Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

5,133 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,601–1,800.

PALWINDER SINGHversusBALWINDER SINGH & ORS.

2008 INSC 119020 October 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, Darshan Kaur, a dumb (and allegedly deaf) woman, was set on fire on 6 April 2001 and gave two dying declarations identifying the accused. The Sessions Judge refused to discharge the accused under Section 227 of the CrPC, but the High Court, on revision, allowed the discharge, preferring one dying declarat

STATE OF ASSAMversusMUHIM BARKATAKI & ANR

1986 INSC 21420 October 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Assam charged Muhim Barkataki and Oulu Dutta with murder and arson, alleging they set fire to the deceased Nagen Dey's shop and body after pouring kerosene. The prosecution relied on eye‑witnesses who saw the fire, a dying declaration made by the victim while in severe pain, and statements recorded under S

ACHARYA JAGDISHWARANAND AVADHUTA, ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CALCUTTA & ANR.

1983 INSC 15320 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Ananda Marga socio‑spiritual organization, sought a writ directing the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, to allow them to hold public processions accompanied by the Tandava dance. They claimed that Ananda Marga is a separate religion and that the Tandava dance is an essential religious r

BHAGWAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2024 INSC 70820 September 2024Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined criminal appeals filed in the name of Bhagwan Singh, who alleged that his son‑in‑law and daughter had fabricated vakalatnamas, affidavits and other documents to lodge a Special Leave Petition and related proceedings without his knowledge, thereby attempting to falsely implicate Ajay Katara, a

SHOOR SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2024 INSC 71320 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, Neelam, died from extensive burn injuries within seven years of her marriage to the son of the appellants, who were her father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law. The prosecution alleged that the accused demanded a motorcycle and Rs 50,000 as dowry and threatened her, invoking the presumption of dowry death under S

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERSversusBHUPENDRA YADAV

2023 INSC 83720 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Bhupendra Yadav, applied for a constable post in the Madhya Pradesh police and truthfully disclosed in his verification form that he had been tried for offences under IPC and the POCSO Act, but was acquitted by the trial court. The Superintendent of Police deemed him unfit on the ground of moral turpitu

BHAGWAN NARAYAN GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 50320 September 2021Dismissed

The appellant, Bhagwan Narayan Gaikwad, was convicted under IPC s.326 read with s.149 for violently amputating the victim's right arm and leg in 1993. The High Court upheld the conviction and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a monetary compensation under CrPC s.357. After serving five months, the

GHEWARCHAND & ORS.versusM/S MAHENDRA SINGH & ORS.

2018 INSC 84020 September 2018Case Allowed

The plaintiffs filed a civil suit in 1978 seeking declaration of title, a permanent injunction and possession of a property that had been attached by a City Magistrate on 23‑12‑1966. The trial court held the suit was within the limitation period and decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. The High Court reversed this, hol

KISHOREBHAI GANDUBHAI PETHANIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 64220 September 2013Dismissed

The appellant was accused of tampering with a medical report and a complaint under Sections 463, 465, 468, 471 and 114 IPC was filed. The appellant sought to quash the complaint under Section 482 CrPC, arguing that the complaint was not maintainable unless filed by the court under Section 195 CrPC. The High Court rejec

VYAS RAM @ VYAS KAHAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 64320 September 2013Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of three accused—Vyas Ram, Naresh Paswan and Sugai Mochi—under TADA and several IPC provisions for a 1992 massacre that killed 35 people. The Court found serious investigative flaws, including non‑examination of the informant, absence of a test identification parade and delayed

BALDEV SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 64420 September 2013Case Partly allowed

The appellants, a Deputy Superintendent of Police and a constable, were convicted for abducting seven members of a family and for their alleged murder. The prosecution alleged that the victims were taken on 29 October 1991, later seen in various police stations, and never returned, leading to convictions under IPC sect

ASH MOHAMMADversusSHIV RAJ SINGH @ LALLA BABU AND ANR.

2012 INSC 41420 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant lodged an FIR alleging that the accused, Shiv Raj Singh (alias Lalla Babu), a known history‑sheeter, orchestrated the kidnapping, confinement for eight days and assault of Bihari Lal under threat, offences punishable under Sections 364 and 506 IPC. The trial court denied bail, but the High Court granted b

HARESH MOHANDAS RAJPUTversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2011 INSC 70020 September 2011Disposed off

The appellant, Haresh Mohandas Rajput, was accused of raping and murdering 10‑year‑old Pooja, whose body was discovered under a cot in his house with blood‑stained sheets and forensic evidence of sexual assault and strangulation. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence, including the location of the bo

SAJJAN KUMARversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2010 INSC 62420 September 2010Disposed off

The case concerned the framing of charges against former MP Sajjan Kumar for alleged involvement in the 1984 anti‑Sikh riots. After the Delhi Police’s closure report, the CBI was tasked with re‑investigation and filed a charge‑sheet in 2010, relying on statements recorded many years after the incident. The appellant so

S.M.S. PHARMACEUTICALS LTDversusNEETA BHALLA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 43220 September 2005Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined a reference concerning prosecutions under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, focusing on the necessity of specific averments in a complaint to hold company officers liable for a dishonoured cheque. It held that a complaint must expressly state that the accused was i

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusMOHAN SINGH

1995 INSC 58920 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh, under Section 432(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted a special remission on Republic Day 1978 to female prisoners and those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST). Writ petitioners, including Mohan Singh, challenged the scheme, alleging violation of the right to

KUMARI SHRILEKHA VIDYARTHI ETC. ETCversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1990 INSC 29420 September 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, appointed as Government Counsel in Uttar Pradesh, challenged a circular dated 6‑Feb‑1990 that terminated all such appointments across the state and ordered fresh panels, irrespective of existing tenures. The State argued the appointments were purely contractual and could be ended at will without cause.

MATHEW AREEPARMTIL & ORS.versusSTATE OF BLHAR AND ORS.

1984 INSC 17220 September 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard writ petitions highlighting that a large number of adivasi persons were being detained in jails without trial for petty offences. The Court observed that many cases were pending for years, violating the right to speedy trial. It directed that adivasi accused facing sentences of seven years or mo

DEVENDRA KUMARversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2025 INSC 100920 August 2025Disposed off

The petitioner, a police SHO, was alleged to have misbehaved with a process server who was serving court summons, leading the process server to lodge a private complaint under s.195 CrPC. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) ordered registration of an FIR under s.186 and s.341 IPC and directed police investigation u

VIKRAM BAKSHI AND OTHERSversusR.P. KHOSLA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 102020 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose between the Khosla and Bakshi groups over a resort development project, leading to allegations of perjury and a criminal proceeding under Section 340 of the CrPC. The High Court initially dismissed the criminal application but later recalled its own order after a review petition was filed under Order

NEELAM KUMARIversusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2025 INSC 101320 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Neelam Kumari, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of her infant son based primarily on alleged extra‑judicial confessions to her husband and other villagers. The prosecution also relied on a green dupatta found with blood stains and circumstantial evidence, but failed to establish a clear

UNION OF INDIAversusSALEEM KHAN

2025 INSC 100820 August 2025Dismissed

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

IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus

2024 INSC 61420 August 2024Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined a criminal appeal filed by the State of West Bengal against a High Court order that set aside the conviction of a 25‑year‑old accused under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of the IPC for raping a 14‑year‑old girl who later gave birth to his child. The Court held t

MUSTAFAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2019 INSC 92420 August 2019Disposed off

An FIR was lodged under the United Provinces Excise Act, 1910 and the IPC for the seizure of illicit liquor and a firearm, leading to the confiscation of a truck owned by the appellant. The District Magistrate, who also acted as the Collector, issued a show‑cause notice and subsequently ordered the vehicle's confiscati

CBI GUJARATversusDILIP MULANI & ANR.

2019 INSC 92520 August 2019Disposed off

The respondent, Dilip Mulani, was charged under IPC section 120‑B and several provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The trial court rejected his discharge application, relying on documentary evidence, telephonic transcripts and witness statements that suggested his participation in a bribery conspiracy.

STATE OF HARYANAversusRAJESH AGGARWAL & ANR.

2018 INSC 72220 August 2018Dismissed

A blast in the factory of M/s Kee Pharma Private Limited in Gurgaon on 27 June 1996 caused a stampede that killed seven workers. An FIR was lodged against the company’s shareholders/directors under Section 302 of the IPC, and the accused sought to quash the FIR by invoking Section 482 of the CrPC. The High Court partia

SATVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF DELHI THROUGH CBI

2014 INSC 54820 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Satvir Singh, an Inspector Customs, was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe from complainant Ramesh Suri in 1989. The trial court acquitted him, finding that the prosecution had not proved the demand, acceptance, or recovery of illegal gratification and that the presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of

NIKHIL MERCHANTversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR

2008 INSC 94820 August 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former managing director of a company that had defaulted on a loan from Andhra Bank, was charged by the CBI with cheating, forgery and corruption offences. The bank’s civil suit for recovery was later compromised, with clause 11 stating that both parties withdrew all claims against each other. The appe

HARDIP SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2008 INSC 95020 August 2008Dismissed

Hardip Singh was found in possession of 7 kg of opium during a police search and was convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act, receiving ten years' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed, alleging that the investigating officer, Inspector Jarnail Singh, bore a personal grudge stemming from a prior vehicle accident and th

GUNNANA PENTAYYA @ PENTADU & ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P.

2008 INSC 95220 August 2008Dismissed

The case arose from a political mob attack on 29 January 2000 in which a group of accused assaulted two houses, resulting in the deaths of D‑1 and D‑2. The trial court convicted several accused under s.302 IPC and s.302 r.w. s.149 IPC; the High Court upheld the s.302 convictions but acquitted on s.149, holding that no

GORIGE PENTAIAHversusSTATE OF A.P. & ORS.

2008 INSC 95520 August 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gorige Pentaiah was charged in a criminal complaint filed by Bakaram Eswar alleging offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and IPC sections 427, 447 and 506, relating to demolition of a wall, caste insult and intimidation in a land dispute. The appell

STATE OF U.P.versusKISHAN CHAND AND ORS.

2004 INSC 45920 August 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh charged five accused with murder and other offences arising from a violent incident on 3 August 1974 during a festival, where the accused formed an assembly, used firearms and sticks, and killed two persons while injuring others. The trial court convicted them under Sections 302/34, 302/149 a

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANKversusR.L. VAID AND ORS.

2004 INSC 46420 August 2004Leave Granted & Disposed off

The accused, charged under IPC s.120‑B and the Prevention of Corruption Act, applied to the trial court for the production of eight documents. The CBI and Punjab National Bank (the appellant) claimed the documents were privileged communication under Evidence Act s.124. The trial court ordered production, but the High C

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusRATILAL LALJIBHAI TANDOL AND ANR.

1997 INSC 61220 August 1997Disposed off

The Gujarat Government, through its Legal Department, issued a circular directing that proposals to file an appeal against an acquittal be routed through the District Magistrate, whose opinion was considered essential before the State took a final decision. The High Court, concerned about delays, ordered that such prop

SHATRUGHANversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 63020 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved an appeal by Shatrughan against his conviction for murder under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the death of his nephew Jagat Ram. The prosecution's case relied mainly on the testimony of the deceased's uncle, who claimed to have heard the victim shout that Shatrughan was assaulting him with

MOHAMMED ZUBAIRversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

2022 INSC 73620 July 2022Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Mohammed Zubair, co‑founder of ALT News, who faced five FIRs in Uttar Pradesh and one in Delhi arising from the same set of tweets. The petitioner sought quashing of the FIRs and, alternatively, their consolidation with the Delhi FIR, along with interim bail in all ca

BRIJESH SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 34120 July 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted five accused persons of offences under Sections 302 read with 149, 304B and 498A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The informant filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking leave to appeal the acquittal. The

KUMER SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR

2021 INSC 34320 July 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, brother of the deceased Sumer Singh, challenged the High Court's grant of bail to three accused (Kamlesh, Arif and Bhojraj Singh) who were alleged to have participated in an unlawful assembly that brutally murdered Sumer Singh and injured his brother Vikram Singh, causing 26 and 11 injuries respectivel

SATWANT SINGHversusMALKEET SINGH

2017 INSC 65320 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Satwant Singh, an investigating officer, arrested Malkeet Singh on a charge of murder (Section 307 IPC) after the latter had been granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC. The High Court had ordered that the bail protection applied only to offences listed in its order, leading to a conviction of Satwant

STATE OF U.P.versusRAM KUMAR & ORS.

2017 INSC 64920 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted Ram Kumar and others for the murder of informant Mohan Lal, his wife, and three children by firearms and arson, alleging a common intention to kill. The trial court convicted all accused and imposed the death penalty. The Allahabad High Court acquitted them, holding that the lanter

BABLU KUMARAND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAIR AND ANR.

2015 INSC 100320 July 2015Dismissed

The appellants were charged with murder and related offences under the IPC. The trial court issued summons and warrants but failed to verify whether they were served, recorded that witnesses were absent and acquitted the accused under Section 232 CrPC. The informant filed a criminal revision under Section 401 CrPC; the

JAYRAJSINH DIGVIJAYSINH RANAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2012 INSC 29420 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute involved alleged illegal disposal of association plots through forged documents, leading Respondent No.2 to lodge an FIR against three accused, including the appellant. The appellant sought quash of the FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC, but the High Court dismissed the application. Subsequently, the appell

RAMESH CHILWAL @ BOMBAYYAversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2012 INSC 29520 July 2012Disposed off

Ramesh Chilwal was convicted of murder under IPC s.302, offences under the Gangsters Act s.213 and the Arms Act s.27, and sentenced to life imprisonment, ten years rigorous imprisonment, and seven years rigorous imprisonment respectively, along with fines and compensation. The High Court affirmed these convictions and

JAGROOP SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2012 INSC 29620 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant Jagroop Singh was convicted of murder under IPC sections 302, 34 and 201 based on circumstantial evidence that the victim was last seen with the accused, voluntary extra‑judicial confessions, and the recovery of a blood‑stained spade. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the time gap betw

SATYAJIT BALLULBHAI DESAI & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2012 INSC 29120 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged in a criminal complaint alleging forgery and fraudulent sale of land, which was later withdrawn after a compromise in a related civil suit. A third party, unrelated to the dispute, succeeded in reviving the complaint before the High Court, which also granted the appellants regular bail. Six

MOHD.HAMID & ANR ETC.ETCversusBADI MASJID TRUST & ORS.ETC.ETC.

2011 INSC 50520 July 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals against a Nagpur High Court order directing the exhumation of a saint's body that had been buried without permission on school premises. The appellants argued that Islamic law (fatwas) prohibited exhumation and that the High Court lacked jurisdiction, contending the matter should be

DISHAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2011 INSC 50620 July 2011Dismissed

The petitioner, Disha, and her husband were involved in a share‑broking business that allegedly duped investors of about Rs 60 crore, leading to an FIR and a charge‑sheet against thirteen persons including the petitioner. The husband later died by jumping from a hotel, an incident investigated by the Maharashtra police

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusLALLOO SINGH

2007 INSC 76820 July 2007Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that allowed Lalloo Singh to retain a tractor trolley seized by forest officials under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The seizure occurred because the trolley was used to load sand from the Yamuna river bed inside a sanctuary. The trial magistrate had

K. SRIKANTH SINGHversusM/S. NORTH EAST SECURITIES LTD. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 77120 July 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against a company and its directors for dishonouring a cheque. The appellant, a director, argued that he was not a director at the relevant time and that the complaint failed to satisfy the statutory requirements of Section 1

M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATIONversusM/S NEPC INDIA LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 45220 July 2006Case Partly allowed

Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) entered into fuel supply contracts with NEPC India Ltd. and its sister company, securing the dues by hypothecating two aircraft. After NEPC defaulted, IOC obtained injunctions and later filed criminal complaints alleging theft, cheating, criminal breach of trust and mischief for the removal

MACHHL SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1983 INSC 7820 July 1983Disposed off

A long‑standing feud between two families in Punjab resulted in a series of five murders on the night of 12‑13 August 1977, killing seventeen people. Machhi Singh and eleven associates were tried in five separate sessions cases; four were sentenced to death and nine to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court examined (i)

HAMZAversusMUHAMMADKUTTY @ MANI & ORS.

2013 INSC 37220 June 2013Dismissed

The deceased woman was stabbed to death in her matrimonial home, leading to an initial prosecution of four in‑law family members under Sections 498A and 306 IPC, which resulted in acquittal. Two years later, the deceased's brother filed a complaint alleging that six family members, including A‑1 and A‑2, murdered her,

HARI PRASAD CHHAPOLIA (DEAD)versusUNION OF INDIA

2008 INSC 76220 June 2008Disposed off

Hari Prasad Chhapolia was convicted under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Gold (Control) Act, 1968; the High Court set aside the Customs conviction but upheld the Gold conviction. He appealed to the Supreme Court under special leave, but died while the appeal was pending. His legal heirs filed an application for substitu

HEERA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 70520 June 2007Dismissed

The appellants were convicted under Section 395 IPC for assaulting a complainant at a petrol pump and stealing cash. The trial court relied on eyewitness testimony and a test identification parade (TI parade) in which the accused were identified by two witnesses; the prosecution also recovered the stolen cash. On appea

SRIversusSTATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, Q BRANCH, RAMANATHAPURAM, TAMIL NADU

2026 INSC 51620 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sri Lankan national named Ranjan, was arrested in 2021 and charged under multiple statutes for allegedly being the absconding accused "Sri" (A‑5) involved in a conspiracy to revive the banned LTTE. The prosecution’s case rested solely on the belated testimonies of two witnesses who identified the appel

M/S KNIT PRO INTERNATIONALversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2022 INSC 62120 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

M/S Knit Pro International filed a criminal application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC to register an FIR against respondent No.2 for alleged violations of Sections 51, 63 and 64 of the Copyright Act and Section 420 of the IPC. The FIR was registered, but the respondent obtained a writ order from the Delhi High Court

ABHISHEKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS

2022 INSC 61820 May 2022Dismissed

The appellant Abhishek Singh was charged under several IPC offences, the Arms Act and MCOCA after a proclamation declared him an absconder. The Additional Director General of Police and Commissioner of Police granted sanction for prosecution under MCOCA, which the appellant challenged before the High Court and then the

DEEPAK YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR

2022 INSC 61020 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Deepak Yadav filed an FIR alleging that the accused Harjeet Yadav (Respondent No.2) shot his father, leading to his death. The accused was arrested, and his bail application was rejected by the Sessions Court but later granted by the Allahabad High Court on the ground of parity with a co‑accused. The Supr

SABITRI SAMANTARAYversusSTATE OF ODISHA

2022 INSC 60820 May 2022Dismissed

The appellants, a husband and wife, were accused of strangling a man to death in their rented house and attempting to conceal the body by pouring acid over it. The trial court convicted them and their daughter under Sections 302, 201 and 34 IPC, sentencing the parents to life imprisonment; the High Court later acquitte

MANOJ & ORSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 60620 May 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellants Manoj, Rahul (Govind) and Neha Verma were convicted for the triple murder of three women during a robbery on 19 June 2011 and sentenced to death, which the High Court affirmed. The Supreme Court held that the trial and appellate courts failed to provide an effective sentencing hearing under s.235(2) CrPC

DEEPAK GULATIversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 34920 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Deepak Gulati was convicted under Sections 365 and 376 of the IPC for allegedly enticing a 19‑year‑old woman with a false promise of marriage, confining her and having sexual intercourse. The woman voluntarily left home to marry the appellant, accompanied him to several locations, and did not raise any ob

SANJAY RAGHUNATH AGARWALversusTHE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2023 INSC 40820 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a chartered accountant, was arrested in September 2022 after the Enforcement Directorate (ED) filed an information report and a prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA) alleging his involvement in a fraudulent Global Depository Receipt (GDR) scheme that misappropriated fu

AMOD KUMAR KANTHversusASSOCIATION OF VICTIM OF UPHAAR TRAGEDY AND ANR.

2023 INSC 39720 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former Deputy Commissioner of Police and licensing officer, ordered the removal of extra seats in the Uphaar cinema in 1979‑80 following a revocation of a prior notification. After the 1997 fire that killed 59 people, the CBI filed a closure report finding no criminal act by the appellant, which the ma

RAMVEER UPADHYAY & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2022 INSC 45520 April 2022Dismissed

Ramveer Upadhyay and others filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the Allahabad High Court’s order dismissing their application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash criminal proceedings (Complaint No.19/2018) filed under IPC sections 365/511 and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

RAMESH BHAVAN RATHODversusVISHANBHAI HIRABHAI MAKWANA MAKWANA (KOLI) & ANR.

2021 INSC 26520 April 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined six bail orders granted by the Gujarat High Court to accused involved in a violent incident that resulted in five homicides. The Court held that the High Court failed to consider the seriousness and gravity of the offences, the role of each accused, and the material evidence contained in the

MAHENDRA SINGH DHONIversusYERRAGUNTLA SHYAMSUNDAR AND ANR.

2017 INSC 128220 April 2017Disposed off

The complainant, dissatisfied with a magazine cover that featured the petitioner with the caption "God of Big Deals," filed a complaint under Section 295A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code before a magistrate in Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner sought transfer of the proceedings to Karnataka and simultaneousl

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.versusAMIT KUMAR @ BACHCHA RAL

2017 INSC 37420 April 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar appealed against the Patna High Court's order granting conditional bail to Amit Kumar, the principal of Vishnu Rai College, who was alleged to be the king‑pin of the "Bihar Toppers Scam" involving tampering of answer sheets, illegal firearms, and large sums of cash and property. The High Court had re

MD. MANNAN @ ABDUL MANNANversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 31920 April 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Md. Mannan, a mason employed in the victim's grandfather's house, sent a seven‑year‑old girl to a betel shop and subsequently abducted her on his bicycle, raping and murdering her. He later confessed, leading police to the body. He was convicted under IPC sections 366, 376, 302 and 201 and sentenced to d

INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADUversusJOHN DAVID

2011 INSC 31620 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu, appealed the High Court's acquittal of John David, who was charged with the gruesome murder of a medical student whose body was dismembered and disposed of in various locations. The trial court had convicted David under IPC sections 302, 201, 364 and 342 based on strong c

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusALL INDIA MANUFACTURERS ORGANIZATION AND ORS.

2006 INSC 23520 April 2006Dismissed

The State of Karnataka entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and a Framework Agreement (FWA) with a private consortium to develop the Bangalore‑Mysore Infrastructure Corridor, requiring acquisition of about 20,193 acres of land. Several public‑interest writ petitions challenged the FWA on grounds of fraud, misrepr

N. BHARGAVAN PILLAI (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2004 INSC 29320 April 2004Dismissed

N.B. Bhargavan Pillai, a public servant on deputation, failed to hand over stock of rice, palmolein and sugar at the end of his tenure, resulting in a shortage valued at Rs.1,63,770. He deposited Rs.50,000 and promised to pay the balance, but retired before a sanction for prosecution could be obtained. He was convicted

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSOHAN LAL AND ORS.

2004 INSC 29420 April 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed to the Supreme Court against a Rajasthan High Court order that refused leave to appeal an acquittal without providing any reasons. The Supreme Court held that a High Court must record reasons when refusing leave under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as the refusal fo

BASHEER@N.P. BASHEETversusSTATE OF KERALA

2004 INSC 29520 April 2004Dismissed

The appellant was caught selling brown sugar on 23 February 2000; a police search of his shirt pocket yielded six small packets containing 1.2 g of the narcotic. He was convicted under section 21 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, he argued that the small quantity should be

STATE OF U.P.versusHARBAN SAHAI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 18720 April 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Harban Sahai and others, who had been convicted for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The High Court had set aside the trial court's findings on the basis of alleged inconsistencies between the FIR and eyewitness testimony, the weight given to

SH. GANESH NARYAN HEDGEversusSH.S. BANGARAPPA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 28220 April 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Ganesh Narayan Hedge filed a complaint under Section 500 IPC alleging defamation by S. B. Bangarappa and two others. The Magistrate, after taking evidence, framed charges, which were challenged by a revision petition under Section 399 before the Sessions Judge, who dismissed it. The respondents then approached the Karn

SMT. VANKA RADHAMANOHARIversusVANKE VENKATA REDDY AND ORS.

1993 INSC 15820 April 1993Amount Awarded

The appellant, a wife, complained that her husband subjected her to cruelty and later contracted a second marriage, invoking Sections 498A and 494 of the Indian Penal Code. The Andhra Pradesh High Court, applying Section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), quashed the criminal proceedings on the ground that the

A.M. MOHANversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY SHO AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 23320 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, A.M. Mohan, was charged under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC along with co‑accused for alleged cheating. He filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashment of the FIR, arguing that the FIR and charge‑sheet did not disclose the essential ingredient of dishonest inducement req

DR. SUBHASH KASHINATH MAHAJANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2018 INSC 24820 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan, a senior government official, was charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for refusing sanction to prosecute two senior officers who had made adverse entries in his service record. He sought anticipatory bail and the quashing o

SHIVDEV KAUR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusR.S. GREWAL

2013 INSC 17720 March 2013Dismissed

Dr. Hira Singh's 1944 will granted his daughter Shivdev Kaur a life interest in a property. After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force, Shivdev Kaur claimed that the life interest had crystallised into an absolute title under Section 14 of the Act. The lower courts held that the life interest remained restric

KHET SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA

2002 INSC 15820 March 2002

Khet Singh was apprehended while travelling in a truck that contained a polythene bag of opium. The contraband was seized and samples were taken at the Customs Office, but the seizure mahazar was not prepared at the spot of recovery as required by the NDPS Act and related standing instructions. The appellant contended

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.versusKARAN SINGH BINAYAK AND ORS.

2002 INSC 16120 March 2002Dismissed

The State of West Bengal sought to revise a 1957 record of rights concerning land that had been leased to a paper mill, arguing that the land vested in the State under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. The respondents, Karan Singh Binayak and others, had purchased the land and commenced construction after

K. VIMALAversusK. VEERASWAMY

1991 INSC 8020 March 1991Appeal(s) allowed

K. Vimala filed a petition for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against her husband, K. Veeraswamy. The husband contended that the marriage was void because he was already married to Veeramma, and therefore he was not liable to maintain Vimala. The trial magistrate dismissed the husband's

JITENDER @ KALLAversusSTATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

2025 INSC 24920 February 2025Disposed off

The appellant, convicted of murder and sentenced to thirty years without remission, filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court but suppressed the fixed‑term nature of his sentence, leading the Court to initially treat the case as a simple life sentence. The SLP was drafted by senior advocate Rishi Malhot

SURINDER DOGRAversusSTATE THROUGH DIRECTOR CBI

2025 INSC 25820 February 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a Traffic Superintendent of Indian Airlines at Jammu, was convicted of cheating the airline by preparing an infant ticket under a fictitious name and then forging the flight coupon to convert it into an adult ticket, thereby obtaining a lower fare and causing loss to the airline. The trial court and the

MOHD ABAAD ALI & ANR.versusDIRECTORATE OF REVENUE PROSECUTION INTELLIGENCE

2024 INSC 12520 February 2024Dismissed

The appellants were acquitted under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence filed an appeal against the acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, after a 72‑day delay, seeking condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Delhi Hi

KULDEEP KUMARversusU.T. CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 12920 February 2024Directions issued

Kuldeep Kumar contested the mayoral election of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation held on 30 January 2024. The presiding officer, Anil Masih, declared the BJP candidate Manoj Kumar Sonkar elected, treating eight ballots cast for the appellant as invalid after marking them with an ink line. Video evidence and physica

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSURESH

2019 INSC 24020 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Suresh for the fatal assault on his father, resulting in death and a charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, along with a false information charge under Section 201 IPC. The Trial Court convicted Suresh under Section 304 Part II and sente

RAVI PRAKASH SINGH @ARVIND SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2015 INSC 14520 February 2015Dismissed

The appellant surrendered before the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 5 July 2013 and was remanded to judicial custody. He applied for bail on 3 October 2013 under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, claiming that the charge sheet had not been filed within the statutory 90‑day period. The magistrate, noting an e

ANIL @ ANTHONY ARIKSWAMY JOSEPHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2014 INSC 11920 February 2014Disposed off

The appellant, Anil @ Anthony Arikswamy Joseph, was convicted of murdering a 10‑year‑old boy after subjecting him to pederasty, under Sections 302, 377 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced to death. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the prosecution's circumstantial and DNA evidence, finding it trustworthy and s

SUNIL MEHTA & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 11520 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether depositions taken by a magistrate under Chapter XV of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) before taking cognizance could be used as evidence for framing charges under Part B of Chapter XIX, and whether the accused is entitled to cross‑examine those witnesses before charges are framed.

RASIKLALversusKLSORE

2009 INSC 22620 February 2009Disposed off

The appellant, Rasiklal, was charged with defamation under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC, both bailable offences, and was granted bail by a Judicial Magistrate under Section 436 of the CrPC on 1 December 2006. The complainant filed a revision before the High Court, which cancelled the bail on the ground that the comp

MUNISH BHASIN & ORS.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI) & ANR.

2009 INSC 22720 February 2009Disposed off

The wife of Munish Bhasin filed a complaint under IPC sections 498A, 406 and 34 alleging cruelty and misappropriation of dowry. The husband and his parents applied for anticipatory bail under CrPC section 438, which the Delhi High Court granted but conditioned on the husband paying Rs.12,500 per month as maintenance to

KAMALA S.versusVIDYADHARAN M.J. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 16520 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kamala S. was charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing a cheque that was dishonoured for insufficient funds. She contended that the cheque was drawn to settle the balance of a property sale, not to discharge any debt. The trial court found her defence probable, rebutted the

STATE OF U.P.versusPREMI AND ORS.

2003 INSC 11320 February 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The State of U.P. alleged that the accused entered the house of Raghubir (PW3) at midnight, assaulted him with the butt of a pistol and, when his wife intervened, also struck her, leading to her death the next day. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302 r/w 34, 307 r/w 34 and 452 IPC. The Allahabad Hi

SUKHBIR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2002 INSC 9320 February 2002Case Partly allowed

The case involved Sukhbir Singh, who was convicted of murder (Section 302 IPC) along with eight co‑accused for a fatal assault that arose from a sudden quarrel over mud splashed on him. The prosecution alleged that all nine formed an unlawful assembly with a common object to kill the deceased, invoking Section 149 IPC.

ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRASversusV. KRISHNAMOORTHY AND ORS.

1997 INSC 16820 February 1997Dismissed

The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, acting as complainant, appealed to the High Court against the sentences imposed on V. Krishnamurthy and others for offences investigated by a Customs Officer, invoking Section 377(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Supreme Court examined whether a Customs Department off

R.M. TEWARI, ADVOCATE ETC. ETC.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) ORS ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 29020 February 1996Disposed off

The Delhi Government, after constituting a high‑power Review Committee as directed in Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, sought the withdrawal of TADA charges in several cases. The Special Public Prosecutor filed applications before the Designated Court relying solely on the Committee’s recommendations. The Designated Co

LAKHAN SAO (DECEASED) NOW THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRSversusDHARAMU CHAUDHARY

1991 INSC 5420 February 1991Dismissed

The plaintiff, heirs of the deceased Lakhan Sao, sued Dharamu Chaudhary for declaration of title and possession of land, relying on a 1964 sale deed and challenging an earlier 1959 deed as a sham transaction without consideration. The trial court and its first appeal upheld the plaintiff's title, but the High Court set

SAHAB SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1990 INSC 5120 February 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted by an Additional Sessions Judge on three counts, including a life sentence with a fine of Rs.200 under Section 302/149 IPC. The High Court, while dismissing their appeal, altered the fine to Rs.5,000 per count per appellant, increasing it to Rs.30,000 each, without any notice or hearing. T

STATE OF PUNJABversusCHARAN SINGH

1981 INSC 4520 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Charan Singh, a police officer, was convicted under sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Punjab High Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution was invalid because the police department had not complied with Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. On appeal, the Supreme Court e

SAURAV DASversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 7620 January 2023Dismissed

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a direction that all State governments upload copies of chargesheets filed under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code on their websites, invoking the transparency principle established in Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India. The petition r

MS. XversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2021 INSC 3120 January 2021Disposed off

Ms. X, a confirmed rape victim, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking rehabilitation, including free education for her minor children, housing accommodation, police protection, and legal aid. The Court noted that she had been convicted of rape in 2002 and had already received compensation under the Jharkhand V

MANIK TANEJA & ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2015 INSC 5520 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Manik Taneja and his wife, posted comments on the Bangalore Traffic Police Facebook page alleging harassment by a police inspector after a road accident. The inspector filed an FIR under Sections 353 and 506 of the IPC. The appellants sought quashing of the FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC, but the Kar

TOMASO BRUNO & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2015 INSC 5220 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Three Italian tourists were accused of murdering their fellow tourist in a hotel room in Varanasi. The trial and appellate courts convicted them under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC based on circumstantial evidence, including alleged motive, post‑mortem findings of strangulation, and the claim that they remained in the

PERUMALversusJANAKI

2014 INSC 3820 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Perumal, was acquitted of offences under Sections 417 and 506(i) IPC after a charge‑sheet filed by Sub‑Inspector Janaki alleged his involvement in a pregnancy that a medical report had disproved. Perumal then lodged a private complaint under Section 190 CrPC seeking to try Janaki for an offence under Sec

RADHA MOHAN SINGH @ LAL SAHEB AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2006 INSC 3820 January 2006Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of Hira Singh during a Holi celebration in Ballia, Uttar Pradesh, where five accused assaulted him and others. The trial court convicted all five under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC, imposing life imprisonment, while the High Court affirmed the convictions. On special leave, the Supreme

STATE OF M.P. THROUGH C.B.I. ETC.versusPALTAN MALLAH AND ORS. ETC.

2005 INSC 4620 January 2005Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh, represented by the CBI, appealed against the High Court's acquittal of nine accused, including Paltan Mallah, for the murder of trade‑union leader Shankar Guha Niyogi. The trial court had convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC based on circumstantial evidence, but the H

MOTI LALversusSTATE OF M.P. (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2004 INSC 4320 January 2004Dismissed

The appellant, a husband, was convicted for dowry harassment and cruelty towards his wife, which culminated in her suicide. The trial court found him guilty under IPC Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34, sentencing him to three years for cruelty and seven years for abetment of suicide, to run concurrently. The H

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.versusSUJIT KUMAR RANA

2004 INSC 4520 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State seized a truck carrying forest produce without a transit permit and initiated confiscation proceedings under the West Bengal amendments to the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The District Judge set aside the confiscation order on the ground that the notice under Section 59‑B was invalid, directing the authorities to

AMRIT LAL CHUMversusDEVOPRASAD DUTTA ROY AND ANR. ETC.

1988 INSC 1820 January 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a company‑allotted flat that a former officer continued to occupy after retirement. The company sought prosecution under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, which penalises officers or employees who wrongfully retain company property. The Supreme Court examined whether the term "officer or employ

RAJEEV KUMAR UPADHYAYversusSRIKANT UPADHYAY & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 112219 December 2024Disposed off

The case arose from an FIR registered under multiple IPC sections and the Witch (Daain) Act after a woman was accused of witchcraft, physically assaulted, verbally abused and publicly disrobed along with another woman. Thirteen persons were named; initially only one was sent to trial, but the Additional Chief Judicial

PRAKASH AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 102019 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 306 and 34 IPC for allegedly abetting the suicide of their daughter-in-law, who had committed suicide on 20 March 2015 after a family dispute and a court‑ordered mahalokadalat. The prosecution’s case hinged on the claim that the appellants' words at the mahalokadalat on 17 Feb

NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUversusKASHIF

2025 INSC 104519 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) seized large quantities of Tramadol and Zolpidem tablets in multiple operations and arrested Kashif and co‑accused. Kashif applied for bail, which the Delhi High Court granted solely on the ground that the NCB had not complied with Section 52A of the NDPS Act within a reasonable time,

ANIL BHAVARLAL JAIN & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2024 INSC 103919 December 2024Dismissed

The appellants, directors of a construction company and employees of a bank, were charged under IPC sections 409, 420 and 120B and the Prevention of Corruption Act for cheating, criminal breach of trust and diversion of funds. The bank had declared the loan a non‑performing asset, recovered part of the amount through a

DIGAMBAR AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 101919 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed an FIR alleging that her husband and his parents-in-law subjected her to cruelty, forced her to consume poisonous food, and caused a miscarriage, invoking sections 498-A, 312, 313 and 34 of the IPC. The appellants filed a criminal application under section 482 of the CrPC seeking quash of the FIR,

BIJOY KUMAR MONIversusPARESH MANNA & ANR.

2024 INSC 102419 December 2024

The complainant lent Rs 7,00,000 to the accused and later received a cheque of Rs 8,45,000, signed by the accused in his capacity as Director of Shilabati Hospital Pvt. Ltd., drawn on the company's bank account. The cheque bounced for insufficient funds and the complainant issued a statutory notice under Section 138 of

AQEEL AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P.

2008 INSC 149319 December 2008Dismissed

A dispute over a banner led a group of armed accused, including Aqeel Ahmad, to enter the informant's house and fire at his sons, killing both. The accused were convicted of murder under IPC s.302, with some also convicted under s.149 (murder in unlawful assembly) and s.148, receiving death and life sentences respectiv

BRIJ NANDAN JAISWALversusMUNNA @ MUNNA JAISWAL & ANR.

2008 INSC 149419 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against a High Court order that granted bail to Munna Jaiswal, who was charged with murder (IPC s.302) and other offences (IPC s.504, s.506). The complainant, Brij Nandan Jaiswal, argued that the accused had a criminal history, pending cases, and that the High Court had granted bail

SHARON MICHAEL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

2008 INSC 149819 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a contract for the export of garments from India to Germany. The German buyer rejected the goods as defective, and the supplier (Respondent No.2) alleged that employees of the certifying agent company (the appellants) failed to pay the value of the exported garments. A complaint was lodged under IPC

PREMKUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2008 INSC 149919 December 2008Case Partly allowed

The deceased Jeeja, married to appellant Premkumar, died by suicide in Tamil Nadu on 14 Feb 2003. Her father‑in‑law reported the death to the Courtallam police (Tamil Nadu) who registered a case under s.174 CrPC and concluded it was a suicide due to mental illness, halting further investigation. The deceased’s father l

HARENDRA NATH CHAKRABORTYversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2008 INSC 150019 December 2008Dismissed

Harendra Nath Chakraborty, a licensed kerosene dealer, was convicted under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for failing to display stock and price lists and for not maintaining the stock register as required by the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968 and the West Bengal Declaration of Sto

CHANAKYA DHIBAR (DEAD)versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

2003 INSC 74319 December 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns the murder of Jaba Dhibar on 16 September 1985, for which five accused were convicted by the trial court under Sections 148 and 304 Part I read with Section 149 of the IPC. The Calcutta High Court acquitted the accused, disbelieving the testimony of two eye‑witnesses (PW‑3 and PW‑5) and labeling them

SIDDIQUEversusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

2024 INSC 87719 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Siddique, was charged under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC for alleged sexual abuse, with the FIR filed in August 2024. He sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which the Kerala High Court rejected. On appeal, the Supreme Court noted that the complainant filed the complaint nearly eigh

JAYANTILAL VERMAversusSTATE OF M.P. (NOW CHHATTISGARH)

2020 INSC 64919 November 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Jayantilal Verma, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the strangulation death of his wife, Sahodara Bai, whose body was found in their matrimonial home. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of the step‑brother (PW‑1) and the post‑mortem report indicating homicidal asphyxia. Althou

PROF. N. K. GANGULYversusCBI NEW DELHI

2015 INSC 84419 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an alleged illegal transfer of a government plot by senior officials of ICMR and ICPO, who were accused of criminal conspiracy and obtaining undue pecuniary advantage under Section 120B IPC and Sections 13(1)(d) & 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The CBI filed a charge‑sheet and the S

K. SRINIVASversusK. SUNITA

2014 INSC 79119 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The husband and wife were married in 1989; the wife later filed a criminal complaint against the husband and his family under several IPC provisions and the Dowry Prohibition Act, which led to their arrest. The husband filed for divorce on the grounds of cruelty and alleged irretrievable breakdown, and the wife was lat

JAIMINIBEN HIRENBHAI VYAS &ANR.versusHIRENBHAI RAMESHCHANDRA VYAS &ANR.

2014 INSC 79319 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The wife and her minor daughter sought maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court initially granted interim maintenance but later awarded maintenance only to the daughter, denying the wife on the ground that she could earn a liveliho

GANESHAversusSHARANAPPA & ANR.

2013 INSC 76219 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Ganesha was acquitted by a trial court of offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 324 and 504 read with 34. On the informant's petition, the Karnataka High Court, in revision, set aside the acquittal and convicted Ganesha under s.324 IPC, imposing six months' simple imprisonment and a fine. Ganesha appealed

SUNIL MAHADEO JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 76319 November 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the custodial death of a kidnapping suspect who was arrested by three police officers and found dead in the lock‑up. The trial court had acquitted all accused, but the High Court convicted them under sections 302, 342, 218 and 193 IPC. The Court held that the arrest panchnama and register wer

SAYGO BAIversusCHUEERU BAJRANGI

2010 INSC 79119 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Saygo Bai, filed a Section 125 CrPC application for maintenance for herself and her two minor children after her husband, Chueeru Bajrangi, took a second wife and threw her out of the matrimonial home. The trial court, revision court, and High Court dismissed her claim, relying on her alleged abandonment

NAHAR SINGH YADAV & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 79019 November 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an application by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to transfer the trial of the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam from the Special Judge, CBI, Ghaziabad to a court in Delhi. The case involved alleged fraudulent withdrawals of government funds by former court officials and judges. The C

REDAUL HUSSAIN KHANversusNATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

2009 INSC 124819 November 2009Dismissed

The petitioner, Redaul Hussain Khan, was arrested on 31 May 2009 for allegedly sending money to an extremist group later declared an unlawful association under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). While the investigation was transferred to the National Investigation Agency, the petitioner sought statu

MOORTHYversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2008 INSC 131719 November 2008Dismissed

The case arose from a land dispute in which the deceased, Murugan, was stabbed multiple times by accused Rathinam and Moorthy in a government hospital, sustaining twenty incised injuries that caused his death. Moorthy, the appellant, gave a statement under Section 313 of the CrPC claiming self‑defence, but the trial co

VITHAL PUNDALIK ZENDGEversusST ATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 132519 November 2008Dismissed

The appellant Vithal Pundalik Zendge and eight others were convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.149 for the killing of the appellant's brother. The conviction was based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑1, who was the sister of the deceased. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguin

STATE OF PUNJABversusRANINDER SINGH AND ANR. ETC.

2007 INSC 116219 November 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard two appeals arising from orders of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. In Criminal Appeal No. 1608 of 2007 the Court considered the grant of anticipatory bail to Raninder Singh and others under Section 438(2)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and clarified that the court may impose a cond

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusTARA DUTT AND ANR.

1999 INSC 52619 November 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh charged Tara Dutt and others under IPC sections 468, 420, 120‑B and the Prevention of Corruption Act for forging receipts in 1983. The charge‑sheet was filed in 1987 and cognizance was taken the same year. The Special Judge acquitted them of the charged offences but convicted them under se

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusGANGULA SATYA MURTHY

1996 INSC 134019 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted Gangula Satya Murthy for raping and throttling to death a 16‑year‑old girl, Satya Vani, whose body was found on a cot in his house. The trial court convicted him under IPC sections 302 and 376, relying on medical evidence of ante‑mortem neck injuries, a fresh vaginal tear, and an

K.M. MATHEWversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

1991 INSC 30219 November 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The Chief Editor of a daily newspaper was charged in a complaint alleging defamation under Sections 500 and 34 of the IPC, but the complaint contained no specific allegation that he edited or approved the offending news item. The magistrate issued summons, the editor pleaded not guilty and requested that the proceeding

BIHAR LEGAL SUPPORT SOCIETYversusTHE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA & ANR.

1986 INSC 24119 November 1986Disposed off

The Bihar Legal Support Society filed a writ petition seeking that special leave petitions (SLPs) against orders refusing bail or anticipatory bail be listed immediately, arguing that "small men" should receive the same urgency as industrialists. The Supreme Court held that the decision to list such SLPs urgently lies

ISHWAR SINGH BAGGA & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN ETC.

1986 INSC 24219 November 1986Case Allowed

The petitioners, holders of contract carriage permits, challenged a 1975 Rajasthan Government notification that authorised officers of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (Deputy General Manager (Traffic), Assistant Depot Managers and Traffic Inspectors) to exercise the powers under Section 129A of the Motor

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusGOWTHU RANGHUNAYAKULU AND ORS.

1986 INSC 24419 November 1986Disposed off

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted ten accused for forming an unlawful assembly and murdering a man returning from a canal, with several eye‑witnesses (PW‑1, 3, 4, 6, 7) testifying to the gruesome attack. The Sessions Court convicted the accused under IPC sections 147, 148, 149 and 302, imposing death, life impriso

INDRAKUNWARversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 93419 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Indrakunwar was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly killing a newborn child she was said to have delivered and then thrown into a pond. The prosecution’s case rested on circumstantial evidence and the accused's statement under Section 313 CrPC, but failed to establish any relationship between the accused and

NAVEEN @ AJAYversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2023 INSC 93619 October 2023Disposed off

The appellant, Naveen (alias Ajay), was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a three‑month‑old girl under multiple provisions of the IPC and the POCSO Act. The trial was completed in fifteen days, during which a legal‑aid counsel was appointed only hours before the case began and was not given su

PARANAGOUDA AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 93319 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the suicide by self‑immolation of Akkamahadevi, married to the accused, who was alleged to have subjected her to mental and physical cruelty for dowry. The trial court convicted the accused under IPC sections 498A, 304B (read with s.34), and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, based largely

NAZMAversusJAVED @ ANJUM

2012 INSC 49119 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed an FIR under dowry and related offences against the respondent. The respondent's family filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash the FIR; the High Court stayed the arrest of the respondent and ordered a monthly deposit of Rs 2,000. After the investigation closed and the magistra

SAYED MOHD. AHMED KAZMIversusSTATE, GNCTD & ORS.

2012 INSC 48719 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sayed Mohd. Ahmed Kazmi, was arrested in connection with an alleged bomb attack and was placed in police and then judicial custody. After the initial 90‑day period expired, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate extended his custody for another 90 days with retrospective effect, despite the appellant's pendin

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusVISHWANATH MARANNA SHETTY

2012 INSC 49419 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State prosecuted Vishwanath Maranna Shetty, accused No.9 in a Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) case, alleging that he managed funds for an organised crime syndicate and abetted the murder of Farid Tanasha. The Special Court denied his bail application, but the Bombay High Court later granted bail.

VITHAL LAXMAN CHALAWADI & ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY P. PROSECUTOR

2010 INSC 70719 October 2010Disposed off

The deceased Ramesh was killed during an altercation with members of the Chalawadi family over a disputed marriage. The trial court convicted two of the six accused for assault, while the High Court later convicted four under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for murder. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the eye

SAMGHAJI HARIBA PATILversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2006 INSC 71519 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Samghaji Hariba Patil, was charged under IPC sections 302, 307, 504 r/w 34 for the murder of Murugappa during a land‑related quarrel. The trial court acquitted him, finding that the prosecution had not proved his motive, that the alleged weapon (a hammer) was not typical for agricultural use, and that wi

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusMUKESH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 71819 October 2006Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged three reservation clerks with abetting Suresh Shah in the illegal procurement and sale of railway tickets under Sections 143(1) and 143(2) of the Railways Act, 1989. Shah was arrested with a large number of tickets and cash, but later absconded, and the clerks were convicted on the b

R. SUNDARARAJANversusSTATE BY D.S.P., SPE, CBI, CHENNAI

2006 INSC 71919 October 2006Dismissed

The appellant, a Group D public servant at the Chennai Harbour Telephone Exchange, demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs.1500 for securing a permanent telephone connection for a subscriber. He was caught red‑handed in a police‑arranged trap, leading to a charge sheet under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The tria

ANIL SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 72019 October 2006Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Anil Singh and another, were named in an FIR for the murder of Ranjit Singh but the investigating officer filed a final report clearing them, which the magistrate accepted, and no chargesheet was filed against them. During the trial, witness testimony implicated the appellants, leading the prosecution t

YUVARAJ AMBAR MOHITEversusSTTE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 73619 October 2006Dismissed

The appellant, a Judo Karate teacher, was accused of murdering his foster sister-in-law after a dispute involving another autorickshaw driver. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, notably that the deceased was last seen with the appellant, and the testimony of three witnesses, including a child who identi

STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)versusDHARAMPAL

2001 INSC 52719 October 2001Disposed off

The State of Delhi appealed the acquittal of Dharampal, who had been convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated "lal mirch kutti". The Sessions Judge had set aside the conviction on the ground that the contents of the Central Food Laboratory certificate were not read out to the accu

STATE OF BIHARversusBAIDNATH PRASAD@ BAIDYANATH SHAH AND ANR.

2001 INSC 52819 October 2001Leave Granted & Allowed

An FIR under Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 was filed in 1991 and a complaint was lodged before a Judicial Magistrate on 13‑01‑1992. After a series of revisions and a long period of inactivity—largely caused by the accused’s own challenges and absence—the case remained pending for mor

GULAM HUSSAIN SHAIKH CHOUGULEversusS. REYNOLDS, SUPTD. OF CUSTOMS, MARMGOA

2001 INSC 53019 October 2001Dismissed

Gulam Hussain Shaikh Chougule was convicted under Section 135 of the Customs Act for allegedly smuggling 207 silver ingots aboard a trawler intercepted by customs officers. During the investigation, his statement was recorded by a gazetted customs officer under Section 108 of the Customs Act, without the safeguards of

IN RE: FRAMING GUIDELINES REGARDING POTENTIAL MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE CONSIDERED WHILE IMPOSING DEATH SENTENCESversusIN RE: FRAMING GUIDELINES REGARDING POTENTIAL MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE CONSIDERED WHILE IMPOSING DEATH SENTENCES

2022 INSC 98719 September 2022Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court, hearing Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.1 of 2022, examined whether a separate, meaningful hearing on sentencing is required after conviction for a capital offence under Section 235(2) of the CrPC. It noted divergent judicial opinions on same‑day sentencing and the lack of a uniform framework for co

RAJU @ RAJENDRA PRASADversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2022 INSC 98319 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased was found hanging from a tree after a dispute with his wife Suman Devi, who allegedly had an illicit relationship with Raju. The FIR alleged that Suman Devi, Raju and other family members conspired to murder the deceased. The trial court and the Rajasthan High Court convicted the accused under Section 302

SMT. GARGIversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 105619 September 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Smt. Gargi, was convicted of murdering her husband by strangulation and subsequently hanging his body to simulate suicide, based largely on the testimony of the deceased's brother and sister. The prosecution alleged strained marital relations, illicit affairs, and a property dispute as motive, while the

GANPAT SINGHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2017 INSC 95619 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ganpat Singh, was convicted for the murder of Shantabai, whose body was discovered in a dry well and identified as the mother of a minor. The trial court relied on circumstantial evidence: the deceased was last seen with the appellant, silver ornaments allegedly lent to her were recovered from the appell

SAMPELLY SATYANARAYANA RAOversusINDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED

2016 INSC 88719 September 2016Dismissed

The appellant, a director of Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd, had taken a loan of Rs 11.5 crore which was disbursed on 28 February 2002. The loan agreement required repayment of installments by post‑dated cheques, which were described as "security". Several of these cheques were dishonoured and a crimina

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH CBIversusVIKRAM ANANTRAI DOSHI AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 65519 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI prosecuted Vikram Doshi and others for fraud involving bank loans, forged letters of credit, and diversion of funds to fictitious companies, alleging offences under IPC sections 420, 406 and others. The bank later settled the civil dispute, paid a sum and issued a "no due certificate", after which the Bombay Hi

YOGENDRA PRATAP SINGHversusSAVITRI PANDEY & ANR.

2014 INSC 65019 September 2014Hearing Adjourned

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent for dishonoured cheques, after serving a notice on 23 September 2008 but before the statutory 15‑day period expired (complaint filed on 7 October 2008). The trial magistrate took cognizance, which the Allahabad Hi

NAGOOR PICHAI @ BADUSHAversusSTATE TR. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2013 INSC 64019 September 2013Dismissed

Nagoor Pichai @ Badusha was convicted under IPC s.302 for murdering his paternal uncle and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was 19 years 8 months old at the time of the offence and 22 years 9 months old at conviction. He applied for bail, contending that the Tamil Nadu Borstal Schools Act, 1925 should have been appli

DEEPAK RAIversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 63819 September 2013Disposed off

The appellants Jagat Rai, Deepak Rai and Bachcha Babu Rai were convicted for the pre‑meditated murder of an informant, his wife and five children by locking them in a house and setting it ablaze, motivated by the informant's refusal to withdraw an FIR. The trial court sentenced all three to death, a decision affirmed b

BALAJI GUNTHU DHULEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 40919 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Balaji Gunthu Dhule was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34 for the death of Ranga Rao during a quarrel, based primarily on the testimony of several eye‑witnesses. The High Court upheld the conviction relying chiefly on PW‑10’s testimony and the appellant’s own statement under CrPC section 313, inferring that PW‑10

PUDHU RAJA & ANR.versusSTATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2012 INSC 41119 September 2012Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Jayalakshmi, who was set on fire in a house she shared with her husband Pudhu Raja (A-1) and his mother (A-2). The prosecution alleged that the accused killed her to extort dowry, invoking Sections 302 r/w 34, 304(b) and 201 of the IPC, while the trial court acquitted them citing contrad

MAHESH CHANDRA VERMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2012 INSC 41019 September 2012Disposed off

The Jharkhand High Court had appointed 17 Additional District Judges (ADJs) to the regular cadre under a 2001 advertisement, but later appointed another 25 ADJs as Fast Track Court (FTC) judges using the same merit list. The petitioners, sub‑judges, challenged these later appointments as illegal, arguing that FTC posts

SHIVLAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2011 INSC 69419 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Fifteen persons were charged with the murder of Shankar Satnami. The sole eye‑witness, the victim's wife (PW‑9), was illiterate and her testimony was found to contain contradictions and improvements. The police recorded only a "Dehati Nalish" instead of a formal FIR, failed to send a copy of the FIR to the magistrate a

PRAMOD KUMAR SAXENAversusUNION OF !NOIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 106119 September 2008Case Partly allowed

Pramod Kumar Saxena, an under‑trial prisoner detained since August 1998 for alleged fraud and other offences in 48 cases across six states, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking release on bail, arguing that his prolonged detention violated his fundamental rights. The State argued that the offences were non‑ba

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSUJAY MANGESH POYAREKAR

2008 INSC 106519 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court acquitted Sujay Mangesh Poyarekar of offences under Sections 307 and 504 IPC, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The State of Maharashtra filed an application under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for leave to appeal the acquittal, which the H

ANWARI BEGUMversusSHER MOHAMMAD AND ANR.

2005 INSC 42819 September 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Anwar Begum, challenged the grant of bail to the accused, Sher Mohammad, who had allegedly shot her husband with intent to kill. The trial court denied bail based on eyewitness testimony, but the Allahabad High Court later granted bail through a terse, non‑reasoned order. The Supreme Court held that a ba

M. PRABHULALversusTHE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE

2003 INSC 49819 September 2003Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of four accused convicted under the NDPS Act for a large heroin seizure. The appellants contended that their confessional statements recorded under Section 67 were involuntary, obtained through torture, and inadmissible because they were made to Revenue Intelligence officers rather

M.NARAYANDASversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 49919 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed

M. Narayandas, the owner of a plot of land, filed a suit for permanent injunction after his sister's family attempted to transfer the land based on documents he alleged were forged. He lodged a criminal complaint alleging forgery, leading to an FIR under IPC sections 468, 470, 471 and 120B. The Karnataka High Court, in

RAJINDER PRASADversusBASHIR AND ORS.

2001 INSC 45219 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rajinder Prasad filed applications before a Judicial Magistrate to add offence under Section 395 IPC and to implead four additional accused. The magistrate, invoking Chapter XIV of the Cr.P.C., allowed the applications and committed the case to the Sessions Court, which framed charges including Section 39

WARIYAM SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

1995 INSC 58419 September 1995Dismissed

The appellants were convicted under Section 120B IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 for a shooting incident that resulted in death. They challenged the conviction on several grounds, chiefly that the confessional statements were not sent to the Chief Judicial Magi

V. SUJATHA ETC. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 39719 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined three sets of appeals arising from a bus‑driver case, a food‑exporter case, and several petitions seeking expunction of adverse judicial remarks. In the bus‑driver appeal, the Court held that the High Court had erred in overturning the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s acquittal because the evidenc

RAGHUBIR SINGH & OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1986 INSC 19519 September 1986Dismissed

The petitioners, five accused including Simranjit Singh Mann, were arrested near the Indo‑Nepal border and charged with offences under the Indian Penal Code, while being detained under the National Security Act. They were granted bail under the proviso to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but could not be

K. PRABHAKAR HEGDEversusBANK OF BARODA

2025 INSC 99719 August 2025Disposed off

K. Prabhakar Hegde, a former officer of Vijaya Bank (later merged with Bank of Baroda), was dismissed after disciplinary proceedings for alleged irregularities in approving temporary overdrafts. He challenged the denial of the preliminary inquiry report, the failure of the Inquiry Officer to generally question him as r

MOHD. ANWARversusTHE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

2020 INSC 49619 August 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Mohd. Anwar, was accused of robbing a motorist with two accomplices, using a knife and a revolver, and extorting Rs.30,000. The trial court convicted him of robbery with hurt and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment, which the High Court reduced to two years under Section 394 IPC and added a conviction

SALEEM AHMEDversusSTATE & ANR.

2019 INSC 91919 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a house owner, was charged with electricity theft after BSES issued a bill of Rs.97,786 and filed a criminal case. The parties settled the dispute in a Permanent Lok Adalat, agreeing that the appellant would pay Rs.83,120 as full and final settlement, which he duly paid. Despite the settlement, BSES late

TARUN JIT TEJPALversusTHE STATE OF GOA & ANR.

2019 INSC 91819 August 2019Dismissed

Tarun Jit Tejpal was charged under IPC sections 354, 354A, 354B, 341, 342, 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k) for alleged sexual offences. After the charge‑sheet was filed, the trial court framed charges under CrPC ss.227/228. The appellant sought discharge on the ground that the informant and the investigating officer were the s

HARSARUP PANWARversusSTATE OF DELHI THROUGH CBI

2015 INSC 58419 August 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the sentencing of A‑15 Harsarup Panwar, the cinema owner held responsible for the 1997 Uphaar fire that killed 59 people. The Court affirmed his conviction under IPC sections 304A, 337, 338 and 36. It imposed one year of rigorous imprisonment but, considering his advanced age and ill health,

VENKATESANversusRANI &ANR.

2013 INSC 54319 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Venkatesan, was tried for offences under Sections 498A, 304B and 302 IPC, alleged to have harassed his wife for dowry and burnt her to death. The trial court acquitted him, but the Madras High Court, on revision filed by the deceased's mother, set aside the acquittal and ordered a fresh trial, finding fl

KESHAV DUTTversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 53019 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a meter reader, was convicted under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for demanding a bribe, based primarily on a handwriting expert’s report linking him to a paper (Ex.PR) used in the alleged offence. The Supreme Court examined whether such expert opinion could be admitted witho

RAJESHWAR TIWARI AND ORS.versusNANDA KISHORE ROY

2010 INSC 53219 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The employee, Nanda Kishore Roy, complained that his employer had wrongfully deducted Rs.1,640 per month as income tax and failed to deposit it, leading a magistrate to issue summons under sections 406/1208 IPC. The employer argued that the deductions were mandated by the Income Tax Act and that the complaint was essen

GAMINI BALA KOTESWARA RAO & ORS.versusSTATE OF AP. THR. SECRETARY

2009 INSC 105519 August 2009Dismissed

The case arose from a violent incident during the 1995 Mandal elections in Gadiparthivaripalem, where the candidate Soodidela Satyanarayana Reddy was murdered by a group of about twenty accused armed with stones, knives and axes. The trial court acquitted all accused, deeming the two eye‑witnesses (the victim's nephew

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusBHASKAR KUSHALI KOTHARKAR AND ORS.

2004 INSC 45819 August 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed against the Karnataka High Court's acquittal of four accused who had been convicted by a Sessions Court for murder and related offences under Sections 304 Part II, 149, 324, 148 and 143 of the IPC. The High Court set aside the conviction on the sole ground that the investigating officer

MADAN LAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2003 INSC 40419 August 2003Dismissed

The police received a secret telephonic tip that charas was being transported in a car, recorded the information and promptly transmitted it to the Superintendent of Police as required under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. A raiding party intercepted the vehicle, seized a bag containing charas, and sent sealed samples for

STATE OF M.P.versusKEDIA LEATHER AND LIQUOR LTD. AND ORS .

2003 INSC 40519 August 2003Case Partly allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged the closure orders issued by a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) against Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. for alleged water and air pollution. The High Court held that the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and

NIRMAL SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1996 INSC 89819 August 1996Disposed off

The murder case arising from FIR No. 89 dated 16 July 1994 was investigated by the CBI, which charged fourteen persons including Nirmal Singh. After being denied bail repeatedly, the Sessions Judge, Ambala, granted interim bail on 11 May 1996 without the prosecution present. The High Court stayed that bail and, on 28 M

STATE OF PUNJABversusMANINDER SINGH

1996 INSC 90319 August 1996Dismissed

The State of Punjab filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the Punjab & Haryana High Court's order that quashed the FIR against Maninder Singh for alleged misappropriation of Rs. 1.61 crore of public funds. The Supreme Court directed the State to produce the charge‑sheet and statements of witnesses under Section 16

SAT PAL @ SADHUversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1992 INSC 21019 August 1992Dismissed

Sat Pal alias Sadhu, convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment in 1978, filed a writ petition claiming his continued detention was illegal because he had served more than 14 years (including remission) and thus his sentence should be deemed commuted under Section 55 of the IPC or Section 433(b)

MOHAN PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSMT. USHA RANI RAJGARIA AND ORS.

1992 INSC 21119 August 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute involved a house in Delhi where the owner, Usha Rani Rajgaria, claimed that the appellants, Mohan Pandey and another, had illegally taken possession of part of the property and were trespassing. While a civil suit for eviction was already pending, the owner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Con

TEESTA ATUL SETALVADversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 63719 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Teesta Atul Setalvad was arrested in June 2022 for alleged offences under Sections 468, 469, 471, 194, 211, 218 and 120B of the IPC, relating to alleged influence over false affidavits concerning documents from 2002‑2012. After being denied bail by the trial court and the High Court, the Supreme Court granted her inter

NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUversusMOHIT AGGARWAL

2022 INSC 73019 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) sought to overturn a Delhi High Court order that granted post‑arrest bail to Mohit Aggarwal, who was charged under Sections 8, 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act. Aggarwal had made a statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, implicating himself and co‑accused in a large drug seizure, but the

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