Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

5,133 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,801–2,000.

MUTHURAMALINGAM & ORS.versusSTATE REP. BY INSP. OF POLICE

2016 INSC 111819 July 2016Reference answered

The appellants were convicted of several murders in a single trial and were sentenced to multiple life imprisonments, each directed to run consecutively, along with term sentences. They challenged the validity of consecutive life sentences under Section 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The Supreme Court examin

ANITA KUSHWAHAversusPUSHAP SUDAN

2016 INSC 118619 July 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether it can transfer civil or criminal proceedings pending in any court of Jammu and Kashmir to a court outside the State and vice‑versa, despite the fact that Sections 25 of the CPC and 406 of the CrPC do not apply to Jammu and Kashmir and the State codes contain no such provis

MAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2011 INSC 50019 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Man Singh was arrested in 1979 with half a bottle of illicit liquor and equipment for liquor manufacture. He was convicted under Section 60(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910 and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine, a conviction affirmed by the trial, appellate and revisional courts. On appe

ANIL SACHAR & ANR.versusM/S SHREE NATH SPINNERS P. LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2011 INSC 50319 July 2011Disposed off

The complainants, partners of Rati Woolen Mills, alleged that cheques issued by Munish Jain in his capacity as director of A.T. Overseas Ltd., a sister concern of Shree Nath Spinners Pvt. Ltd., were given for payment of goods supplied to Shree Nath Spinners. The cheques were dishonoured and the accused were charged und

FOOD INSPECTOR, ERNAKULAM AND ANR.versusP.S. SREENIVASA SHENOY

2000 INSC 34019 July 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Inspector purchased a sample of toor dal and, after a Public Analyst reported it adulterated with kesari dal, filed a complaint under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The respondent challenged the prosecution, arguing that a fresh sanction under Section 20 was required when a later certificate from the

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusCHAMRU@BHAGWANDAS ETC. ETC.

2007 INSC 70319 June 2007Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged Chamru and Geetabai with the quadruple murder of a family, alleging the accused acted out of a land dispute. Three child witnesses identified the accused in a Test Identification Parade, leading the trial court to convict Chamru (death) and Geetabai (life imprisonment). On appeal, th

RAMBALAKversusSTATE OF U.P.

2026 INSC 51119 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Rambalak was charged under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471. The Allahabad High Court rejected his second bail application and, while exercising its bail jurisdiction, directed the trial court to issue summons under CrPC ss.62 and 69 and to take coercive measures against persons delaying the proceedings. The Sup

PARVINDER SINGHversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2026 INSC 51919 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parvinder Singh, was subject to an ECIR and arrested, after which the Enforcement Directorate filed a prosecution complaint under the PMLA on 24 June 2024. The Special Court took cognizance of the offence on 2 July 2024, after the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) had come into force, without giv

RAVINDER SINGH SIDHUversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2025 INSC 72719 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, Ravinder Singh Sidhu, faced 64 FIRs across ten states arising from alleged financial fraud. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the clubbing and transfer of all FIRs to a single jurisdiction, later modifying the prayer to consolidation within each state. The Supreme Court examined whether

RAMJI PRASAD JAISWAL @ RAMJEE PRASAD JAISWAL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2025 INSC 73819 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Ramji Prasad Jaiswal, Ashok Kumar Jaiswal and Bal Mukund Jaiswal, were convicted for a 1982 fraud against the State Bank of India under IPC sections 420, 468, 471, 120B and the Prevention of Corruption Act. During the trial, their statements under Section 313 of the CrPC were recorded by asking only fou

RAMESH CHANDRA VAISHYAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 56919 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramesh Chandra Vaishya, was charged under sections 323, 504 IPC and section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act for allegedly assaulting and verbally abusing the complainant over a water‑drainage dispute. Two FIRs were filed – one by the complainant and a second by the appellant after the police initially refused t

PRAKASH NISHAD @ KEWAT ZINAK NISHADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 56119 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

A six‑year‑old girl was sexually assaulted, murdered and her body dumped in a drain. Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad was arrested on suspicion and convicted under IPC sections 376, 377, 302 and 201, receiving a death sentence for murder. On appeal, the Supreme Court found serious procedural lapses: the appellant’s

IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881versus.

2021 INSC 25719 May 2022Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu writ concerning the massive pendency of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, noted that over 33 lakh complaints were pending, a sharp rise from 26 lakh five months earlier. An expert committee had recommended the creation of de novo special NI courts, but amic

ARNAB RANJAN GOSWAMIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2020 INSC 40019 May 2020Disposed off

The petitioners, a prominent journalist and media owner, challenged fourteen FIRs and complaints filed in various states arising from a single television broadcast on 21 April 2020, alleging that the FIRs violated their freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). The Supreme Court examined whether multiple FIRs on the sa

RAMAYAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 32319 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramayan Singh, filed an FIR alleging that Respondent No.2 (Vivek Pal) and co-accused Punit Pal violently assaulted his uncle, resulting in the uncle's death. Both accused were charged under multiple IPC sections, the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 and were initially denied bail by the trial court. The

INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIAversusSATYANARAYAN BANKATLAL MALU & ORS.

2024 INSC 31919 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) filed a criminal complaint under Sections 73(a) and 235A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against the former directors of SBM Paper Mills for non‑compliance with a One‑Time Settlement ordered by the NCLT. The Sessions Judge issued process, but the res

BABU SAHEBAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2024 INSC 32019 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted six accused, including A‑1, A‑2 and A‑3, for the alleged murder of Malagounda under sections 302 r/w s.34 IPC, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable and the complainant's testimony contradictory. The State appealed under s.378 CrPC, and the Karnataka High Court reversed the acquittal, co

PARTEEK BANSALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS

2024 INSC 32419 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chartered accountant, was accused of offences under Sections 498A, 406, 384, 420 and 120(B) of the IPC in two FIRs – the first lodged in Hisar, Haryana on 10 Oct 2015 and the second in Udaipur, Rajasthan on 15 Oct 2015, both based on the same allegations. The appellant sought quashing of the second FIR

MOHD. FIROZversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 42919 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mohd. Firoz, was convicted for the rape, sexual assault and murder of a four‑year‑old girl, under Sections 302, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m), 363, 366 IPC and Sections 5(i), 5(m), 6 POCSO. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, the "last seen together" theory, DNA evidence and the appellant's own adm

MS.YversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2022 INSC 43119 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant State of Rajasthan challenged a High Court order that granted regular bail to respondent No.2, who was accused of repeatedly raping his 19‑year‑old niece and was a habitual offender with nearly twenty pending cases. The High Court’s bail order was found to be cryptic, lacking any reference to the gravity

INDRAJEET YADAVversusSANTOSH SINGH AND ANR.

2022 INSC 44019 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Allahabad High Court allowed the appeals of the accused in a murder case, acquitting them and ordering their release, but it pronounced only the operative part of its order on the same day and delivered a reasoned judgment five months later. The original complainant filed a petition before the Supreme Court challen

VENKATESH @ CHANDRA & ANR. ETCversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2022 INSC 130219 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by four members of the Dandupalya gang convicted of murder and robbery. The trial court had relied on the accused’s voluntary statements recorded by police, shown on DVD, and a chart of gang activities to uphold death sentences under Section 396 IPC. The Court examined the admissibi

TEHSEEN POONAWALLAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2018 INSC 36919 April 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined petitions filed under Article 32 seeking an inquiry into the death of Judge Brijgopal Harkishan Loya, who died on 1 December 2014 while presiding over the Sohrabuddin case. The petitioners relied on media reports alleging foul play and questioned the conduct of the judges who accompanied the

KALYAN DEY CHOWDHURYversusRITA DEY CHOWDHURY NEE NANDY

2017 INSC 37019 April 2017Case Partly allowed

The husband Kalyan Dey Chowdhury and his wife Rita Dey Chowdhury (née Nandy) were married in 1995 and later divorced. The wife sought permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was initially set at Rs.16,000 per month in 2015. The husband’s net salary rose from Rs.63,842 to Rs.95,000, prompting

BALAKRAMversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

2017 INSC 36519 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Balakram, was charged with murder and attempted murder and, after the prosecution's witness (the investigating officer) was examined, sought to produce copies of pages from the police diary obtained under the Right to Information Act to confront the officer. The trial court rejected the application, the

VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2016 INSC 117719 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Videocon Industries Ltd. and its directors were penalised by the adjudicating authority under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) for alleged violations of sections 18(2) and 18(3). They appealed before the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, which held that the transactions (purchase of goods from Korea an

RAMESH RAJAGOPALversusDEVI POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED

2016 INSC 32719 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a director of Devi Polymers Private Limited, was prosecuted under IPC sections 409, 468 and 471 and IT Act sections 65 and 66 for allegedly forging a website that portrayed Devi Consultancy Services as a separate entity and for misappropriating funds. The High Court refused to quash the proceedings, hold

STATE OF HARYANAversusSHAKUNTLA AND ORS.

2012 INSC 17719 April 2012Dismissed

The State prosecuted nine accused for the armed assault and murder of Manohar Lal and his wife Sushila, resulting in 30 and 33 injuries respectively. The trial court convicted all nine under Sections 148, 302/149 and 325/149 IPC. The High Court upheld convictions of six accused but acquitted Shakuntla, Premwati and Sar

SIDHARTHA VASHISHT @ MANU SHARMAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2010 INSC 21919 April 2010Dismissed After

The case concerns the murder of Jessica Lal on 30 April 1999, for which Sidhartha Vashisht (Manu Sharma) and two co‑accused were initially acquitted by the trial court. The State appealed, alleging that the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt through ocular testimony, telephone call

RAM BABUversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 22019 April 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of dacoity under Section 395 IPC based on eyewitness identification in court and a test identification parade conducted under a magistrate's supervision. They challenged the admissibility of the parade evidence, arguing that the delay in conducting it rendered the identification unreliable

ABU THAKIR AND ORS.versusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

2010 INSC 22219 April 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder (Section 302 IPC) based largely on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses (PWs 2‑4) who claimed to have seen the assailants stabbing the deceased. The defence challenged the conviction, arguing that the presence of these witnesses at the scene was doubtful and that the statements r

SHAMIMA KAUSERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 22419 April 2010Disposed off

The petitioners, parents of victims of alleged police encounters in Gujarat, filed writ petitions seeking a CBI investigation into the deaths, alleging the encounters were staged. The Gujarat High Court constituted an Investigation Team and, after a Metropolitan Magistrate’s inquiry under Section 176 CrPC found the enc

GENERAL INSURANCE COUNCIL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

2010 INSC 22519 April 2010Disposed off

The General Insurance Council and several insurers filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that police and other agencies were not complying with Supreme Court directions concerning the disposal of vehicles seized in criminal investigations. They contended that non‑compliance of Sections 451

N. RANGACHARIversusBHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.

2007 INSC 43819 April 2007Dismissed

Data Access (India) Ltd issued two cheques to Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd which were dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed against the company and its directors, including the appellant N. Rangachari. The appellant claimed he was an honorary chair

RAJ PAL AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2006 INSC 23419 April 2006Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Raj Pal and others, assaulted a deceased and several witnesses with lathis over a property dispute, resulting in the deceased's death. They claimed the assault was in private defence of their person and property, asserting that they had suffered injuries themselves. The trial court convicted them under

GAURISHANKARPRASADversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2000 INSC 22719 April 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Gauri Shankar Prasad, a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, entered a complainant's clinic to enforce a court‑ordered removal of encroachments on government land, used abusive language and dragged the complainant out. The complainant filed a criminal complaint alleging offences under Sections 323, 504 and 452 IPC, and the Addit

NAIB SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1983 INSC 4119 April 1983Dismissed

Naib Singh, originally sentenced to death for murder, had his sentence commuted to "imprisonment for life" and had served 22 years (including remissions). He claimed that life imprisonment could not be executed in Indian jails and that, after serving 14 years of rigorous imprisonment, he should be released absent a for

V. GANESANversusSTATE REP BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR.

2026 INSC 26519 March 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a movie producer, borrowed money from the complainant on the promise of a share in profits and later issued post‑dated cheques to repay the principal, which later bounced. The complainant filed a criminal complaint for cheating under Section 420 IPC and criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC. The

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

APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2024 INSC 22319 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who created and acted in the web‑series “College Romance”, were charged with publishing obscene and sexually explicit material under Sections 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act after a complaint that an episode titled “Happily F****d Up” contained vulgar expletives. The High Court upheld the F

THE STATE OF KERALAversusMAHESH

2021 INSC 19519 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed against a Kerala High Court order that granted bail to Mahesh, who was accused of brutally murdering a young doctor in the presence of her father. The Sessions Court had denied bail, citing the seriousness of the offence, the risk of witness tampering, and the accused's prior absconding. Th

AKSHAY KUMAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 31219 March 2020Dismissed

Akshay Kumar Singh, a convict in the Nirbhaya case, filed a mercy petition with the President of India, which was rejected on 19 March 2020. He subsequently filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the rejection, alleging miscarriage of justice, solitary confinement, torture, media influence, and a pending di

P. SREEKUMARversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2018 INSC 24619 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chief executive trustee of a charitable trust, was accused by a fellow trustee of defrauding the trust, leading to the registration of an FIR against the appellant, the trust treasurer and three bank officials. The appellant subsequently lodged a separate FIR against the treasurer alleging fraud and fo

HMT WATCHES LTD.versusM.A. ABIDA &ANR.

2015 INSC 24019 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

HMT Watches Ltd filed a series of criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M.A. Abida for the dishonour of 57 cheques, which were stopped by a stop‑payment instruction and for which a demand notice had been issued. The High Court of Kerala, invoking its powers under Section 482 of

MRS. PRIYANKASRIVASTAVAANDANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 23919 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a series of criminal complaints filed by borrower Prakash Kumar Bajaj against senior officials of Punjab National Bank Housing Finance Ltd. after the bank invoked the SARFAESI Act to recover a defaulted housing loan. The borrower, having settled the loan through a one‑time settlement, repeate

SUBODH NATH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TRIPURA

2013 INSC 17619 March 2013Disposed off

The appellants Subodh Nath and Paritosh were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for the murder of Ashutosh. Paritosh was 16 years old at the time of the offence, raising the question of whether the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, as amended, applied to an offence committed befo

STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.versusUJJAL KUMAR BURDHAN

2012 INSC 13919 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa directed its Vigilance Cell to investigate alleged irregularities in the procurement and milling of paddy by the respondent, a proprietary rice mill owner. The respondent filed multiple writ petitions; the High Court initially ordered the inquiry to be completed within twelve weeks, later stayed and

RAMESHBHAI PANDURAO HEDAUversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2010 INSC 15719 March 2010Dismissed

The appellant's brother was found dead and a post‑mortem concluded natural causes; the police investigation was closed. Dissatisfied, the appellant filed a complaint before a Metropolitan Magistrate alleging murder and sought a fresh police investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Th

THELAPALLI RAGHAVAIAHversusSTATION HOUSE OFFICER AND ORS.

2007 INSC 30319 March 2007Dismissed

The petitioner, a sub‑contractor, alleged that the respondent company mixed fly ash with gravel, made illegal deductions from its bills and fabricated expert reports, thereby cheating it and committing criminal conspiracy, breach of trust and other offences under the IPC. An FIR was lodged and the investigating officer

SMT. OM WAT! AND ANR.versusSTATE. THROUGH DELHI ADMN. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 15219 March 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the mother of a deceased youth, appealed against the Delhi High Court’s order that quashed the murder charge (IPC s.302) framed against the accused and directed the trial court to give detailed reasons for framing charges. The Supreme Court held that under Sections 227 and 228 of the Code of Criminal Pro

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusTEJA RAM AND ORS.

1999 INSC 12119 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves the double murder of Ram Lal and his mother Gamni in a Rajasthan village. The trial court convicted six accused, including Teja Ram and Ram Lal, based on dying declarations, eyewitness accounts, and the recovery of blood‑stained axes. The Rajasthan High Court set aside the convictions, rejecting the d

KADRA PAHADIYA AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR ETC.

1997 INSC 29319 March 1997Disposed off

The petitioners filed writ petitions seeking a Supreme Court direction that all States appoint sufficient Special Judicial Magistrates (SJM) and Special Metropolitan Magistrates (SMM) under Sections 13(1) and 18(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to clear the massive backlog of petty criminal cases and ensure spe

DEEPAK KUMAR SHRIVAS & ANRversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2024 INSC 11719 February 2024

The appellant complained to the district collector in 2021 that respondent No.6 had demanded money to secure a job for his brother, leading to an inquiry that recorded mutual allegations of money‑extraction. Despite being aware of the complaint, respondent No.6 waited three years before lodging an FIR in July 2022 alle

SANJEEV KAPOORversusCHANDANA KAPOOR & ORS.

2020 INSC 21519 February 2020Dismissed

The husband and wife filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 of the CrPC, which the Family Court disposed of by a settlement order directing monthly maintenance and a mutual consent divorce. The husband paid only four months' maintenance; the wife filed an execution petition which was rejected as the order was d

KRISHNAVENI RAIversusPANKAJ RAI & ANR.

2020 INSC 21119 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Krishnaveni Rai, the appellant, obtained a decree of divorce from her first husband in 2005 and filed an appeal against that decree almost a year after the limitation period, which was later condoned. While the appeal was pending, she married Pankaj Rai in December 2014. The respondent sought a declaration that this se

BALVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 22619 February 2019Disposed off

The incident occurred on 11 March 1998 when the victim, Mohan Mehtar, was stopped by four accused; Bharat Singh beat him with a lathi, Balvir Singh and Bhav Singh held him, and Harnam Singh shot him at close range, causing instant death. The trial court convicted all four under sections 341, 302 and, for Harnam Singh,

SANJEEVversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 13619 February 2015Disposed off

The appellant Sanjeev was accused of killing his brother-in-law Raj Pal after a drunken altercation. Evidence included an eyewitness who saw Sanjeev fleeing with blood‑stained clothes, a medical injury on Sanjeev’s forearm, an extra‑judicial confession to a witness that he struck the victim with a brick, and forensic b

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusGIRIRAJ DUBEY

2013 INSC 10819 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that refused to grant leave to appeal an acquittal of Giriraj Dubey by the Sessions Court. The trial court had acquitted the accused on the ground of insufficient evidence under Sections 294 and 436 IPC. The High Court’s order merely resta

R. KUPPUSAMYversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBEILIGAI

2013 INSC 10919 February 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Kuppusamy, was accused of murdering his ten‑month‑old daughter by throwing her into a well, resulting in death by drowning. The prosecution's case rested on an extra‑judicial confession made by the appellant to the Village Administrative Officer (VAO), which was recorded and signed. The trial court and t

SUNDAR BABU AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2009 INSC 21819 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The wife, Sukanya, filed a complaint under IPC s.498A and Dowry Prohibition Act s.4 against her husband Sunder Babu, his parents, sister and maternal grandmother, alleging dowry harassment. The husband had left for the USA six months after their marriage and the complaint was lodged many months later without any explan

KALEGURA PADMA RAO AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF A.P. REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2007 INSC 15419 February 2007Case Partly allowed

The deceased was assaulted by a group of accused after a dispute over his auto and later died from the injuries. The trial court convicted the accused under sections 148, 448 r.w. s.149, 302/149 and 324/149 IPC; the High Court affirmed these convictions for some. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the eviden

RABINDRA KUMAR NAYAKversusCOLLECTOR, MAYURBHANJ, ORISSA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 7319 February 1999Dismissed

Rabindra Kumar Nayak, an advocate, was provisionally appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor under the Orissa Law Officers Rules, 1971 and CrPC, 1973. While holding this post he was elected as a member and subsequently as Chairman of Moroda Panchayat Samiti. A rival candidate filed a petition under Section 45‑B of the

M. KRISHNAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1999 INSC 7419 February 1999Disposed off

M. Krishna, a Class‑I officer of the Karnataka Administrative Service, was investigated in 1989 for possession of disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, resulting in a ‘B’‑form that was accepted by a Special Judge and his attached properties were released. In 1995 a fresh FIR was lodged a

ANIL @ ANDYA SADASHIV NANDOSKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1996 INSC 27819 February 1996Dismissed

The appellant was seized at a hotel in a notified area under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) after police, acting on prior information, recovered a country‑made revolver with two live cartridges and cash. The seized items were sealed, placed in safe custody and, after a 15‑day dela

KUSHA DURUKAversusSTATE OF ODISHA

2024 INSC 4619 January 2024Dismissed

Kusha Duruka, accused under the NDPS Act, filed multiple bail applications after his arrest on 3 February 2022. The first bail request was rejected by the Sessions Court, and a subsequent application before the Odisha High Court was also dismissed, while his co‑accused was granted bail. During the pendency of a Special

JOHN ANTHONISAMY @ JOHNversusSTATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 5419 January 2023Dismissed

The appellant, John Anthonisamy, was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of a taxi driver and the subsequent concealment of the body. The prosecution’s case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the exhumation of the victim’s body from a location disclosed by the appellan

LAKHVIR SINGH ETCversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2021 INSC 3019 January 2021Disposed off

The appellants, aged 19 and 20, were convicted under Section 397 IPC for grievous hurt and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. While the State argued that the mandatory minimum sentence could not be reduced, the appellants sought release on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, citing their

ATUL THAKURversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ETC. ETC.

2018 INSC 3719 January 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Atul Thakur, attacked Hitesh Thakur with a knife during a sudden quarrel at a drink party, inflicting six injuries that later caused Hitesh's death. The trial court convicted him of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part‑II IPC and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonm

BOBBILI RAMAKRISHNA RAJU YADAV & ORSversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF A.P. HYDERABAD, A.P. & ANR.

2016 INSC 6019 January 2016Case Partly allowed

The wife of the first appellant died under suspicious circumstances and a FIR was lodged under Sections 304B and 498A IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The father of the deceased later filed a private complaint under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act alleging that dowry amount and articl

NANKAUNOOversusSTATE OF U.P.

2016 INSC 6519 January 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Nankunoo, visited the deceased barber's shop demanding preferential service, was rebuffed, and later shot the barber in the left thigh with a pistol, causing the victim to die of shock and hemorrhage. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC (murder) and sentenced him to life impriso

SHANMUGHANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2012 INSC 4319 January 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Shanmughan, was convicted of murder and causing hurt for allegedly administering cyanide to his wife, Raji, resulting in her death. The trial and High Courts upheld the conviction and life sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the circumstantial evidence—motive, injuries indicating forc

SUDEVANANDversusSTATE THROUGH CBI

2012 INSC 4119 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of Sudevanand and co‑accused for an attempted murder of the Chief Justice of India, based largely on the testimony of an approver, Vikram, who later retracted his earlier statements while in jail. The appellants filed three criminal miscellaneous applications after a delay of more than

SUNIL KUMAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 4319 January 2005Dismissed

The case involved eight accused who arrived together in a jeep, surrounded the deceased and assaulted him – one accused (R) delivering fatal knife blows while the others used hockey sticks, iron rods and pipes. R was convicted under Section 302 IPC and the remaining seven under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. Th

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.versusM/S. GALAXY TRADERS AND AGENCIES LTD. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 3719 January 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. issued a cheque to Galaxy Traders which was dishonoured. The appellant served a statutory notice on 13 June 1998, but the respondents claimed they received only an empty envelope and wrote to the appellant on 20 June. The appellant re‑presented the cheque on 1 July, which was again dishonour

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH S.P. JAIPURversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2001 INSC 3819 January 2001Disposed off

A complaint alleging serious offences was filed before a magistrate who, invoking his power under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate and required a final report. The CBI challenged the order, arguing that a magistrate has no jurisdiction to

RAMANARANGversusRAMESH NARANG AND ORS.

1995 INSC 6119 January 1995Dismissed

The appellant, Rama Narang, was appointed Managing Director of a deemed public limited company after being convicted of offences involving moral turpitude. Respondent Ramesh Narang challenged the appointment under Section 267 of the Companies Act, 1956, which bars a person convicted of such offences from holding the of

MUSKAN ENTERPRISES & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2024 INSC 104618 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to pay a compensation of Rs.74,00,000, with the Sessions Court directing a 20% deposit of that amount. They challenged the deposit condition through a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which the High C

RINKU BAHETIversusSANDESH SHARDA

2024 INSC 101418 December 2024Disposed off

The petitioner-wife Rinku Baheti filed a transfer petition seeking to move a pending divorce suit to the Pune Family Court and opposed the respondent-husband Sandesh Sharda's application under Article 142(1) for a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. The parties had a brief marriage o

P. MANIKANDANversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.

2024 INSC 100718 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, P. Manikandan, was originally convicted of kidnapping and murdering a four‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death, but the Madras High Court acquitted him on the ground of reasonable doubt. The High Court, however, ordered the transfer of the case file to the CBI and directed a de‑novo reinvestigation and

AKSHAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2019 INSC 141118 December 2019Dismissed

The case concerns the conviction and death sentence of Akshay Kumar Singh, a bus cleaner, for his participation in the gang rape and murder of a young woman on a Delhi bus (the Nirbhaya case). Singh filed a criminal review petition challenging the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment that upheld his conviction and death penal

G H KANWAR PAL SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 140618 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a director of a mining company, was granted a lease to excavate sand in specific plots in Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, but was alleged to have mined sand outside the permitted area, leading to registration of an FIR under Section 379 IPC, the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the

G H KHAJA BILAL AHMEDversusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2019 INSC 140418 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Khaja Bilal Ahmed was detained under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 on 25 October 2018, with the order citing fourteen prior criminal cases from 2007‑2016 as his antecedent background. The appellant challenged the detention, arguing that the cited cases were stale, irrelevant, and that there

ANOKHILALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 139918 December 2019Disposed off

The appellant, Anokhilal, was convicted of kidnapping, rape and murder of a nine‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death along with several other terms of imprisonment. He was represented by an Amicus Curiae appointed by the Legal Services Authority on the same day that charges were framed, leaving the counsel no time to

.JAGMOHAN BAHL & ANR.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2014 INSC 104618 December 2014Disposed off

The appellants, Jagmohan Bahl and another, were charged under IPC sections 420 and 34 for alleged cheating in a property transaction. Their first anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the CrPC was rejected by Additional Sessions Judge‑6, but a second application was later allowed by a different Additional

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENTversusSUBAIR @ MOHAMED SUBAIR AND ORS.

2008 INSC 147118 December 2008Dismissed

The deceased Veeraganesh was stabbed by four accused and later died. Two eye‑witnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑2) testified to the assault but their conduct—leaving the victim and failing to report the incident until police interrogation—was deemed implausible. The victim gave two dying declarations: one before a Judicial Magistr

LAL SURAJ @ SURAJ SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2008 INSC 147218 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from an FIR that named seven persons for offences under the IPC, Arms Act and Explosive Substances Act, but only one appellant was specifically named. No charge‑sheet was filed against two other alleged participants, Suraj Singh and Arbind Singh. The Sessions Judge, relying on the testimony of PW‑6 (a no

VINOD SOLANKIversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2008 INSC 147318 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Vinod Solanki's office was searched and cash seized; he subsequently made statements to Enforcement officials under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) admitting to foreign exchange remittances, but later retracted those statements alleging coercion. The authorities imposed a Rs 10 lakh penalty based largely on

SHAMSUDDIN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2003 INSC 73418 December 2003Dismissed

The case arose from communal disturbances in Sandhwa, Madhya Pradesh on 21 October 1990, where the deceased Rajunath was killed and Narish Chandra (PW‑1) was seriously injured. The accused, Shamsuddin and others, were charged under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted them, fi

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusRAM SEWAK AND ORS.

2002 INSC 55618 December 2002Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the Allahabad High Court's acquittal of five accused in a murder case arising from a factional clash. The deceased had given a dying declaration naming Ram Sewak as the shooter, which was corroborated by a promptly lodged FIR and eyewitness testimony. The trial court convicted all fi

SUDHANSU SEKHAR SAHOOversusSTATE OF ORISSA

2002 INSC 56018 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a District Malaria Officer, was convicted by the Sessions Court and the Orissa High Court for rape (IPC s.376) and wrongful confinement (IPC s.342) based primarily on the testimony of Ms. X, a lady supervisor who alleged she was taken to the appellant's house at night and forced to have sexual intercours

VINEET NARAIN AND ORSversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 82618 December 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined public‑interest writ petitions filed after the CBI seized diaries implicating senior politicians and bureaucrats. The petitions alleged that the CBI and revenue authorities had failed to investigate the allegations and that a government "Single Directive" requiring prior sanction of the conce

D.K. BASUversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

1996 INSC 150818 December 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed after media reports of deaths and torture in police lock‑ups, seeking guidelines for preventing custodial violence and for awarding compensation to victims or their families. The Court held that torture, rape and death in police custody violate Article

SMT. RASHMI KUMARversusMARESH KUMAR BHADA

1996 INSC 150718 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The wife, Rashmi Kumar, married under Hindu rites, received jewellery, cash and household goods as stridhana from her family and entrusted them to her husband for safekeeping. After being driven out of the matrimonial home, she demanded the return of the stridhana on 5‑December‑1987, which the husband refused. She file

SAMPAT SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1992 INSC 35618 December 1992Dismissed

Petitioners, comprising 16 MLAs and 3 MPs, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a CBI investigation into alleged corruption by Minister Bhajan Lal and the setting aside of a magistrate's order of discharge. The High Court dismissed the petition without addressing the petitioners' locus standi, prompting a Sp

RISHIPAL SINGH SOLANKIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2021 INSC 75218 November 2021Dismissed

The appellant alleged that respondent No.2, Nishant Solanki, who was charged with serious offences including murder, was not a juvenile and challenged the Juvenile Justice Board's (JJ Board) declaration that he was a juvenile delinquent based on his matriculation certificate. The appellant argued that the admission for

BAIJNATH & OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2016 INSC 104018 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Saroj Bai was found hanging in her matrimonial home within seven years of marriage. The State alleged that her husband’s family demanded a motorcycle as dowry, subjecting her to cruelty and harassment, thereby invoking Sections 304B and 498A of the IPC and the statutory presumption under Section 113B of th

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.versusFOOD INSPECTOR AND ANR.

2010 INSC 78618 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturer of sweetened carbonated water, was prosecuted after a public analyst reported the presence of the pesticide carbofuran (0.001 mg/L) in its product, alleging adulteration under Rule 65 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and Section 2(ia)(h) of the Preven

MOHMED AMIN @ AMIN CHOTELI RAHIM MIYAN SHAIKH & ANR.versusC.B.I THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

2008 INSC 131318 November 2008Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of confessions recorded under Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) in a murder‑conspiracy case. The appellants argued that their confessions were involuntary, obtained while in police custody, and later retracted, and that no corrobo

HANUMAN PRASAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2008 INSC 131518 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted eight accused for the rape of a school‑going girl, alleging that the accused had repeatedly abducted and assaulted her. While three of the accused were convicted at trial, the remaining five, including Hanuman Prasad, were acquitted. On appeal, the Rajasthan High Court reversed the acq

K. ANBAZHAGANversusTHE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND ORS. ETC.

2003 INSC 64218 November 2003Case Allowed

The petitioners, led by K. Anbazhagan, sought transfer of two corruption cases against J. Jayalalitha and others from the Special Court in Chennai to a court in Karnataka, alleging that the trial was being subverted by the recall of witnesses, the dispensing of personal appearance of the accused, and the public prosecu

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusAVADH KISHORE GUPTA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 64318 November 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that quashed a criminal investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act against Awadh Kishore Gupta, an executive engineer, on the ground that he had acquired assets beyond his known sources of income. The High Court had relied on annexed docum

ASHOK KUMAR PANDEYversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2003 INSC 64518 November 2003Dismissed

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking conversion of a death sentence to life imprisonment on the ground that the execution had been delayed for a long time, alleging mental torture of the condemned. He claimed the case was a public interest litigation, relying on the ratio in Smt. Triveniben v.

SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2002 INSC 47518 November 2002Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered the procedure for custody and disposal of property seized by police under Sections 451 and 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioners sought further directions on how seized items should be handled when the accused denies involvement and no physical article is recovered. T

HARGOVANDAS DEVRAJBHAI PATEL AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

1997 INSC 73318 November 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Police officers were accused of murdering a man identified as Kantuji Mohan Singh after beating him during interrogation at a police station. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the discovery of a decomposed body in a jungle and identification of the body by relatives based on clothing and arti

AMMINI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

1997 INSC 73718 November 1997Dismissed

The appellants, four accused, were alleged to have conspired to murder Merli and her two children by administering potassium cyanide. The prosecution relied on extensive circumstantial evidence, including the accused's movements, fingerprint on a glass, forensic laboratory report, medical certificates, and a confession

ASIM AKHTARversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2024 INSC 79418 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Asim Akhtar, was charged with kidnapping and related offences under the IPC and Arms Act. During trial, the victim and her parents were examined-in-chief, but their cross‑examination was delayed after the appellant filed an application under Section 319 CrPC to summon the appellant's parents. The prosecu

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

VIVEK BATRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 97118 October 2016Dismissed

Vivek Batra, an Indian Revenue Service officer, was investigated by the CBI for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. After a six‑year investigation, the Finance Ministry sought and eventually received a sanction for his prosecution on 9 October 2012, following advice from the Central Vigilance Commis

BAD SHAHversusSOU.URMILA BADSHAH GOOSE & ANR

2013 INSC 70318 October 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, Urmila Badshah Goose and her daughter Shivanjali, filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC seeking maintenance, claiming that Urmila was the wife of the petitioner Badshah and that Shivanjali was their illegitimate child. Badshah contended that he was already lawfully married to another woman

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,

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

PATEL HIRALAL JOITARAMversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2001 INSC 52318 October 2001Dismissed

The appellant, Patel Hiralal Joitaram, was convicted of murder for setting the victim, Asha Ben, ablaze with combustible liquid and a lighter. The victim had given a dying declaration identifying the appellant as her assailant, which the trial court rejected but the High Court admitted, leading to his conviction. On ap

S.W. PALANITKAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2001 INSC 52518 October 2001Case Partly allowed

The appellants, a company and its directors, entered into a consignment stockist agreement with respondent No.2. A dispute over a Rs 15 lakh payment led the respondent to issue a notice invoking an arbitration clause, which was rejected. He then filed a criminal complaint alleging criminal breach of trust, cheating and

STATE OF DELHIversusGYAN DEVI AND ORS.

2000 INSC 49118 October 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Delhi charged Gyan Devi, her mother‑in‑law and husband with culpable homicide not amounting to murder (IPC 304/34) in the death of Sudesh. The High Court, on a revision petition, directed the trial court to record only medical evidence and then quashed the charge under Section 304/34 using its inherent pow

MANISH DIXIT AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2000 INSC 49218 October 2000Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the murder of jeweller Gulshan Makhija, in which Manish Dixit (A2) and Sharad Dhakar (A1) were accused. The Court considered whether a hotel register entry could be treated as a "book of accounts" under Sec. 34 Evidence Act, the evidentiary weight of the accused's absconding, the legality of

MERUGU SATYANARAYANA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 7618 October 1982Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined two writ petitions under Article 32 filed by Merugu Satyanarayana and Bandela Ramulu, who were already in judicial custody when the District Magistrate of Adilabad issued preventive detention orders under the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioners argued that a person already detained c

JAG DISHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2009 INSC 115518 September 2009Dismissed

Jagdish was convicted of murdering his wife and five minor children after his brother and neighbours saw him with a blood‑stained knife and the bodies. The trial court relied on circumstantial evidence, medical post‑mortems and the appellant’s self‑inflicted injuries, and sentenced him to death. On appeal, the Supreme

RAJ NARAIN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2009 INSC 115618 September 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a shooting at a petrol pump in Jaunpur district where two sons of the complainant were killed. The trial court convicted three accused under sections 302, 307, 323, 342 IPC and sections 27, 30 of the Arms Act, but the Allahabad High Court acquitted them. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the con

STATE OF PUNJABversusDEEPAK MATTU

2007 INSC 95118 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a public servant, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed the conviction and, under Section 389 of the CrPC, sought suspension of the conviction; the Special Court granted it, and the High Court upheld the suspension. The State

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusAMEER JAN

2007 INSC 93918 September 2007Dismissed

The respondent, Ameerjan, a second‑division assistant in the Registrar of Firms and Co‑operative Societies, was alleged to have demanded a bribe of Rs 300 for issuing a certificate. He was charged under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The sanctioning authority, the Com

MAKSUD SAIYEDversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2007 INSC 94018 September 2007Dismissed

The appellant, a director of Nagami Nicotine Pvt. Ltd., alleged that Dena Bank had inserted false information in its prospectus for a public issue, claiming a pending suit before the Debt Recovery Tribunal instead of the City Civil Court. He filed a criminal complaint alleging defamation and other offences against the

DINESH DALMIAversusC.B.I

2007 INSC 94118 September 2007Dismissed

The CBI filed an FIR against Dinesh Dalmia and three companies for alleged fraud and filed a charge‑sheet under Section 173(2) CrPC after Dalmia had absconded to the United States. Cognizance was taken, and Dalmia was arrested on a non‑bailable warrant; the CBI repeatedly sought judicial custody of him under Section 16

SUGA RAM @ CHHUGA RAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2006 INSC 62418 September 2006Case Partly allowed

The trial court acquitted four accused persons of offences under the IPC and the SC/ST Atrocities Act. The State of Rajasthan applied for leave to appeal under Section 378(3) CrPC, but the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the application without giving any reasons. The informant (appellant) had earlier filed a revision p

GAJANAND AGARWALversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 62618 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a deceased woman (Gajanand Agarwal) appealed against the Orissa High Court’s grant of bail to two accused (Bimal Kumar Khetan and Sunil Kumar Khetan) in a dowry‑death case involving offences under Sections 498A, 304B, 302, 406 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Earlier bail applications had b

DAMODARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2003 INSC 49318 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a murder case where the initial information about the offence came via a cryptic telephone call, followed by a written report by a child witness (PW‑15). It held that such telephonic information does not constitute a First Information Report and therefore the written report is not barred by S

AVTAR SINGH AND ORSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2002 INSC 39618 September 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were apprehended in a truck carrying 640 kg of poppy husk at an odd hour; two were sitting on the bags and one was driving. They were convicted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act on the basis of presumptions of possession under Sections 54 and 35 of the Act, without any direct evidence of custody or contro

SALIMKHAN SARDARKHANversusSTARE OF GUJARAT

1985 INSC 19818 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

A police constable was charged under IPC s.161 and the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly accepting a Rs 50 bribe from a taxi driver. The prosecution had laid a trap by treating the money with phenolphthalein, which turned rosy when tested, and recovered the notes from the constable's left pocket. The constable

V. S. KUTIAN PILLAIversusRAMAKRISHNAN & ANR.

1979 INSC 18618 September 1979Dismissed

The petitioners, office bearers of a charitable Sabha, challenged a search warrant issued under Section 93(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, on the ground that it violated the constitutional protection against self‑incrimination under Article 20(3). The Supreme Court examined whether a general search of pr

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

R.A.H. SIGURANversusSHANKARE GOWDA @ SHANKARA & ANR.

2017 INSC 77718 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, R.A.H. Siguran, was charged under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 for procuring minor girls for prostitution. The investigation was conducted by an officer who was not a Special Police Officer as required by the Act, leading the respondent to invoke Section 482 of the CrPC to have the proceedi

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

MURLI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 105218 August 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Patwari Virendra Singh, for which appellants Murli and Heera were convicted under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149. The prosecution’s case rested on two eye‑witnesses, Lakendra Singh (PW‑1) and Sadri Lal (PW‑2), whose statements were recorded after considerable delay and wh

DINESH SETHversusSTATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

2008 INSC 94018 August 2008Dismissed

Dinesh Seth was married to Rama, who died by hanging within two years of marriage. The trial court framed a charge under IPC Section 304B (dowry death) read with Section 34 and convicted the accused. On appeal, the Delhi High Court acquitted them of the 304B charge but convicted Seth under IPC Section 498A (cruelty) an

SWARAN SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE THROUGH STANDING COUNSEL & ANR.

2008 INSC 94118 August 2008Disposed off

The appellants were charged under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for calling a Scheduled Caste informant "Chamar" (or "Chuda‑Chamar") in what the FIR described as a public setting. The Supreme Court examined whether the term "Chamar" in contemporary usa

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA AND ANRversusB. SRINIVAS

2008 INSC 94418 August 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a corruption investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against B. Srinivas, an engineer, where the Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayuktha authorized an Inspector to investigate and an FIR was lodged on 12 June 2000. Srinivas filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC see

PULICHERLA NAGARAJU @NAGARAJA REDDYversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2006 INSC 52018 August 2006Dismissed

The case involves a long-standing feud between two families in Chittoor district, culminating in the stabbing of Purushotham Reddy by appellant Nagaraja Reddy with a Barisa (dagger). The trial court acquitted the accused, extending the benefit of doubt and rejecting the testimony of two eyewitnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑2) on

VINOD K. CHAWLAversusU.O.I. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 52118 August 2006Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a detention order issued under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) against Vinod K. Chawla, who was alleged to have evaded customs duty by under‑invoicing electronic imports and remitting proceeds thr

SANJAYDUTTversusSTATE THROUGH CBI, BOMBAY

1994 INSC 33118 August 1994

Sanjay Dutt, accused in the Bombay blast case, was arrested under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) for possession of unauthorised arms. The charge‑sheet was filed after the statutory period of 180 days, and the petitioner sought bail on the grounds that mere possession of arms witho

SHIVAJI NARAYAN BACHHAVversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1983 INSC 9618 August 1983Case Allowed

Shivaji Narayan Bachhav was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment by a Sessions Judge. He appealed to the Bombay High Court, which dismissed the appeal in limine with a one‑word order, "dismissed." The appellant filed a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution.

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

N.C.V. AISHWARYAversusA.S. SARAVANA KARTHIK SHA

2022 INSC 131018 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 21‑year‑old wife residing in Chennai, sought the transfer of her husband’s petition for annulment of marriage filed in the Family Court at Vellore to the Family Court at Chennai under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. She also had two other matrimonial petitions – restitution of conjugal right

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

DHARAM PAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2013 INSC 47918 July 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a magistrate, after receiving a police report under Section 173(3) CrPC, could disagree with the report, issue summons to persons listed in column 2 and either try them or commit the case to a Sessions Court, and whether the Sessions Court could, upon committal, take cognizance and su

MANJIT PRAKASH & ORSversusSHOBHA DEVI & ANR.

2008 INSC 84318 July 2008Case Allowed

The respondent filed a criminal case against her husband and his family. The accused were granted provisional bail on 3 May 2006, which was confirmed on 7 September 2006. The Patna High Court later cancelled the bail of three appellants without recording any reasons. The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court, conten

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusBANTARA SUDHAKARA @ SUDHA & ANR.

2008 INSC 84218 July 2008Case Allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed the Karnataka High Court’s acquittal of two tailors accused of raping two girls. The trial court had convicted them under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, relying on school certificates and the headmaster’s testimony that the victims were under 16 years of age. The High Court revers

ALEQUE PADAMSEE AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 76018 July 2007Disposed off

The petitioners alleged that the police in Maharashtra and Gujarat failed to register FIRs against two respondents for alleged communal speeches constituting cognizable offences and also failed to grant sanction under Section 196 of the CrPC. They sought a writ under Article 32 directing the police to register the FIRs

IN RE: NOISE POLLUTION - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LAWS FOR RESTRICTING USE OF LOUDSPEAKERS AND HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMSversus.

2005 INSC 29718 July 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ filed by engineer Anil K. Mittal after a 13‑year‑old girl died because loudspeaker noise prevented her cries from being heard. The petition sought stringent enforcement of laws restricting loudspeakers, firecrackers, vehicular horns and other high‑volume sound system

SRINIVASA GOPALversusUNION TERRITORY OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH (NOW STATE)

1988 INSC 17718 July 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an executive engineer, was charged under IPC sections 279, 304A and 338 for a fatal jeep accident in Arunachal Pradesh in November 1976. The magistrate initially took cognizance on the date of the police report, but the High Court held that cognizance was only taken on 31 March 1986, more than nine years

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

D. DEVARAJAversusOWAIS SABEER HUSSAIN

2020 INSC 43618 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior police officer, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash a private complaint (PCR No.17214 of 2013) that alleged police excesses while the respondent was in custody during an investigation. The magistrate had taken cognizance of the complaint without obtaining prior sanction un

RANA NAHID @ RESHMA @ SANA & ANR.versusSAHIDUL HAQ CHISTI

2020 INSC 43218 June 2020Disposed off

A Muslim couple divorced; the wife filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance, which the Family Court converted into an application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and ordered maintenance. The High Court set aside the conversion, holding the Family Cou

SHAURABH KUMAR TRIPATHIversusVIDHI RAWAL

2025 INSC 73418 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, relatives of the respondent Vidhi Rawal, sought to quash a domestic‑violence application filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, by invoking the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (and Se

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

CAPTAIN MANJIT SINGH VIRDI (RETD.)versusHUSSAIN MOHAMMED SHATTAF & ORS.

2023 INSC 55518 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves the murder of Captain Manmohan Singh Virdi, whose body was discovered in a pool of blood. A chargesheet was filed against respondents 1 (Hussain Mohammed Shattaf) and 2 (Waheeda Hussain Shattaf) after an investigation that included statements, psychological profiling, polygraph and BEOS tests. The tri

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 BY LOKAYUKTHA POLICEversusH. SRINIVAS

2018 INSC 54918 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The State by Lokayuktha Police appealed against the Karnataka High Court's order quashing FIRs filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act against H. Srinivas and others on the ground that the police had conducted a preliminary enquiry without recording it in the General Diary. The Supreme Court examined whether a pre

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

SUKHWANT SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2009 INSC 83518 May 2009Disposed off

Petitioners Sukhwant Singh and others applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which the Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed. They appealed to the Supreme Court, which did not interfere with the High Court's order. However, the Court clarified that a court hearing a regular bail application posses

RIZWAN AKBAR HUSSAIN SYYEDversusMEHMOOD HUSSAIN AND ANR.

2007 INSC 62918 May 2007Case Partly allowed

Rizwan Akbar Hussain Syyed was arrested for offences under the IPC and was released on bail by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 10 February 2006 upon furnishing a Rs 10,000 surety, without any specific conditions. The complainant filed an application for cancellation of bail, and a notice was served; the

MANJAPPAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 63218 May 2007Case Partly allowed

The appellant Manjappa was convicted for voluntarily causing grievous hurt (IPC s.325) and simple hurt (IPC s.323) in 1997, receiving a cumulative sentence that was reduced by lower courts to one and a half months. He appealed to the Supreme Court seeking probation under CrPC s.360/361, arguing that the offence was his

BUDH SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2007 INSC 64018 May 2007Disposed off

Budhsingh was convicted for murder under Sections 302/34 and 307/34 of the IPC. He appealed to the Supreme Court alleging that the FIR was not ante‑timed, that the investigation was defective, that the ballistic evidence was unreliable, and that the post‑mortem timing and lack of blackening of the wound cast doubt on t

VIJAYKUMAR BALDEV MISHRA @SHARMAversusST ATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 65218 May 2007Disposed off

The appellant, Vijay Kumar Baldev Mishra, was charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and IPC for a gang‑related murder. A Review Committee, set up under the Kartar Singh guidelines, recommended that the TADA provisions were inapplicable because the offence was motivated by persona

SWAMY SHRADDANANDA @ MURALI MANOHAR MISHRAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 65318 May 2007Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, Swamy Shraddananda (aka Murali Manohar Mishra), was convicted of murdering his wife, Shakereh, a wealthy woman who disappeared in May 1991. Investigations uncovered a wooden box in the backyard of their house containing skeletal remains identified through forensic, DNA and photo‑superimposition evidence

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

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusJAYEETA DAS

2024 INSC 31318 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal appealed against a Calcutta High Court order that quashed the addition of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) offences to an IPC case and set aside extensions of remand. The investigation, conducted by the State police, led the Chief Judge of the City Sessions Court to permit inclusion

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,

SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH OF CLUNYversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2018 INSC 36318 April 2018Disposed off

The Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny, a society that had established Cluny Women’s College as a secular institution, later applied to the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI) for a minority status certificate, which was granted in 2007. The society and the college’s governing body subsequentl

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

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusCDR. RAVINDRA V. DESAI

2018 INSC 36118 April 2018Dismissed

Commander Ravindra V. Desai was convicted by a court‑martial of making obscene telephone calls to the wives of three naval officers, resulting in dismissal from service and forfeiture of 24 months' seniority. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) upheld the conviction on seven charges but substituted the dismissal with loss

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

KUNAPAREDDY @ NOOKALA SHANKA BALAJIversusKUNAPAREDDY SWARNA KUMAR! & ANR.

2016 INSC 32318 April 2016Dismissed

The case concerned a petition filed by Kunapareddy @ Nookala Shanka Balaji (the wife) under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking protection, maintenance and other reliefs. After the petition was transferred to another magistrate, the wife sought to amend the prayer clause to increase maintenance, claim return of dow

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

MURALEEDHARANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2001 INSC 21518 April 2001Dismissed

The appellant, Muraledharan, was alleged to be a chief conspirator in the Kollam liquor tragedy that caused numerous deaths and injuries, and was charged under Section 8 of the Kerala Abkari Act among other offences. He obtained anticipatory bail from a Sessions Judge under Section 438 of the CrPC on the basis that the

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

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