Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

5,133 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 401–600.

ANJU GARG & ANRversusDEEPAK KUMAR GARG

2022 INSC 103328 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The wife (appellant) and her son filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, alleging that the husband subjected her to cruelty, dowry harassment and forced her to leave the matrimonial home. The Family Court dismissed the wife’s application but granted maintenance to the son, a decis

CHOTKAUversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 103228 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Chotkau, was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a six‑year‑old girl based solely on the testimonies of three prosecution witnesses and circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court found serious contradictions in the witnesses' accounts regarding the FIR filing, the handling of the

MAHESHWAR TIGGAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2020 INSC 56428 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Maheshwar Tigga was convicted by the trial court and the Jharkhand High Court for rape, voluntarily causing hurt and wrongful restraint under Sections 376, 323 and 341 IPC, based on the prosecutrix’s allegation that he assaulted her when she was a minor. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecutrix was indeed a m

ROMILA THAPAR AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2018 INSC 91228 September 2018Disposed off

Five eminent citizens filed a writ petition under Article 32 on behalf of five human‑rights activists arrested in connection with the Bhima‑Koregaon violence. The petitioners alleged that the arrests were fabricated, that the police were using the media to prejudice public opinion, and sought a Special Investigating Te

HEMUDAN NANBHA GADHVIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2018 INSC 90928 September 2018Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under IPC s.376(2)(f) for sexually assaulting a nine‑year‑old girl. The victim initially identified the appellant in a test identification parade (TIP) but later turned hostile and refused dock identification. The High Court upheld the conviction on the basis of the FIR, medical report, seme

SOMASUNDARAM @ SOMUversusSTATE REP. BY DY. COMM. OF POLICE

2020 INSC 41228 September 2016Matter referred to larger bench

The case concerned the abduction and murder of former MLA M.K. Balan. The prosecution’s case against appellants A‑3 (Manickam), A‑4 (Somasundaram) and A‑15 (Bomb Selvam) relied primarily on the testimony of two alleged accomplices, PW‑10 and PW‑11, supported by peripheral witnesses and documentary evidence. The trial c

MANUBHAI RATILAL PATEL TR. USHABENversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2012 INSC 43828 September 2012Dismissed

An FIR for offences under sections 467, 468, 471, 409 and 114 IPC was filed against the appellant. He sought quashing of the FIR and a stay of investigation under Section 482 CrPC, but was arrested before the stay order took effect. The magistrate remanded him to police custody and later to judicial custody. The High C

BALJINDER SINGH @ BITTUversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2011 INSC 72028 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

In July 1994, Baljinder Singh and his brother Bhupinder Singh assaulted Kulwinder Singh, the owner of a cart that had inadvertently entered their paddy field, inflicting knife and fist injuries. The trial court convicted Baljinder under IPC sections 326 and 324, sentencing him to four years rigorous imprisonment with a

RAJESH KUMARversusSTATE THROUGH GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI-II

2011 INSC 72228 September 2011Disposed off

The appellant Rajesh Kumar was convicted of murdering two children, aged four years and eight months, and was sentenced to death by the trial court and the Delhi High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the death penalty was justified under the "rarest of rare" doctrine, emphasizing the need to balance

BRUNDABAN MOHARANA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF ORISSA

2010 INSC 65328 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, the in‑laws of Amani Moharana, were convicted by the trial court for murder based on two dying declarations of the deceased, one recorded by a doctor (PW‑8) and another by a police officer (PW‑9) under Section 161 of the CrPC. The High Court discarded the doctor’s declaration as a Xerox copy but upheld

GURIYA@TABASSUM TAUQUIR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2007 INSC 98428 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from an FIR in which three persons were arraigned as accused, while the appellants were not. Witnesses 1‑3 only testified to the appellants' presence, without attributing any specific role, and after the prosecution evidence was closed, two additional witnesses (4 and 5) were examined under s.311 CrPC. T

STATE OF PUNJABversusMOHINDER SINGH AND ORS.

2007 INSC 98628 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab prosecuted Mohinder Singh and others for the murder of Dalip Singh, alleging they used sharp weapons during a land dispute. The trial court convicted one accused under Section 302 IPC and the others under Section 302 read with Section 34, rejecting the defence that the FIR was delayed, the injuries

KHURSHEED AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 99528 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were convicted under Sections 325 and 323 of the IPC, each read with Section 34, for assaulting the complainant and his wife. Subsequently, the parties reached an amicable settlement and filed a deed of compromise seeking compounding of the offences. The appellants contended that both offences are compounda

GURMEET SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2005 INSC 45328 September 2005Dismissed

Gurmeet Singh was convicted of murdering thirteen members of his own family in a moonlit night, using swords, after a dispute over his newly‑married wife and a co‑accused. The trial court sentenced him to death under Section 302 IPC, a sentence confirmed by the Allahabad High Court despite a split decision among its ju

GANGADHAR JANARDAN MHATREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 55628 September 2004Dismissed

The appellant, Gangadhar Janardan Mhatre, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking transfer of the investigation of a FIR in which his brother was allegedly killed. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the case was already before the Sessions Court and that the writ was not the appropriate remedy.

STATE OF PUNJABversusNAIB DIN

2001 INSC 47028 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab convicted Naib Din under Section 9 of the Opium Act for possession of opium, relying in part on affidavits of two police officers who had handled the seized sample. The High Court, on revision, quashed the conviction because the affidavits were not cross‑examined and their contents were not put to t

KALYAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2001 INSC 47228 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with murder and related offences under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149 and 1208 of the IPC for an incident alleged to have occurred on 27 June 1977 in Badayun, Uttar Pradesh. The trial court acquitted all accused, holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt

DANIAL LATIFI AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

2001 INSC 46828 September 2001Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of Muslim women, challenged the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, arguing that it discriminated against them by excluding Muslim divorced women from the protection of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court examined whether

ANIL KHANDELWAL ETC.versusPHOENIX INDIA AND ANR.

2025 INSC 106928 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Bank of Baroda issued a possession notice under the SARFAESI Act to recover defaulted loans, but a clerical error inflated the outstanding amount, leading the borrower Phoenix India to allege defamation and file a criminal complaint under Sections 499, 500 and 501 IPC against the Bank's senior officers. The magistr

MANOJ TEJRAJ JAINversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2025 INSC 109028 August 2025Disposed off

The case arose from a raid on a godown in Ahmedabad where 55 boxes containing 1,364 kg of ephedrine, a controlled substance under the NDPS (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order 2013, were seized. Four appellants were convicted under Sections 25A and 29 of the NDPS Act based largely on the confessional statement o

MANIK MADHUKAR SARVE & ORS.versusVITTHAL DAMUJI MEHER & ORS.

2024 INSC 63628 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the bail granted by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court to respondent No.1, who was accused of conspiracy, cheating, forgery and criminal breach of trust in a massive financial scam involving a cooperative society. The prosecution alleged that the respondent withdrew approximately ₹9 cr

K. NIRMALA & ORS.versusCANARA BANK & ANR.

2024 INSC 63428 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were appointed by Canara Bank and other central government undertakings in the Scheduled Caste category based on caste certificates issued under Karnataka state circulars that listed their community as a synonymous Scheduled Caste. After the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Maharashtra v. Milind, the

ILAVARASANversusTHE SUPERITENDENT OF POLICE & ORS.

2023 INSC 81328 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Ilavarasan married Mathithra under Section 7A of the Hindu Marriage Act, with the assistance of advocates and social workers, and later filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that she was being detained by her parents and forced to marry her maternal uncle. The Madras High Court dismissed the petition, h

UNION OF INDIAversusASHOK KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 51728 August 2020Disposed off

The Union of India challenged a High Court order that quashed an FIR registered under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for the alleged sale of unlicensed drugs, holding that prosecution for offences under Chapter IV of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 must be initiated only by persons named in Section 32 of the A

MENOKA MALIK AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 75128 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a violent clash between CPI(M) and IPF workers in Karanda village, West Bengal, where a mob set fire to houses, assaulted occupants and caused five deaths and twenty‑four serious injuries. The trial court acquitted all 82 accused, relying on alleged inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony, a stamped

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusMANINDER SINGH

2015 INSC 61428 August 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI alleged that Maninder Singh, together with a co‑accused, obtained credit facilities from New Bank of India by submitting forged documents and colluding with a bank manager, thereby cheating the bank of over Rs 10.62 lakh. After a lengthy investigation, a charge‑sheet was filed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471

NARAYAN MANIKRAO SALGARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 35428 August 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 148, 302 read with 149, 341, and 323 of the IPC for the death of Khushal Salgar. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses, a dying declaration, and forensic evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether the evidence established a common object to cause mur

MAHESH CHAND SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2009 INSC 109028 August 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mahesh Chand Sharma, purchased land and obtained possession, but the accused (Panna Lal, Ram Babu and Rajkumar) colluded with an area lekhpal to have the property mutated in their names through a false report. The appellant filed a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC, leading to investigation and a charg

STATE OF U.P.versusRAJA @ JALIL

2008 INSC 98728 August 2008Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh alleged that the accused, Raja (also known as Jalil), abducted an 11‑year‑old girl, attempted to rape her and subsequently killed her. The trial court convicted him under IPC sections 302, 376 and 511, relying on circumstantial evidence and an alleged extra‑judicial confession, and imposed th

STATE OF H.P.versusSURESH KUMAR @ CHHOTU

2008 INSC 98428 August 2008Dismissed

The trial court convicted Suresh Kumar (Chhotu) under Sections 363, 366, 368 and 376 of the IPC for kidnapping and rape of a girl, sentencing him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the Himachal Pradesh High Court acquitted him, holding that the victim was over sixteen years of age and had accompanied the

SUBRAMANI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2002 INSC 35528 August 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Subramani and four others, were charged with murder, grievous hurt and criminal trespass after a violent clash over a disputed plot of land they had cultivated for over 50 years. The prosecution alleged that the deceased, a purchaser of the land, and his family attempted to plough the field, were assaul

SADANANDAN BHADRANversusMADHAVAN SUNIL KUMAR

1998 INSC 32628 August 1998Dismissed

The appellant, Sadanandan Badran, received a Rs 30,000 cheque from the respondent, Madhavan Sunil Kumar, to settle a loan. The cheque was presented twice (January and May 1991) and was dishonoured both times for insufficient funds. After each dishonour the appellant issued a legal notice demanding payment; the responde

GENTELA VIJAYAVARDHAN RAO AND ANR.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1996 INSC 95428 August 1996Dismissed

The appellants, G. Vijayavardhan Rao and another, were convicted of setting fire to a passenger bus, killing 23 people and injuring many, with the motive of robbery. They poured petrol into the bus, ignited it, and robbed passengers of cash, a wristwatch and clothing, as evidenced by recovered items and witness testimo

MAHESHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1996 INSC 95628 August 1996Disposed off

Mahesh was charged with the murder of Krishna Kumar after a dispute over grazing cattle in a field. The deceased and two other labourers asked Mahesh to remove his cattle, leading to an altercation in which Mahesh struck Krishna Kumar once on the head with a pharsa, causing instant death. The trial court, after evaluat

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusANAND SINGH BISHT

1996 INSC 95828 August 1996Disposed off

Anand Singh Bisht, a Naik in the Border Security Force, was convicted under the BSF Act and IPC section 307 for injuring a cadet and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment. He had already spent about a year in pre‑trial detention and sought release by invoking Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whic

JANTA DAL ETC. ETC.versusH.S. CHOWDHARY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 22628 August 1992Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a petition filed by H.S. Chowdhary, claiming to be a public‑interest litigant, seeking to quash a FIR and stop a letter rogatory to Switzerland in the Bofors scandal. The Court held that Chowdhary had no locus standi and that the petition did not fall within the definition of public‑interest

BHAGWAN SWARUP AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1991 INSC 21528 August 1991Disposed off

The father (A1) and son (A2) were charged with murder, conspiracy and abetment of the death of A2's wife, who was found dead in their house. The trial court acquitted them for lack of evidence of a conspiracy and of a homicidal death. The High Court convicted them under Sections 302, 201 and 120‑B IPC, sentencing both

A.K. SUBBAIAH & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

1987 INSC 23128 August 1987Dismissed

The State Government filed a criminal complaint under s.500 IPC, with sanction under s.199(2) CrPC, alleging defamation of the Director General of Police. The trial court took cognizance and issued process against the appellants. The appellants filed a revision petition under s.397 and s.401 CrPC challenging the issue

CHIRAG SEN AND ANOTHER ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 90328 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, prominent badminton players and their coach, were accused in a private complaint of falsifying birth records to gain entry into age‑restricted tournaments, leading to the registration of an FIR under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 34 IPC. The complaint relied mainly on an unauthenticated 1996 GPF nomination

VERNONversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2023 INSC 65528 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from the Bhima‑Koregaon violence of December 2017, after which the National Investigation Agency (NIA) expanded the investigation, searched the residences of several activists and arrested Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira. The prosecution alleged that the two were members of the banned CPI (Maoist) and

SANDEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR

2023 INSC 65428 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an informant and prosecution witness, identified three persons named in the FIR but omitted from the charge‑sheet as assailants during his examination‑in‑chief. He moved an application under Section 319 of the CrPC to summon these persons, which the trial court allowed. The High Court, on revision, set a

SANJAY PURAN BAGDE & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 76628 July 2022Dismissed

On the night of 2-3 November 2015, the deceased Vilas Gawande was attacked by four accused; two of them wielded an axe while the other two, Sanjay Puran Bagde and Rajratna (Nandu) Bagde, held the victim. The victim’s wife, an eyewitness, testified that all four were present and that the accused had a pre‑meditated plan

THE STATE OF KERALAversusK. AJITH & ORS.

2021 INSC 36628 July 2021Dismissed

During the 2015 Kerala budget presentation, several opposition MLAs climbed onto the Speaker's dais and damaged furniture, leading to a criminal case under IPC sections 427, 447, 34 and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. The public prosecutor sought to withdraw the prosecution under Section 321 of t

PARMINDER KAUR @ P.P. KAUR @ SONIversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 46728 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parminder Kaur, a single woman living with her child and mother, was convicted under IPC sections 366A and 506 for allegedly enticing a minor girl to illicit intercourse with her tenant boy and for threatening the victim’s brother. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of the minor victim and he

UNION OF INDIAversusNIYAZUDDIN SK & ANR.

2017 INSC 68628 July 2017Disposed off

The Union of India appealed against a Calcutta High Court order that released two accused, Niyazuddin SK and Asif Aslam, on bail in a narcotics case involving a commercial quantity of drugs. The public prosecutor had opposed the bail application, but the High Court granted bail without addressing the special conditions

V. K. MISHRA&ANR.versusSTATE OF UTIARAKHAND &ANR.

2015 INSC 52528 July 2015Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the death of Archana Mishra, who died of poisoning within six weeks of marriage, and determined that she had been subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and in‑laws in connection with dowry demands. The prosecution established the essential ingredients of Section 3048 IPC and the

BIRAPPA & ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2010 INSC 44528 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved three accused—Birappa (A‑1), Kareppa (A‑2) and Muttappa (A‑3)—charged with the murder of Gulappa. The trial court convicted Birappa based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑1, the brother of the deceased, while acquitting the other two. On appeal, the High Court upheld Birappa's con

SATPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 44828 July 2010Dismissed

Satpal Singh was convicted of rape under Section 376 IPC for assaulting the minor Rajinder Kaur. He appealed, arguing that the FIR was lodged after an inordinate four‑month delay, that the victim was a major, and that the act was consensual because they were schoolmates. The Supreme Court held that the delay was explai

SHAIL KUMARI DEVI & ANR.versusKRISHAN BHAGWAN PATHAK @ KISHUN B. PATHAK

2008 INSC 87128 July 2008Case Partly allowed

Shail Kumari Devi and her minor daughter filed a Section 125 CrPC maintenance suit against Krishan Bhagwan Pathak in 1997, seeking Rs.500 each per month. The Family Court later ordered maintenance of Rs.2,000 and Rs.1,000 respectively, payable from the date of application (July 21, 1997). The High Court reduced the amo

STATE OF PUNJABversusKASTURI LAL AND ORS.

2004 INSC 40528 July 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The State of Punjab appealed against a High Court order that quashed charges framed under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 against the directors of Mis. Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd., leaving only the production manager to stand trial for adulterating vegetable oil. The Supreme Court examined w

KRISHNAN AND ANR.versusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2003 INSC 33528 July 2003Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of Krishnan and others, upholding their conviction for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and for voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323. The Court held that the FIR was lodged immediately after the incident, negating any possibility of a fabricated stat

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusRAMDAS SHRINIVAS NAYAK & ANR.

1982 INSC 5728 July 1982Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra filed a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 challenging a Bombay High Court order that the Governor should exercise his own discretion, not the advice of the Council of Ministers, when deciding whether to grant sanction under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act for the prosecutio

RAJPATIversusBACHAN & ANR.

1980 INSC 13528 July 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the Allahabad High Court's order quashing a magistrate's final decree under CrPC s.145, which granted him possession of disputed land. The magistrate had recorded a finding of breach of peace in the preliminary order but omitted such a finding in the final order. The High Court, invoking s.482,

N.S. GNANESHWARAN ETC.versusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR.

2025 INSC 78728 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under sections 120B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly diverting bank funds. Parallel civil recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal were settled through a One Time Settlement (OTS) in which the ba

ARIF MD. YEASIN JWADDERversusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

2025 INSC 78528 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a lawyer, filed a public interest litigation alleging that up to 171 police encounters in Assam between 2021 and 2022 were fake and that the State had violated the procedural safeguards laid down in the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) guidelines. The Gauhati High Court dismissed the petition as

BATLANKI KESHAV (KESAVA) KUMAR ANURAGversusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 79028 May 2025

The appellant, Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag, sought to quash FIR No. 103 of 2022 alleging offences under Section 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, claiming the allegations of sexual relations under a false promise of marriage were fabricated. The de‑facto complainan

NATHU SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2021 INSC 30028 May 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Nathu Singh and other complainants, challenged orders of the Allahabad High Court that, after rejecting anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 of the CrPC, granted the accused a 90‑day protection from coercive action and directed them to surrender for regular bail. The Supreme Court examined w

GURMEET SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2021 INSC 29928 May 2021Dismissed

Gurmeet Singh was convicted under Section 304‑B of the IPC for the dowry‑related death of his wife, who died after consuming poison within four years of marriage. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the prosecution had not proved the "soon before" dowry demand, that the presumption of causation under

SATBIR SINGH & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2021 INSC 30128 May 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for dowry death (Sec. 304B IPC) and abetment of suicide (Sec. 306 IPC) after the victim died from severe burns within a year of marriage, allegedly following dowry harassment. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved the essential ingredients of Sec. 304B, including th

KUSTI MALLAIAHversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2013 INSC 35828 May 2013Dismissed

The appellant Kusti Malliah and his co‑accused were convicted for the murder of Neelagiri Parvamma and for stealing her ornaments, offences punishable under IPC ss.302, 404 read with s.34. The prosecution relied primarily on the testimony of a sole eye‑witness (PW‑6) who saw the assault from a distance, corroborated by

SUJIT BISWASversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 35928 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of raping and murdering a three‑year‑old girl and was convicted under Sections 376(2)(f) and 302 IPC, receiving a death sentence which was later commuted to life imprisonment. The prosecution's case rested mainly on two circumstantial facts – the appellant pointing out the location of the vict

KARAN SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2013 INSC 35528 May 2013Dismissed

Karan Singh was convicted for the murder of Raj under IPC s.302, the prosecution alleging a motive of non‑payment of Rs 47,000 for a buffalo. Eye‑witnesses Maya Devi (PW‑3) and her daughter Birma (PW‑4) saw the appellant dragging the victim with a rope, and an independent witness (PW‑8) corroborated the allegation. The

RAVIRALA LAXMAIAHversusSTATE OF A.P.

2013 INSC 35728 May 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Ravirala Laxmaiah, was convicted for murdering his wife Balamani by strangulation and for dowry-related harassment under IPC sections 302 and 404. The trial court and High Court relied on circumstantial evidence, the appellant’s failure to explain the death (last‑seen theory), false statements to the vic

DAMMU SREENUversusSTATE OF A.P.

2009 INSC 84628 May 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Dammu Sreenu, had an illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased, Sitra Nagarjuna Rao. After the wife was taken away for counseling, the appellant forcibly removed her from her brother's house and kept her for four days, after which the deceased, feeling humiliated, expressed a desire to die and s

STATE OF PUNJABversusMANJIT SINGH & ORS.

2009 INSC 84728 May 2009Dismissed

The accused Kamaljit Singh and Manjit Singh, who were in an illicit relationship with Bhinder Kaur, the wife of Sewa Singh, murdered Sewa Singh and his three sons after the family harassed Bhinder Kaur. The trial court sentenced the two accused to death, while the High Court altered the death sentences to life imprison

CHUNNI BAIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 57728 April 2025Case Partly allowed

Chunni Bai was convicted of murdering her two young daughters after the trial court and High Court upheld a Section 302 IPC conviction. She claimed she acted under the influence of an invisible power, asserting unsoundness of mind under Section 84 IPC. The Supreme Court examined the eyewitness testimony, medical autops

K.P. TAMILMARANversusTHE STATE BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2025 INSC 57628 April 2025Dismissed

The case concerns the honour killing of a Dalit boy, Murugesan, and his Vanniyar bride, Kannagi, in 2003. Police officers Sub‑Inspector K.P. Tamilmaran (A‑14) and Inspector M. Sellamuthu (A‑15) failed to register an FIR despite being informed of the murders and later fabricated evidence to implicate Dalit relatives whi

RAVISH SINGH RANAversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2025 INSC 63528 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ravish Singh Rana, was accused by his live-in partner of raping her after refusing to marry, leading to FIR No. 482 of 2023 under IPC sections 376, 323, 504 and 506. The appellant sought quash of the FIR invoking Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, arguing that the two-year cohabitatio

SHRI SUKHBIR SINGH BADALversusBALWANT SINGH KHERA AND ORS.

2023 INSC 46628 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a private complaint alleging that the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal) filed a false affidavit with the Election Commission of India, contradicting its constitution submitted to the Gurudwara Election Commission, thereby violating the secularism requirement of Section 29‑A of the Representation of People

PRAKASH AGGARWALversusGANESH BENZOPLAST LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 46428 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd. (complainant) entered into Inter‑Corporate Deposit agreements with Morgan Securities & Credits Ltd., pledging shares as security. When the value of the pledged shares fell, the lender invoked the pledge and sold the shares to itself and its group companies in 2001. The complainant waited until 20

P. V. NIDHISH & ORS.versusKERALA STATE WAKF BOARD & ANR.

2023 INSC 45228 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, long‑time tenants of premises that later became part of a Wakf, were facing civil eviction when the Wakf Act, 1995 was amended in 2013 adding a penal provision (Section 52A) and a definition of "encroacher". The Wakf Board filed a criminal complaint under Section 52A alleging the appellants were encroac

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANRversusVIJAYANAGARAM CHINNA REDDAPPA

2023 INSC 72628 April 2023Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that granted a writ of habeas corpus, directing the release of a life convict (P. Reddy Bhaskar) who had escaped twice and was later sentenced to a one‑year simple imprisonment for kidnapping. After being granted special remission for his life sentence, th

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusPHOOLCHAND RATHORE

2023 INSC 44428 April 2023Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the High Court's acquittal of Phoolchand Rathore, who had been convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of his wife under sections 302 and 201 IPC. The prosecution's case rested on alleged motive (a dispute over jewellery), a disclosure statement and recovery of blood

BOHATIE DEVI (DEAD) THROUGH LRversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS

2023 INSC 46528 April 2023Disposed off

The mother of the deceased sought a reinvestigation of a murder case (IPC ss.302, 120B) by the Central Bureau of Criminal Investigation (CBCID) after the accused had been chargesheeted and a quashing petition dismissed. The Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, ordered the transfer of investigation to CBCID based solely on

STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusHEMENDHRA REDDY & ANOTHER. ETC.

2023 INSC 46028 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated alleged disproportionate assets of D. Dwarakanadha Reddy and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, filed a closure report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in 2008, and the Special Judge accepted it. In 2013 the CBI obtain

SANTOSH @ BHUREversusSTATE (G.N.C.T.) OF DELHI

2023 INSC 44328 April 2023Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of Hari Shankar whose body was found in an apartment rented by the appellant Santosh @ Bhure. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – tenancy of the flat, the presence of blood, a suicide letter allegedly written by co‑accused Neeraj, and recovery of a knife and blood‑stained c

KALABHAI HAMIRBHAI KACHHOTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2021 INSC 27428 April 2021Dismissed

The appellants, three villagers, were convicted for the murder of Gokalbhai and the assault of two others after a quarrel over rent and animosity. The prosecution presented 32 witnesses, medical and post‑mortem reports, serological evidence and the testimony of injured witnesses who identified the accused. The defence

M/S. NORTHERN MINERALS LTD. & ORS.versusRAJASTHAN GOVT. & ANR.

2016 INSC 35328 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Northern Minerals Ltd. and its directors were prosecuted under the Insecticides Act, 1968 after a seized sample of their product was declared mis‑branded by the State Pesticide Testing Laboratory. The appellants filed a show‑cause notice, indicated their intention to contest the analyst's report, and sought a re‑an

UPENDRA PRADHANversusSTATE OF ORISSA

2015 INSC 36228 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Upendra Pradhan was convicted for murder under IPC sections 302 and 34, based on the High Court's reversal of an acquittal granted by the Additional Sessions Judge. The appellant contended that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence and that the benefit of doubt should apply, also challenging the re

HARI SHANKERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2015 INSC 36128 April 2015Case Partly allowed

Hari Shanker and three others were convicted for the murder of Shiv Shanker under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution's case rested on the eye‑witness PW2 who said Hari fired the first shot, striking the victim's wrist, while other accused fired the fatal abdominal shot. The High Court acquitte

GOLBAR HUSSAIN AND ORS.versusSTATE OFASSAMANDANR.

2015 INSC 36528 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were acquitted by the trial court for a murder under IPC s.302 read with s.149, but the High Court convicted them on the basis of testimonies of two related witnesses, PW‑4 and PW‑5, who were brothers of the deceased. The Supreme Court examined two issues: the scope of an appellate court's power in an ap

RAM SINGHversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS

2011 INSC 34228 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a hotel servant, was arrested after 2.1 kg of opium was recovered from a hotel room and he made two confessional statements to officers of the Central Bureau of Narcotics (CBN). The trial court convicted him under Sections 8 and 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, relying on

S. KHUSHBOOversusKANNIAMMAL AND ANR.

2010 INSC 24728 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The actress S. Khushboo made remarks in a 2005 news‑magazine survey endorsing societal acceptance of premarital sex and live‑in relationships. Several members of the PMK political party filed criminal complaints alleging defamation, obscenity, indecent representation of women and incitement under the IPC and the Indece

STATE OF PUNJABversusNIRMAL KAUR

2009 INSC 63128 April 2009Dismissed

Nirmal Kaur, who operated a coaching centre, was charged under several IPC offences and under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The trial court framed charges under the Act, but the High Court quashed them, holding that she was not a public servant. The State appealed,

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.versusRAMESHCHANDRA SHIVRATAN KOSAR AND ANR. ETC.

2009 INSC 63328 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat filed complaints alleging that respondents had stored and sold food articles adulterated with saccharin, violating Sections 7(1), 7(5) and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The respondents moved the Gujarat High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to q

TUTUL KUMAR! SENversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2009 INSC 63428 April 2009Disposed off

The appellant, an informant, lodged an FIR alleging that the respondent had raped her, invoking Sections 376 and 493 of the IPC. The respondent filed an application for discharge under Section 227 of the CrPC, contending that the informant's age was misstated and therefore no offence was made out. The trial court rejec

BATAKRUSHNA PARIDAversusSTATE OF ORISSA

2009 INSC 63528 April 2009Dismissed

The case arose from a long-standing rivalry between two hamlets of Saruali village. On 2 November 1982, members of the Parida hamlet, armed with lathis and guns, entered the Dehury hamlet. Batakrushna Parida fired a shot that killed Sahadev Dehury and injured others. The trial court convicted Batakrushna under Section

YOGESH @ SACHIN JAGDISH JOSHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 53428 April 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a minor at the time, was alleged to have conspired with his family members, an employee and a friend to murder Kunal Parihar, the complainant's son, based largely on threatening phone calls and a motive of a disputed marriage. The prosecution charged the appellant and fifteen others under Sections 302, 1

DINESH M.N. (S.P.)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2008 INSC 53228 April 2008Dismissed

The appellant, a senior IPS officer of Rajasthan, was arrested in connection with the alleged fake encounter killings of Sohrabuddin and his wife. The trial court granted him regular bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., relying on the accused's clean service record and the alleged criminal antecedents of the victim.

DR. NARENDRA K AMINversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2008 INSC 53328 April 2008Dismissed

Dr. Narendra Kamin, accused in the Sohrabuddin fake‑encounter case and charged with several serious offences under the IPC and the Arms Act, was granted bail by the Additional City and Sessions Judge. The State of Gujarat filed an application under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to cancel the bail, an

SUNEET GUPTAversusANIL TRILOKNATH SHARMA & ORS.

2008 INSC 53528 April 2008Dismissed

The appellant, Suneet Gupta, entered into a partnership with M/s K.M. Agencies, which later faced a dispute when the other partner joined M/s Mangla Agencies and allegedly misrepresented the firm's status to the principal, Johnson & Johnson, resulting in payment to the latter firm. Gupta filed a criminal complaint unde

STATE OF U.P.versusVEER SINGH AND ORS.

2004 INSC 32028 April 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted several accused for the murder of members of two families. The sole surviving witness, Harbhajan Kaur (PW‑4), gave a statement that was recorded as a dying declaration, although she later survived. The trial court convicted five accused based on her statement and other evidence, bu

DEEPAK KUMAR PRAHLADKAversusCHIEF JUSTICE PRABHA SHANKER MISHRA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 32328 April 2004Disposed off

The appellant filed two contempt petitions in the Calcutta High Court challenging a suo motu contempt notice and a judgment that criticized his claim of being a legal researcher. The High Court convicted him of contempt for the scandalising allegations in those petitions and sentenced him to six months' imprisonment wi

VISVESWARANversusSTATE REP. BY S.D.M.

2003 INSC 26228 April 2003Dismissed

The appellant, a police constable, was convicted under IPC sections 346, 366 and 376 for raping a young woman after abducting her and her husband. The appellant appealed, arguing that he was not positively identified by the victim or witnesses and that the failure to hold a test identification parade rendered the convi

AMINAversusHASSN KOYA

2003 INSC 26428 April 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Amina married Hassn Koya on 28 December 1972 while she was five months pregnant. The husband later claimed that the pregnancy had been concealed, rendering the Muslim marriage void and absolving him of maintenance liability under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The trial magistrate held the marriage valid a

MOHD. HADI RAJA ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

1998 INSC 20328 April 1998Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether officers of public sector undertakings and government companies, which may be deemed "State" under Article 12 because of deep governmental control, fall within the definition of "public servant" for the purposes of Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The petitioners arg

SURJIT SINGH ALIAS GURMIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1992 INSC 12728 April 1992Dismissed

Surjit Singh, a serving soldier, was charged along with his brothers and two others for criminal trespass, murder of the village Sarpanch, and grievous hurt. He claimed an alibi, asserting he left the village at 4 p.m. on the day of the crime and was traveling by train to his unit, and also argued that there was confus

SMT. CHAND DHAWANversusJAWAHAR LAL AND ORS.

1992 INSC 13028 April 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Smt. Chand Dhawan filed a criminal complaint alleging bigamy under Sections 494 and 109 IPC, claiming her husband Jawahar Lal had married another woman while their marriage subsisted. The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance and issued summons against the husband, the second wife, and their parents. The husband mo

K.T.M.S. MOHD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

1992 INSC 13428 April 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The Enforcement Directorate seized Rs.4,28,713 in 1966 and recorded statements from appellants K.T.S. Mohammed and M. Jamal Mohammed under Section 39 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA). Both appellants later retracted those statements, claiming they were obtained under duress, and the Income‑Tax Officer reco

SHAHZAD HASAN KHANversusISHTIAQ HASAN KHAN & ANR.

1987 INSC 13628 April 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shahzad Hasan Khan filed a criminal appeal against the Allahabad High Court's order granting bail to the accused Ishtiaq Hasan Khan in a murder case. The accused had faced three prior bail rejections by the same High Court judge, and a subsequent application was initially directed to that judge but later

IMRAN PRATAPGADHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR

2025 INSC 41028 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Rajya Sabha member, posted a video of a mass‑marriage on the social‑media platform X, in which a poem was recited in the background. The poem was alleged to promote communal enmity, leading the police to register an FIR under Sections 196, 197(1), 299, 302, 57 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. T

AKHILESHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 43128 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed an FIR alleging that four persons shot his father dead over a boundary dispute. While the chargesheet named only two of the alleged shooters, the trial court, relying on the testimonies of two prosecution witnesses, summoned the other two persons under Section 319 of the CrPC. The High Court set asi

MOHD MUSLIM @ HUSSAINversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI

2023 INSC 31128 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mohd Muslim, was arrested in 2015 in connection with a seizure of 180 kg of ganja and charged under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution relied on statements of co‑accused, the appellant’s confessional statement and bank‑transaction records, but failed to produce any direct evidence li

PULEN PHUKAN & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2023 INSC 30528 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the murder of Pradip Phukan, alleged to have been committed by a group of thirteen persons who entered his house and assaulted him with sharp weapons, resulting in his death. The trial court convicted eleven accused under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 326, 447 and 34 of the IPC, sentencing them to life

SHIVA KUMAR @ SHIVA @ SHIVAMURTHYversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 30628 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted under IPC sections 366, 376 and 302 for raping, kidnapping and murdering a woman, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment for the murder. The appellant appealed, arguing that only the High Court or Supreme Court can impose a modified punishment such as a fixed-term life senten

HARITA SUNIL PARABversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 29028 March 2018Dismissed

Harita Sunil Parab, a practising advocate in Mumbai, filed FIRs in Delhi and Ghaziabad alleging offences under various IPC sections and later sought to have those cases transferred to Mumbai, claiming threats from the accused, fear of a biased investigation and personal inconvenience. The Supreme Court examined whether

KRISHANAKANT TAMRAKARversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2018 INSC 28828 March 2018Disposed off

Krishanakan​t Tamrakar, convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, had been in custody for over ten years while his appeal against the conviction was pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. He applied for bail, arguing that the prolonged delay rendered the appeal meaningless. The Supreme Court, while

VIRUPAKSHAPPA GOUDA AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 28328 March 2017Dismissed

Virupakshappa Gouda and another were charged under several IPC sections, including 302 and 149, for an alleged honour killing. They applied for bail repeatedly; the trial court and High Court rejected the first two applications and a Special Leave Petition, but a third application was granted bail by an Additional Sess

KRISHNEGOWDA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA BY ARKALGUD POLICE

2017 INSC 27628 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved an alleged unlawful assembly in which members of two rival groups clashed, resulting in the death of a farmer, Channegowda. The accused were convicted by the Karnataka High Court on charges including murder (Sec. 302 IPC) and assault (Sec. 324 IPC) despite the trial court’s acquittal. On appeal, the S

SANGHIAN PANDIAN RAJKUMARversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2014 INSC 22628 March 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered appeals by two police officers, an IPS officer and a Sub‑Inspector of the Anti‑Terrorist Squad, who had been in judicial custody for nearly seven years on charges of murder, conspiracy and related offences. Their bail applications had been rejected by the High Court of Bombay. The Court exa

R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIRversusTHE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT VIGILANCE POLICE & ANR.

2011 INSC 22628 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

R. Ramachandran Nair, the first Vice‑Chancellor of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, was accused of obtaining a pecuniary advantage while overseeing earth‑filling of university land. An FIR was lodged in 1996 and a charge‑sheet filed after an 8½‑year delay, without obtaining the prior sanction of the Universit

RAJESH SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2011 INSC 22728 March 2011Dismissed

The appellants were charged with murdering an eleven‑year‑old boy who was beaten and later found hanged in a house belonging to one of them. The trial court acquitted them, dismissing the testimony of two eye‑witnesses and the medical evidence, and questioning the timing of the FIR and the credibility of the witnesses.

PADMJA SHARMAversusRATAN LAL SHARMA

2000 INSC 16028 March 2000Case Partly allowed

The wife, a government lecturer, filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce and sought maintenance for her two minor sons under Section 125 of the CrPC and Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court granted modest maintenance and custody to the mother, which the High Court later

SUDERSHAN SINGH WAZIRversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

2025 INSC 28128 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

UNION OF INDIA THR. I.O. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUversusMAN SINGH VERMA

2025 INSC 29228 February 2025Case Partly allowed

The Narcotics Control Bureau seized a large quantity of alleged heroin from Man Singh Verma, who was arrested and placed in judicial custody. After two laboratory tests returned negative results, the Special Judge ordered his release on 10 April 2023. Despite his release, the Allahabad High Court entertained a pending

PRADIP N. SHARMAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2025 INSC 29128 February 2025

The appellant, a former District Collector, was charged under Sections 409, 219 and 114 of the IPC for allegedly misusing his official position to restore government land to private allottees who were not cultivating it and were residing abroad. The High Court dismissed his application under Section 482 CrPC to quash t

ABDUL WAHID & ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2025 INSC 29528 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Ahsan Ali under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC based on the testimony of a single eyewitness and alleged recovery of weapons. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the eyewitness, the absence of forensic evidence linking the accused to the crime, and the suspect

INDRAJIT DASversusTHE STATE OF TRIPURA

2023 INSC 17528 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Indrajit Das was convicted for murder under Sections 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC based largely on circumstantial evidence and extra‑judicial confessions. The prosecution alleged that the victim Kaushik Sarkar went missing after riding with the appellant and a juvenile, and that the accused assaulted and di

ROYDEN HAROLD BUTHELLO & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2023 INSC 18028 February 2023Dismissed

The appellants, Royden Harold Buthello and his father, alleged that the appellant was illegally abducted in Odisha on 20 October 2020 and subsequently framed in a narcotics case in Raipur on 21 October 2020. They sought a direction from the High Court to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation

AMRITLALversusSHANTILAL SONI & ORS.

2022 INSC 24328 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a written complaint on 10 July 2012 alleging that the respondents had failed to return silver entrusted to them, with the alleged offence dated 4 October 2009. An FIR was registered and a charge‑sheet filed, after which the Judicial Magistrate took cognizance on 4 December 2012. The respondents cont

GANDI DODDABASAPPA @ GANDHI BASAVARAJversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2017 INSC 126828 February 2017Dismissed

The appellant, Gandi Doddabasappa, was convicted by the Karnataka High Court for killing his daughter Shilpa, allegedly because she married a man of a lower caste. The trial court had acquitted him, dismissing the sole eyewitness testimony of PW‑18, but the High Court relied on that testimony, corroborated by forensic

CBI, ACB, MUMBAIversusNARENDRA LAL JAIN & ORS.

2014 INSC 15228 February 2014Dismissed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleged that Narendra Lal Jain and others conspired with officials of the Bank of Maharashtra to inflate the creditworthiness of companies and obtain loans beyond entitlement, invoking Sections 120‑B and 420 of the IPC and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Acts. While

OM KR. DHANKARversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2012 INSC 11428 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a transport operator, complained that a Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (respondent No.2) demanded payment of passenger tax at his residence, received Rs. 2 lakh, and released the appellant's impounded buses, allegedly cheating him and embezzling public money. The Judicial Magistrate issued a sum

BRAJENDRASINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2012 INSC 11628 February 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Brajendrasingh, was convicted of murdering his wife and their three young children after alleging an illicit affair between his wife and a neighbour. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, forensic findings, and the appellant's own statements under Section 313 CrPC, while the defence claimed

RAMNARESH & ORS.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2012 INSC 11728 February 2012Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of four accused for the rape and murder of Rajkumari, based primarily on the testimony of a 16‑year‑old servant, PW6, who was the sole eye‑witness. The Court found that PW6's statement was reliable, corroborated by medical evidence and the testimony of the victim's mother, and

AYYUB ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2002 INSC 10828 February 2002Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Ayyub and Abdul Jabbar, were convicted by a Designated TADA Court for throwing bombs at a police picket, causing one death and several injuries, and were sentenced under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Damage to Property Act. A

PANDAPPA HANUMAPPA HANAMAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1997 INSC 20428 February 1997Dismissed

The appellants were accused of murdering their brother‑in‑law, Hanamappa, and of acting with common intention under IPC sections 302 and 34. The trial court acquitted them, disbelieving the eye‑witness P.W.2, the hostile witness P.W.1 and several independent villagers, and giving undue weight to minor contradictions an

UMASHANKAR PANDAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1996 INSC 33128 February 1996

Umashankar Panda was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 307 for murdering his wife and two daughters with a sword and attempting to murder his three other children, who survived with grievous injuries. The trial court sentenced him to death, a judgment affirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. In a Special Leave Pet

PHIROZE DINSHAW LAM ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS.

1996 INSC 32928 February 1996Disposed off

Godrej & Boyce manufactured refrigerators packed in corrugated fibre containers (CFCs) and contested the inclusion of CFC value in excise valuation. The Revenue served demand notices including CFC value, leading Godrej to file writ petitions. Godrej attempted to support its case with fabricated dealer letters, which we

IVAN RATHINAMversusMILAN JOSEPH

2025 INSC 11528 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ivan Rathinam, was alleged by the respondent and his mother to be the biological father of the respondent, who was born during the respondent's mother's marriage to Mr. Raju Kurian. The parties litigated in a Munsiff Court, a Sub‑Judge Court and a Family Court over a declaration of paternity, a DNA test,

CHANDRABHAN SUDAM SANAPversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 11628 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap, was convicted of rape and murder of a 23‑year‑old woman and sentenced to death, based largely on circumstantial evidence, CCTV footage, witness testimonies, an alleged extra‑judicial confession and recovered items. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution's evidence sat

GAMBHIR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 16428 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gambhir Singh, was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of his brother, sister‑in‑law and their four children. The prosecution relied on three alleged incriminating circumstances – motive, last‑seen testimony and recoveries of weapons – to link the appellant to the crime. The Supreme Court hel

CENTRUM FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITEDversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

2022 INSC 11528 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Centrum Financial Services Ltd., a non‑banking financial company, filed a criminal appeal against the Delhi High Court’s order granting bail to Jayant Kumar Jain (Respondent No.2) in a case involving alleged siphoning of Rs 25 crore through shell companies and offences under IPC sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120

DEEPAK S/O LAXMAN DONGREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2022 INSC 11028 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Deepak Dongre, was ordered to leave District Jalna for two years under Section 56(1)(a)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, based on five offences (three dated 2013‑2018 and two from 2020) and confidential witness statements. He challenged the externment order through a statutory appeal and a writ pe

RAJENDRA KHAREversusSWAATI NIRKHI AND ORS.

2021 INSC 4528 January 2021

Rajendra Khare, who lodged FIR No.39/2016, was not made a party to a transfer petition filed by the accused seeking to move the trial of Criminal Case No.3483 of 2017 from Delhi to Allahabad. The Supreme Court transferred the case on 18 May 2018 without issuing notice under Order XXXIX Rule 2, and the petitioner’s subs

CHANDESHWAR SAWversusBRIJ BHUSHAN PRASAD & ORS.

2020 INSC 9528 January 2020Disposed off

In a Bihar Panchayat election for the post of Mukhia, the petitioner alleged that his valid votes were being rejected while invalid votes for the returned candidate were accepted. The Election Tribunal, after hearing evidence, ordered a recount and later declared the election of the returned candidate void, directing a

SATYA RAJ SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 9728 January 2019Dismissed

The appellant Satya Raj Singh was convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, based on eyewitness testimony that he stabbed the deceased on the neck with a knife. He challenged the conviction on the grounds that the trial courts erred in accepting the eye‑witnesses' statements and that the

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusRAM KAILASH ALIAS RAM VILAS

2016 INSC 10028 January 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Ram Kailash alias Ram Vilas for shooting Mangla Ram, who later died from his injuries. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC (murder) and sections of the Arms Act, imposing life imprisonment and additional terms. On appeal, the Rajasthan High Court reduced the mur

UNION OF INDIAversusMOHANLAL & ANR.

2015 INSC 80828 January 2016

The Supreme Court examined the procedure for seizure, sampling, storage and disposal of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances under the NDPS Act, 1985, in response to a criminal appeal by the Union of India. It held that Section 52A mandates that samples be drawn and certified in the presence of a magistrate, rend

JAGE RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 7028 January 2015Disposed off

The case involved an altercation in 1994 where the complainant Jagdish and his sons were cutting reeds on land also claimed by the accused Jage Ram and his sons. During the fight, the second accused Rajbir (Raju) delivered a pharsi blow to the head of the son Sukhbir, causing grievous injuries that required emergency s

A.C. NARAYANANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2015 INSC 6928 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two criminal appeals: A.C. Narayanan, who challenged the taking of cognizance of a complaint filed by a power‑of‑attorney (POA) holder on behalf of six complainants under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and G. Kamalakar, who contested a conviction for a dishonoured c

SANJAY KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2014 INSC 6028 January 2014Dismissed

The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, alleged that he was appointed as a senior lecturer in a purportedly fake dental college, received post‑dated cheques for salary which later bounced, and consequently filed a criminal complaint under various IPC sections and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court quas

MOHINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 6128 January 2013Disposed off

Mohinder Singh was convicted of murdering his wife and daughter with an axe after a history of rape, intimidation and prior convictions. The trial court sentenced him to death, which the High Court confirmed under Section 366 of the CrPC. The Supreme Court examined whether the "rarest of rare" doctrine justified the de

STATE THROUGH C.B.I.versusMAHENDER SINGH DAHIYA

2011 INSC 8028 January 2011Dismissed

The State alleged that Dr. Mahender Singh Dahiya strangulated his wife Namita during their honeymoon in Brussels, dismembered her body and disposed of the parts, while the prosecution failed to produce a weapon, reliable forensic identification of the body parts, or a clear motive. The trial court convicted Dahiya unde

POONAM CHAND JAIN AND ANR.versusFAZRU

2010 INSC 6328 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud in a land transaction, which was dismissed by a Judicial Magistrate under Section 203 of the CrPC. After the dismissal became final, the respondent filed a second complaint on almost identical facts, suppressing the existence of the first complaint. The appellant

MUSHEER KHAN @ BADSHAH KHAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2010 INSC 6428 January 2010Disposed off

The prosecution alleged that Musheer Khan (A‑4) and Basant Shiva (A‑5) were hired killers who shot the deceased Mallu Bhaiya at close range, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of two eyewitnesses, PW‑3 and PW‑4. The trial court convicted them of murder under IPC s.302/1208 and the Arms Act s.25(

RAM SINGH @ CHHAJUversusSTATE OF H.P.

2010 INSC 6528 January 2010Dismissed

The appellant Ram Singh was accused of raping a 40-year-old midwife, Chanchala Devi, on the night of 12-13 August 1989, after being persuaded to accompany a co-accused to a village. The victim testified that she was gagged, assaulted, and forced into sexual intercourse, a narrative corroborated by her son, a village he

KISHANGIRI MANGALGIRI GOSWAMIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2009 INSC 8228 January 2009Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Kishangiri Mangalgiri Goswami, was convicted for abetment of suicide under s.306 IPC, cruelty and dowry harassment under s.498A IPC, and for dowry demand under s.3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, based largely on letters he allegedly wrote demanding Rs.40,000. He appealed, arguing that the letters were uns

VAARIKUPPAL SRINIVASversusSTATE OF A.P.

2009 INSC 8328 January 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Vmrikuppal Srinivas, was convicted under Sections 498A and 3048 of the IPC for causing the death of his wife by acid. The conviction was based primarily on the victim's dying declaration recorded by a magistrate and an earlier statement to a police constable. On appeal, the appellant argued that the medi

GHASITA SAHUversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2008 INSC 11128 January 2008Dismissed

Ghasita Sahu was convicted under the NDPS Act for possession of 17.75 kg of ganja after his house was searched by the investigating officer, who offered him the option of a search in the presence of a gazetted officer, which he declined. The appellant challenged the legality of the search, arguing that the panchas pres

K.C. BUILDERS AND ANR.versusTHE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2004 INSC 6528 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed

K.C. Builders, a partnership engaged in construction, filed original income tax returns for AY 1983-84 to 1986-87 and later revised them based on an approved valuer's report. The Assessing Officer treated the difference as concealed income and levied penalties under Section 271(1)(c) and initiated prosecution under Sec

AJAY MITRAversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2003 INSC 4028 January 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, Sanjiva Bottling Company, entered into five‑year bottling agreements with Cadbury Schweppes Beverages India, which were later assigned to Atlantic Industries, a Coca‑Cola subsidiary. After Atlantic gave notice that the agreements would not be renewed, the complainant filed a criminal complaint under Se

G. SAGAR SURI AND. ANRversusSTATE OF C.P. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 3428 January 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, G. Sagar Suri and Shama Suri, were accused of obtaining a loan of Rs. 50 lakh from a finance company and issuing cheques that later bounced. A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed, and concurrently a First Information Report under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC was lo

GANGULA ASHOK AND ANR.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2000 INSC 3728 January 2000Disposed off

The appellants, a lawyer and his wife who was a hostel matron, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly outraging a hostel resident's modesty and for attempting to suppress the complaint. The police filed the charge‑sheet directly before the Sessions Cour

MOHAN SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P.

1999 INSC 2728 January 1999Case Partly allowed

Mohan Singh and Kailash Singh were convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, with Mohan Singh also convicted under the Arms Act. They appealed, challenging the post‑mortem finding of blackening under the wound, the reliability of eyewitness identification in low light, the lack of detail in

SUNIL KUMARversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1997 INSC 7428 January 1997Dismissed

The appellants, involved in a land dispute, attacked Dayashankar and his brother Ramesh, dismembering the former and severely injuring the latter. Ramesh (PW‑1) survived, narrated the incident to his mother (PW‑2) and nephew (PW‑3), and later gave a statement to the police and a dying declaration to a magistrate. PW‑3

XversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2024 INSC 90927 November 2024

The petitioner filed an FIR alleging rape (Sec. 376D) and kidnapping (Sec. 342) against the accused and a co-accused. The victim's statement was recorded under Sec. 164 CrPC, but neither the victim nor her mother (an eye‑witness) had been examined when the accused applied for bail. The trial court denied bail, but the

ARNAB MANORANJAN GOSWAMIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2020 INSC 66527 November 2020Disposed off

The appellant, a news‑channel editor, was arrested in November 2020 in connection with an FIR under Sections 306 and 34 of the IPC alleging his role in the suicide of a contractor who claimed unpaid dues. He filed a petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the

VINOD KUMAR GARGversusSTATE (GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI)

2019 INSC 128727 November 2019Dismissed

Inspector Vinod Kumar Garg was convicted for demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs.500 from Nand Lal in exchange for facilitating an electricity connection to a shed, with the money recovered from his pant pocket during a police trap. The appellant appealed, alleging material contradictions in the testimonies of the co

M/S. LAXMI DYECHEMversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2012 INSC 54627 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chemical supplier, filed forty complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that the respondent company’s post‑dated cheques were dishonoured because the signatures did not match the specimen signatures on file. The High Court quashed the complaints, holding that a signature

CHATURBHUJversusSITA BAI

2007 INSC 119027 November 2007Dismissed

The wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking maintenance, claiming she was unemployed and unable to maintain herself. The husband contended that she earned income from house rent and the sale of agricultural land and could therefore maintain herself. The trial court, after eval

NAVEEN CHANDRAversusSTATE OF UTTRANCHAL

2006 INSC 91627 November 2006Case Partly allowed

Naveen Chandra and his parents were convicted for the murder of three members of a rival family. The appellant claimed that the killings occurred in a sudden quarrel, were provoked, and were in self‑defence. The Supreme Court examined whether Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC (sudden fight) applied and whether the right o

M.C.MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 91327 November 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a Public Interest Litigation concerning the Taj Heritage Corridor project, which alleged irregularities and unauthorized release of Rs. 17 crore. The Court had earlier ordered a CBI inquiry and later directed the CBI to register an FIR and investigate senior officials. The Director of CBI sub

RAM DULAR RAI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2003 INSC 67427 November 2003Dismissed

The appellants, including Ram Dular Rai, were convicted for murder, attempted murder and related offences after a night‑time assault on a household in which they fired on the son and daughter of the informant. The trial court identified four of the accused but noted that several other armed persons were present. On app

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusPUTTARAJA

2003 INSC 67527 November 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The accused, Puttaraja, was convicted of raping a pregnant woman in the presence of her husband under Section 376 IPC. The trial court sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment and a fine, despite the statutory minimum of seven years. The Karnataka High Court reduced the sentence to the 46 days already served, citing t

NAGA PEOPLE'S MOVEMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA

1997 INSC 76327 November 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) and the Assam Disturbed Areas Act, 1955, along with notifications declaring disturbed areas in several northeastern states. Petitioners argued that Parliament lacked competence to enact AFSPA, that the Act was colourable legisl

SURESH KUMAR BHIKAMCHAND JAINversusPANDEY AJAY BHUSHAN AND ORS.

1997 INSC 76527 November 1997Dismissed

The President of Jalgaon Municipality filed a criminal complaint against four senior government officials who, while preventing the demolition of an illegal encroachment, assaulted him and others. The trial court issued process against three respondents but discharged the fourth for lack of sanction under Section 197 o

PHOOLAN DEVI ETC.versusSTATE. OF M.P. AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 139227 November 1996Disposed off

Phoolan Devi surrendered in Madhya Pradesh in 1983 and was released on parole after serving eleven years of custody. She filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking her release and the quashing of about 55 criminal prosecutions pending in Uttar Pradesh, alleging violation of her Article 21 right to a speedy trial an

B. KUMAR@ JAYAKUMAR@ LEFT. KR.@ S. KUMARversusINSP. OF POLICE TH. C.B.C.L.D.

2014 INSC 101927 October 2014Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a mason, entered the house of the prosecutrix on 4 October 2002 armed with an aruval, intending to satisfy his lust. He tied up the brother (Manikandan) and a relative (Sangeetha), raped the prosecutrix, murdered Manikandan when he attempted to call for help, subsequently slit Sangeetha's throat, and sto

RANJIT SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2010 INSC 74727 October 2010Dismissed

The case involved an alleged unlawful assembly that rioted and assaulted victims, resulting in two deaths and three grievous injuries. The trial court convicted ten accused under sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 365 and 342 IPC, but the High Court acquitted two and upheld convictions of eight; five appealed before the Supr

P.K. SHAJI @ THAMMANAM SHAJIversusSTATE OF KERALA

2005 INSC 53427 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, P.K. Shaji, was charged under Sections 120B and 307 IPC and was granted bail by the Sessions Court with specific conditions, including reporting to the investigating officer on designated days and seeking magistrate’s permission before entering the sessions division. The bail order directed that any brea

TULSHIDAS KANOLKARversusTHE STATE OF GOA

2003 INSC 56727 October 2003Dismissed

Tulshidas Kanolkar was convicted of rape and criminal intimidation of a mentally challenged girl who later gave birth to a stillborn child. The appellant argued that the delay in filing the FIR, the non‑examination of certain witnesses, and the victim’s alleged consent should exonerate him or reduce his sentence. The S

M.S. AHLAWATversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1999 INSC 49327 October 1999Appeal(s) allowed

M.S. Ahlawat, a police officer, filed forged affidavits and made false statements before the Supreme Court, which subsequently convicted him under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code (perjury) and Article 129 of the Constitution (contempt) by way of a show‑cause notice. Ahlawat challenged the perjury conviction, conte

BHOLA BHAGAT ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1997 INSC 71227 October 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder and related offences under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the IPC for the killing of Ram Naresh Choubey in 1978. They later claimed that they were children at the time of the offence and sought the benefit of the Bihar Children Act, 1970/1982 and the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. Th

PHULEL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARAYANA

2023 INSC 86327 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the death of Kiran Kaur, who suffered severe burns and later died, with the prosecution alleging that her husband Phulel Singh set her ablaze over dowry demands. The trial court convicted Singh under Section 304‑B IPC based primarily on the victim's dying declaration recorded by an Executive Magistra

RAVINDRANATHA BAJPEversusMANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. & OTHERS ETC.

2021 INSC 55527 September 2021Dismissed

The appellant, Ravindranatha Bajpe, filed a private complaint alleging that two companies and their senior officers conspired to lay a water pipeline beneath his property, demolish a stone wall and cut down about 100 trees, causing loss of over Rs.27 lakh. The Judicial Magistrate issued summons against all thirteen acc

SHRI MAHADEV MEENAversusPRAVEEN RATHORE AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 54827 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mahadev Meena, filed a complaint after his son, an IB officer, was found dead under suspicious circumstances. The FIR alleged that the first respondent, Praveen Rathore, an anti‑corruption bureau constable, had a close relationship with the deceased's wife and was involved in a conspiracy to murder, with

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSAHI RAM

2019 INSC 109627 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan charged Sahi Ram under Sections 8 and 15 of the NDPS Act for possession of 223 kg of poppy husk seized from his vehicle. The trial court convicted him, but the High Court acquitted on the ground that the entire bulk of contraband was not produced before the court, deeming the prosecution's eviden

JOSEPH SHINEversusUNION OF INDIA

2018 INSC 89827 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalized adultery, and Section 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which restricted the right to prosecute for adultery to the husband. A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that

RANJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 65627 September 2013Disposed off

The appellant was charged with murder and related offences and first sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which was rejected. The High Court later ordered him to surrender and apply for regular bail, but the Sessions Judge, misreading that order, granted bail under Section 439 without applying the st

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusJAMIL KHAN

2013 INSC 65727 September 2013Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the High Court's commutation of a death sentence to life imprisonment for Jamil Khan, who was convicted of raping and murdering a girl under five years old and also convicted under IPC sections 376 and 201. The Supreme Court held that the High Court had not examined the aggravati

POONGODI & ANR.versusTHANGAVEL

2013 INSC 65927 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The wife and son of Thangavel filed successive applications under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance, claiming arrears from February 1993. The High Court limited their claim to arrears of only one year preceding the 2002 application, invoking the first proviso to Section 125(3). The Supreme Court held that the pro

V.K. SASIKALAversusSTATE REP. BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2012 INSC 42927 September 2012Disposed off

The appellant, V.K. Sasikala, was on trial for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. While her examination under Section 313 CrPC was in progress, she applied for certified copies and, alternatively, inspection of certain unmarked and unexhibited documents that had been forwarded to the court under Section 1

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusAMITBHAI ANIL CHANDRA SHAH AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 43427 September 2012Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered CBI's appeal against the Gujarat High Court's grant of bail to former Home Minister Amitbhai Shah in the Sohrabuddin encounter case and a petition to transfer the trial out of Gujarat. The Court noted that Shah, as a minister, could potentially influence witnesses and tamper with evidence,

AJAY KUMAR PARMARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 43527 September 2012Dismissed

The appellant Ajay Kumar Parmar was accused of raping the complainant, who later approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to record a statement under Section 164 CrPC claiming the FIR was false. The CJM directed a Judicial Magistrate to record the statement, but the complainant was not produced before the magistr

M/S THERMAX LTD. & ORS.versusK.M. JOHNY & ORS.

2011 INSC 71627 September 2011

Thermax Ltd. entered into purchase orders with K.M. Johny’s firms for storage tanks and consumables. The contracts fell apart and Johny alleged non‑payment of large sums, filing three earlier complaints that were closed as civil matters. In 2002 he lodged another complaint before a magistrate alleging offences under Se

PARAMJEET SINGH @ PAMMAversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2010 INSC 64727 September 2010Dismissed

Paramjeet Singh (Pamma) was convicted for murdering his brother and two nephews and injuring three other family members in a property dispute. The trial court and the Uttarakhand High Court upheld the conviction based on the FIR, statements under Section 161 CrPC, medical reports, forensic evidence and the testimony of

GANPATversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2010 INSC 64927 September 2010Dismissed

Ganpat, the complainant, appealed against the High Court's order acquitting eleven accused persons charged under IPC sections 148, 149, 302, 323, 324, 325. The trial court had convicted the accused, but the High Court set them free, holding that the complainant was the aggressor and that the prosecution failed to prove

SMT. PEBAM NINGOL MIKO DEVIversusSTATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.

2010 INSC 65027 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The husband of the appellant, an editor of a Manipuri daily, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on allegations of extorting money for the UNLF and causing a terror wave. The appellant challenged the detention, arguing that the grounds were vague, unsupported by material, and that there w

AMARSINGH MUNNASINGH SURYAWANSHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 98227 September 2007Dismissed

The appellant, Amarsingh MunnaSingh Suryawanshi, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her ablaze. The prosecution’s case rested solely on two dying declarations recorded by a head constable and a special judicial magistrate, both of which were taken after medical of

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusKANDA GOPALUDU

2005 INSC 45127 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh charged Kanda Gopaludu with murder under Section 302 IPC. The trial court convicted him based on an extra‑judicial confession he made before three village officials (the sarpanch and two ward members), corroborated by the investigating officer’s testimony, a doctor’s medical report indicatin

BONKY @ BHARAT SHIVAJI MANE AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1995 INSC 60527 September 1995Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted by a Designated Court for murder, attempt to murder, causing hurt and an offence under Section 3 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) arising from an altercation at a video parlour that led to a fatal assault near a hotel. On appeal, the Supreme Court held tha

KALVAKUNTLA KAVITHAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 63227 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Kalvakuntla Kavitha, a former Member of Parliament and Legislative Council, was charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in CBI and Enforcement Directorate investigations relating to a Delhi excise policy conspiracy. She applied for bail, invoking the special treatment granted to women under the provi

KHUMAN SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 96527 August 2019Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Khuman Singh, entered the deceased Veer Singh's field with his buffaloes, leading to a dispute over grazing rights. In a sudden quarrel, Singh struck Veer Singh on the head with an axe, causing six injuries that resulted in death. The trial court convicted Singh under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(v)

DENY BORAversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2014 INSC 57127 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

A doctor was shot dead in his clinic and the accused, Deny Bora, was charged under Sections 302, 34 and 314 of the IPC and under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA). The Designated Court acquitted him of the TADA offences but convicted him for murder based solely on the testimony of PW‑14, w

MANOJ NARULAversusUNION OF INDIA

2014 INSC 56827 August 2014Disposed off

The petition challenged the appointment of several Union Ministers on the ground that they had criminal antecedents or were facing charges for serious offences, seeking a declaration that such appointments were unconstitutional and requesting the Court to frame guidelines for ministerial appointments. The Court examine

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