Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

P VENKATARAMA REDDI

40 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

IDRISH BHAI DAUDBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2005 INSC 5631 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Idrish Daudbhai (appellant) was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for allegedly sharing a common intention with three co‑accused to murder Siddique Ahmed Patel and to cause hurt to Yusuf Adam Patel. The prosecution's case rested on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses and the FIR, alleging that the appellant stru

ACHINTYA KUMAR SAHAversusM/S. NANEE PRINTERS AND ORS.

2004 INSC 7330 January 2004Dismissed

The appellant, having purchased a property bequeathed to a widow with a life interest, filed a title suit for eviction against M/s Nanee Printers, alleging that their 11‑year agreement dated 5 July 1976 was a revocable licence. The trial court held it a licence and dismissed the suit; the first appellate court reversed

SHIVAPPA BUDAPPA KOLKAR @ BUDDAPPAGOLversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 56329 September 2004Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Buddappa Kolkar, was charged with murder (S.302 IPC) after he struck the deceased, Hanamant Basappa, on the head with an axe during a quarrel over a bullock‑cart passage. The trial court acquitted him, but the Karnataka High Court convicted him of murder. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the

HEM RAJ AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2005 INSC 16229 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Hemant Kumar under Section 302 IPC based primarily on the testimony of two related eyewitnesses, PW4 and PW5. An independent eyewitness, Kapur Singh, who was present at the scene, was never examined, and the prosecution offered no explanation for this omission. The Court

C.S. KRISHNAMURTHYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2005 INSC 16329 March 2005Dismissed

C.S. Krishnamurthy, a technical supervisor in Bangalore Telephones, was charged under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income between 1964 and 1986. The Deputy General Manager of the department sanctioned the prosecution

M/S. SUN BEVERAGES (P) LTD.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2003 INSC 68428 November 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mis. Sun Beverages Ltd., set up a pioneer industrial unit in a zero‑industrial area of Uttar Pradesh and was registered as a Medium Scale Industry with the Director General of Technical Development (DGTD). It received a cash subsidy of Rs.15 lacs under the State's Capital Grant Scheme. After the Governme

THE JALANDHAR IMPROVEMENT TRUSTversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2002 INSC 49827 November 2002Dismissed

The Jalandhar Improvement Trust appealed against a High Court order that dismissed its writ challenging the Land Acquisition Collector's decision to grant enhanced compensation to a mother (the fourth respondent) under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land had been acquired in 1978 and a reference und

M.R.F. LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS.

2004 INSC 6227 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed

M.R.F. Ltd., a manufacturer of vulcanising solution, was initially classified under sub‑heading 4006.90 (15% duty) which was approved by the Revenue Department. The Assistant Collector later directed re‑classification under sub‑heading 4005.00 (40% duty) and demanded payment of differential duty for the period 1‑Mar‑86

M/S PEPSI FOODS LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH

2003 INSC 67325 November 2003Dismissed

Pepsi Foods Ltd sold a beverage concentrate to bottlers under an agreement that also required the bottlers to pay a royalty for using Pepsi's 'Lehar' trademark on the finished drinks. The Central Excise authorities proposed including the royalty in the assessable value of the concentrate under Section 4(a) of the Centr

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSANJAY S/O DIGAMBARRAO RAJHANS

2004 INSC 61725 October 2004Dismissed

The State alleged that the accused, Sanjay, set fire to his fiancée Veena by pouring petrol from a can on her while riding a scooter, leading to her death. The prosecution's case relied heavily on two dying declarations recorded at the hospital, statements of the victim's parents, and the testimony of a tea‑stall vendo

GILBERT PEREIRAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2004 INSC 46724 August 2004Dismissed

The appellant, Gilbert Pereira, was accused of murdering a young girl and robbing her of gold ornaments. The prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the victim’s body found in a house the appellant could access, blood‑stained clothes and knife matching the victim’s blood group, injuries on the

BIHARI NATH GOSWAMIversusSHIV KUMAR SINGH AND ORS.

2004 INSC 12724 February 2004Dismissed

The father of the deceased, Anup Goswami, appealed to the Supreme Court against the Patna High Court's order acquitting ten accused persons of abduction and murder under IPC sections 302, 149 and 364, 149. The trial court had convicted them, but the High Court, by a majority, found the prosecution evidence insufficient

SURESH CHANDRAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2005 INSC 30421 July 2005Dismissed

During a marriage ceremony that turned violent, three members of the bridegroom party (Baratis) shot and killed two men and injured others. They were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the offence could be reduced

DARPAN KUMAR SHARMA @ DHARBAN KUMAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

[2003] 1 S.C.R. 44220 January 2003Case Allowed

The petitioner, an under‑trial prisoner for theft and robbery, was detained under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982 on the ground that he had pelted stones at the public while committing a robbery, allegedly creating alarm and threatening public order. He challenged the detention

ASHEESH PRATAP SINGH AND ORS.versusM. SACHDEVAND ORS.

2002 INSC 56319 December 2002Directions issued

Thirty-two students who had qualified the CPMT in 1998 were admitted to Azamgarh Medical College, completed the first professional MBBS examination, and then discovered that the college was closed due to infrastructure deficiencies. The Supreme Court had earlier directed the Medical Council of India (MCI) and the Direc

MADRAS REFINERIES LTD.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2001 INSC 44618 September 2001Disposed off

Madras Refineries Ltd., a petroleum refinery, sold its products primarily to Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL). Under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, tax is levied only at the point of first sale in the State, and Explanation 1 excludes sales between oil companies from being treated as first sales. The Sta

JAGJIT SINGH @ JAGGAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 4018 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Jagjit Singh (Jagga) was convicted of murder of three persons and alleged rape based primarily on the testimony of a seven‑year‑old child witness, Billo (PW‑6). The child’s statements were recorded three and six days after the incident, after being allegedly prompted by her father, and she never identified the appellan

PRAMOD MANDALversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2004 INSC 52817 September 2004Dismissed

The appellant, Pramod Mandal, was convicted under Section 396 IPC for a dacoity and murder that occurred on 13 January 1989. He appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the conviction on the ground that the Test Identification Parade (TIP) was held about a month after the incident and that only one eyewitness (PW‑4)

DATTU SHAMRAO VALKE AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2005 INSC 21015 April 2005Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a violent altercation in the village of Walkewadi where the deceased Krishna and his son Bajirao, accompanied by family members, went to the fields armed with axes and sticks. The appellants, Dattu Shamrao Valke and Tanaji Shamrao Valke, also armed with a double‑barrel gun, axes and sticks, attacked

PARSURAM PANDEY AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2004 INSC 60514 October 2004Case Partly allowed

The case involved a violent incident in which Raghunath Pandey shot Kanhaiya Pandey, resulting in his death, and other accused fired indiscriminately causing injuries to villagers. The appellants Parshuram, Bishram and Somaru Pandey were convicted under Sections 302 read with 149 IPC, 307 IPC, 324 read with 34 IPC, and

DASHRATH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2004 INSC 44913 August 2004

The case arose from a violent dispute over a piece of land in which the victim, Pratap Singh, was struck on the head with a kanta and later died after 38 days of medical treatment. The trial court convicted both appellants, Dashrath Singh and Raja Ram, under Section 302 (murder) and related offences, but the High Court

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

2005 INSC 28313 May 2005Case Partly allowed

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

COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ORS.versusSWASTIK ROADWAYS AND ANR.

2004 INSC 10813 February 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Sections 57, 58 and 59 of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994, which require clearing and forwarding (C&F) agents to furnish transaction details and impose a penalty of three times the tax evaded if they fail to do so. The High Court had struck down thes

UMESH KAMATversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 3313 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

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

M/S. NATURALLE HEALTH PRODUCTS (P) LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD

2003 INSC 62311 November 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Naturalle Health Products (P) Ltd. manufactured medicated cough drops, throat drops, Sloan's balm and Sloan's rub under an Ayurvedic drug licence and claimed that the products should be classified under Chapter 3003.30 of the Central Excise Tariff as Ayurvedic medicaments, attracting nil duty. The Central Excise au

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (SEA), CHENNAIversusM/S. BALLARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD.

2001 INSC 43611 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent imported goods claiming they were accessories exempt from customs duty, paid duty under protest, and later sought a refund. The Assistant Collector granted a refund of about Rs 2.5 crore for certain items, deeming them accessories, while denying refund for others as spares. The Commissioner (Appeals) inv

SHUBH SHANTI SERVICES LTD.versusMANJULA S. AGARWALLA AND ORS

2005 INSC 27511 May 2005Case Partly allowed

The managing director of Shubh Shanti Services Ltd. was allotted a company flat during his employment; after his death his widow and daughter continued to occupy it. The company served notice to vacate, but the respondents claimed they were allowed to stay until another flat was provided, based on an oral assurance fro

CHARANJIT LAL MEHRA AND ORS.versusSMT. KAMAL SAROJ MAHAJAN AND ANR.

2005 INSC 13411 March 2005Dismissed

The landlord, Smt. Kamal Saroj Mahajan, leased a showroom to four brothers jointly under a lease deed dated 4 September 1977 for Rs. 2,500 per month, later increased to over Rs. 3,500, causing the Delhi Rent Control Act to cease applying. She served a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act terminating

MURLIDHAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 2689 May 2005Case Partly allowed

The appellants Murlidhar, Chhaju Ram and Babu Lal were convicted of abduction under Section 364 IPC and of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The Supreme Court examined the evidence of eye‑witnesses, circumstantial facts and the applicability of Section 106 of the Evidence Act. It held that the testimon

M/S. PEICO ELECTRONICS AND ELECTRICALS AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 1499 March 2004Disposed off

The appellant, Mis. Peico Electronics, terminated the dealership of its second dealer (R‑2) under Clause 29 of a standard form agreement. R‑2 complained before the MRTP Commission alleging several restrictive trade practices, including territorial allocation, discrimination, and a clause (Clause 7) that allowed the com

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusGOPAL SARKAR

2001 INSC 5667 November 2001Appeal(s) allowed

During a raid on Gopal Sarkar's saw‑mill, forest officials seized illegally felled timber along with a band‑saw and related implements. The authorised officer, invoking Section 59A(3) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (West Bengal Amendment, 1988), ordered confiscation of both the timber (property of the State) and the to

SHANTHA @ USHADEVI AND ANR.versusB.G. SHIVANANJAPPA

2005 INSC 2666 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Shantha @Ushadevi and her minor daughter filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance, which was granted on 20 January 1993. They later filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.47/1993 under Section 125(3) to recover arrears up to August 1993, but the husband filed revisions in the Sessions Court an

SATISH SHARMA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2002 INSC 5215 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were charged with offences under IPC sections 114 and 302 and the Arms Act. Their applications for anticipatory bail were rejected by the Sessions Court and the Gujarat High Court. While the bail matter was pending, two police officers (the appellants) filed a report under Section 169 of the Criminal Proced

ICICI BANK LTD. AND ANR.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3324 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

ICICI Bank installed illuminated sign boards above its ATM centres and extension counters in Bombay without obtaining permission from the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC). The BMC issued notices under Sections 328 and 328A of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, requiring the bank to remove the boards or pay a

VASANTHIversusSTATE OF A.P.

2005 INSC 2574 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Vasanthi was arrested under the Andhra Pradesh Control of Organized Crime Act, 2001 and several IPC provisions for allegedly lending her car for a kidnapping. The High Court denied her bail, applying Section 21(4) of the Act and holding that there were reasonable grounds to believe she was guilty and might commit furth

DEELIP SINGH @ DILIP KUMARversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2004 INSC 6363 November 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Deelp Singh, was convicted under Section 376 IPC for raping a girl, based on the prosecution's claim that she was under 16 and that the sexual intercourse was against her will or without consent, allegedly induced by a false promise to marry. The Supreme Court examined the age of the victim, finding the

RAMESH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2005 INSC 1163 March 2005Disposed off

The wife filed a complaint in Trichy alleging offences under Sections 498‑A, 406 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband, his relatives and the husband’s sister, Gowri Ramaswamy. The accused filed petitions under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment on grounds of frivolous allegations, l

PARMANANDA PEGUversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2004 INSC 4912 September 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Parmananda Pegu and his co‑accused Jitu Pegu were convicted and sentenced to death for kidnapping and murdering two minor boys under Sections 302 and 365 IPC. The conviction was based largely on an extra‑judicial confession recorded during a crime‑scene recreation, a judicial confession under Section 164 that was later

M/S. AWAZ PRAKASHAN PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPRAMOD KUMAR PUJARI

2003 INSC 2102 April 2003Dismissed

Awaz Prakashan Private Ltd closed its newspaper and retrenched reporter P.K. Pujari on 1 July 1989. The reporter claimed the retrenchment violated the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and obtained a Labour Court award for reinstatement with back wages. The employer later challenged the award, arguing that the Working Jour

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