Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
21 judgments · newest first · showing 1–21
The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Sandip Ramesh Gangurde, who is one of fifteen accused in a case involving serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, the Arms Act …
The applicant, Mayur Dinkar Nikam, sought anticipatory bail in connection with an alleged assault and threat against an informant on 15 March 2026. The prosecution alleged that Nikam, along with co‑accused, held the informant’s neck and threatened him with a scythe, asserting that the informant was …
The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Swapnil Dnyaneshwar Suryavanshi, who was charged with offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Arms Act, Maharashtra Police Act, MCOC Act, and Criminal Law Amendment …
Shankar Mukesh Kambale applied for regular bail in a case (Crime No. 367 of 2025) alleging assault with a sharp weapon and intent to kill, charged under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013. The prosecution presented CCTV footage …
The State of Gujarat appealed under Section 377 of the CrPC seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on Ketanbhai Ramanbhai Parmar, who was convicted of raping a five‑year‑old girl and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000. The State argued that the punishment …
The appellants, members of a political party, were arrested after a communal protest triggered by an incendiary social media post on 10 October 2022 and were later released on bail. Six months later, the police prepared a gang chart and lodged a fresh FIR on 30 April 2023 under the Uttar Pradesh …
The appellant, Ramayan Singh, filed an FIR alleging that Respondent No.2 (Vivek Pal) and co-accused Punit Pal violently assaulted his uncle, resulting in the uncle's death. Both accused were charged under multiple IPC sections, the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 and were initially denied bail by …
The appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC for allegedly raping his sister‑in‑law’s younger daughter, who was claimed to be a minor at the time. The prosecution’s case rested on the prosecutrix’s delayed testimony, a school register indicating a birth date of 04‑04‑1987, and a medical report …
The victim was allegedly raped and set on fire by the accused, Shailendra Kumar Rai, and later died of septicemia caused by the burn injuries. While on her way to death she gave a statement to police officer Lallan Prasad, which was read back to her, signed, and later treated as a dying declaration. …
The appellant, a known acquaintance of the victim's family, entered the home of a blind Scheduled Caste woman and raped her, after which he was apprehended at the scene. The trial courts convicted him under Section 376(1) of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes …
A two‑and‑a‑half‑year‑old girl was abducted, brutally raped and murdered by her maternal uncle, Shatrughna Baban Meshram. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 302, 376(1), 376(2)(f,i,m) and 376A of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, imposing death sentences on the charges of …
The appellant, OMANAKUTTAN, was convicted for voluntarily causing grievous hurt by pouring acid on his neighbour, Sunil Kumar, in 1997, resulting in extensive burns and permanent disfigurement. The trial court sentenced him to one year imprisonment and a fine, a conviction affirmed by the High …
The appellants, a police driver and a singer, were convicted of gang rape of a 16‑year‑old girl and of criminal conspiracy under Sections 376(2)(g) and 120‑B IPC, receiving fifteen years and ten years rigorous imprisonment respectively, to run concurrently. They challenged the conviction on the …
Maqbool was charged with an acid attack in which the victim sustained injuries that a medical report described as simple. He applied for discharge under Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code, arguing that the provision applies only to grievous hurt. The trial court and the Allahabad High Court …
The Supreme Court of India considered the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which criminalized 'carnal intercourse against the order of nature' with any man, woman, or animal. The petitioners challenged the provision insofar as it criminalized consensual sexual …
The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed the acquittal of the accused in a rape case involving a 12‑year‑old girl. The trial court had convicted the accused under Section 376 IPC based on the victim's testimony, medical evidence of a torn hymen, and an eyewitness who saw the accused fleeing. The High …
The appellant, a 19‑year‑old male, was convicted under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC for kidnapping and raping a girl who was under sixteen. The girl had voluntarily left her home and stayed with the appellant for about ten days, and the sexual intercourse was described as consensual. The trial …
The Supreme Court considered two criminal appeals filed by the Attorney General against the High Court’s order allowing the recall of all prosecution witnesses in a rape trial after the accused’s statement under Section 313 CrPC had been recorded. The accused argued that his earlier counsel was …
The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh challenging the High Court's grant of bail to several convicts who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for serious offences under the IPC and the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. The central issue was whether, at the …
The Constitution Bench examined whether a police officer must register a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) upon receiving information of a cognizable offence, or may first conduct a preliminary inquiry to test its veracity. Relying on the …
Shimbhu and another were convicted of gang rape and related offences under Sections 376(2)(g), 366, 342, 363, 506 and 34 of the IPC and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment. They appealed, seeking reduction of the sentence on the basis of a compromise with the victim, the passage of time …
