Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Arms Act, 1959

22 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

SATBIR SINGHversusRAJESH KUMAR AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 41631 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Satbir Singh, an army serviceman, was stabbed and assaulted by Mukesh and several others during a volleyball match dispute. He filed an application under Section 319 of the CrPC to summon Rajesh Kumar, Neeraj, Sagar @ Bittoo and Ankit as additional accused. The Sessions Judge allowed the application, but the High Court

CHETANversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

2025 INSC 79330 May 2025Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder (IPC s.302), misappropriation of property (IPC s.404), and unlawful possession and use of a firearm (Arms Act s.3, s.5) based largely on circumstantial evidence, including the last‑seen theory, forensic ballistics, and his subsequent abscondence. The Supreme Court examined whether

JASMINBHAI BHARATBHAI KOTHARIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2025 INSC 17230 January 2025Dismissed

Jasminbhai Bharatbhai Kothari, convicted under IPC Section 302 read with Section 34 and the Arms Act, sought an extension of temporary bail, which the Gujarat High Court refused. While filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court, he also filed an interlocutory application seeking exemption from surre

SUDERSHAN SINGH WAZIRversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

2025 INSC 28128 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sudershan Singh Wazir, was arraigned as an accused in a murder case and was discharged by the Sessions Court on 20 October 2023 upon furnishing a personal bond. The State of Delhi filed a revision challenging the discharge and the Delhi High Court, ex‑parte, stayed the discharge order and later directed

CONSTABLE 907 SURENDRA SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2025 INSC 11427 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from an incident on 15 November 2004 where a Head Constable Jagdish Singh fired at a car suspected of smuggling liquor, killing the passenger. The trial court acquitted three constables – Surendra Singh, Surat Singh and Ashad Singh – on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove they shared a common

NIMAI GHOSH & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)

2025 INSC 81623 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Manmohan Ghosh in 1989, for which six relatives were charged, including Nimai Ghosh, Sonachand Ghosh and Sambal Ghosh. The trial court acquitted all accused, finding the eyewitness testimonies unreliable and noting the absence of the weapon and forensic evidence. The High Court reversed

UNION OF INDIAversusSALEEM KHAN

2025 INSC 100820 August 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined two bail appeals arising from a 2020 FIR under the IPC, Arms Act and UAPA, involving accused no.11 (Saleem Khan) and accused no.20 (Mohd. Zaid). Both had been denied bail by the trial court, but the Karnataka High Court granted bail to Khan while refusing it to Zaid. The Court held that Khan'

SANTOSH @ RAJESH @ GOPALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 72319 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Santosh @ Rajesh @ Gopal, was convicted for the murder of Narayan Singh based on the recovery of a pistol from his possession and a ballistic report linking the weapon to the fatal bullet. The prosecution’s case relied on a disclosure statement made by a co-accused, which led to the discovery of the pist

STATE (CBI)versusMOHD. SALIM ZARGAR @ FAYAZ & ORS.

2025 INSC 37619 March 2025Dismissed

The case arose from a 1990 kidnapping and murder of the Vice Chancellor of Kashmir University and his personal secretary, allegedly carried out by members of the JKSLF. The CBI charged several accused, including Mohd. Salim Zargar, under the Ranbir Penal Code and the now‑repealed TADA Act. The Special Court acquitted a

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

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,

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & OTHERSversusVIKASH TIWARY @ BIKASH TIWARY @ BIKASH NATH

2025 INSC 7916 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Vikash Tiwary, a life convict serving a sentence for multiple offences, was transferred by the Inspector General of Prisons from Hazaribagh Central Jail to Central Jail, Dumka on 17 May 2023 after the jail superintendent warned of a potential gang war and insufficient staff to control notorious inmates. The respondent

GOVINDversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 131814 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Govind was convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC and for illegal possession of a firearm under Section 25 of the Arms Act based primarily on the recovery of a country‑made pistol and two live cartridges from an iron box in his house and a forensic report linking the cartridges to the bullets recovere

ASHOK DHANKADversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

2025 INSC 97413 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ashok Dhankad, challenged a Delhi High Court order that granted regular bail to accused wrestler Sushil Kumar under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging abduction, assault with dangerous weapons, and the death of a complainant's son. The High Cou

VINOD @ NASMULLAversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 22013 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

GURDEEP SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 95711 August 2025Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant Superintendent of Jail, was alleged to have facilitated a private vehicle ride for two police constables escorting an undertrial prisoner, during which two unidentified youths attacked the constables with red chilli powder, a knife and a kirpan, attempting to free the prisoner. The prosecuti

SHAHID ALIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 19111 March 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Shahid Ali, fired a country-made pistol during a celebratory firing at a marriage ceremony on 17 March 2016, striking the deceased Ishfaq Ali in the neck and causing his immediate death. The trial court and the High Court convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder, along wi

S.K. JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2025 INSC 121510 October 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a Colonel in the Army Ordnance Corps, was tried by a General Court Martial on three charges: corruption for accepting Rs 10,000, possession of ammunition without licence, and an act prejudicial to good order and discipline for possessing Rs 28,000 cash. The GCM convicted him of the first two charges and

GURWINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 927 February 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Gurwinder Singh, was arrested along with co‑accused for alleged involvement in a terrorist module of the banned organization ‘Sikhs for Justice’, including raising funds, conspiracy and attempts to procure weapons. The investigation, taken over by the NIA, resulted in charges under the UAPA, IPC and Arms

STATE OF CHHATTISGARHversusAMIT AISHWARYA JOGI

2025 INSC 12856 November 2025Dismissed

The trial court acquitted Amit Aishwarya Jogi in a 2007 murder case involving the killing of a Congress leader, after a CBI‑investigated chargesheet superseded the original police investigation. The State of Chhattisgarh, the CBI and the victim’s son (de‑facto complainant) sought leave to appeal the acquittal, but the

STATE OF PUNJABversusGURPREET SINGH & ORS.

2024 INSC 1546 February 2024Disposed off

The State of Punjab appealed against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s acquittal of Gurpreet Singh and three co‑accused under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Amarjit Kaur. The trial court had convicted them based on the eyewitness testimony of the victim’s husband and daughter, the reco

VAIBHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 8004 June 2025Disposed off

The appellant Vaibhav was convicted for murdering his friend Mangesh under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and for illegal possession of a firearm under the Arms Act, based solely on circumstantial evidence. He contended that Mangesh accidentally shot himself with his father's service pistol, citing the bullet trajectory, lac

RAMA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 7553 October 2024Case Partly allowed

The case concerns the murder of MLA Brij Bihari Prasad and his bodyguard Lakshmeshwar Sahu at IGIMS Hospital in 1998. The trial court convicted several accused, but the Patna High Court acquitted all, prompting appeals by the State (through the CBI) and the victim's wife, Rama Devi. The Supreme Court examined the credi

WAHIDversusSTATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 1453 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Wahid and Anshu, were convicted for robbery under IPC sections 392/397 and for possession of arms under the Arms Act, based on an FIR that named no specific perpetrators. The prosecution’s case relied on the complainant’s identification of the accused at a bus depot two days after the incident and the r

STATE OF NCT OF DELHIversusRAJ KUMAR @ LOVEPREET @LOVELY

2024 INSC 113 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act, and the investigation period of 90 days expired on 15 September 2020. The investigating officer obtained two extensions, first to 11 November 2020 and then, on 7 November 2020, a further 30‑day extension

RAJANversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 10812 September 2025Dismissed

The appellant Rajan was convicted for murder under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act based primarily on the ocular testimony of two eyewitnesses, despite the alleged firearm not being recovered. He appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court’s delay of two years and five m

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