Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

2,851 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 2,601–2,800.

SOMASUNDARAM @ SOMUversusTHE STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

2020 INSC 4123 June 2020Disposed off

The case concerns the abduction, extortion and murder of former MLA M.K. Balan, whose body was cremated under a fictitious name. The prosecution relied on extensive circumstantial evidence, the testimony of two accomplices (PW10 and PW11), recoveries of vehicles, a false death certificate, and statements recorded under

SATISH SHETTYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2016 INSC 4363 June 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of Satish Shetty, convicted under IPC sections 498A (cruelty) and 306 (abetment of suicide) for the death of his wife, who had left a ten‑month‑old son and was twenty weeks pregnant. The High Court had set aside the trial court’s acquittal, invoking the presumption under Evidence A

DR. RINI JOHAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 4413 June 2016Case Allowed

Dr. Rini Johar, a doctor, and a senior advocate were arrested in November 2012 on a FIR alleging fraud under IPC sections 420 and 34 and the Information Technology Act. The arrest was carried out without complying with Sections 41 and 41‑A of the CrPC, nor the D.K. Basu guidelines, and the petitioners were taken to Bho

ACHIN GUPTAversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2024 INSC 3693 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Achin Gupta, was the sole accused in a chargesheet under IPC sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 arising from an FIR filed by his wife alleging dowry demands and cruelty. The FIR was lodged in April 2021, more than two years after the husband had filed a divorce petition and after the wife’s mother filed a d

ANEESversusTHE STATE GOVT. OF NCT

2024 INSC 3683 May 2024Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murdering his wife inside their home, where their five‑year‑old daughter also lived. The prosecution relied on forensic evidence, the appellant's blood‑stained clothes, and his conduct in leading police to the weapon, while the defence claimed unknown intruders were responsible. The key l

ALAUDDIN & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

2024 INSC 3763 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the murder of Sahabuddin Choudhury. They challenged the convictions on the ground that the prosecution witnesses' statements contained material omissions and contradictions, and that the "last seen together" theory and motive were not

PEETHAMBARANversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2023 INSC 4813 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Peethambaran, was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating persons by promising jobs in exchange for money. The FIR led to two police final reports: the first concluded the case was false due to lack of evidence, while the second recorded a further investigation ordered by the District Police

VASANTA SAMPAT DUPAREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2017 INSC 4363 May 2017Dismissed

The petitioners, Vasanta Sampat Dupare, were convicted of raping and murdering a four‑year‑old girl and sentenced to death. They sought review, arguing that the trial court violated Section 235(2) of the CrPC by not granting a separate hearing on sentencing, that the State failed to discharge its burden under Bachan Si

MANGA @ MAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013 INSC 3023 May 2013Dismissed

The appellants, a group of fifteen men, were convicted for firing on the complainant's family, causing two deaths and multiple injuries, under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC. They challenged the convictions on grounds of alleged delay in lodging the FIR and forwarding the express report to

MADHAO AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2013 INSC 3053 May 2013Dismissed

The Government of Maharashtra framed a scheme to purchase land and allocate it to Scheduled Castes and neo‑Buddhists below the poverty line. While implementing the scheme, the appellant officials executed sale deeds in favour of the Government. A social worker filed a criminal complaint alleging that the land had been

BHAIKON @ BAKUL BORAHversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 3063 May 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Bhaikon @ Bakul Borah, was convicted of rape (IPC s.376) and murder (IPC s.302) of Rupamoni Dutta based on the testimony of an eye‑witness (PW‑1) corroborated by the victim's father (PW‑2) and the post‑mortem doctor (PW‑9). The trial court sentenced him to death for murder and life imprisonment for rape;

VIDYA DHAR & ORS.versusMULTI SCREEN MEDIA PVT. LTD.

2013 INSC 3013 May 2013Dismissed

Three petitioners convicted in the Junior Basic Trained (JBT) teachers recruitment scam appealed their convictions before the Delhi High Court. While the appeal was pending, the respondent, a television producer, sought to broadcast a dramatized episode of "Crime Patrol Dastak" depicting the scam. The petitioners obtai

MD. ISHAQUE AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 3073 May 2013Disposed off

The case concerned a mob assault on 5 July 1983 in Siktahar village, where 200‑250 persons, including the accused, forced people out of their houses and attacked them with sharp and blunt weapons, resulting in one death and serious injuries to three others. The trial court convicted the appellants under Section 302 IPC

ANKUSH SHIVAJI GAIKWADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 3093 May 2013Disposed off

Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad and two others were convicted of murder for the death of Nilkanth Pawar after a sudden quarrel over a barking dog, during which Gaikwad struck the victim on the head with an iron pipe. The appellant argued that the incident was a sudden fight without pre‑meditation and that Exception 4 to Section

ARJUNversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 1993 May 2012Disposed off

The appellant, Arjun, was convicted of murder (s.302 IPC) and causing grievous hurt (s.326 IPC) after he attacked Jagannath and his family during a property dispute, using a large knife to inflict fatal head injuries on the deceased and injuries on the deceased's wife. The appellant claimed he acted in private defence,

KRISHNA KUMAR VARIARversusSHARE SHOPPE

2010 INSC 2633 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Krishna Kumar Variar, accused under Sections 415 and 420 IPC, was summoned by a Delhi court. He contended that only a Bombay court had jurisdiction and filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC in the Delhi High Court, which dismissed his challenge. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that an accused must first appr

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusHOPESON NINGSHEN & ORS.

2010 INSC 2593 May 2010Disposed off

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) sought transfer of two kidnapping‑murder cases involving an NSCN (IM) activist from the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court in Ukhrul, Manipur to a CBI‑court in Delhi under Section 406 of the CrPC. The incidents involved the abduction and killing of three government employees, sp

DAMODAR S. PRABHUversusSAYED BABALAL H.

2010 INSC 2603 May 2010Disposed off

The appellant and respondent were parties to commercial transactions in which five cheques issued by the appellant were dishonoured, leading to criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. After protracted litigation up to the Supreme Court, the parties reached a settlement and sought

MUKESH KISHANPURIAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 2663 May 2010Disposed off

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which the Calcutta High Court rejected. He filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court challenging that order. The Court examined the record and found no justification to grant anticipatory bail. However, it clarified

SHAFHI MOHAMMADversusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2018 INSC 753 April 2018Directions issued

The Supreme Court considered the use of videography at crime scenes as a tool to improve criminal investigations. Submissions highlighted international practice, the benefits of body‑worn cameras, and the need for safeguards under evidentiary law. The Court examined prior judgments on electronic evidence and the admiss

BABUBHAI BHIMABHAI BOKHIRIA & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2014 INSC 2433 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Babubhai Bhimabhai Bokhiria, was summoned as an accused under Section 319 of the CrPC after the trial court relied on a letter written by the deceased a year earlier, in which the deceased alleged the appellant intended to kill him. The Supreme Court examined whether the letter qualified as a dying decla

YOGENDRA PRATAP SINGHversusSAVITRI PANDEY & ANR.

2012 INSC 1613 April 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent for dishonoured cheques, after serving a statutory notice on 23‑09‑2008. The complaint was lodged on 07‑10‑2008, i.e., before the expiry of the 15‑day period prescribed in the proviso to Section 138(c). The magist

SURESHversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2025 INSC 3183 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her on fire. The prosecution's case relied heavily on a dying declaration recorded by a Judicial Magistrate, which accused the appellant, while earlier statements by the deceased to a doctor and a police c

C. KAMALAKKANNANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE C.B.C.I.D., CHENNAI

2025 INSC 3093 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Sections 120B, 468 and 471 of the IPC for allegedly preparing a postal cover that transmitted a forged marksheet. The prosecution’s case hinged on the testimony of a handwriting expert who claimed the cover bore the appellant’s handwriting, but the original postal cover was never produ

K.S. MEHTAversusM/S MORGAN SECURITIES AND CREDITS PVT. LTD.

2025 INSC 3153 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, K.S. Mehta and Basant Kumar Goswami, were non‑executive directors of Blue Coast Hotels & Resorts Ltd. and were implicated in criminal complaints under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoured cheques issued to repay an inter‑corporate deposit. They neither atte

PREMCHANDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 2073 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Premchand was convicted by the trial court of murder (s.302 IPC) and attempted murder (s.307 IPC) based on oral testimony of prosecution witnesses, while his written statement under s.313(5) CrPC was not considered. The High Court affirmed the conviction. On appeal, the Supreme Court observed that the tri

SATPALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2021 INSC 1433 March 2021Leave Granted & Dismissed

The appellant Satpal was convicted for the murder of his wife Pooja Rani, who died from severe burns after he allegedly poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. A dying declaration was recorded by a Judicial Magistrate while the victim was still alive and fit to speak, in which she identified the appellant as the ass

K. VIRUPAKSHA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2020 INSC 2613 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, two senior bank officials, challenged a criminal complaint filed under Section 200 of the CrPC alleging that they colluded with an auction purchaser to cause wrongful loss to the borrower, K. Virupaksha, after the bank invoked the SARFAESI Act to enforce a secured loan of Rs.2.68 crore. The borrower’s

PHULA SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2014 INSC 1613 March 2014Dismissed

The appellant, a Kanungo, was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 after a trap was laid by the complainant. Although the trial court acquitted him, the High Court convicted him, sentencing him to one year imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, the

MILIND SHRIPAD CHANDURKARversusKALIM M. KHAN & ANR.

2011 INSC 1773 March 2011Dismissed

The appellant, claiming to be the sole proprietor of Vijaya Automobiles, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent who issued a cheque in the name of the firm that later bounced. The trial court and appellate court convicted the respondent, but the High Court set aside

CENTRE FOR PIL & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2011 INSC 1753 March 2011Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the legality of Shri P.J. Thomas's appointment as Central Vigilance Commissioner under Section 4(1) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003, which was based on a recommendation by the High Powered Committee (HPC). The Court found that the HPC failed to consider material indicating pendi

WAHIDversusSTATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 1453 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAMU APPA MAHAPATARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 1473 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramu Appa Mahapatar, was convicted for the murder of his live-in partner Manda based primarily on an extra‑judicial confession he allegedly made to the landlord (PW‑1) and the deceased's brother (PW‑3), which was later endorsed by PW‑4 and PW‑6. The Supreme Court examined whether such a confession, coupl

AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusPRADIP KUMAR BANERJEE

2025 INSC 1493 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Assistant Engineer of the Airports Authority of India, was arrested and convicted for demanding illegal gratification, leading to his dismissal from service. After being acquitted on benefit of doubt in a criminal appeal, he sought reinstatement, but the Authority initiated fresh disciplinary proceed

NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (NOIDA)versusYUNUS & ORS.

2022 INSC 1423 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a land acquisition notification where the original compensation award was Rs.24,033 per bigha. The respondents did not file an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, but later a reference was made and a Lok Adalat, under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, p

SMT. REKHA JAIN AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2022 INSC 1413 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR was lodged under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B IPC against six persons, including Smt. Rekha Jain and Smt. Minakshi Jain, alleging misappropriation of deposits and the sale of an attached property. The FIR primarily implicated a co‑accused, Arun Kumar Maheshwari, while the only allegation against th

VISHWAS BHANDARIversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2021 INSC 573 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR was lodged alleging that the appellant and another accused had kidnapped a 17½‑year‑old girl for the purpose of marriage. The complainant later limited her allegations to the other accused, Vikram Roop Rai, and the prosecutrix testified that she had voluntarily married Vikram with family consent and bore two chi

N. VIJAYAKUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2021 INSC 603 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sanitary Inspector, was charged under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding Rs.500 and a cell phone as bribe from a supervisor to process a contract extension. The trial court acquitted him, but the Madras High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted him, r

OPTO CIRCUIT INDIA LTD.versusAXIS BANK & ORS.

2021 INSC 563 February 2021Case Partly allowed

The Enforcement Directorate, invoking the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), issued a communication on 15 May 2020 directing several banks to debit‑freeze the accounts of Opto Circuit India Ltd. The company challenged the order, seeking its quash and the defreezing of the accounts to enable payment of sta

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusFATEHKARAN MEHDU

2017 INSC 1043 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the High Court’s order quashing charges framed by a Special Judge against mining engineer Fatehkaran Mehdu and Kishan Singh Rawat under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The charges alleged that Mehdu, while granting a quarry licence, sanctioned an area of 80,000 sq. ft. on

AVEEK SARKAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2014 INSC 753 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, editors and publishers of Sports World magazine and Anandabazar Patrika, reproduced a semi‑nude photograph of tennis player Boris Becker and his fiancée Barbara, originally published in the German magazine STERN, which was intended to protest apartheid and promote interracial love. A lawyer filed a comp

BACHU DASversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 9193 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a criminal complaint under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 448 of the IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Sessions Judge held that a prima facie case was made out against the accused. The High Court, however, granted anticipatory ba

SUSANTA GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2012 INSC 743 February 2012Disposed off

Susanta Ghosh, a sitting MLA, was named in a fourth FIR lodged nine years after a 2002 incident in which seven persons were killed. The earlier three FIRs and charge‑sheets did not mention him. He had earlier been granted anticipatory bail, but the trial court denied regular bail, prompting an appeal to the Calcutta Hi

SATISH P. BHATTversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR

2024 INSC 163 January 2024Dismissed

Satish P. Bhatt and Vishwanath R. Nayak, directors of Astral Glass Pvt Ltd, were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to ten months imprisonment with a compensation liability of Rs.1.10 crore. They entered into a settlement undertaking on 3 July 2018 to pay Rs.4.63.5 lakh to the c

NEERAJ SHARMAversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 63 January 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Neeraj Sharma and Ashwani Kumar Yadav, abducted an 18‑year‑old student, attempted to murder him by strangulation and burning, and stole his money and phone. The trial court and High Court convicted them under Sections 307/120B, 364‑A, and 392/397 of the IPC, imposing life imprisonment for the 364‑A char

STATE OF NCT OF DELHIversusRAJ KUMAR @ LOVEPREET @LOVELY

2024 INSC 113 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

PERUMAL RAJA @ PERUMALversusSTATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2024 INSC 133 January 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Perumal Raja, was detained during an investigation into a separate murder and gave a disclosure statement that led police to recover the body parts of his cousin, Rajini, and other stolen items. The key issue was whether the appellant was "in custody" for the purposes of Section 27 of the Evidence Act de

KAUSHAL KISHORversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2023 INSC 43 January 2023Reference answered

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 113 of 2016 and Special Leave Petition (Diary) No. 34629 of 2017 were referred to a Constitution Bench to answer five questions concerning the scope of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and the enforceability of fundamental rights against non-State actors. The petitions arose from st

RAJENDRA BHAGATversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2022 INSC 63 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a serving army Naik, was convicted under Section 498-A IPC for cruelty towards his wife and sentenced to three years' simple imprisonment. After his conviction, the parties entered into a genuine settlement, resumed cohabitation, and the wife was nominated as his service record nominee. The High Court, n

SATISHCHANDRA RATANLAL SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 23 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a retired bank employee, obtained a loan of Rs.27 lakh from a money‑lending company whose director (respondent No.2) later filed a criminal complaint alleging non‑payment and threats. The High Court dismissed the appellant's Section 482 CrPC application to quash the FIR and the charge‑sheet, holding that

KISHORE BHADKEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2017 INSC 143 January 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of three accused (Nalini, Kishore Bhadke and Satish) convicted of murder, abduction and related offences arising from a land‑transaction dispute that led to the killing of Raman. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – motive established by the land deal, the victim’s l

VAJRESH VENKATRAY ANVEKARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

[2013] 1 S.C.R. 803 January 2013Dismissed

The appellant, a husband, was charged with cruelty, dowry harassment and abetment of suicide after his wife, Girija, died by consuming poison in their matrimonial home within seven years of marriage. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the Karnataka High Court convicted the husband under Sections 498A and 306, r

JAGAT SINGHversusSTATE OF H. P.

2011 INSC 13 January 2011Case Partly allowed

Jagat Singh (A‑1) and three others were involved in a land‑dispute altercation that escalated into a free fight during which the deceased, Bachittar Singh, was stabbed and later died. The trial court acquitted all accused, but the High Court convicted A‑1 under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with Section 34, sentencing

STATE OF KERALAversusRANEEF

2011 INSC 53 January 2011Dismissed

The State of Kerala appealed a Kerala High Court order granting bail to Dr. Raneef, a dental surgeon accused of aiding assailants who assaulted a college professor and severed his right palm. The prosecution alleged that Dr. Raneef, a member of the Popular Front of India (PFI), had pre‑arranged to provide medical treat

TUHIN KUMAR BISWAS @ BUMBAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2025 INSC 13732 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tuhin Kumar Biswas, was charged under IPC sections 341, 354C and 506 for allegedly restraining a complainant and voyeuristically photographing her when she attempted to enter a disputed property. The complainant claimed intimidation and intrusion of privacy, while the appellant argued that he was enforci

ROUSANARA BEGUMversusS.K. SALAHUDDIN @ SK SALAUDDIN & ANR.

2025 INSC 13752 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Rousanara Begum married S.K. Salahuddin in 2005 and divorced him in 2011. At the time of marriage her father gave Rs 7 lakh and 30 bhori of gold, which the appellant sought to recover under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. Lower courts awarded partial amounts, but the Calcutta

ASHOKversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 9192 December 2024Case Allowed

The appellant was accused of raping and murdering a ten‑year‑old girl in 2009, with the prosecution relying primarily on the testimony of the victim's seven‑year‑old cousin and recovered clothing items. The trial court convicted him under IPC sections 376, 302, 201 and the SC/ST Act, imposing the death penalty, which t

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusP.S. JAYAPRAKASH ETC. ETC.

2022 INSC 12432 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered an FIR in 2021 against 18 persons, including former Kerala Police and Intelligence Bureau officials, for allegedly filing false espionage cases against ISRO scientists. The FIR was filed following a Supreme Court‑directed committee report (Justice D.K. Jain) that rec

NIMAY SAHversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2020 INSC 6702 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nimay Sah, elder brother of the deceased's husband, was convicted under Section 498-A read with Section 34 IPC for alleged dowry harassment leading to the death of his sister‑in‑law, Asha Kumari. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and found that, apart from

PARAMVIR SINGH SAINIversusBALJIT SINGH & ORS.

2020 INSC 6722 December 2020Directions issued

In Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh & Ors., the Supreme Court revisited its earlier directions (April 3, 2018) requiring the use of photography and videography at crime scenes. The Court noted that compliance affidavits filed by 14 States and 2 Union Territories were inadequate, lacking details on the exact locatio

SANDEEP KUMAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER

2020 INSC 6712 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants (husband, father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law) were convicted under Section 304B IPC for dowry death based on a claim that the deceased was poisoned after demanding Rs 10 lakhs. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution proved the essential ingredients of a dowry death – marriage within seven years,

GURPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2016 INSC 10902 December 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant and his son were involved in a family land dispute with their brother (the informant). After a verbal altercation, the appellant fetched a 12‑bore DBBL gun and fired at the informant, killing him, and subsequently shot at the informant's wife and two friends, killing one and injuring another. The trial co

UNION OF INDIAversusV. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 8862 December 2015Reference answered

The case arose from the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, for which several accused were convicted and sentenced to death, later commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court. The State of Tamil Nadu proposed to remit the life sentences of the convicts, prompting the Union of India to file a wri

SUJOYMITRAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 8852 December 2015Disposed off

The appellant, Sujoy Mitra, was charged with rape of an Irish citizen (PW5) and the trial court recorded PW5's testimony via video conference. The appellant challenged the procedure under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing it was unfair and seeking access to the video recording. The High Court had prescribed a set of saf

ASHISH CHADHAversusSMT. ASHA KUMARI & ANR.

2011 INSC 8322 December 2011Disposed off

A complaint alleged that a former MLA and her husband conspired to illegally obtain government land using forged documents. The Special Judge framed charges, which the High Court set aside, quashed the charges against all accused, and transferred the case to another court, claiming the accused were denied a fair trial

SIDDHARAM SATLINGAPPA MHETREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 8432 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Congress party member, was accused of instigating party workers to fire on BJP supporters, resulting in a murder eight days later. He applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which the High Court rejected. The Supreme Court, relying on the Constitution Bench decision in Sibbia's cas

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.versusDR. MAROTI S/O KASHINATH PIMPALKAR

2022 INSC 11522 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal appeal against the quashing of FIR No.185/2019 and the charge‑sheet against Dr. Maroti, a medical practitioner, who was alleged to have failed to report sexual assaults on minor tribal girls in a hostel as required under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) A

SHATRUGHNA BABAN MESHRAMversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2020 INSC 6242 November 2020Case Partly allowed

A two‑and‑a‑half‑year‑old girl was abducted, brutally raped and murdered by her maternal uncle, Shatrughna Baban Meshram. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 302, 376(1), 376(2)(f,i,m) and 376A of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, imposing death sentences on the charges of murder and rape‑resul

HIMACHAL PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION & ANR.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

2018 INSC 10392 November 2018Disposed off

The Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) was granted lease of government land to build a world‑class cricket stadium, later receiving additional land for a club house and a hotel at commercial rates. Two FIRs were filed alleging illegal lease grants, cheating, criminal breach of trust and violations of the Preve

SATHYA NARAYANANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2012 INSC 5052 November 2012Dismissed

The case involved twelve accused members of an ashram who were charged with murdering a woman, Leelavathi, who was a trustee of the ashram. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the fact that the accused were last seen with the deceased, distress cries heard by a neighbor, commotion in the ashram

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ETC.ETC.versusSAEED SOHAIL SHEIKH ETC. ETC.

2012 INSC 5042 November 2012Case Partly allowed

The State of Maharashtra transferred a group of under‑trial prisoners from Arthur Road Jail in Bombay to other jails, citing overcrowding and security concerns, and the jail authorities later used force to quell a disturbance involving some of those prisoners. The prisoners filed writ petitions alleging that the transf

PHIRERAMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 10742 September 2025Disposed off

The appellant, the original complainant, filed an FIR for murder and related offences, after which the accused was released on bail by the High Court with specific conditions prohibiting intimidation of witnesses. Subsequent FIRs alleged that the accused threatened a key witness, prompting the appellant to seek cancell

RAJANversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 10812 September 2025Dismissed

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

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusMAYA DEVI & ORS.

[2024] 9 S.C.R. 9992 September 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by National Insurance Company Ltd. against compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT) to the families of two deceased victims of a road accident on 11 April 2017. The insurer contended that the vehicle it insured was not involved in the accident, that the poli

M/S BANDEKAR BROTHERS PVT. LTD. & ANRversusPRASAD VASSUDEV KENI, ETC. ETC

2020 INSC 5312 September 2020Disposed off

The appellants, M/s Bande\u200bkar Brothers Pvt. Ltd., were in a business dispute with the respondents and filed civil suits, after which they lodged criminal complaints alleging false evidence and forged debit notes under IPC sections 191, 192 and 193. The magistrate converted these complaints into private complaints

MOHD. ARIF @ASHFAQversusHE REGISTRAR, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 5902 September 2014Disposed off

The petitioners, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, challenged the constitutionality of Order XL Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, which mandates that review petitions be disposed of by circulation without oral argument. The Supreme Court examined whether Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees

KUSHA LAXMAN WAGHMAREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2014 INSC 5832 September 2014Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Kusha Laxman Waghmare, was accused of killing his wife Anusuya by beating her with a wooden stick. No eye‑witness was present, but the appellant made extra‑judicial confessions to two persons (PW‑1 and PW‑2) and no defence was offered under Section 313 of the CrPC. The post‑mortem report corroborated the

PREM SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 5812 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Prem Singh and six others were charged under IPC sections 120‑B, 148, 302 read with 149 and under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The trial court acquitted all accused, citing the non‑examination of a key witness, inherent lacunae in the testimony of two eye‑witnesses, doubts about the recovery of firearms and lack of fore

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusARJUN SINGH & ORS. ETC

2011 INSC 6432 September 2011Dismissed

The case involved the murder of two brothers and the attempted murder of a third during a gun‑fire incident in Rajasthan. The trial court convicted nine accused under sections 302/149 and 307/149 IPC, but the High Court acquitted six and altered the conviction of three to sections 302/34 and 307/34 IPC. The Supreme Cou

BHUSHAN KUMAR MEENversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2011 INSC 6332 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bhushan Kumar Meen, was married to the respondent No.2 in 2004. After periods of discord, the wife filed a complaint in 2006 alleging dowry demand and cruelty, leading to an FIR under Sections 406 and 498‑A IPC. The Women's Cell’s inquiry found no evidence of dowry demand and deemed the dispute civil, bu

ARUN KUMAR AGGARWALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

2011 INSC 6442 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant complained to the Lokayukta that three government officials had caused a loss of Rs.4 crore to the State of Madhya Pradesh by purchasing land at inflated prices. The Lokayukta police investigated, exonerated the officials and filed a closure report under Section 169 of the Cr.P.C. before the Special Judge

STATE OF PUNJABversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS.

2011 INSC 6392 September 2011Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed against a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to take over fresh investigation of several FIRs, including one for which a charge‑sheet had already been filed under Section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C. The petition raised the question whether

THOTA VENKATESWARLUversusSTATE OF A.P. TR. PRINCL. SEC. & ANR.

2011 INSC 6342 September 2011Disposed off

The petitioner, Thota Venkateswarlu, married Parvathareddy Suneetha in India and later moved with her to Botswana, where she alleged cruelty and dowry demands. A complaint was lodged in India invoking IPC sections 498‑A and 506 (alleged to have occurred abroad) and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4 (alleged to hav

PREM SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 6462 September 2011Matter referred to larger bench

The victim Siri Krishan was shot during a morning walk; the prosecution relied on the brother's report, two alleged eye‑witnesses (PW‑11 and PW‑12), and a widow's statement linking a property dispute to the accused. The appellant Prem Singh and co‑accused were arrested, but the appellant refused to take part in a test

SUDEEP CHATTERJEEversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2024 INSC 5672 August 2024Disposed off

The appellant, Sudeep Chatterjee, was accused under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act by his wife. The High Court of Patna granted him provisional pre‑arrest bail on the condition that he file a joint affidavit within four weeks undertaking to fulfil all physical and financial needs of his wif

WAZIR KHANversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 6742 August 2023Dismissed

Wazir Khan was charged under Sections 302 and 201 IPC for the murder of his wife, Bushra, whose body bore 17 incised wounds. The trial court acquitted him, finding the prosecution had not proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but the Uttarakhand High Court reversed the acquittal, holding that Khan's failure to explain

SIDDHARTH MUKESH BHANDARIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2022 INSC 7882 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, Siddharth Mukesh Bhandari, filed FIRs in 2019 and the accused filed Special Criminal Applications under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quash of the proceedings. The Gujarat High Court initially stayed any coercive steps on 10‑Oct‑2019, an order that the Supreme Court

NOOR MOHAMMEDversusKHURRAM PASHA

2022 INSC 7792 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Noor Mohammed, issued a Rs.7,00,000 cheque to the respondent, Khurram Pasha, which was dishonoured, leading to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court ordered the appellant to deposit 20% of the cheque amount as interim compensation under Section 143A, which he fa

DAUVARAM NIRMALKARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2022 INSC 7862 August 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Dauvaram Nirmalkar, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for killing his brother Dashrath Nirmalkar. The trial court and High Court found him the sole perpetrator based on eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence, and his own confession, which was held inadmissible under Section 25 of the Evidenc

RITESH SINHAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2019 INSC 8552 August 2019Disposed off

The appellant Ritesh Sinha was implicated in a fraud case and the police sought a voice sample to match a recorded phone conversation. The Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered him to appear and give his voice sample, which the appellant challenged under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The High Court upheld the magistrate's ord

NEERA YADAVversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATON

2017 INSC 6982 August 2017Case Partly allowed

Neera Yadav, while serving as Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer of the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), filed ante‑dated and incomplete applications to obtain residential plots for herself and her daughters, manipulated the layout plan to enlarge her plot, and secured shop allotments for her da

KISHAN RAOversusSHANKARGOUDA

2018 INSC 5612 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant had given the accused a loan of Rs.2,00,000 and the accused issued a post‑dated cheque to repay it, which was later returned for insufficient funds. The trial court, applying the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted the accused under Section 138, a decision affirmed b

DEVIDAS LOKA RATHODversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 5602 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Devidas Loka Rathod was convicted under Sections 302 and 324 IPC for assaulting several persons with a sickle, resulting in one death. He pleaded unsound mind, asserting that a pre‑existing psychotic disorder rendered him incapable of understanding his acts. The trial and appellate courts rejected this defence, relying

SONVIR @ SOMVIRversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2018 INSC 5622 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sonvir, was convicted along with two others for a double murder under Sections 302, 392 and 34 of the IPC based largely on circumstantial evidence such as recovered jewellery, a blood‑stained knife, a blood‑stained shirt, a Maruti van, and fingerprint matches. The appellant challenged the admissibility o

S.R. SUKUMARversusS. SUNAAD RAGHURAM

2015 INSC 4732 July 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a magistrate had taken cognizance of an offence under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) when a complaint was recorded and whether a complaint could be amended before cognizance was taken. It held that cognizance requires the magistrate to apply his judicial mind to the

DAYA RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 4722 July 2015Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the double murder of two brothers, Ashok and Rohtash, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The sole eyewitness, the victims' brother (PW 3), hid during the attack out of fear and later reported the incident, identifying the appellants and describing the weap

PUNDAPPA YANKAPPA PUJARIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 4552 July 2014Dismissed

The appellant, Pundappa Yankappa Pujari, was charged with murder after allegedly assaulting Mahantappa with an axe during a boundary stone dispute, resulting in Mahantappa's death. The trial court acquitted the accused, but the Karnataka High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted him under Section 302 IPC, imposi

RISHIPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2014 INSC 4612 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a bank branch manager, was charged with multiple IPC offences for allegedly conspiring with co‑accused to cheat a complainant after a lost cheque book was reported. The complainant had written to the bank on 17 May 2004 requesting that the lost cheques not be honoured, and the bank indeed refused to clea

ARJUN JADAVversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2014 INSC 4642 July 2014Dismissed

Arjun Jadav was convicted of murder in 1991 and sentenced to life imprisonment simplicitor. He served more than 20 years, including remission, and his wife’s two mercy petitions were rejected; the Superintendent of Alipore Central Jail later recommended his release. Jadav filed a writ petition under Article 32, arguing

ARNESH KUMARversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2014 INSC 4632 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Arnesh Kumar, husband of Sweta Kiran, was charged under IPC s.498-A and the Dowry Prohibition Act s.4. He sought anticipatory bail, which was denied by the trial court and the High Court, prompting a petition before the Supreme Court. The Court examined the statutory framework governing police arrests without a warrant

SURYAKANT DADASAHEB BITALEversusDILIP BAJRANG KALE & ANR.

2014 INSC 4582 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Suryakant Bitale was acquitted by the Sessions Court of offences under Sections 302 and 498A IPC relating to the death of his wife, Archana, who suffered severe burns. The complainant, her father Dilip Kale, sought revision of the acquittal under Section 397 of the CrPC, alleging misappreciation of two dy

STATE OF PUNJABversusGURMIT SINGH

2014 INSC 4542 July 2014Dismissed

The State of Punjab filed a prosecution under Section 3048 of the Indian Penal Code for dowry death, summoning Gurmit Singh as an accused. Singh contended that he could not be tried under this provision because he was not a "relative of the husband" of the deceased woman. The Punjab & Haryana High Court agreed and quas

RAFIQUE @ RAUF & OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 4102 July 2013Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for murder and related offences after an incident in which they allegedly entered the deceased's house and fired indiscriminately, killing Zahiruddin and injuring two others. The prosecution relied on the deceased's statement recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC (Ext.Ka‑9) as a dying dec

JASVINDER SAINI & ORS.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

2013 INSC 4122 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 498A, 304B, 406 and 34 IPC for the death of Ms Chandni, the wife of Jasvinder Saini. The trial court initially framed charges under 498A, 304B and 34, but after the Supreme Court’s direction in Rajbir v. State of Haryana to add Section 302 IPC in dowry‑death cases, it mechanic

SHEO SHANKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 4072 July 2013Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of Lorik, who was shot dead after his motorcycle was stopped by four accused who opened fire on him. The trial court convicted all four accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment, also convicting them under Section 379 IPC. On appeal, the acc

P. SANJEEVA RAOversusTHE STATE OF A.P.

2012 INSC 2602 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed

P. Sanjeeva Rao was tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding and receiving a bribe. During the trial, prosecution witnesses PW1 (the complainant) and PW2 (an independent witness) were examined, but their cross‑examination was deferred pending the examination of the trap‑laying officer PW11. The appell

JITENDRA NATH MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR

2023 INSC 5762 June 2023Dismissed

The appellant, brother of an accused named Dharmendra Nath Mishra, was summoned to stand trial under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure despite not being named in the FIR. The FIR, registered under several IPC sections and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleged that Dharmendra, his brother and an

UTTAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 6342 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Uttam was convicted under s.302 IPC for allegedly murdering his wife Pushpabai by pouring kerosene on her and setting her ablaze. The conviction rested on two written dying declarations recorded by a Special Executive Magistrate and an Investigating Officer, and two oral dying declarations given to the victim's father

SHANKARversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 3662 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Shankar and Vishal, were named in an FIR for the murder of Vijay Singh based solely on the mother’s (PW‑1) suspicion arising from a long‑standing family enmity. PW‑1 later clarified in her Section 161 statement and during trial that the names were included falsely and that she was not an eyewitness. No

OMPRAKASH SAHNIversusJAI SHANKAR CHAUDHARY & ANR. ETC.

2023 INSC 4782 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Om Prakash Sahni, challenged the High Court's order that suspended the life‑imprisonment sentences of three convicts (Jai Shankar Chaudhary, Abhay Kumar and Ram Babu Sahni) for the murder of his brother and released them on bail under Section 389 of the CrPC. The Supreme Court examined whether the High C

MURUGANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2018 INSC 4402 May 2018Dismissed

The appellant Murugan was convicted under Sections 364 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of his father-in-law, Murugan, after the main accused Kumar, who had a motive to marry Kumar's daughter, invited the victim for dinner and killed him. The prosecution proved a motive, the invitation, the dinner

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, LUCKNOW, U.P.versusINDRA BHUSHAN SINGH & ORS.

2014 INSC 3542 May 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a criminal appeal filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation against Indra Bhushan Singh and others, arising from a complaint lodged by the Deputy Registrar of the Allahabad High Court under Section 195(1)(b) of the CrPC. The Court found that the Deputy Registrar had filed the complaint on

M.T. ENRICA LEXIE & ANR.versusDORAMMA & ORS.

2012 INSC 1972 May 2012Disposed off

Two Indian fishermen were killed when an Italian-flagged vessel, M.T. Enrica Lexie, allegedly opened fire while its Naval Military Protection Squad (NMP) was on board. The Kerala Police detained the vessel and a Circle Inspector issued a notice prohibiting it from sailing without permission. The vessel challenged the d

LAL KISHORE JHAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2011 INSC 3462 May 2011Dismissed

The wife filed a complaint against her husband under IPC sections 494 and 498A. During trial the husband entered into a settlement promising to take her back despite having taken a second wife. She initially expressed willingness to live with both, but later alleged breach of the settlement and petitioned the trial cou

SATYAVIR SINGH RATHIversusSTATE THR. C.B.I

2011 INSC 3472 May 2011Dismissed

In 1997 a police party, led by ACP Satyavir Singh Rathi, mistakenly identified two civilians as a notorious criminal and opened fire on their car, killing both occupants and grievously injuring a third. The father of one victim filed a complaint, leading to a CBI investigation and the conviction of ten police officials

STATE (NCT) OF DELHIversusRAJEEV SHARMA

2025 INSC 4562 April 2025Dismissed

The State of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court order granting bail to Rajeev Sharma, who was arrested under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Section 120B of the IPC. Sharma filed multiple bail applications, all of which were dismissed, and later invoked Section 167(2) of the CrPC claimi

BALLU @ BALRAM @ BALMUKUND AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 2582 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with murder and related offences under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the IPC for the death of Mahesh Sahu, allegedly due to a love‑relation dispute. The trial court acquitted them, finding that the prosecution's circumstantial evidence was unreliable, witnesses were inconsistent, and the chain

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCYversusZAHOOR AHMAD SHAH WATALI

2019 INSC 4562 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) sought to deny bail to Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, accused No.10 in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) and several IPC offences, alleging he was a key fund‑raiser for terrorist activities. The Delhi High Court granted bail, holding that the charge‑sh

STATE OF HARYANAversusBASTI RAM

2013 INSC 2082 April 2013Disposed off

The State prosecuted Basti Ram for gang rape, kidnapping, confinement and intimidation of a girl, H.L., who was below 16 years at the time. The trial court, relying on H.L.'s detailed statement under Section 164 CrPC and her testimony, convicted Basti Ram under IPC sections 376(2)(g), 366, 342 and 506. The High Court,

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusEX-GNR AJEET SINGH

2013 INSC 2062 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a serving army soldier, was tried by a General Court Martial (GCM) for six offences including absence without leave, theft of ammunition and possession of a counterfeit seal, receiving dismissal and seven years' rigorous imprisonment. He contended that some offences were committed while he was a juvenil

RAJNISH SINGH @ SONIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 3082 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajnish Singh, was charged under Sections 376, 384, 323, 504 and 506 IPC for alleged sexual exploitation and blackmail of the complainant, who claimed he promised marriage and later married another woman. The complainant alleged a 16‑year consensual relationship that began with a forced act in 2006, duri

THE STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUversusLOKESH CHADHA

2021 INSC 1422 March 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

Lokesh Chadha, proprietor of a courier agency, was convicted by a Special Judge under Sections 23(c) and 25A of the NDPS Act for facilitating the shipment of heroin and pseudo‑ephedrine and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment plus three years. While his appeal was pending, he applied for suspension of the sen

SHIVAJI CHINTAPPA PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2021 INSC 1362 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Shivaji Chintappa Patil, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for the death of his wife, who the prosecution alleged was killed after being abused for not obtaining money from her mother. The case hinged on circumstantial evidence, including the appellant's alleged motive, the lack of a detailed

SAMTA NAIDU & ANR.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 2482 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Samta Naidu and others, challenged the dismissal of a second complaint filed under the Criminal Procedure Code alleging forgery in the sale of a family vehicle. The first complaint had been rejected by a Judicial Magistrate on the ground that no prima facie case was made out, and the dismissal was on me

PARVAT SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 2442 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, accused Nos.2‑5, were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the murder of Bal Kishan based solely on the testimony of the sole eyewitness, PW‑8 (Mullo Bai). The Supreme Court examined the consistency of PW‑8's statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC and her later deposition

SATISHKUMAR NYALCHAND SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2020 INSC 2462 March 2020Dismissed

The private victim filed a Special Criminal Application seeking further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC against an uncharged accused, Shri Bhaumik. The appellant, Satishkumar Nyalchand Shah, a co-accused already charge‑sheeted and on trial, sought to be impleaded as a respondent in that application. The High Co

SHRI SATISH KUMAR & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR.

2020 INSC 2512 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Ratti Ram, for which Satish Kumar and Rajeev Kumar were convicted under IPC s.302 r/w s.34 and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The trial court acquitted the accused, holding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly because the dead body

M. G. ESHWARAPPA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2017 INSC 1982 March 2017Dismissed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted four relatives of the complainant for offences under Sections 506, 354 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the fatal assault of Basavaraj. The trial court acquitted the accused, holding that the prosecution had not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt, particularly questioni

SHAHID KHANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 2382 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Ashok Kumar, for which accused Nos. 2‑5 were convicted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution’s case hinged on the testimony of two alleged eyewitnesses, PW 25 (Mirza Majid Beg) and PW 24 (Mohamed Shakir), who claimed to have seen the assaila

SAMPATH KUMARversusINSPECTOR OF POLICE, KRISHNAGIRI

2012 INSC 1242 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 34 IPC based primarily on the testimony of a single witness (PW7) and the alleged motive that one accused disapproved of the victim's relationship with his sister. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of PW7, noting a material contradiction between hi

RAJESH TALWARversusC.B.I. & ORS.

2012 INSC 1272 March 2012Dismissed

The murder of Aarushi Talwar and the subsequent killing of domestic help Hemraj led to a criminal trial before the Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI) in Ghaziabad. Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar filed separate transfer petitions under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to move the trial to De

AMRUTBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI .PATELversusSUMANBHAI KANTIBHAI PATEL & ORS.

2017 INSC 1022 February 2017Dismissed

The appellant, Amrutbhai Shambhubhai Patel, filed a petition under Section 173(8) of the CrPC seeking a court‑ordered further investigation by the police after a charge‑sheet had been filed and the trial was underway. The trial court had granted the direction, but the High Court set it aside, holding that a magistrate

BALU S/O ONKAR PUND & OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2015 INSC 852 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, led by Apparao Pund, entered a cattle shed owned by Madhavrao Range to forcibly take possession of the land, resulting in a scuffle during which they set the shed on fire with kerosene. Savitribai, the wife of Madhavrao, was injured in the blaze and later died from her burns. The trial court and High Co

OMI @ OMKAR RATHORE & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 272 January 2025Dismissed

The petitioners Omi (Omkar) Rathore and another were named in the FIR for a murder case but the investigating officer filed a closure report exonerating them and they were not included in the charge‑sheet. During trial, the first informant reiterated his FIR testimony implicating the petitioners, leading the trial cour

PREM SINGHversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2023 INSC 32 January 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Prem Singh, was convicted of murdering his two sons by manual strangulation and of causing the disappearance of evidence by throwing their bodies into a canal. The trial and high courts held that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt through a cogent chain of circumstantial evidence, th

RAM CHANDER & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2017 INSC 52 January 2017Dismissed

The appellants Ram Chander and others were convicted for the murder of a mother and her unmarried daughter after the prosecution presented the testimony of Guddi (PW‑9), a close relative and next‑door neighbour, who described the assault, killing with a gandasa, and subsequent burning of the bodies. The defence argued

IMTIYAZ AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2017 INSC 62 January 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the chronic delay in disposal of serious criminal cases in district courts, noting that many stays were issued by High Courts under Art. 226 of the Constitution and Sections 397/482 of the CrPC. It evaluated the Law Commission's "rate of disposal" method and the criticisms thereof, and consid

BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIAversusCRICKET ASSOCIATION OF BIHAR & ORS.

2017 INSC 92 January 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the Board of Control for Cricket in India's (BCCI) failure to implement the Lodha Committee recommendations, particularly the appointment of a CAG nominee to the Apex Council, despite a prior judgment dated 18 July 2016. The Court found that President Anurag Thakur had sought a letter from th

SAVARALA SAI SREEversusGURRAMKONDA VASUDEVARAO & ORS.

2014 INSC 8972 January 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of respondents under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The trial court had sentenced them to three months' imprisonment, far below the statutory minimum of five years, without recording any special reasons. The High Court further reduced the sentence to four days on

SHASHIKANT SHARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2023 INSC 10361 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under several IPC sections and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act for allegedly firing a gun at Rinku Thakur, a member of a Scheduled Caste, and subsequently abusing a witness belonging to the same community. The medicolegal report, however, found no gunshot wound, and the prosecution’s case r

MADAN RAZAKversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8801 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a 13‑14‑year‑old girl, Saraswati Kumari, filed a complaint after her body was recovered following a disappearance from a mela. Police recorded statements of several witnesses about a month after the incident, identifying the accused who allegedly kidnapped, raped and murdered the girl. The Additional Chie

UNION OF INDIA ETC. REP. THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEversusT. NATHAMUNI

2014 INSC 8241 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint of bribery was lodged against T. Nathamuni, an Income Tax Inspector, leading to a CBI case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The investigating officer, initially an Inspector of Police, was replaced by Sub‑Inspector G.A. Suriya Kumar after a petition under Section 17 of the Act obtained permissi

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSHERA RAM @ VISHNU DUTTA

2011 INSC 8301 December 2011Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Shera Ram @ Vishnu Dutta, who had been found not guilty of murder, offences under Sections 302, 295 and 449 IPC on the ground that he was of unsound mind at the time of the incident. The trial court had convicted him, but the High Court reversed the conviction, accepting

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusVIMAL KUMAR SURANA AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 8401 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Vimal Kumar Surana, who had passed the Chartered Accountant examination but was not a member of the Institute, impersonated a chartered accountant, prepared audit reports and forged the Institute's seal before tax authorities. The Institute filed a criminal complaint alleging offences under the Chartered Accountants Ac

BABASAHEB MARUTI KAMBLEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 10311 November 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Babasaheb Maruti Kamble was convicted of murder, rape and kidnapping, receiving a death sentence for murder, life imprisonment for rape and two months' simple imprisonment for kidnapping. The Sessions Court referred the death sentence to the High Court, which affirmed both conviction and death penalty. Kamble filed a S

HARSHAD GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 7761 October 2024Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of rape and criminal intimidation on 30 April 2015, but before his sentencing hearing the presiding judge was transferred. The appellant sought to have the new judge rehear the case, including the conviction, invoking Sections 353 and 354 of the CrPC. The High Court dismissed the petition, h

PARVEZ NOORDIN LOKHANDWALLAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2020 INSC 5731 October 2020Disposed off

The appellant, an Indian citizen and US Green Card holder, was charged in 2014 with forgery and related offences under the IPC and was arrested in 2020. The High Court granted him eight weeks of interim bail but refused to relax the conditions to allow travel to the United States, despite his frequent prior travel and

UNION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2019 INSC 11021 October 2019Case Allowed

The Union of India sought review of the Supreme Court's directions in Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra, which required approval of the appointing authority for arresting a public servant and of the SSP for a non‑public servant, and mandated a preliminary inquiry by a Dy SP before registering an FIR

KODUNGALLUR FILM SOCIETY & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 9171 October 2018Disposed off

The Kodungallur Film Society filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking directions to prevent mob violence against cultural establishments, especially following protests over films like Padmaavat. The Court examined whether the State must implement the guidelines from In Re: Destruction of Public and Private Proper

SUDHIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 7251 October 2015Dismissed

The case involved two officials of the Rural Water Supply Department of Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, accused of misappropriating public funds allocated for rural drinking‑water schemes. FIRs were filed after an enquiry by the Revenue Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, alleging large sums were siphoned through fictitious

KISHAN RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013 INSC 6651 October 2013Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Suresh Chandra, who was tied up and assaulted with lathis and dandas by five accused including Kishan Ram, Pani Ram, Dev Singh, Har Ram and Chandan Singh. The trial court and the High Court convicted the five under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced them to life i

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusJAGJIT SINGH

2013 INSC 6641 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI filed a criminal case against Jagjit Singh and others for cheating and forgery under Sections 420 and 471 IPC, alleging that they obtained bank loans through forged documents with the collusion of bank officials. The accused later settled the debt with Indian Overseas Bank by complying with an order of the Debt

ANIL KUMAR & ORS.versusM. K. AIYAPPA & ANR.

2013 INSC 6661 October 2013Dismissed

The appellants filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC alleging that the respondent, a public servant, committed offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Special Judge referred the complaint for investigation by the Karnataka Lokayukta under Section 156(3) of the CrPC without obtaining

IQBAL ABDUL SAMIYA MALEKversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 4401 October 2012Disposed off

The appellants, convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, appealed to the Gujarat High Court. The High Court affirmed the conviction without examining the complete record, including oral and documentary evidence, merely narrating the prosecution and defence cases. The Supreme Court h

MANHARIBHAI MULJIBHAI KAKADIA & ANR.versusSHAILESHBHAI MOHANBHAI PATEL & ORS.

2012 INSC 4391 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a criminal complaint alleging offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B IPC. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, invoking s.202 CrPC, ordered a police investigation and later dismissed the complaint under s.203, stating the dispute was civil. The complainants sought revision under s.397 read

TARUN SHARMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 11391 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of Tarun Sharma under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Munish Kumar, based primarily on a dying declaration recorded by a police Sub‑Inspector. The Supreme Court examined whether the dying declaration was reliable, given that the victim had been unconscious for most of the period, the

SUSHIL KUMAR TIWARIversusHARE RAM SAH & ORS.

2025 INSC 10611 September 2025Disposed off

The case involved a minor girl who became pregnant after being allegedly raped separately by two accused, Hare Ram Sah and Manish Tiwari, in 2016. The trial court convicted them under IPC s.376(2) and POCSO §§4,6, imposing rigorous life imprisonment, but the High Court acquitted them, holding that the prosecution faile

KIRANversusRAJKUMAR JIVRAJ JAIN & ANR.

2025 INSC 10671 September 2025Disposed off

The case arose from an FIR filed by Kiran, a member of the Scheduled Caste ‘Mang’, alleging that Rajkumar Jain and others assaulted him, his mother and aunt with an iron rod, used caste‑based slurs and threatened to burn their house after he voted against a candidate. The accused sought anticipatory bail under Section

M/S TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 10601 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, was ordered by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to pay Rs.18 crore as environmental compensation for alleged illegal discharge of untreated effluents and related violations. The appellant challenged the orders on the ground that it was n

HARENDRA RAIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8061 September 2023Disposed off

The case concerns a murder that occurred in 1995, for which respondent No.2 was initially acquitted by the trial and High Courts but later convicted by the Supreme Court under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC. The principal issue before the Court was the appropriate sentence, including whether the death penalty was warr

BHADRESH BIPINBHAI SHETHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT &ANOTHER

2015 INSC 6231 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth, was originally charged in 2001 under Section 506(2) IPC for harassment. After a nine‑year delay, the prosecutrix sought addition of a rape charge under Section 376 IPC, which was finally framed in 2014. The appellant obtained anticipatory bail from the Additional Sessions Judge

NITINBHAI SAEVATILAL SHAH & ANOTHERversusMANUBHAI MANJIBHAI PANCHAL & ANOTHER

2011 INSC 6311 September 2011Disposed off

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a summary trial before a Metropolitan Magistrate. After the magistrate recorded the substance of evidence, he was transferred and his successor proceeded with the trial relying on the recorded evidence, convicting the appellants. The a

SANTOKH SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2010 INSC 5671 September 2010Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Sanjay Kumar, a union leader, who was shot with his own licensed pistol after being taken to a hotel by four accused Union members. The trial court convicted all four under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, but the High Court upheld the conviction of only two appellants, Santo

MYLADIMMAL SURENDRAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2010 INSC 5681 September 2010Dismissed

The case involves the murder of a BJP leader in Kerala, allegedly carried out by workers of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) as part of a political rivalry. The victim's wife, along with two other eyewitnesses, identified the assailants, and a dying declaration of the victim corroborated their testimony. The tria

NATIONAL HOUSING BANKversusBHERUDAN DUGAR HOUSING FINANCE LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2024 INSC 5661 August 2024Case Partly allowed

The National Housing Bank filed a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging that Bherudan Dugar Housing Finance Ltd., its Managing Director, and five directors violated Section 29A(i) read with Section 50 of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987, an offence punishable under Section 49(2A). The High Court quashed

SUNITA PALITA & OTHERSversusM/S PANCHAMI STONE QUARRY

2022 INSC 7751 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, who were independent, non‑executive directors of MBL Infrastructure Ltd., were impleaded as accused in a complaint under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of an account‑payee cheque signed by the company’s managing director. They filed a criminal revision under Se

MANOHARANversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARIETY HALL POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE

2019 INSC 8511 August 2019Disposed off

Manoharan was convicted for kidnapping, gang‑rape of a 10‑year‑old girl and the murder of the girl and her 7‑year‑old brother, who were thrown into a canal after a failed poisoning attempt. The prosecution proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt through extensive witness testimony, forensic DNA evidence linking Man

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusM. SIVAMANI

2017 INSC 6951 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI filed a charge sheet alleging a false insurance claim and charged several persons, including advocate M. Sivamani, under IPC sections 182, 120‑B, 420, 468, 471 and the Prevention of Corruption Act. Sivamani moved a petition invoking CrPC s.195(1)(a)(i), contending that the court could not take cognizance of the

DASHRATH RUPSINGH RATHODversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2014 INSC 5141 August 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the proper territorial jurisdiction for criminal complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It held that the offence is completed when a cheque is dishonoured by the drawee bank, and therefore the court having jurisdiction over the place where the cheque is dishonou

RAMESHversusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2014 INSC 5151 August 2014Dismissed

The appellant was accused of raping an eight‑year‑old girl who later died of neurogenic shock. Although the initial FIR did not name him, the investigation recovered the child's shawl and recorded a voluntary confessional statement. The trial court convicted him under IPC sections 376, 302 and 201 and sentenced him to

NEERAJ GUPTAversusPARDEEP KUMAR BANSAL & ORS.

2026 INSC 6601 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Neeraj Gupta filed a private complaint alleging that his father died after an altercation with the respondents, leading to a criminal proceeding under sections 302 IPC. The complaint was taken up by a Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 156(3) CrPC, and the magistrate recorded some pre‑charge ev

CHANDRIKABEN KISHOR DAFDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2026 INSC 6651 July 2026Disposed off

Chandrikaben Kishor Dafda appealed against the High Court's refusal to quash a criminal case initiated for allegedly suppressing her spouse's property in an election affidavit filed for the 2015 municipal councillor election. The trial magistrate had taken cognizance under Section 125A of the Representation of Peoples

SHAURYA SUNIL KUMAR SINGHversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2026 INSC 6661 July 2026Dismissed

The appellant, Shaurya Sunil Kumar Singh, was arrested in connection with a cyber‑fraud case involving a mule company and was charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IT Act. After being remanded, the investigating agency filed a charge‑sheet on 2 September 2025, but failed to

PARVEEN KUMAR @ PARVEEN CHAUHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2026 INSC 6671 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Parveen Kumar was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2009. In 2022 he applied for remission under the 2002 Haryana remission policy, which required the Governor’s approval under Article 161 of the Constitution, but his application was rejected on the ground that the later 2008 policy, issued unde

ASIM SHARIFFversusNATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

2019 INSC 7091 July 2019Dismissed

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) investigated the murder of Rudresh and charged Asim Shariff, the Bengaluru unit president of the Popular Front of India, along with four others under multiple provisions of the IPC, Arms Act and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Shariff filed an application for discharge

SATVINDER SINGH @ SATVINDER SINGH SALUJA & ORSversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2019 INSC 7101 July 2019Disposed off

The appellants, a group of Rotarians, were traveling from Jharkhand to Bihar in a private vehicle when they were stopped at a check post in Nawada. Although no liquor was found in the vehicle, a breath analyser indicated the presence of alcohol in some of the appellants, leading to charges under Section 53(a) of the Bi

PRADEEP RAMversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2019 INSC 7061 July 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Pradeep Ram, was granted bail in 2016 for offences under the IPC, Arms Act and Criminal Law Amendment Act. Subsequent addition of serious offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act led the investigating agency to seek his arrest and the Special NIA Judge remanded him to judicial custody. The

PETROLEUM & NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARDversusINDRAPRASTHA GAS LIMITED & ORS.

2015 INSC 4591 July 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) could, under the PNGRB Act, 2008, fix the maximum retail price of gas and determine network tariff and compression charges for a city or local natural gas distribution network owned by Indraprastha Gas Ltd. The Court held that Sec

BRANCH C.1.0., TIRUNELVELI RANGE, TAMILNADUversusMARIYAANTONVIJAY

2015 INSC 4631 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The police intercepted the vessel M.V. Seaman Guard Ohio within Indian territorial waters and seized a large quantity of unlicensed firearms and ammunition, leading to a charge sheet under the Arms Act, 1959 and other statutes. The accused challenged the charge sheet through revision (s.397) and a petition under the in

STATE OF M.P.versusMADAN LAL

2015 INSC 4581 July 2015Case Partly allowed

Madan Lal was convicted by a Sessions Court for raping a seven‑year‑old girl under IPC Section 376(2)(f) read with Section 511 and sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. The High Court, relying on a compromise between the accused and the victim’s parents, set aside the rape conviction, reduced the charge to Se

MANOHAR LALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 4391 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Manohar Lal, was convicted under Section 3048 of the IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife, who died from burn injuries within seven years of marriage. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for dowry, culminating in her death, and charged the appellant un

UMAKANT & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATISGARH

2014 INSC 4471 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of Umakant and his in‑laws for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, which was based solely on the victim's dying declaration. The Court held that the dying declaration was unreliable, showing signs of tutoring and contradictions with other evidence, and therefore

PARAMSIVAM & ORS.versusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2014 INSC 4441 July 2014Dismissed

The case involved the abduction and murder of Mani alias Parai Mani, a quarry leaseholder, by accused Paramasivam and two others. The prosecution proved motive, the victim's last sighting with the accused, DNA identification of the exhumed body, and recovered incriminating items obtained through confessional statements

DURYODHAN ROUTversusSTATE OF ORLSSA

2014 INSC 4431 July 2014Case Partly allowed

The appellant Duryodhan Rout was convicted of rape, murder and concealment of evidence of a ten‑year‑old girl based solely on circumstantial evidence and his own confession recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The trial court sentenced him to death for murder, rigorous imprisonment for the rape and concealmen

HARIVADAN BABUBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2013 INSC 4001 July 2013Case Partly allowed

Harivadan Babubhai Patel (A‑1) and three others were tried for kidnapping, murder and conspiracy under Sections 342, 346, 302, 1208 and 201 IPC read with Section 34. The trial court convicted A‑1 and A‑2, acquitting A‑3 and A‑4; the High Court later acquitted A‑2 but upheld A‑1's conviction. On appeal, the Supreme Cour

MAJENDRAN LANGESWARANversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2013 INSC 4011 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a helmsman on the cargo ship "Lok Prem", was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly murdering a fellow helmsman, L. Shivaraman, based primarily on circumstantial evidence and an alleged extra‑judicial confession to an engine officer. The prosecution relied on the appellant's fingerprints on a bloo

ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD.versusREGISTRAR GENERAL, DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS

2013 INSC 3741 July 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, including Essar Teleholdings Ltd., challenged the Delhi High Court's administrative order and the NCT of Delhi's notification appointing a Special Judge to try the 2G spectrum case, arguing that the Special Judge lacked jurisdiction to try IPC offences (420/120‑B) arising from the same transaction. The

B. RAGHUVIR ACHARYAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 3801 July 2013Disposed off

The case involved a Rs 65 crore investment in CANCIGO units of Canbank Mutual Fund (CMF) by four subscribers, where B. Raghuvir Acharya (Trustee/General Manager) and Hiten P. Dalal (approved broker) were alleged to have obtained a false brokerage of Rs 32.5 lakhs. The Special Court convicted Acharya and Dalal, but acqu

NISHANT AGGARWALversusKAILASH KUMAR SHARMA

2013 INSC 3821 July 2013Dismissed

The complainant, a resident of Bhiwani, presented a cheque drawn by the appellant on a Guwahati bank, which was stopped and returned unpaid. After sending a legal notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant filed a complaint in the Judicial Magistrate Court at Bhiwani, which initially he

MRS. APARNA A. SHAHversusM/S. SHETH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2013 INSC 3981 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mrs. Aparna A. Shah, challenged criminal proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a cheque dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The cheque was issued by her husband from a joint account and was signed only by him. The Supreme Court examined whether a joint account h

MOHIT ALIAS SONU AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

2013 INSC 3991 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mohit alias Sonu, and another were not summoned under an application filed by the complainant under Section 319 CrPC, and the Sessions Court rejected the application twice. The complainant challenged the rejection in the High Court by invoking the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC, which led the High

KARTHI @ KARTHICKversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 3761 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant Karthick was convicted for rape and cheating after he forced sexual intercourse on the prosecutrix Poomari by gagging her and promising to marry her, thereby obtaining her consent through deceit. The first assault occurred when she was alone at home; subsequent intercourse continued for six months under t

JARNAIL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 3781 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant Jarnail Singh was convicted under IPC sections 366, 376(g) and 120‑B for kidnapping and raping a girl who was later found to be a minor. The Supreme Court examined the prosecution's evidence, including the victim's statements under Section 164 CrPC, forensic reports, and corroboration by her father, and r

SHARANJIT KAUR & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 3791 July 2013Dismissed

The appellants were charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating a complainant of Rs 30 lakhs and sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the offence fell within the jurisdiction of a Gram Panchayat under the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The High Court dismissed their bail applications and a subsequent writ

SARABJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2013 INSC 3751 July 2013Dismissed

Sarabjit Singh purchased land from Salamat Masih and later claimed that an agreement to sell additional land existed, for which he alleged he paid Rs.3,00,000. He filed an FIR under Sections 420, 379, 427, 506, 148 and 149 IPC alleging fraud by the vendor Ittefaq Singh and his brother, but the FIR contained no details

DOLIBEN KANTILAL PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 3861 July 2013Dismissed

Doliben Kantilal Patel, an American citizen of Indian origin, was arrested in connection with a land dispute and alleged that she was repeatedly raped during a five‑day police remand. She filed a complaint under Sections 376 and 1208 IPC, but no FIR was registered. She approached the High Court under Article 226 seekin

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