 July 2023Dismissed

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

P. YUVAPRAKASHversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 67618 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

SONU@AMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2017 INSC 63418 July 2017Dismissed

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

HUSSEIN GHADIALLY @M.H.G.A. SHAIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 49418 July 2014Disposed off

The case arose from twin bomb blasts in Surat in 1993 for which several accused were convicted under the Indian Penal Code, the Explosives Substances Act and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA). The trial court recorded the offences under TADA after obtaining approvals from the Additional Ch

KETANKUMAR GOPALBHAI TANDELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2013 INSC 48418 July 2013Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder and assault in 1995 and sentenced to life imprisonment and fines. At the time of the offence he was 17 years, 11 months and 5 days old, i.e., below 18 years. The issue was whether he should be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2

MUSTAK @ KANIO AHMED SHAIKHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2020 INSC 43518 June 2020Dismissed

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

ROOP SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2013 INSC 36918 June 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Roop Singh, was convicted of rape under Section 376 IPC and house trespass under Section 450 IPC for forcibly entering his neighbour's house at night and having sexual intercourse with the complainant while she was asleep. The appellant appealed, claiming the complainant had consented to the act and that

HAKIMversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

2025 INSC 72818 May 2025

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

CHANCHALPATI DASversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2023 INSC 55418 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAVI MANDALversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 55218 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusVINOD KUMAR

2012 INSC 24018 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

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

THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESHversusKAMAL AGARWAL & ORS. ETC

2024 INSC 31718 April 2024Disposed off

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

MUKHTAR ZAIDIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 31618 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

KIRPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2024 INSC 31218 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

ANSAR AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2023 INSC 72518 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

JAGJEET SINGH & ORSversusASHISH MISHRA @ MONU & ANR.

2022 INSC 42718 April 2022Disposed off

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

SEEMA SINGHversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2018 INSC 36418 April 2018Dismissed

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

SHANKERversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2018 INSC 35918 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Sanjay Sorle at a marriage ceremony, for which eleven persons were charged, including appellants A‑3 (Suresh) and A‑5 (Shanker). The trial court convicted the five remaining accused under Sections 148, 149 and 302 of the IPC, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the Supreme

AYAN CHATTERJEEversusFUTURE TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION INC. & ORS.

2017 INSC 35818 April 2017Disposed off

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

SURAJSINH ALIAS SONU SURAJSINH COLLECTORSINH ALIAS SEVARAM RAJPUTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2017 INSC 36318 April 2017Dismissed

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

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

2013 INSC 26918 April 2013Case Partly allowed

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

SAHIB HUSSAIN @ SAHIB JANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 27018 April 2013Dismissed

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

MARIAPPANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 27318 April 2013Dismissed

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

HAZARA SINGHversusRAJ KUMAR AND ORS.

2013 INSC 26818 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Hazara Singh filed a criminal revision seeking enhancement of sentence against four accused who were convicted under Section 307 IPC for attempting murder and other offences. The trial court sentenced two accused to five years' rigorous imprisonment and the other two to three years, along with fines. The

BACHPAN BACHAO ANDOLANversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2011 INSC 30718 April 2011Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ filed by Bachpan Bachao Andolan seeking protection for children employed in Indian circuses, who were subjected to physical, sexual and emotional abuse and denied education. The Court examined whether such employment violated the children’s fundamental rights, especi

WAIKHOM YAIMA SINGHversusSTATE OF MANIPUR

2011 INSC 31018 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased was found unconscious on the road and taken to a hospital where he allegedly regained consciousness and made an oral dying declaration accusing Waikhom Yaima Singh of assault before dying the next morning. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the dying declaration unreliable due to lack of medica

BHANU VALVEversusSTATE

2011 INSC 31218 April 2011Dismissed

The petitioner, a father, was convicted of repeatedly raping his own daughter over a period of five years, resulting in the birth of a child. The trial court and the Bombay High Court at Goa upheld the conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition before the Suprem

TR. A. BABUversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2025 INSC 79918 March 2025

The appellant, a 68‑year‑old former managing trustee of two charitable trusts, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for criminal misconduct, criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of grant‑in‑aid funds meant for schools for specially‑abled children. The High Court rejected his appeal agains

SOMNATHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 23218 March 2024Disposed off

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

PERIYASAMYversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2024 INSC 21218 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

NAVAS @ MULANAVASversusSTATE OF KERALA

2024 INSC 21518 March 2024Case Partly allowed

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

MS. XversusMR. A AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 21618 March 2024Dismissed

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

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

2021 INSC 19218 March 2021Disposed off

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

JEETENDRAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 30818 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jeetendra, was arrested in 2019 for alleged forgery of property documents that had earlier been used as a personal bond for his bail in a matrimonial dispute. Two police closure reports—one in 2013 and another in September 2019—concluded that no offence was committed. Despite these reports, the High Cour

BHAGWAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2020 INSC 31018 March 2020Case Partly allowed

During his son’s wedding in Uttarakhand, the appellant fired a licensed gun towards the roof, causing pellets to strike five guests, two of whom died. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302 and 307 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and five years’ rigorous imprisonment, respectively. On appeal, the S

INDRAJIT SURESHPRASAD BIND & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2013 INSC 17318 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The wife of appellant No.1 committed suicide by pouring kerosene on herself on 18 May 2004. The prosecution alleged that the husband and his parents had subjected her to cruelty and harassment for dowry, instigating her suicide, and secured convictions under Sections 3048, 498A and 306 of the IPC. The sole piece of evi

NIRMALA J. JHALAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 17018 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Chief Judicial Magistrate, was accused by a litigant of demanding a Rs.20,000 bribe to influence a case. A preliminary inquiry was followed by a regular departmental enquiry, which found her guilty of the first charge and partially guilty of a second. The High Court, on the administrative side, recomme

CHILDLINE INDIA FOUNDATION & ANR.versusALLAN JOHN WATERS & ORS.

2011 INSC 22518 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by Childline India Foundation and the State of Maharashtra against the Bombay High Court’s order acquitting three accused of sexual and physical abuse of children in Anchorage Shelter Homes in Mumbai. The trial court had convicted the accused under IPC sections 377, 109, 1208, 1

STATE OF M.P.versusRAMESH AND ANR.

2011 INSC 22118 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSURENDRA SINGH RATHORE

2025 INSC 24818 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

HOTEL PRIYA, A PROPRIETORSHIPversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2022 INSC 20618 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of orchestra bars, challenged licence conditions imposed by the Maharashtra Police Commissioner that limited the number of performers to eight, with a gender cap of four women and four men on stage. The High Court upheld the conditions, but the Supreme Court held that the gender cap is unconstitu

GHUSABHAI RAISANGBHAI CHORASIYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2015 INSC 13318 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased wife, Biniben, committed suicide after allegedly being driven to despair by her husband Rakesh's extramarital affair with Jasuben (appellant No.4). The State charged the husband, his parents, and Jasuben under Sections 498A (cruelty), 306 (abetment of suicide), 201 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The tri

VIJAY KUMARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2014 INSC 10718 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Dr. Atma Ram and Vijay Kumar, were convicted for murder and related offences under Sections 1208, 302, 460 and 382 IPC based solely on circumstantial evidence that the deceased midwife was killed and her ornaments were stolen. The prosecution relied on four circumstances: homicidal death, a threat by th

BHASKAR LAL SHARMA & ANR.versusMONICA & ORS.

2014 INSC 10518 February 2014Disposed off

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

RAVIversusBADRINARAYAN AND ORS.

2011 INSC 13918 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

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

ABDUL MANNANversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2010 INSC 10918 February 2010Dismissed

The case arose from an assault on Abdul Hakim and his brothers on 17 February 1994, during which Abdul Karim was also attacked and later died of his injuries. Six persons, including Abdul Mannan, were charged under Sections 302, 132, 313 and 34 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court set a

GEETA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 5418 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

ISHWARJI NAGAJI MALIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 5718 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

BHAGWANIversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 5218 January 2022Case Partly allowed

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

NAND KISHOREversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 5818 January 2019Case Partly allowed

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

GOPAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 4218 January 2013Dismissed

The case involved a double murder arising from a fight between two rival groups in a field in Rajasthan. The appellants Gopal and Mahesh killed Rameshwar (R) while defending themselves from an attack, and subsequently chased and killed Prabhat (P) who was fleeing the scene. The trial court convicted them under Section

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

2013 INSC 4318 January 2013Disposed off

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

ONKAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 3818 January 2012Dismissed

The case arose from a midnight attack on the house of complainant Jalsur on 22-23 March 1980, during which the deceased Onkar Singh was shot dead and Jalsur's son and daughter were injured. The appellants, along with five other accused, were convicted under Sections 302, 307 and 452 IPC read with Section 149 for murder

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusVISHWESHWAR KOL

2011 INSC 5618 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

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

ALAMELU & ANR.versusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2011 INSC 5518 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

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

SAMBHUBHAI RAISANGBHAI PADHIYARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 107217 December 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of kidnapping, brutal sexual assault and murder of a four‑year‑old boy and sentenced to death by the trial court, a sentence confirmed by the Gujarat High Court. The Supreme Court examined whether the circumstantial evidence satisfied the golden principles and whether the presumption under S

ATHAR PARWEZversusUNION OF INDIA

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 109317 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, alleged active member of the Popular Front of India (PFI), was arrested in July 2022 for allegedly planning disturbances during the Prime Minister's visit to Patna. He was charged under several sections of the IPC and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), but the chargesheet had not been frame

AYUB KHANversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 68017 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a District and Sessions Judge of Rajasthan, was criticised by the Rajasthan High Court for not including a tabular chart of the accused's antecedents in a bail order, as directed in the Jugal Kishore case. The High Court deemed this non‑compliance as indiscipline and possibly contempt, ordering the judge

GOVINDANversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2021 INSC 91517 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellant Govindan was convicted under Section 304(ii) IPC for causing the death of Kamsala during a land dispute over a pathway. The trial court found that the incident arose from a sudden quarrel, with the complainant's family acting as aggressors, and held that there was no pre‑meditation, though the appellant e

BRIJMANI DEVIversusPAPPU KUMAR & ANR.

2021 INSC 91917 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, mother of the deceased Rupesh Kumar, filed two FIRs alleging that the respondent, Pappu Kumar, attempted to murder her son in 2017 and murdered him in 2020, also violating the Arms Act. The respondent was arrested after absconding for seven months and was denied bail by the Sessions Court, but the Patna

PARVATI DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR NOW STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2021 INSC 91117 December 2021Disposed off

The appellant husband, Ram Sahay Mahto, and his mother-in-law, Parvati Devi, were convicted under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the IPC for the death of the appellant's wife, Fulwa Devi, who disappeared from her matrimonial home and was later found dead in a river. The prosecution alleged that the accused demanded dowry

RAHNA JALALversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER

2020 INSC 70717 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 70617 December 2020Disposed off

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

MANJUversusSTATE OF DELHI

2019 INSC 138517 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF PUNJABversusLABH SINGH

2014 INSC 87617 December 2014Case Partly allowed

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

STATE OF PUNJABversusJAGGA SINGH ETC

2014 INSC 87817 December 2014Dismissed

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

RAJINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 88417 December 2014Case Partly allowed

The appellant Rajinder Singh was convicted for the murder of Suraj Mal and Shri Ram and for violating Section 27 of the Arms Act after a violent altercation following a Holi celebration. The incident involved a quarrel between a juvenile and another party, after which the appellant allegedly fired his licensed double‑b

GULABRAO BABURAO DEOKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2013 INSC 84217 December 2013Dismissed

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

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusBHAGWAN DAS AGRAWAL & OTHERS

2013 INSC 84117 December 2013Disposed off

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

ASHFAQ AHMED QUERESHI & ANR.versusNAMRATA CHOPRA & ORS.

2013 INSC 84317 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

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

TUMMALA VENKATESWAR RAOversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2013 INSC 84717 December 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Tummala Venkat... was convicted under Section 304B IPC for causing the death of his wife Neelima, who died after ingesting poison following repeated dowry demands and physical abuse. The High Court upheld the conviction and sentenced him to seven years rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the Supreme Court

CHHOTAN SAO & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 84917 December 2013Case Partly allowed

The deceased, Babita Devi, allegedly died after being forced to consume poison following dowry harassment by her husband’s relatives. The father‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law were tried and convicted under Sections 304B (dowry death) and 498A (cruelty) of the IPC, as well as under the Dowry Prohibition Act. The High Court a

RAJ KUMAR @ BHEEMAversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 132217 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Raj Kumar was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based primarily on the identification by the injured eye‑witness, PW‑18, whose testimony was recorded via video‑link eight and a half years after the incident. The High Court upheld the conviction, relying on the witness's identification, the appella

KUNA@ SANJAYA BEHERAversusTHE STATE OF ODISHA

2017 INSC 112417 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

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

BALKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 102917 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the murder of Satinder Sekhon, for which A‑10 (Balkar Singh) was convicted under Sections 120B (conspiracy) and 302 read with 34 of the IPC, based largely on circumstantial evidence. The trial court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court upheld the conviction, while the accused argued that there was no m

VISHWAJEET KERBA MASALKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 78817 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

SUPRIYO @ SUPRIYA CHAKRABORTY & ANRversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 92017 October 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court of India considered a batch of petitions seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and other laws. The Court held that there is no fundamental right to marry under the Constitution, and the Special Marriage Act is not unconstitutional for excluding same-sex c

GURMAIL SINGH & ANRversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 109717 October 2022Dismissed

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

MD. JABBAR ALI & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2022 INSC 109617 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

MANOJ KUMAR TIWARIversusMANISH SISODIA & ORS

2022 INSC 110417 October 2022Disposed off

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

DR. LAKSHMANversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2019 INSC 115317 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

MANI PUSHPAK JOSHIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2019 INSC 116117 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

KULDEEP KAURversusSTATE OF UTIARAKHAND

2014 INSC 73717 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kuldeep Kaur, the mother‑in‑law of Jagpreet Kaur, was convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code for abetment of suicide after the bride died by hanging within four months of marriage. The prosecution alleged dowry demands and harassment, but the trial court found no specific evidence of dowry

N. SOUNDARAMversusP.K. POUNRAJ & ANR.

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

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

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

2012 INSC 47817 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

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

THAMMINENI BHASKARversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 112417 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

KANCHAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 49617 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusANIL KANWARIYA

2021 INSC 49017 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

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

AJOY ACHARYAversusSTATE BUREAU OF INV. AGAINST ECO. OFFENCE

2013 INSC 63217 September 2013Dismissed

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

BRIJ LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 60617 August 2016Dismissed

The appellant Brij Lal, a government employee, and his co‑accused Kashi Ram, armed with pistols, went to the residence of Mohan Ram where a crowd had gathered to prevent them from killing Mohan Lal. Brij Lal fired at the unarmed crowd, causing the deaths of Om Prakash, Sultan Bhat and Munni Devi, and injuries to others

SUBHASH KRISHNANversusSTATE OF GOA

2012 INSC 33917 August 2012Dismissed

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

MALOTH SOMARAJUversusSTATE OF AP.

2011 INSC 58717 August 2011Dismissed

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

AMITAVA BANERJEE @ AMIT @ BAPPA BANERJEEversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2011 INSC 58417 August 2011Dismissed

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

STATE NCT OF DELHIversusAJIT SETH @ AJJI

2010 INSC 52017 August 2010Dismissed

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

MADAN MOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2010 INSC 52117 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

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

M SAMBASIVA RAOversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 86817 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSHYAM BIHARI & OTHERS

2023 INSC 62317 July 2023Dismissed

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

ARVIND KUMARversusSTATE OF NCT, DELHI

2023 INSC 62217 July 2023Case Partly allowed

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

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

2023 INSC 97217 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

TEHSEEN S. POONAWALLAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 61717 July 2018Directions issued

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

PADMINI MAHENDRABHAI GADDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2017 INSC 62217 July 2017Matter referred to larger bench

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

SALIL BALIversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2013 INSC 47417 July 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard a batch of writ petitions challenging Sections 2(k), 2(1), 15, 16, 17, 19 and 21 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, on the ground that the age limit of 18 years for juveniles was arbitrary and violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, especially in the wa

ARSHAD HUSSAINversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 47717 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Arshad Hussain, was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of Iqbal, based on the prosecution claim that he fired three shots from a 12‑bore gun after being prompted by his brothers, Mujaffar and Shahjad. The High Court acquitted the brothers on alibi grounds, but uphe

RAJENDRA SHARMAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 47617 July 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a taxi driver, was convicted along with two others for committing dacoity under Sections 395 and 397 of the IPC, as well as offences under the Arms Act and the Explosive Substances Act, after a gold jewellery workshop was looted and the perpetrators fled in two taxis. The trial court sentenced each accus

NAGAPPANversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 47817 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the murder of Pasupathy by four accused (A-1 to A-4) in Tamil Nadu. The trial court convicted all four under IPC s.302 read with s.34 based largely on the testimony of two brothers (PW‑1 and PW‑3) who were relatives of the deceased, and on a post‑mortem report by Dr. PW‑10. The appellant, Nagappan (A‑

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

2012 INSC 28917 July 2012Case Partly allowed

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

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusTALEVAR & ANR.

2011 INSC 41717 June 2011Dismissed

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

GHURELAL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2011 INSC 41817 June 2011Dismissed

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

AJWARversusWASEEM AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 43817 May 2024Disposed off

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

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

2022 INSC 57717 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

MS. XversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANR.

2018 INSC 52917 May 2018Disposed off

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

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusFIROZ KHAN @ ARIF KHAN

2016 INSC 42917 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

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

HUIDROM KONUNGJAO SINGHversusSTATE OF MANIPUR & ORS.

2012 INSC 23917 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Huidrom Shantikumar Singh was arrested for murder under Section 302 IPC and the Arms Act and, while already in custody, a District Magistrate ordered his detention under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (NSA) on the basis that he might be released on bail in a similar case and could engage in activities prejud

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

2025 INSC 50217 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

ANKIT MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 50117 April 2025Dismissed

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

SUBHASH AGGARWALversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 49917 April 2025Dismissed

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

SIJU KURIANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 37817 April 2023Dismissed

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

M.NARAYANversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2015 INSC 33717 April 2015Dismissed

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

MOHAN LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2015 INSC 33417 April 2015Dismissed

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

MONJU ROY & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 33617 April 2015Case Partly allowed

Shanti Roy, married to Sekhar Roy, allegedly faced a dowry demand of Rs.5,000 by her husband, his mother, and siblings, leading to harassment and her suicide by self‑immolation while eight months pregnant. The trial court convicted the husband, his mother, and the siblings under Sections 3048, 498A, 306 and 304B of the

ANNAPURNAversusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 26317 April 2013Dismissed

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

SAFI MOHD.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 26217 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant Safi Mohammad was arrested on suspicion of supplying secret information about the Indian Armed Forces to Pakistani intelligence. During a search of his railway quarter, police seized a blue diary (1982) and a hand‑drawn map (Ex.D‑3) which were deemed by the Air Force to be useful to an enemy. He was convi

HIRALAL PANDEY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P

2012 INSC 17417 April 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of three accused who fired on a motorcycle, killing Raja Ram Singh and Kunj Behari Singh on 22 September 1979. The prosecution relied on two eyewitnesses, PW‑1 (the complainant) and PW‑2, who testified that the accused fired multiple shots from a double‑barrel gun, a single‑barre

SUBRAMANIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2026 INSC 24917 March 2026Dismissed

The appellant Subramani was accused of murdering his wife by pouring kerosene on her, setting her alight, and also of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC. The trial court acquitted him, relying on the small size of the bathroom and questioning the reliability of the victim's dying declaration. On appeal, the High Cou

MOHAMMAD KALEEMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2026 INSC 25117 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusCHATRA

2025 INSC 36017 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

In 1986 a minor girl (referred to as V) was found unconscious and bleeding after the accused Chatra allegedly raped her. The trial court convicted Chatra under Section 376 IPC based on medical evidence, circumstantial evidence and the testimony of a key eyewitness, Gulab Chand, despite the victim’s silence. The High Co

CARDINAL MAR GEORGE ALENCHERRYversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2023 INSC 25017 March 2023Disposed off

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

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

2023 INSC 25717 March 2023Directions issued

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

MS. XversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 25217 March 2023Disposed off

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

DAULAT RAM @ DAULTIversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 97317 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Daulat Ram was convicted under Sections 302 read with 34 and Section 201 of the IPC for the murder of Zile Singh, based largely on the testimony of the victim's father and his relatives who claimed to have seen the accused throwing the dead body into a dry well. The prosecution's case relied on circumstan

NAVAL KISHOREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2015 INSC 97217 March 2015Dismissed

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

M. MAHENDAR KUMARversusM. MANI & ORS.

2015 INSC 23217 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2015 INSC 22817 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAVINDRA PAL SINGHversusAJIT SINGH & ANR

2011 INSC 21717 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, whose son was allegedly killed in a fake police encounter, filed a criminal case against five police officers under Sections 120B, 364, 302, 201 and 1208 of the IPC. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated the matter and submitted a charge‑sheet implicating the officers. The accused applie

COMMR. OF POLICE AND ORSversusSANDEEP KUMAR

2011 INSC 21917 March 2011Dismissed

Sandeep Kumar applied for the post of Head Constable in 1999 and answered "No" to a question about any arrest, prosecution, detention, fine or conviction. He had earlier been involved in a criminal case (FIR 362 under IPC sections 325/34) that was compromised and he was acquitted in 1998, but disclosed this only in the

RAVINDRA PAL SINGHversusSANTOSH KUMAR JAISWAL & ORS.

2011 INSC 22017 March 2011Disposed off

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

RAKESH MITTALversusAJAY PAL GUPTA @ SONU CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 16117 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

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

ROHIT JANGDEversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2026 INSC 16217 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rohit Jangde, the step‑father of a six‑year‑old girl, was convicted by the trial court and the High Court for her murder based on three circumstances: a ‘last seen together’ theory, recovery of charred bone fragments and ashes after the accused allegedly led police to the site, and DNA matching of verteb

PARAMESHWARIversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS

2026 INSC 16417 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

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

SUBHELAL @ SUSHIL SAHUversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 24217 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

HITESH UMESHBHAI MASHRUversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2025 INSC 24617 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

JAIDEEP BOSEversusM/S BID AND HAMMER AUCTIONEERS PRIVATE LIMITED

2025 INSC 24117 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAM GOPAL S/O MANSHARAMversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 13317 February 2023Dismissed

Ram Gopal, the former sarpanch of Har Gangoli, was accused of murdering his neighbour Pratap Singh after taking him on the evening of 19 December 1995; the victim was found dead the next morning. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen together" theory, the short interval between the

RASHMI BEHLversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2015 INSC 13017 February 2015

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

JABIR & ORSversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 4817 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

YOGENDRA @ JOGENDRA SINGHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 5417 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

INDIAN HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION (AHAR) & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2019 INSC 5217 January 2019Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance Act, 2016 and its Rules, which regulate dance performances in hotels, restaurants and bar rooms. Petitioners argued that provisions defining "obscene dance", licensing restrictions, punitive measures for tips, and various licensing co

SARVEPALLI RADHAKRISHNAN UNIVERSITY & ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2019 INSC 5717 January 2019Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conduct of R.K.D.F. Medical College, which had been permitted to admit MBBS students but was found to have repeatedly failed to meet minimum standards. An enquiry revealed that the college fabricated patient records and falsified documents to mislead the Court and the Medical Council of I

MAUVIN GODINHOversusSTATE OF GOA

2018 INSC 2817 January 2018Disposed off

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

IQRAMversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS

2022 INSC 129516 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAJARAMversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS

2022 INSC 129616 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Pushpa was burnt and later died; two dying declarations were recorded—first (Ex. P‑11) by a Naib Tehsildar, which did not name her husband Rajaram, and second (Ex. P‑26) by a police officer, which accused Rajaram and others of cruelty and dowry harassment. The trial court convicted Rajaram under Section 49

ANITA RANIversusASHOK KUMAR & ORS

2021 INSC 90516 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Anita Rani filed two civil suits against her relatives Ashok Kumar and others to recover money. In the first suit, the respondents had taken a Rs 10.5 million loan, repaid Rs 5 million and claimed the repayment was a full and final settlement, but no written receipt or memorandum of compromise was produced. In the seco

SEELAN @ JEYASEELANversusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2020 INSC 70316 December 2020Dismissed

The petitioner, Seelan @ Jeyaseelan, was convicted for raping a six‑year‑old girl. He filed a Special Leave Petition contending that the charge was framed only under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, which does not carry the mandatory ten‑year minimum punishment prescribed in Section 376(2)(f). The Supreme Court

SANJAI TIWARIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 70416 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

PUNEET DALMIAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, HYDERABAD

2019 INSC 137916 December 2019Disposed off

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

MANGU SINGHversusDHARMENDRA & ANR.

2015 INSC 93516 December 2015Dismissed

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

BIMLA DEVIversusRAJESH SINGH &ANR.

2015 INSC 93016 December 2015Dismissed

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

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusHEMANT KAWADU CHAURIWAL ETC.

2015 INSC 93716 December 2015Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of the accused husband and mother‑in‑law in a murder case where the deceased had died from severe burns. The trial court had relied on the deceased's dying declaration and letters she allegedly wrote to her father, convicting the accused under Sections 302, 304B and 498A

STATE OF PUNJABversusBITTU &ANR. ETC. ETC.

2015 INSC 93616 December 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by the State of Punjab against the acquittal of five accused persons for murder, kidnapping, conspiracy and related offences. The trial court had convicted them based on eyewitness testimony, medical evidence and a motive established by a friend of the deceased. On appeal, the High Co

RAJIV SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANOTHER

2015 INSC 93816 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

MOHD. FEROZ KHAN@ FEROZversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2015 INSC 104416 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

NARENDER KUMARversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2015 INSC 93216 December 2015Dismissed

The appellants, three police constables, were convicted for the murder of Laxman Singh under Sections 302 read with 34 (and 330) of the IPC. The prosecution's case rested on a dying declaration recorded by a Metropolitan Magistrate after the victim was taken to hospital, where he alleged severe beatings and being set o

NEERU YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P AND ANOTHER

2014 INSC 84116 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

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

VIJAY PAL SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTIARAKHAND

2014 INSC 87016 December 2014Case Partly allowed

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

HARISH KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 87116 December 2014Case Partly allowed

Harish Kumar was married to Manisha, who suffered severe burn injuries on 13 September 1993 and died five days later. He was charged under Sections 304B (dowry death) and 498A (dowry cruelty) of the IPC. The trial court convicted him on both counts; the High Court upheld the convictions. On appeal, the Supreme Court ex

NAND KLSHOREversusSTATE OF M.P.

2014 INSC 104116 December 2014Case Allowed

The petitioner, convicted under Section 302 of the IPC for a murder committed on 18 June 1997, claimed that he was only 17 years old at the time of the offence and therefore entitled to the benefits of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The Supreme Court examined documentary and oral evid

ABRARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2010 INSC 88516 December 2010Dismissed

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

SUBHASHversusSLATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 88616 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

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

HARI SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2010 INSC 88716 December 2010Dismissed

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

SANJAY KUMAR JAINversusSTATE OF DELHI

2010 INSC 89016 December 2010Case Partly allowed

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

SHER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 89116 December 2010Disposed off

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

MOHAMMAD MIANversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 89416 December 2010Dismissed

The case involved a long‑standing enmity between Mohammad Mian and the Husain family, which escalated into a gun‑fire incident resulting in the death of Riyasat Husain and grievous injury to his brother Firasat Husain. The trial court acquitted the accused of murder under Sections 302 and 34 IPC, relying on a perceived

MS.S.versusSUNIL KUMAR AND ANR.

2015 INSC 103816 November 2015Dismissed

The appellant Ms. S appealed against Sunil Kumar, who had been convicted by the Supreme Court on 10 April 2015 for an offence under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and ordered to be taken into custody. The Court later learned that the accused had died on 14 October 2012, a fact that was not known to the Court a

GULAB DAS & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2011 INSC 80416 November 2011Case Partly allowed

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

LALU YADAVversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 78216 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

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