Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

2,851 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 2,201–2,400.

SASIKALA PUSHPA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2019 INSC 6367 May 2019Disposed off

The appellants, including a former Rajya Sabha MP, filed anticipatory bail applications in a sexual harassment case and submitted a vakalatnama that purportedly bore their signatures dated 17 August 2016 in Madurai, although they were abroad at that time. The Madurai High Court held the vakalatnama to be forged, deemed

KRISHNAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2013 INSC 3207 May 2013Matter referred to larger bench

The appellants challenged the validity of Section 32‑A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which bars suspension, remission or commutation of any sentence awarded under the Act. The High Court had upheld the provision, denying the appellants any remission. The Supreme Court examined whether the

KHAIRUDDIN & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 3227 May 2013Case Partly allowed

The case involved a violent land dispute in which twenty‑four accused, including the appellants, attacked a group working on disputed land, resulting in two deaths and several injuries. The trial court convicted twenty‑one accused under Sections 302, 149, 148 and 323 of the IPC, a decision affirmed by the High Court. O

NEEL KUMAR @ ANIL KUMARversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 2047 May 2012Disposed off

The appellant, Neel Kumar (also known as Anil Kumar), was convicted of raping and murdering his four‑year‑old daughter. The trial court and High Court relied on the victim’s custody, the appellant’s silence, blood‑stained clothing recovered from his disclosure statement, and the absence of any explanation for these inc

UTPAL DAS & ANR.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 2947 May 2010Dismissed

The victim, a married woman with two children, was intercepted while traveling by rickshaw, taken to a house under construction and forcibly raped by the two appellants, Utpal Das and Haradhan Sutradar. She was later rescued, identified the accused, and lodged an FIR. The trial court acquitted the appellants, but the C

GAUTAM SATNAMIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2026 INSC 3257 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gautam Satnami, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based largely on a 'last‑seen' testimony, recovery of a blood‑stained axe and his driving licence, and alleged motive. The High Court affirmed the conviction, but the Supreme Court examined whether the circumstantial evidence formed a complete

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusSRI CHANNAKESHAVA.H.D. & ANR.

2025 INSC 4717 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed a Karnataka High Court order that had quashed an FIR registered against Sri Channakeshava H.D., an executive engineer, for alleged disproportionate assets under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court had held that the Superintendent of Polic

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusNISAR RAMZAN SAYYED

2017 INSC 3217 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra prosecuted Nisar Ramzan Sayyed for the murder of his pregnant wife and their three‑year‑old son, alleging that he poured kerosene on his wife and set her on fire after demanding Rs.50,000 as dowry. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302 and 498‑A of the IPC and sentenced him to death,

GOPAKUMAR B. NAIRversusC.B.I. & ANR.

2014 INSC 2557 April 2014Dismissed

The appellant, GOPAKUMAR B. Nair, sought to have criminal proceedings quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing that a private settlement with the bank had extinguished the dispute. The High Court of Kerala declined to quash the case, where the appellant was charged with criminal conspiracy under the Prevention of

M/S. INDUS AIRWAYS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusM/S. MAGNUM AVIATION PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2014 INSC 3517 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, purchasers, issued post‑dated cheques as advance payment for aircraft parts ordered from the respondent supplier. The supplier cancelled the orders and returned the cheques, but the cheques were later presented and dishonoured, leading to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,

SUBHANKAR BISWASversusSANDEEP META

2011 INSC 2837 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint under Section 19 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 alleged violations of Rules 2, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 23 of the Packaged Commodities Rules, but failed to identify the individual(s) responsible for the day‑to‑day affairs of the company. The appellant, then Deputy General Manager, and the company

DR SONIA VERMA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2024 INSC 2277 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, doctors running a hospital, purchased land and filed a civil suit to confirm their ownership, while the respondent filed an FIR alleging forgery and fraud. The High Court refused to quash the FIR, holding that the alleged offences were made out. The appellants contended that the dispute was essentially

YERUVA SAYIREDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 12977 March 2022Disposed off

The appellant, convicted of murder under IPC s.302, appealed his conviction and sentence. While the appeal was pending, he died in prison after about twelve years. Section 394 of the Cr.P.C. provides that an appeal abates on the death of the appellant unless a near relative applies within thirty days for continuance. N

M. NAGESWARA REDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 2667 March 2022Disposed off

On 18 January 2007, eleven accused formed an unlawful assembly and attacked a vehicle, resulting in the death of Rajasekhar Reddy and injuries to several others. The trial court convicted accused Nos. 1‑3 under Sections 148 and 302 of the IPC and acquitted accused Nos. 4‑11. The High Court reversed the conviction of No

MANIK KUTUMversusJULIE KUTUM

2019 INSC 3327 March 2019Disposed off

The wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking maintenance for herself and her minor daughter. The trial court awarded Rs.2,000 per month for the daughter but rejected the wife's claim, holding she was not the legally married wife of the husband. The wife appealed to th

SUKUMARANversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2019 INSC 3277 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sukumar, a Forest Range Officer, chased a lorry he suspected of sandalwood smuggling. The lorry occupants attacked his jeep with stones and shouted “fire them”. Sukumar fired his DBL‑gun, killing the driver. He later loaded sandalwood and a gun from the lorry and claimed he acted in private defence. He w

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

RANA AYYUBversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

2023 INSC 1017 February 2023Dismissed

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner conducted three crowdfunding campaigns on the Ketto platform. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opened investigations under FEMA and later filed a complaint under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA), attaching the petitioner’s bank account in Navi Mumbai. The Specia

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusRAHUL MODI & ORS.

2022 INSC 1587 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) appealed against the Delhi High Court's order granting statutory bail to Rahul Modi and others, who had been arrested in connection with alleged offences under the Companies Act and the Indian Penal Code. The charge‑sheet was filed within the 60‑day period prescribed by Sec

IQBAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2017 INSC 1157 February 2017Dismissed

The case involved six accused, including Iqbal and Virendra, who entered the complainant's house armed with rifles and fired upon the family, resulting in the death of Bhoop Singh and injuries to others. All were convicted under IPC Sections 148, 149, 302 and 307 for forming an unlawful assembly with the common object

MD IMRAN @ D.C. GUDDUversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 367 January 2026

The case arose from a murder investigation where the FIR named nine persons, but the police filed a charge sheet against only three, filing a closure report for the remaining six. Based on oral eyewitness testimony, the first informant applied under Section 319 CrPC to have the six dropped co-accused added as accused;

OM PRAKASH @ ISRAEL @ RAJU @ RAJU DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 437 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, convicted of culpable homicide amounting to murder for a 1994 incident, claimed he was a minor at the time of the offence, asserting a plea of juvenility under s.9(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Despite earlier courts treating him as an adult based on a bank‑accou

THE STATE OF PUNJABversusHARI KESH

2025 INSC 507 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab prosecuted Hari Kesh under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, after a sanction order dated 19‑Nov‑2018 was issued. The trial had commenced and the prosecution had examined several witnesses when the accused filed a petition in the High Court seeking quashing of the sanct

JASDEEP SINGH @ JASSUversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 237 January 2022Disposed off

The case involved the murder of a man at a dhaba in Jalandhar, where four accused (A1‑A4) were convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC. The father of the deceased (PW6) initially did not allege that A3 and A4 instigated the shooting, but later, in a supplementary statement under Section 161 CrPC, claimed they did. The t

RAJESH PRASADversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. ETC.

2022 INSC 197 January 2022Case Partly allowed

The case concerned an appeal by Rajesh Prasad, the informant, against a High Court order that set aside the conviction and death sentences of three accused who had been found guilty under IPC s.302/34, 120B and the Explosive Substances Act s.3/4 for throwing bombs that killed his father and another victim. The High Cou

M.E. SHIVALINGAMURTHYversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BENGALURU

2020 INSC 67 January 2020Dismissed

The case involved a partnership firm (AMC) whose reconstitution in 2009 led the Director of Mines and Geology of Karnataka (the appellant) to issue Mineral Dispatch Permits (MDPs) to the new partners. The Central Bureau of Investigation alleged that the appellant acted without the prior State Government sanction requir

MONUversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2019 INSC 247 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Monu appealed to the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court Single Judge dismissed his Section 482 application seeking quashal of a charge‑sheet filed under IPC sections 420, 498A, 323, 376, 506 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The High Court dismissed the petition with a terse order stating there was

PARBIN ALI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 107 January 2013Dismissed

The appellants Parbin Ali and another were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for the murder of Sakat Ali, based primarily on an oral dying declaration made by the deceased to his wife, father‑in‑law and relatives. The trial court and the Gauhati High Court upheld the conviction, finding the declaration credible d

RAJ PALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 117 January 2013Dismissed

The appellant Raj Pal was convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the killing of his rival's brother. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony of the deceased's brother and sister, medical reports indicating fatal injuries that could not be self‑inflicted, and the recovery of weapons. The appellant

SAJJAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 247 January 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sajjan Sharma, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Narain Kunwar in an alleged unlawful assembly that fired weapons. The FIR and the original Fard‑e‑beyan named five accused, including the appellant's father and brother, but did not name the appellant himself. He was later added in the

KUNHIMUHAMMED@KUNHEETHUversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2024 INSC 9376 December 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a sympathiser of a political party, participated in a violent clash on 11 April 2006 during which he stabbed the deceased Subrahmannian multiple times with a knife, causing fatal injuries to vital organs. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 324 and 326/34 of the IPC and sentenced him to lif

LAKHAN SINGHversusAMARJEET SINGH & ANR

2022 INSC 13276 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Lakhan Singh, convicted of murder under IPC s.302 and sentenced to life, appealed the conviction and also sought to adduce additional evidence to support an insanity defence under IPC s.84. The Delhi High Court, invoking CrPC ss.311 and 391, allowed the application and directed the trial court to record the extra evide

THE STATE OF TELANGANAversusSRI MANAGIPET @ MANGIPET SARVESHWAR REDDY

2019 INSC 13336 December 2019Disposed off

The State of Telangana filed a criminal appeal against a Hyderabad High Court order that partially quashed a charge‑sheet under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against former OSD Sri Managipet @ Mangipet Sarveshwar Reddy for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. The High Court had held that the

DARSHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2019 INSC 13276 December 2019Dismissed

The deceased, Surjit Kaur, was found dead in a jute bag with her face disfigured by acid; she had inherited land and was not receiving lease money from her son, providing a motive for the accused. The prosecution relied on extra‑judicial confessions recorded by a witness, medical evidence of a fractured hyoid bone and

LAJPAT & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2018 INSC 11636 December 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Lajpat and others were charged under Sections 420, 406 and 504 of the IPC. They filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the charge sheet. The Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court dismissed the application, relying solely on Supreme Court pronouncements about the scope of Se

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusPRADEEP SHARMA

2013 INSC 8106 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged Pradeep Sharma and co‑accused with murder and conspiracy (IPC ss.302, 120B, 34) for allegedly poisoning the deceased. Both accused were declared absconders and proclaimed offenders under CrPC s.82, and the High Court granted them anticipatory bail under s.438. The Supreme Court exami

ALSIA PARDHIversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2013 INSC 8076 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Alsia Pardhi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the production of his 14‑year‑old niece, Rajnandani, alleging that forest officials had abducted her from a fish market. The State police, acting on the High Court's direction, recorded statements only of the forest officials and ignored eyewi

SRI BHAGWANversusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 5686 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Sri Bhagwan, was convicted for murdering Yogender Nath Bhargava by pouring acid on him, an offence initially registered under Section 326 IPC and later altered to Section 302 IPC. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two eyewitnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑3) who claimed to have seen the assault, and on the

AKIL@ JAVEDversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2012 INSC 5676 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant Akil @ Javed was convicted for murder (IPC s.302) and robbery (IPC s.392) along with a co‑accused. The prosecution relied on the testimony of several eye‑witnesses, especially PW‑20 who identified the appellant, and on the recovery of a Rado watch and gold chain from the appellant that were identified by

MIHIR RAJESH SHAHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 12886 November 2025Directions issued

The appellant, Mihir Rajesh Shah, was arrested for a fatal hit‑and‑run involving his BMW, but the police failed to provide him with a written copy of the grounds of arrest as required by Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The High Court upheld the arrest de

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

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusBIBHU PRASAD ACHARYA, ETC.

2024 INSC 8436 November 2024Dismissed

The Enforcement Directorate filed complaints under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA alleging money‑laundering offences by two civil servants, one a Vice Chairman/Managing Director of a state corporation and the other a Principal Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh government. The Special Court took cognizance of the complaints

DEVENDRA KUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 8416 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants assaulted the deceased, Bahal, with lathis and an axe after threatening to kill him, during a land dispute that created prior enmity between the families. Bahal later died from head injuries, and the trial court convicted the appellants under Section 302 IPC and Section 307 read with Section 34, sentenci

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusT. NASEER @ NASIR @ THANDIANTAVIDA NASEER @ UMARHAZI @ HAZI & ORS.

2023 INSC 9886 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted accused persons for a series of bomb blasts in Bangalore in 2008, seizing numerous electronic devices that were examined by the CFSL, Hyderabad, producing a report dated 29‑11‑2010. The trial court refused to admit the CFSL report without a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence

ADITI ALIAS MITHIversusJITESH SHARMA

2023 INSC 9816 November 2023Disposed off

The minor daughter of Jitesh Sharma challenged the High Court's order that reduced the maintenance awarded by the Family Court from Rs 20,000 to Rs 7,500 per month. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court had not required the parties to file the uniform affidavits of disclosure of assets and liabilities prescrib

MANJUNATH & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 9786 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of six appellants for offences under various sections of the IPC, based primarily on a dying declaration, ocular testimony and circumstantial evidence. The trial court had acquitted all accused, but the Karnataka High Court overturned the acquittals of five appellants, sentencing them

JAVED ABDUL RAJJAQ SHAIKHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 12106 November 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh, was accused of murdering his wife by throttling her after demanding half tola gold, money and a dress. The trial court convicted him and three co‑accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and also under Section 498A. The High Court acquitted the co‑accused and c

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusTRIBHUWAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 10786 November 2017Case Partly allowed

In 1980 a violent altercation in Azamgarh resulted in the death of Ram Lagan and injuries to Baij Nath. Six persons, including Tribhuwan, were tried; Tribhuwan was convicted under Section 325 IPC read with Section 149 and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Court. The Allahabad High Court uphe

VIPUL SHITAL PRASAD AGARWALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2012 INSC 5086 November 2012Dismissed

Dr. Vipul Shital Prasad Agarwal, a Superintendent of Police, was arrested in connection with FIR No.115 of 2006 concerning a alleged fake encounter. The Supreme Court had directed the CBI to take over the investigation and the CBI registered a fresh FIR, but the original charge‑sheet filed under the first FIR was submi

BALVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 8796 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant Balvir Singh was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC and dowry harassment under s.498A IPC, while his mother‑in‑law Maheshwari Devi was convicted of s.498A IPC read with s.34 IPC. The prosecution proved that the victim died from aluminium phosphide poisoning, a fumigant not explainable by her heart medica

RANJAN KUMAR CHADHAversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2023 INSC 8786 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant was arrested at a bus stand after police received a tip that he was carrying charas. He consented to be searched by the police, and during the search of his bag, 1.25 kg of charas was recovered. The trial court acquitted him, holding that Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which mandates informing the suspect of

BHARATH BOOSHAN AGGARWALversusSTATE OF KERALA

2021 INSC 6216 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a sandalwood oil manufacturer, was convicted under Section 27(1)(d) of the Kerala Forest Act for allegedly possessing forest produce illicitly removed from a reserved forest. The High Court upheld the conviction, treating the presumption under Section 69 as creating a reverse burden of proof on the accus

HIRAL P. HARSORA AND ORS.versusKUSUM NAROTTAMDAS HARSORA AND ORS.

2016 INSC 9556 October 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the definition of "respondent" in Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which limited it to an "adult male person". The Court held that this restriction bore no rational relation to the Act's purpose of protecting women from all forms of domestic violence a

SATYAPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2015 INSC 7376 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a deceased woman filed an appeal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the acquittal of five accused in a dowry‑death case. The High Court dismissed the appeal mechanically, without examining whether the appellant needed leave of the High Court under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Proce

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE THR. CBI

2010 INSC 6796 October 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Santosh Kumar Singh, was accused of raping and murdering Priyadarshini Mattoo. The trial court acquitted him, rejecting the DNA evidence and deeming the circumstantial evidence insufficient. The High Court reversed the acquittal, finding the chain of circumstantial facts – continuous harassment, presence

RATHINAM @ RATHINANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2009 INSC 11666 October 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the rape and murder of a mill worker, Chitra, for which Rathinam, the son of the mill owner, was charged under Sections 376, 302 and 201 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court reversed this acquittal based largely on the later statements of two witnesses, PW‑4 and PW‑5,

BACCAROSE PERFUMES AND BEAUTY PRODUCTS PVT. LTDversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2024 INSC 6626 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Pvt. Ltd (the appellant) challenged the Special Judge's order taking cognizance of alleged offences relating to the payment of Countervailing Duty (CVD) on invoice value instead of Maximum Retail Price (MRP). The company claimed that it had been granted immunity from prosecution u

MANDAKINI DIWAN AND ANR.versusTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2024 INSC 6666 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, mother and brother of Ranjana Diwan, alleged that her death in 2016, officially recorded as suicide, was suspicious due to six ante‑mortem injuries and possible influence by her husband, a senior judicial officer, over the police investigation. They filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a fair

R. SREENIVASAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 8036 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a co-accused in a murder case, was acquitted by the trial court on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was last seen in his company. The High Court reversed this acquittal and convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, relying on a disputed 'last seen' th

K. HYMAVATHIversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 8116 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant K. Hymavathi loaned Rs 20 lakh to respondent No.2, who executed a promissory note on 25 July 2012 promising repayment by December 2016. The respondent later issued a cheque for Rs 10 lakh on 28 April 2017, which was dishonoured, leading the appellant to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable

SMT. ROOPA SONIversusKAMALNARAYAN SONI

2023 INSC 8146 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The marriage between Roopa Soni and Kamalnarayan Soni, solemnised in 2002, broke down after the birth of their child, leading to a separation that has lasted for over fifteen years. Both parties filed serious allegations against each other, including a complaint under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, and

DHARIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusKISHORE WADHWANI & ORS.

2016 INSC 8536 September 2016Disposed off

Dhariwal Industries Ltd filed a complaint under Sec. 200 CrPC alleging several IPC offences. After the police investigation and filing of a charge‑sheet, the accused applied for discharge under Sec. 239 CrPC. The appellant sought, orally, permission to be heard alongside the Assistant Public Prosecutor at the charge‑fr

L. NARAYANA SWAMYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2016 INSC 8566 September 2016Dismissed

The petitioners alleged that certain public officials abused their positions to facilitate a land transaction and sought quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The High Court had dismissed the petition, holding that the order directing investigation under Section 156(3) C

UMESH KUMARversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR

2013 INSC 5906 September 2013Disposed off

The case arose from a complaint alleging that a senior police officer, V. Dinesh Reddy, had amassed disproportionate assets, which was later claimed to be forged and signed by a fictitious MP. An investigation led to a charge sheet against Umesh Kumar under IPC sections 468, 471, 120‑B and 201, and the appellant sought

AJAY KUMAR DASversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2011 INSC 6556 September 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Ajay Kumar Das, was charged under IPC 304B (dowry death) read with s.34 for the death of his wife, who was allegedly pushed into a well by her parents‑in‑law after a telephone conversation with the appellant. The FIR implicated the parents‑in‑law and the appellant, and a charge‑sheet was filed. The appel

AASIF @ PASHAversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2025 INSC 9446 August 2025Disposed off

The appellant was convicted under several provisions of the IPC, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Atrocities Act and sentenced to a maximum of four years’ rigorous imprisonment, to run concurrently. While his appeal against conviction was pending before the Allahabad High Court, he filed an application under Section 389 of

SHANTI DEVIversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 9876 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shanti Devi, her son Rajbir and another accused Veena were convicted by the trial court and upheld by the High Court for the murder of Balwant, the informant's son, under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC. The prosecution's case relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including a motive of illegal occupa

JAMNALALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 9356 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a minor rape victim appealed against the Rajasthan High Court's order that suspended the conviction and sentence of the accused under Section 389 of the CrPC and released him on bail. The accused had been convicted under Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act and Section 376(3) of the IPC, receiving a 20‑year r

ANAND RAMACHANDRA CHOUGULEversusSIDARAI LAXMAN CHOUGALA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 8636 August 2019Dismissed

The case arose from a land dispute between related parties that escalated into a verbal duel and scuffle on 7 June 2002, resulting in the death of a person. The trial court convicted all four accused under Section 302 IPC with a common intention charge, but the Karnataka High Court altered the conviction of two accused

MANZOOR ALI KHANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 5266 August 2014Disposed off

The petition sought a declaration that Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which requires prior sanction before a public servant can be prosecuted, is unconstitutional and that all pending cases should proceed without such sanction. The Court examined whether the sanction requirement infringes the rig

BAKHSHISH SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2013 INSC 5186 August 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Bakhshish Singh, his nephew Satbir Singh and Rachhpal Singh for the murder of Gurcharan Singh, who was stabbed while taking a morning walk in a park. The prosecution proved that Satbir and Rachhpal, identified by the victim's wife Kulwinder Kaur, carried out the stabbing, whil

DINESH B. PATEL & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2010 INSC 4856 August 2010Dismissed

A criminal complaint was filed against a medicine‑manufacturing company and its directors alleging that the drug was defective due to fungal growth, constituting a breach of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The company and its directors sought to quash the complaint under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Guj

SIRAJUL & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. &ANR.

2015 INSC 4816 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Sirajul and others, were summoned in a criminal complaint under Section 307 IPC filed by respondent No.2, a co‑accused who had been convicted in a cross‑case relating to the same 1992 incident. The complaint was lodged in 2008, sixteen years after the alleged offence and more than a decade after the cro

MAINUDDIN ABDUL SATTAR SHAIKHversusVIJAY D. SALVI

2015 INSC 4806 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant booked a flat with the respondent's company and paid Rs.74,200, for which the respondent later issued a cheque for refund. The cheque was drawn by the respondent in his personal capacity and was dishonoured, leading the appellant to issue a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and fi

STATE OF M.P.versusMANISH & ORS.

2015 INSC 4846 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed a High Court order that quashed an FIR for offences under IPC sections 307, 294, 34 and Arms Act sections 25, 27 on the ground that the victim and accused had settled the dispute out of court. The issue was whether the High Court could invoke its inherent power under Section 482 of

MS. MAYAWATIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2012 INSC 2726 July 2012Case Allowed

Mayawati, then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging FIR No. RC 0062003A0019 dated 05.10.2003, which the CBI had lodged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act alleging disproportionate assets. The FIR was said to be based on a Sup

JAHID SHAIKH & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2011 INSC 4636 July 2011Disposed off

The petitioners, accused in the 2008 Ahmedabad‑Surat bomb blast cases, sought transfer of the Sessions trial from Gujarat to another state under Section 406 of the CrPC, alleging bias by police, jail authorities and the judiciary and a hostile communal atmosphere that would deny them a free and fair trial. The State op

JALPAT RAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 4646 July 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a triple murder and injury incident in Jind, Haryana, where six accused were tried. The trial court convicted only A‑2 under IPC s.302 and the Arms Act, acquitting the other five appellants. The High Court reversed the acquittals, convicting the five under s.148 and s.302 r.w. s.149 IPC. On appeal,

SUBA SINGH & ANR.versusDAVINDER KAUR & ANR.

2011 INSC 4696 July 2011Dismissed

Suba Singh and his son Shingara Singh were convicted of murder and related offences for the killing of Surinder Singh. The widow of the deceased and her minor daughter filed a civil suit under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 seeking Rs. 3 lakh as compensation. The trial court awarded the amount with 12% interest, which w

SHIVJEE SINGHversusNAGENDRA TIWARY AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3556 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shivjee Singh filed a protest petition that was converted into a complaint alleging that four persons killed his son. The Judicial Magistrate, after examining the appellant and only two of the four witnesses he named, took cognizance of offences under Sections 302, 1208 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act and iss

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. ASIAN GLOBAL LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 3566 July 2010Dismissed

The Central Bank of India sued Asian Global Ltd., its sister concern, and several directors for offences under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that a cheque issued as a corporate guarantee was dishonoured. The trial court held the bank to be a holder in due course and rejected the direc

MOHAMMED ASARUDEENversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2025 INSC 7466 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, accused in a NIA case, challenged an order of the Special Court that granted witness protection to a large number of witnesses under sub‑section 2 of section 44 of the UAPA and the corresponding provision in the NIA Act, without recording individual satisfaction for each witness. The High Court upheld mo

RAMKIRAT MUNILAL GOUDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.

2025 INSC 7026 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 3‑year‑9‑month‑old child based on three strands of circumstantial evidence: a disputed 'last seen together' testimony, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, and a forensic soil match. The Supreme Court examined whether the investigation was

CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIAversusM.R VIJAYABHASKAR & ORS.

2021 INSC 2866 May 2021Disposed off

The Chief Election Commissioner (EC) sought an order restraining the media from reporting oral remarks made by the Madras High Court, which alleged that the EC was "singularly responsible for the second wave of COVID‑19" and should face murder charges. The High Court’s oral observations were not part of its written ord

GURU DUTT PATHAKversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 2856 May 2021Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of village Pradhan Ram Aasare Pathak, for which four accused were charged under IPC sections 302 and 34. The trial court acquitted all four, relying on alleged relationships among witnesses, lack of independent witnesses, disputed motive, and questions about the place of occurrence and inju

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusMEHRAM & ORS.

2020 INSC 3846 May 2020Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the High Court's conversion of the murder conviction of accused Mehram (No.5) under Section 302 IPC to a lesser offence under Section 326 IPC and the reduction of his sentence to five months. The facts reveal that the accused, armed with lethal weapons, lay in wait behind bushes

STATE OF HLMACHAL PRADESHversusRAJIV JASSI

2016 INSC 3846 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed the High Court's acquittal of Dr. Rajiv Jass, who was convicted by a trial court for murdering his pregnant wife by forcibly administering organophosphorus poison. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including multiple ante‑mortem injuries on the victim, the accused

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusP. VENKATESHWARLU

2015 INSC 3846 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub Registrar, was caught in a police‑laid trap after demanding a bribe of Rs.500 for registering a will. The prosecution proved demand and acceptance through eyewitness testimony, a positive phenolphthalein test, and the unchallenged recovery of the tainted money. The High Court acquitted the accused

SUBRATA ROY SAHARAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 3676 May 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Subrata Roy Sahara challenging an order dated 4.3.2014 directing his arrest and detention for non-compliance of earlier orders to refund money collected through Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCDs). The Court held that the two Sahara companies flouted orde

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusDIRECTOR, CENTERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2014 INSC 3586 May 2014Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 6‑A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (inserted by Section 26(c) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003), which required prior approval of the Central Government before the CBI could inquire into or investigate alleged offences u

KUSHALBHAI RATANBHAI ROHIT & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 3666 May 2014Dismissed

An FIR under the NDPS Act led to the arrest of a accused who escaped while being escorted by police constables. The constables were charged under IPC Section 222 and convicted, prompting them to file a criminal appeal. The Gujarat High Court, after dictating an acquitting order in open court but before signing it, reca

RAJ KUMAR SINGH @ RAJU @ BATYAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 3136 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder, rape and kidnapping of a 4‑year‑old girl based solely on circumstantial evidence, including the testimony of four family members and forensic findings. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the credibility of the witnesses, noting material contradictions, embellishments and incons

SUSHIL SURIversusC.B.I & ANR.

2011 INSC 3616 May 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a petition by Sushil Suri, an executive director of Morepen Labs Ltd., who sought to quash a CBI chargesheet under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. on the ground that the company had repaid the hire‑purchase loan it obtained fraudulently from Punjab & Sind Bank and thus caused no loss. The chargesh

SIVAKUMARversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2026 INSC 3186 April 2026Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a boundary dispute between close relatives in which the deceased Ganesan’s brother was killed after a heated altercation. The accused Senthil (A‑1) and Sivakumar (A‑2) were originally convicted of offences under Sections 324 and 325 IPC respectively, while the trial court acquitted them of the more

DR. S. BALAGOPALversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

2026 INSC 3196 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a pediatric surgeon, performed an orchidectomy on a 1½‑year‑old boy after obtaining a consent form that listed both orchidopexy and orchidectomy, but the father alleged that consent for orchidectomy was never given and that the term was interpolated. An FIR was filed under multiple IPC sections and the c

SAJAL BOSEversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2026 INSC 3226 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an FIR registered on 18 October 2022 alleging assault, criminal intimidation and related offences against eight persons, including Sajal Bose, his wife Nabina Bose and Chandidas Joardar. The High Court quashed the proceedings against two co‑accused but refused to grant the same relief to the three ap

JASPAL SINGH KAURALversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2025 INSC 4576 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jaspal Singh Kaural, had a consensual physical relationship with the complainant after promising to marry her and care for her children, leading her to obtain a divorce. When the appellant later refused to marry and threatened her children, the complainant filed an FIR under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. The

BISWAJYOTI CHATTERJEEversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2025 INSC 4586 April 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, a former judicial officer, was charged under Sections 376(2)(f), 417 and 506 IPC for allegedly promising marriage to a woman who was in the midst of a divorce, subsequently having a consensual relationship and later avoiding her. The complainant claimed the appellant used his position to exploit her, whi

DR. SOU JAYSHREE UJWAL INGOLEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2017 INSC 3176 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, a haemophiliac road‑accident victim, was admitted to Irvin Hospital. On 5 September 1997, after developing abdominal pain, the Emergency Medical Officer called Dr. Jayshree Ingole, the surgeon on call, who examined the patient, ordered a physician to be summoned and then left the hospital at about 11 p.m.

DEVENDRA NATH SRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF U.P.

2017 INSC 3166 April 2017Dismissed

Devendra Nath Srivastava was convicted by a trial court for murdering his wife after assaulting her with a brick, resulting in her death by asphyxia due to multiple ante‑mortem injuries. The trial court sentenced him to death under Section 302 IPC. On appeal, the Allahabad High Court set aside the murder conviction, ho

STANDARD CHARTERED BANKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ETC.

2016 INSC 2986 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Standard Chartered Bank filed three complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against ABG Shipyard Ltd. and several of its directors for the dishonour of cheques issued to repay a Rs.200 crore loan. The Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons to the company and the directors, but the Bombay High Cou

SHAMIMA FAROOQUIversusSHAHID KHAN

2015 INSC 2836 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Shamima Farooqui, a Muslim woman, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance after being harassed and deserted by her husband Shahid Khan, who later divorced her. The Family Court ordered Rs 2,500 per month from the date of application and Rs 4,000 per month from the da

JASBIR SINGH @ JAVRI @ JABBAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 2846 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Jasbir Singh was convicted under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act for allegedly planning and attempting a dacoity with firearms. The Supreme Court examined the evidence, noting the absence of independent witnesses, the fact that the investigating officer himself conducted the

UTTAM CHAKRABORTYversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2010 INSC 1986 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

An eight‑month‑pregnant woman was found dead with severe abdominal injuries and the foetus removed. The husband, Mission Suklabaidhya, and his friend, Uttam Chakraborty, were convicted of murder; the husband received the death penalty and the friend life imprisonment. Both appealed to the Supreme Court, which examined

GYANENDRA SINGH @ RAJA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2025 INSC 3356 March 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Gyanendra Singh, was convicted for raping his nine‑year‑old daughter, resulting in convictions under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(i) of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, with a life sentence and a fine. He appealed, arguing that because the offences overlapped, the special law (POCSO) under

YUVRAJ LAXMILAL KANTHER & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 3386 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a contractor and a store manager, were charged with offences under Sections 304 Part II, 304A, 182 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the deaths of two employees who were electrocuted while working on a sign board using an iron ladder. They filed discharge applications under Section 227 of the

JAMIN & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 3306 March 2025Dismissed

The appellants Jamin and Akil were summoned as accused under Section 319 of the CrPC after the original murder trial had concluded and the co‑accused were convicted. They challenged the summoning order, arguing that the trial court could not entertain a Section 319 application after the trial and that the High Court ha

M/S SHRI SENDHUR AGRO & OIL INDUSTRIESversusKOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

2025 INSC 3286 March 2025Disposed off

Shri Sendhur Agro & Oil Industries, a proprietorship based in Coimbatore, defaulted on an overdraft facility and Kotak Mahindra Bank filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the Judicial Magistrate Court at Chandigarh. The petitioner sought transfer of the criminal case to a court in Tam

XXXXversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 1816 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought to quash FIR No. 52, registered under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC, alleging that the complaint was an abuse of process because the complainant, a married woman, had voluntarily entered into a relationship with him. The High Court dismissed the petition, but the Supreme Court examined the complai

VISHNU CHANDRU GAONKARversusN.M. DESSAI

2018 INSC 2146 March 2018Dismissed

Vishnu Chandra Gaonkar, a legal heir, alleged that advocate N.M. Dessai forged the thumb impression of a deceased appellant, Shaba Manju Velip, to withdraw a civil appeal and related execution proceedings. Gaonkar filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure Code seek

G.N. VERMAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2014 INSC 1736 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, G.N. Verma, the Chief General Manager of Karkata Colliery, was charged under s.72‑B of the Mines Act, 1952 for contravening a prohibitory order that led to a fatal accident. The complaint alleged that he was a "deemed Agent" of the mine, but it contained no specific allegation that he acted on behalf of

M/S. NAV NIRMAN BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NAVEEN SINGHversusTHE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT OF INDIA RANCHI, JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 1306 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Nav Nirman Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) had two parcels of land provisionally attached under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and a confirmation order under s.8(3) was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal under s.26. While the appeal was pending, the Enforcement Directorate filed a

SANJAYversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 3176 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Sanjay was convicted of murder and rape of a four‑year‑old girl, X, and sentenced to death by the trial court, a decision affirmed by the High Court. The prosecution's case relied on the victim’s last‑seen testimony, an extra‑judicial confession by the accused that led to the recovery of the body and clot

VIHAAN KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 1626 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vihaan Kumar was arrested on 10 June 2024 for alleged offences under the IPC, but he was not informed of the grounds of his arrest as required by Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the CrPC. The High Court held that the information given to his wife and the entry in the police diary did n

AYYUB & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 1686 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a suspected romantic relationship between Ziaul Rahman and his cousin Tanu. After Ziaul’s death in a physical assault, Tanu allegedly committed suicide, and the complainant Vijay (R‑2) filed an FIR accusing the appellants of abetting her suicide under Section 306 IPC. The High Court refused to quash

RAJA KHANversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 1676 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Raja Khan was convicted for murder and concealment of evidence based on circumstantial evidence, including a weapon and gold chains recovered after his alleged disclosure under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution relied on the recovery of a stone, a gandasa, and gold chains, as well as testimo

VINUBHAI MOHANLAL DOBARIAversusCHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR

2025 INSC 1556 February 2025Disposed off

The appellant, an individual with salary and partnership income, filed his income‑tax returns for AY 2011‑12 and AY 2013‑14 well after the statutory due dates, attracting show‑cause notices under section 276CC of the Income Tax Act. He sought compounding of the offences under the 2014 Guidelines; the first application

GEDDAM JHANSI & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2025 INSC 1606 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant alleged dowry demands, mental and physical harassment by her husband and in‑laws, and implicated the appellant Geddam Jhansi (her mother‑in‑law’s sister) and her son Geddam Sathyakama Jabali as pressurising her to obey her husband’s wishes. The High Court declined to quash criminal proceedings under Sec

RAJKUMARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 7186 February 2023Directions issued

Petitioner Rajkumar sought enforcement of the Supreme Court’s earlier directions in Rashidul Jafar for premature release of life‑imprisoned convicts, alleging that Uttar Pradesh had not considered eligible prisoners despite the existence of the Uttar Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act, Rules and a Standing Po

BIR SINGHversusMUKESH KUMAR

2019 INSC 1496 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Bir Singh (complainant) advanced a Rs 15 lakh loan to Mukesh Kumar (accused) and received a cheque which was dishonoured for insufficient funds on two occasions. After a statutory notice went unanswered, a criminal complaint under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was filed. The trial court c

DATARAM SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2018 INSC 1076 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under Sections 419, 420, 406 and 506 of the IPC and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheating a complainant of over Rs. 37 lakh. During a seven‑month investigation he was never arrested, and when he sought to quash the FIR the High Court granted him time to appear before the t

THE STATE (NCT) OF DELHIversusKHIMJI BHAI JADEJA

2026 INSC 256 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court decision that held each deposit made by investors in a large cheating scheme constituted a separate transaction and that separate FIRs and charge sheets were required. The scheme, alleged to involve 1,852 victims defrauded of ₹46.40 crore, was initially investigate

S. NAGESHversusSHOBHA S. ARADHYA

2026 INSC 276 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging dishonour of a cheque, but the complaint was filed two days after the statutory one‑month period. The magistrate took cognizance of the complaint on the same day it was filed, before any application for condonation of the dela

BISHWAJIT DEYversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2025 INSC 326 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bishwajit Dey, owned a truck that was stopped at a police checkpoint in Assam where two soap boxes containing 24.8 g of heroin were discovered. The drug was found in the vehicle but the charge‑sheet named only a third‑party occupant, Md Dimpul Ali, as the accused; the owner and driver were not alleged to

ABDUL NASSARversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2025 INSC 356 January 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Abdul Nassar, was convicted of raping and murdering a nine‑year‑old girl, offences punishable under Sections 376 and 302 of the IPC, and was sentenced to death. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts, forensic DNA evidence linking the appellant’s semen to the victim’s clothing, and te

SURINDER KUMARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 16 January 2020Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act for possession of 1 kg 750 g of opium seized during a police patrol on 12 September 1996. The prosecution’s case relied on the testimony of police officials and the recovery of the narcotic in the presence of the ASP, while the ASI who handled the seized prop

THE STATE OF TELANGANAversusHABIB ABDULLAH JEELANI & ORS.

2017 INSC 326 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Telangana filed a criminal appeal against a Hyderabad High Court order that, while refusing to quash FIR No. 205/2014 (offences under IPC sections 147, 148, 149 and 307), directed the police not to arrest the three accused. The Supreme Court held that such a direction amounts to an order under Section 438

MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIMversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2017 INSC 296 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Md. Sajjad, was convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Ramchandra Singh, based primarily on the testimony of three eyewitnesses and the suspicion of the victim's widow. The eyewitnesses identified the accused in a test identification parade held more than two month

SRI GANESHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2017 INSC 346 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of having sexual intercourse with the complainant on five to six occasions, allegedly on a false promise of marriage, the last of which occurred in August 2009. The trial court, relying on documentary evidence, held that the appellant was born on 19 October 1991 and was therefore a juvenile at

AJAY SINGH AND ANR. AND ETC.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR.

2017 INSC 356 January 2017Dismissed

The trial judge in two dowry‑death cases recorded the acquittal of the accused in the order sheet but did not pronounce a judgment in open court, nor was any typed judgment signed or dated. A complaint led the High Court to investigate and find that no judgment existed on record, resulting in the judge's suspension and

PREM SAGAR MANOCHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2016 INSC 196 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

In the Jessica Lal murder investigation, the police sought a forensic opinion on two .22 cartridges. The appellant, Deputy Director of the State Forensic Science Laboratory, reported that the cartridges were .22 caliber and likely from a pistol, but could not give a definitive opinion on whether they were fired from th

STATE OF A.P.versusPATCHIMALA VIGNESWARUDU@ VIGGANNA @ GANAPATHI

2016 INSC 156 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted Patchimala Vigneswarudu for the murder of his wife, alleging he strangled her after a night out, motivated by strained marital relations and suspicion of venereal disease transmission. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC, but the High Court acquitted him, holding t

STATE (NCT OF DELHI)versusNARENDER

2014 INSC 126 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The police seized a vehicle carrying 47 cartons of illicit liquor and filed an FIR under Sections 33(a) and 58 of the Delhi Excise Act, 2009. The Metropolitan Magistrate refused the owner’s application for release of the vehicle, but the Delhi High Court, invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), o

NANDLAL WASUDEO BADWAIKversusLATA NANDLAL BADWAIK & ANR.

2014 INSC 96 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The husband, Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik, challenged a maintenance order under Section 125 of the CrPC granted to his wife Lata Badwaik and their daughter, asserting that he was not the biological father of the child. He obtained two DNA test reports, both excluding him as the father. The trial courts had upheld maintenanc

DR. MRS. NUPUR TALWARversusC.B.I., DELHI & ANR.

2012 INSC 86 January 2012Disposed off

The case arose from the murder of a young girl, Arushi, and a domestic help, Hemraj, where the CBI filed a closure report. The father of the deceased filed a protest petition, leading the Special Judicial Magistrate to take cognizance of offences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC against Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nu

BODDELLA BABUL REDDYversusPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P.

2010 INSC 146 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Boddella Babul Reddy, was convicted by the Andhra Pradesh High Court for murder (Sec. 302 IPC) arising from a factional clash in which he was alleged to have hurled a bomb that killed a coolie. The trial court had acquitted all accused, including the appellant, on the ground that the prosecution evidence

HARINARAYAN G. BAJAJversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2010 INSC 156 January 2010Dismissed

In a criminal proceeding under Sections 406 and 114 IPC, the trial court had framed charges against respondents No.2‑4 and later, under Section 319(1) Cr.P.C., added respondent No.5 as a co‑accused. The newly added accused sought to have the proceedings against him commenced afresh from the inquiry stage (Section 244)

INDRESH KUMARversusRAM PHAL AND ORS.

2010 INSC 166 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Indresh Kumar alleged that Inspector Ramphal and six other police officers tortured him and his family in 1992. The trial court convicted Ramphal under IPC sections 218, 342 and 323, while acquitting the six co‑accused. The High Court later set aside Ramphal’s conviction and acquitted all accused, dismissing Indresh Ku

SUKHPAL SINGH KHAIRAversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2022 INSC 12525 December 2022

The appellant was summoned as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code after the trial of the original co‑accused had concluded with a conviction and sentence on the same day. The Supreme Court examined whether the power to summon under s.319 could be exercised after a judgment of convicti

RATNAMBAR KAUSHIKversusUNION OF INDIA

2022 INSC 12545 December 2022Case Allowed

Petitioner Ratnambar Kaushik was arrested for allegedly transporting 90,520 kg of raw unmanufactured tobacco in seven trucks for clandestine manufacture of zarda, thereby evading GST under Sections 132(1)(a), (h), (k), (l) and 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The investigation was completed and a

STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CBI/ACB/BANGALOREversusB.A. SRINIVASAN AND ANR.

2019 INSC 13225 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

B.A. Srinivasan, a former Assistant General Manager of Vijaya Bank who retired on 31‑Oct‑2012, was alleged to have conspired with others to fraudulently sanction and disburse loans, violating bank rules. An FIR was lodged in 2013 and a charge‑sheet filed in 2014, charging him under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,

MAHIPALversusRAJESH KUMAR @ POLIA & ANR.

2019 INSC 13255 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Mahipal filed a criminal appeal challenging the Rajasthan High Court's order granting bail to five accused in the murder of his nephew, Akhilesh. The FIR alleged that the accused assaulted the victim with rods, causing fatal head injuries, as corroborated by a post‑mortem report and a Section 161 statement of an eyewit

STATE OF NCT OF DELHIversusSHIV CHARAN BANSAL & ORS.

2019 INSC 13215 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the State’s appeal against the discharge of several accused in the murder of S.N. Gupta. The prosecution alleged a pre‑planned criminal conspiracy involving Shiv Charan Bansal, his son, and others, supported by call‑detail records, recovered weapon, ballistic reports and statements. The Court

MAHENDER CHAWLA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 11535 December 2018Disposed off

The petitioners, who were witnesses or relatives of witnesses in the Asaram rape cases, alleged that they faced threats, attacks and even murders, and that the State failed to provide any protection, violating their right to a fair trial under Art. 21. They sought a court‑monitored witness‑protection programme and the

JOHN K. ABRAHAMversusSIMON C. ABRAHAM & ANOTHER

2013 INSC 8035 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent alleged that the appellant borrowed Rs.1,50,000 and issued a cheque which later bounced, invoking Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court acquitted the appellant, finding the complainant's evidence riddled with contradictions and gaps, particularly regarding the loan amount, date,

SISTER MINA LALITA BARUWAversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 8045 December 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Sister Mina Lalita Baruwa, a Catholic nun, alleged assault, molestation and gang rape during communal violence in Kandhamal. During the trial, PW‑18, a Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate who conducted the test identification parade, gave a statement that conflicted with the official parade record (Exhibit‑8). The victi

XYZversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2024 INSC 8695 November 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, an illiterate woman, filed an FIR alleging serious offences including rape (IPC s.376(2)(N)), criminal intimidation (IPC s.506) and caste-based atrocities (SC/ST Act s.3(1)(R), s.3(1)(w), s.3(2)(5)). The accused sought quashing of the charge sheet on the basis of a purported settlement, and the Gujarat H

SUBRATA CHOUDHURY @ SANTOSH CHOUDHURY & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2024 INSC 8345 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed an original complaint on 11.11.2010 alleging offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 IPC, which led to a police investigation and a negative final report accepted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) on 06.06.2011 after rejecting the complainant's protest (narazi) petition. Dissatisfied, the comp

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 6345 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint was lodged in 1989 alleging adulteration of Dalda Vanaspati Ghee manufactured by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL). The trial magistrate initially absolved the company’s directors and continued prosecution against the nominated officer, Nirmal Sen, who was later convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulter

HITESH VERMAversusTHE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2020 INSC 6365 November 2020Disposed off

The appellant, Hitesh Verma, challenged a charge‑sheet filed under Sections 452, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(e) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleging that the FIR was based on a property dispute and was false. The High Court dismissed his petition under Sec

M/S IVECO MAGIRUS BRANDSCHUTZTECHNIK GMBHversusNIRMAL KISHORE BHARTIYA & ANR

2023 INSC 8805 October 2023Dismissed

The German company Iveco Magirus Brandschutztechnik GmbH (appellant) challenged a summons issued by an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi after a private complaint of defamation was filed by Nirmal Kishore Bhartiya (respondent). The complaint alleged that letters written by the appellant’s authorised age

GEO VARGHESEversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2021 INSC 6185 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Physical Training Teacher, was charged under Section 306 IPC for alleged abetment of his student’s suicide, based on an FIR alleging harassment and insult. The High Court dismissed the appellant’s petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR, holding that the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence. On

M/S. METERS AND INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.versusKANCHAN MEHTA

2017 INSC 10095 October 2017Disposed off

The appellants, M/s. Meters and Instruments Private Ltd. and others, were charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a dishonoured cheque to the complainant, Kanchan Mehta. The complainant refused to accept a demand draft, while the accused offered to pay the cheque amount with interest and

SHAHEJADKHAN MAHEBUBKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 4535 October 2012Disposed off

The appellants were arrested for transporting 500 grams of brown sugar, a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, and were convicted under Sections 8(c), 21 and 29, receiving 15 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1.5 lakh with a default imprisonment of three years for non‑payment. They appealed, seeking redu

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYAM ANSARI AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6715 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed a decision that allowed a co‑accused to cross‑examine an approver whose pardon, granted under Section 307 of the CrPC, was later forfeited by a certificate under Section 308. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme of Sections 306, 307 and 308, holding that forfeiture of the pa

KANWAR NATWAR SINGHversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR

2010 INSC 6765 October 2010Dismissed

Kanwar Natwar Singh and others appealed against the Directorate of Enforcement after a show‑cause notice was issued under Rule 4(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal) Rules, 2000. The appellants demanded that the adjudicating authority furnish copies of all documents in its possess

HARILAL ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2023 INSC 8015 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Harilal and Parasram were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under Section 302 IPC based on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses and the seizure of a lathi and clothes allegedly belonging to them. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the witnesses, noting that the FIR was lodg

PUSHPALATAversusVIJAY KUMAR (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.

2022 INSC 9105 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The father, Laxmi Prasad, the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family, bought several parcels of land using his own funds but registered them in the names of his minor sons, Vijay Kumar and Rajendra Kumar. The sons later sold one of the parcels, prompting the father’s widow and daughters to sue for declaration of title and s

STATE THROUGH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEversusR. SOUNDIRARASU ETC.

2022 INSC 9155 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu, through a Deputy Superintendent of Police, appealed against the High Court’s order discharging a public servant (R. Soundirarasu) and his wife from prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and IPC s.109 for possessing assets disproportionate to the servant’s known sources of inc

P. CHIDAMBARAMversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2019 INSC 10105 September 2019Dismissed

The appellant, former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, was charged with alleged irregularities in a foreign investment clearance and money‑laundering offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA). The Enforcement Directorate (ED) produced a sealed cover containing doc

R.S. SEHRAWATversusRAJEEV MALHOTRA & ORS.

2018 INSC 7795 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, R.S. Sehrawat, a junior engineer of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, was convicted by the Delhi High Court for contempt of court for allegedly filing a false affidavit concerning the demolition of unauthorised structures in Sainik Farms. He appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 19(1)(b) of the C

S. K. RAJU @ ABDUL HAQUE @ JAGGAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2018 INSC 7805 September 2018Dismissed

The appellant was intercepted on a public road near a club and, after being informed of his right to be searched before a gazetted officer or magistrate, consented to a search by a gazetted officer. A bag containing 1.5 kg of charas and cash was recovered from him. The appellant challenged the conviction on the grounds

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.versusTASNEEM RIZWAN SIDDIQUEE

2018 INSC 7835 September 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The police, investigating a case involving illegal sale of call detail records, arrested Rizwan Alam Siddique and obtained a magistrate's order remanding him to police custody until 23 March 2018. His wife, Tasneem Rizwan Siddiquee, filed a writ of habeas corpus in the High Court alleging unlawful detention; the High C

PRABHU CHAWLAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 8515 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard appeals by Prabhu Chawla and Jagdish Upasane challenging a Rajasthan High Court order that dismissed their petitions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., on the ground that the same relief could be obtained through a revision petition under Section 397. The Court examined a conflict between two ear

PARGAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2014 INSC 6095 September 2014Dismissed

In 1999, two men withdrew Rs. 4 lakh from a bank, were ambushed, shot, and robbed of the money bag. One victim, Varun Kumar, died; another, Kamaljit Singh (PW‑2), was injured. After a seven‑year investigation, the accused were arrested and tried. The trial court, affirmed by the High Court, convicted them under IPC sec

MRINAL DAS & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA

2011 INSC 6505 September 2011Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Tapan Chakraborty on 31 August 2000, for which thirteen persons were charged. One accused, Ratan Sukladas (A‑12), applied for and was granted pardon, becoming an approver whose testimony formed the core of the prosecution's case. The trial court convicted only two accused (A‑5 and A‑11)

SHAIL KUMARIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 9365 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Shail Kumari was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly drowning her two children after taking them to a pond. The trial court and the Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the conviction primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑2, while other potential witnesses were not examined. On appeal, the Supreme C

KALLU NAT ALIAS MAYANK KUMAR NAGARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2025 INSC 9305 August 2025Dismissed

The petition challenged the order of the trial court and the High Court that summoned Kallu Nat alias Mayank Kumar Nagar as an accused under Section 193 of the CrPC in a murder‑rape case, despite his name being omitted from the charge‑sheet. The core issue was whether a Court of Session, after a case is committed to it

NADEEM AHAMEDversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2025 INSC 9935 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Nadee m Ahamed was seized with approximately 125 g of heroin while a co‑accused was found with about 130 g, leading the trial court to treat the combined 255 g as a commercial quantity and convict both under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds that the

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 7965 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) filed a criminal complaint against Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) alleging violation of Section 77 of the Companies Act, 1956 for alleged fraudulent allotment of shares. SEBI’s investigation report of 2005 was inconclusive, prompting SEBI to obtain two opinions from reti

XYZversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS

2022 INSC 7995 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a yoga instructor, alleged that the Vice‑Chancellor of her institute sexually harassed her in March 2019 and repeatedly complained to the police, which failed to register an FIR. She then approached a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, seeking a police investigation;

KATHI DAVID RAJUversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2019 INSC 8615 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under the IPC for allegedly obtaining a false Scheduled Caste certificate by misrepresenting his parentage and caste. The police, shortly after his arrest, applied to a civil court under Section 53 of the CrPC for a DNA test of the appellant, his mother and brothers, and the Additional Junior

M/S APEX DISTRIBUTORS & ANR.versusM/S TIMEX GROUP INDIA LTD.

2014 INSC 5235 August 2014Case Allowed

Apex Distributors and another issued a cheque on Vyasa Bank, Vellore, to Timex Group India Ltd., which was later dishonoured at Vellore. Timex sent statutory demand notices from Delhi and filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a Delhi court. The petitioners filed a transfer pe

SREE MAHESH STATIONARIES & ANR.versusINDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES. LTD.

2014 INSC 5245 August 2014Case Allowed

The petitioners borrowed Rs.15 lakh from the respondent company and issued a cheque for partial repayment, drawn on a Bangalore bank but presented for encashment in Gurgaon, where it was dishonoured. The respondent served statutory notices from Gurgaon and filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrumen

ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYYUM ANSARIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2013 INSC 5125 August 2013Disposed off

Abu Salem, an accused in the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts, was extradited from Portugal to India in 2005 on the assurance that he would not face the death penalty or imprisonment beyond 25 years. After his return, the Designated Court framed additional charges beyond those covered by the extradition, which Abu Salem argued

SADANANDA MONDALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2013 INSC 5165 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sadananda Mondal, was charged along with 13 others for the murder of Bharat Mondal, who died from a gunshot wound during a picnic dispute. The trial court convicted eight accused, including the appellant, under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, while the High Court acquitted all but the appellant. On appea

NAVAL KISHORE MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2019 INSC 7255 July 2019

The victim, the brother and legal heir of a deceased murder victim, challenged the trial court's acquittal of the accused under Sections 452, 302/34 IPC. The State sought leave to appeal under Section 372 read with Section 378 of the CrPC, which was denied. The victim filed an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 (i

MAHIPAL SINGH RANA, ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2016 INSC 4925 July 2016Disposed off

Advocate Mahipal Singh Rana threatened a civil judge in Etah on two occasions, leading the Allahabad High Court to convict him of criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and impose two months' imprisonment, a fine, and a ban on appearing in Etah courts until he purged the contempt. The High Court also

SURINDERJIT SINGH MAND & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2016 INSC 4935 July 2016Dismissed

The case concerned the arrest and alleged illegal detention of Neeraj Kumar between 24‑06‑1999 and 28‑06‑1999 by two Deputy Superintendents of Police, Surinderjit Singh Mand and P.S. Parmar. The prosecution, after obtaining sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC for the later arrest on 28‑06‑1999, sought to take cogniz

V. K. .BANSALversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2013 INSC 4425 July 2013Case Partly allowed

V.K. Bansal, a director of several companies, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing cheques that were dishonoured while repaying loans from Haryana Financial Corporation. He received multiple imprisonment terms and fines and sought a direction under Sections 427 and 482 of the Co

ELAVARASANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2011 INSC 4545 July 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a government watchman, assaulted his wife and mother with a sharp weapon and caused the death of his one‑year‑old daughter during a sudden quarrel. He pleaded insanity under Section 84 of the IPC, but the trial and High Courts rejected the plea due to lack of credible medical or behavioural evidence. The

SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICERversusJUGAL KISHORE SAMRA

2011 INSC 4595 July 2011Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a NDPS investigation where Jugal Kishore Samra (respondent) was summoned by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for interrogation. He alleged torture and a heart attack during the summons and obtained anticipatory bail. He then sought modification of the bail order to have his lawyer and a cardi

CHUNNI LALversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 3465 July 2010Dismissed

Chunni Lal was convicted of murdering his uncle Heera Lal by firing a gun, and the Supreme Court upheld the life sentence. The appellant argued there was no motive, that only interested witnesses were examined, and that the delay in lodging the FIR and commencing investigation tainted the case. The Court found a clear

M/S BALAJI TRADERSversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 8065 June 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a betel nut trader, was threatened at gunpoint by the accused and his associates, who demanded a monthly payment of five lakh rupees and attempted to kidnap him. The trial court issued a summons under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for putting the complainant in fear of death to commit exto

HARJINDER SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2025 INSC 6345 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, father of the deceased Dharminder Singh, challenged the High Court's order quashing a summons issued by the trial court under Section 319 of the CrPC against respondent No.2 (Varinder Singh) for alleged abetment to suicide. The incident involved a confrontation on 10 May 2016 where the deceased was taunt

RAJENDRA ANANT VARIKversusGOVIND B. PRABHUGAONKAR

2025 INSC 6335 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajendra Anant Varik, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a dishonoured cheque and was ordered to pay compensation. He appealed, and the First Appellate Court acquitted him, holding that the complainant was an unlicensed money‑lender under the Goa Money‑Lenders Act, whic

J. SEKAR @SEKAR REDDYversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2022 INSC 5195 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

J. Sekar Reddy, managing partner of SRS Mining, was searched by the Income Tax Department in December 2016, leading to the seizure of about Rs 107 crore in cash and gold. The CBI registered FIRs for scheduled offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) attached the

MS. PversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 5145 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Ms. P filed a criminal appeal against the State of Madhya Pradesh and the accused (respondent No.2) challenging the High Court's order granting regular bail under Section 439 of the CrPC in a case involving offences of rape (IPC s.376(2)(n)) and criminal intimidation (IPC s.506). The High Court had granted bail on the

KUMARANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2017 INSC 4475 May 2017Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and was ordered to pay Rs.2.75 lakh as compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a default imprisonment of one month for non‑payment. He served both the principal sentence and the default imprisonment, after

MUKESH & ANR.versusSTATE FOR NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

2017 INSC 4485 May 2017Dismissed

On 16 December 2012, a 23-year-old paramedical student and her male friend boarded a bus in Delhi. Six men, including the appellants, gang-raped her, inserted an iron rod into her private parts causing severe internal injuries, and threw both victims out of the moving bus. The woman died from her injuries. The appellan

R. RACHAIAHversusHOME SECRETARY, BANGALORE

2016 INSC 11825 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, including R. Rachaiah, were originally charged under Section 306 IPC for abetting suicide and later, at the close of trial, the prosecution sought and the trial court framed an alternative charge of murder under Section 302 IPC. The court failed to follow the mandatory procedures of Sections 216 and 217

SUMER SINGHversusSURAJBHAN SINGH AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 9695 May 2014Case Partly allowed

The case concerns a criminal appeal filed by the injured party, Sumer Singh, under Article 136 of the Constitution seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on Surajbhan Singh and others for grievous hurt (IPC s.326) and related offences arising from a land dispute. The High Court had reduced the sentence to the seve

DEVENDER KUMAR & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC.

2010 INSC 2735 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were arrested in a dowry‑related case under IPC sections 498‑A, 406, 506, 323 and 34 and produced before a magistrate. Their first application for police remand was dismissed and they were placed in judicial custody, after which they were granted bail. The investigating officer later filed a second appli

MUNNAWAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. ETC.

2010 INSC 2745 May 2010Dismissed

The victim, Fateh Mohammad, was shot by the accused and died five days later from septicemia. Two dying declarations were recorded—one by a police officer and another by an Executive Magistrate, both endorsed by a doctor who certified the victim's lucidity. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 307 IPC bu

S.K. DASGUPTA & ORS.versusVIJAY SINGH SENGAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 2755 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Vijay Singh Sengar filed a public interest writ petition alleging that power cuts in Madhya Pradesh were endangering patients in government hospitals and disrupting street lighting. The Madhya Pradesh High Court issued interim orders directing the State Electricity Board to provide round‑the‑clock electricity to hospit

SMT. SELVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2007 INSC 5205 May 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered whether the involuntary administration of narcoanalysis, polygraph, and Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) tests for investigative purposes violates fundamental rights. The Court held that compulsory administration of these techniques violates Article 20(3) of the Constitution, whic

SHOMA KANTI SENversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2024 INSC 2695 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Shoma Kanti Sen was arrested in June 2018 in connection with the Elgar Parishad event and charged under the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). The High Court dismissed her bail application, directing her to approach the trial court, after the investigation was transferred to th

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