Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Evidence Act, 1872

2,253 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,601–1,800.

RAGHBLR SINGH GILLversusGURCHARAN SINGH TOHRA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1279 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by independent candidate Raghbir Singh Gill challenging the setting aside of his election to the Council of States on grounds of tampered postal ballot papers. The High Court had found that four postal ballots, originally cast for Akali candidate Gurcharan Singh Tohra, were altered

KIZHAKKE VATTAKANDIYIL MADHAVAN (DEAD) THR. LRS.versusTHIYYURKUNNATH MEETHAL JANAKI AND ORS

2024 INSC 2879 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a suit for partition of a property claimed by a son born of a widow’s second marriage, who sought his share through his mother, the widow. The widow had remarried after the death of her first husband, and the plaintiff relied on a series of lease and assignment deeds executed in 1910 and 1925 to esta

SMT. NAJMUNISHAversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 2909 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The prosecution alleged that secret information received by an intelligence officer indicated that Accused No.4 would transport narcotics in an auto‑rickshaw, leading to a raid in which 1.45 kg of charas was seized from the vehicle and, subsequently, 2.098 kg was recovered from the house of Accused No.4 where Accused N

JAGDISH PRASAD PATEL (DEAD) THR. LRS.& ANOTHERversusSHIVNATH & OTHERS

2019 INSC 4939 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of several khasra lands, alleging that their fathers were lessees under a patta-lease. The appellants-defendants contended that the land had been auctioned in 1929 to their grandfather Gaya Din, who obtained a valid patta-lease (Ex.D‑20) an

BASALINGAPPAversusMUDIBASAPPA

2019 INSC 5009 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mudibasappa, issued a cheque for Rs.6,00,000 that was returned for insufficient funds, leading the complainant, Basalingappa, to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court acquitted the accused, holding that the complainant failed to prove his financial capacity

ANURAG SONIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2019 INSC 5039 April 2019Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Anurag Soni, had a romantic relationship with the prosecutrix and promised to marry her, while already being engaged to another woman. He lured the prosecutrix to his residence, engaged in sexual intercourse after she initially resisted, and later reneged on the marriage promise, marrying the other woman

STATE OF ORISSAversusPRASANNA KUMAR MOHANTY

2009 INSC 4819 April 2009Disposed off

The State of Orissa prosecuted Prasanna Kumar Mohanty and examined the investigating officer, Bipin Behari Mahapatra, in chief on 1 September 1999. Although the defence was given two occasions to cross‑examine the witness, he was later recalled and failed to appear from 2003 to 2006, citing illness and old age. The Hig

NARAIN SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2008 INSC 4719 April 2008Disposed off

The appellants, led by Narain Singh, were involved in a land dispute during which they attempted to sow jowar in a field belonging to the complainants. When the complainants and their husband tried to stop them, Narain Singh fired a gunshot that killed the husband, and his sons assaulted the complainants with sticks. T

SALIM AKHTAR @ MOTAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2003 INSC 2239 April 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Salim Akhtar (Mota), was convicted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act (TADA) for allegedly possessing a pistol, cartridges, a bomb and RDX that were recovered after he led police to a polythene bag in an open area. The pistol was not sealed at the time of recovery and its make a

RAKESH SINGHA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 4969 April 1996Dismissed

The case arose from a violent incident on 10 May 1978 at a marriage venue in Simla, where a group of youths armed with hockey sticks, iron rods and other weapons attacked the gathering in retaliation for a prior altercation involving a parked jeep. The assault resulted in injuries to several persons and the death of Su

GURBAKSH SINGH SIBBIA ETC .versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1980 INSC 689 April 1980Case Partly allowed

Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia, a former minister, faced allegations of political corruption and applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, fearing arrest for non‑bailable offences. The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the applications, imposing a series of restrictive conditions and rejecting blanket b

SUMETI VIJversusM/S PARAMOUNT TECH FAB INDUSTRIES

2021 INSC 1729 March 2021Leave Granted & Dismissed

The appellant, Sumeti Vij, ordered non‑woven fabric from the respondent, received the goods and issued two cheques to pay the invoices. Both cheques were returned by the bank for insufficient funds; legal notices were served but the appellant neither responded nor paid within the statutory period, leading to two compla

NILESH DINKAR PARADKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2011 INSC 1959 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nilesh Dinkar Paradkar, was convicted under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) and the IPC based largely on voice identification of a recorded telephone conversation. The High Court upheld his conviction while acquitting the other accused, relying on the officer's identification of th

KUNHIABDULLA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2004 INSC 1469 March 2004Disposed off

The deceased woman, Sherifa, married in 1989, allegedly faced mental and physical harassment from her husband for not receiving the full dowry of Rs.35,000. On 29 August 1991 she jumped into an uncovered well, resulting in her death, which the prosecution claimed was a suicide linked to dowry harassment. The trial cour

SHANKAR NARAYAN BHADOLKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2004 INSC 1489 March 2004Case Partly allowed

Shankar Narayan Bhadolkar invited the deceased to a dinner and, after the meal, shot him at close range with a loaded gun, causing instantaneous death. The appellant then wrapped the body in a gunny bag and disposed of it in a well. He pleaded that the killing was accidental, invoking Section 80 IPC, or alternatively t

RAVIversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 1709 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Ravi was convicted of murdering his first wife Jamni by strangulation based largely on circumstantial evidence and hostile witness testimony. The prosecution's case relied on a Zero FIR, a post‑mortem report indicating asphyxia, and the recovery of a rope, while key eyewitnesses turned hostile. The Suprem

PAPPUversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 1649 February 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Pappu, lured a seven‑year‑old girl under the pretext of picking lychees, raped and murdered her, and later disclosed the location of her body to the police. He was convicted by the trial court and the High Court of offences under IPC sections 376, 302 and 201 and POCSO sections 5 and 6, and sentenced to

PAWAN KUMAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

1998 INSC 769 February 1998Case Partly allowed

Pawan Kumar (husband) and his parents-in‑law were convicted for the death of his wife, Urmil, who died from severe burns within seven years of marriage. The prosecution alleged that the husband and his relatives repeatedly demanded a scooter and refrigerator as dowry, subjected the wife to mental cruelty and harassment

TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARDversusA. VISWAM (DEAD) BY LRS.

1996 INSC 2199 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Tamil Nadu Housing Board acquired 339 acres of land, including a one‑acre parcel earmarked for a public park, under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The original owners, represented by A. Viswam (deceased), claimed they remained in possession and sought a perpetual injunction against the Board. The Board argued that

RINA KUMARI @ RINA DEVI @ REENAversusDINESH KUMAR MAHTO @ DINESH KUMAR MAHATO AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 559 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The husband, Dinesh Kumar Mahto, obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against his wife, Reena, in 2022, yet she continued to live apart, alleging mental cruelty, dowry demands, and a miscarriage. Reena filed a maintenance suit under Section 125 of the CrPC in 2019 and was awarded ₹10,000 per month. The

GOVERDHAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 479 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The trial court convicted two brothers, Goverdhan and Rajendra, and their father Chintaram for the murder of Suraj under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, based primarily on the testimony of Suraj's mother, Lata Bai, who was the sole eye‑witness. The High Court upheld the convictions of the brothers but acquitted t

SHER SINGH @ PARTAPAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 219 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sher Singh, was convicted under Sections 3048 and 498A IPC for the alleged dowry‑related suicide of his wife, Harjinder Kaur, who had reportedly complained of dowry harassment two months before her death. The prosecution alleged that the husband and his family demanded a motorcycle and a fridge, leading

KANHAIYALALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 259 January 2008Dismissed

The appellant Kanhaiyalal was convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act based primarily on a statement he gave to an officer under Section 67 of the Act. The key issues were whether such a statement could be used as a confession for conviction, whether it attracted the bar of Sections 24

MADHUKAR D. SHENDEversusTARABAI ABA SHEDAGE

2002 INSC 149 January 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Madhukar D. Shende, claimed title to a suit property based on a registered will executed by the deceased Bhagubai in favour of her niece Chingubai, which was later transferred to the plaintiff. The defendant, Tarabai Abashedage, contested the will, alleging oral gift and adverse possession, and the trial

LAL SINGH ETC. ETCversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2001 INSC 139 January 2001Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of five appellants under Section 3(3) of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) for alleged conspiracy to commit terrorist acts, the recovery of large quantities of arms, ammunition and explosives, and related offences under the IPC, Explosive Substanc

GOVIND MANDAVIversusSTATE OF CHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 13998 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Govind Mandavi was convicted for murder under IPC s.302 r/w s.34 and for an offence under the SC/ST Act based on the testimony of the deceased's wife (PW‑2) and her father‑in‑law (PW‑1), who identified the accused after a delayed statement and a Test Identification Parade (TIP). The Supreme Court examined

SIVAKUMARversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2005 INSC 6008 December 2005Dismissed

The appellant Sivakumar was convicted under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code for the death of his relative, based on circumstantial evidence, the recovery of an air‑gun, and an extra‑judicial confession he made to a Village Administrative Officer (VAO) and later to a police inspector. The appellant challeng

U.P. STATE BRASSWARE CORPN. LTD. AND ANR.versusUDAI NARAIN PANDEY

2005 INSC 6028 December 2005Case Partly allowed

The workman Udai Narain Pandey was engaged on a daily‑wage basis for a fixed tenure by U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. His services were terminated on the expiry of that tenure, but he had rendered more than 240 days of service in the preceding year, making him a "workman" under Section 6‑N of the U.P. Industrial

HARJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2005 INSC 6038 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Harjit Singh was convicted by the trial court under Section 304‑B IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife, Jasbir Kaur, and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved the essential ingredients of a dowry death – that the deceased was sub

MEERA KANWARIAversusSUNITA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 6058 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The first respondent, a Rajput woman, married a Scheduled Caste man and fraudulently obtained a Scheduled Caste certificate by birth, which was later cancelled. She contested a Delhi municipal corporation election for a seat reserved for Scheduled Caste women and was declared elected. The appellant, another candidate,

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusAKHILESH SINGH

2004 INSC 7028 December 2004Dismissed

The Central Bureau of Investigation appealed against the Allahabad High Court’s order that quashed the murder‑conspiracy charges against Akhilesh Singh, a co‑accused in the killing of badminton player Syed Modi. The main accused, Dr. Sanjay Singh, and the deceased’s wife were earlier discharged, and the Supreme Court h

DULI CHAND (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusJAGMENDER DASS

1989 INSC 3828 December 1989Dismissed

The landlord sought eviction of tenant Duli Chand under Section 14(1)(b) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, alleging that the tenant had sub-let the shop to M/s Hira Lal Sri Bhagwan after June 9, 1952 without the landlord's written consent. The tenant contended that no sub‑letting occurred, that the business was run

NATHIYAversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BAGAYAM POLICE STATION, VELLORE

2016 INSC 10088 November 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court convicted Nathiya and Suresh under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of Gurunathan, relying on circumstantial evidence and alleged confessional statements. The High Court upheld the conviction, but on appeal the Supreme Court examined the evidence and found no eye‑witness, an in

AYAAUBKHAN NOORKHAN PATHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 5128 November 2012Disposed off

The appellant, Aymubkhan Noorkhan Pathan, was appointed as a senior clerk in the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation under a Scheduled Tribe reservation based on a caste certificate that declared him a member of the Bhil Tadvi tribe. Respondent No.5, a general‑category citizen, alleged that the appellant, being a Muslim,

MRS. ANITA MALHOTRAversusAPPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL & ANR.

2011 INSC 7898 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Anita Malhotra, a former non‑executive director of Lapareil Exports (P) Ltd., resigned on 31‑08‑1998. In 2004 the company issued cheques that were later dishonoured, and the Apparel Export Promotion Council filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, naming Malhotra as accused director. Malho

SHIVANNA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2006 INSC 8068 November 2006Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Shiv Anna and others, were convicted for the murder of Mahadevappa and related offences arising from a land‑dispute in which they entered the disputed field and assaulted the deceased and his relatives, resulting in Mahadevappa's death. The appellants appealed, claiming that they acted in private defenc

RAMASHRAY YADAY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2005 INSC 5538 November 2005Dismissed

The deceased, a timber merchant, was shot dead by three local goondas who demanded a "goonda tax" which he refused to pay. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of the deceased’s brother (PW12), corroborated by the tractor driver (PW3) and a by‑stander (PW5), as well as medical evidence. Seven prosecution witn

DR. RAJESH TALWAR AND ANR.versusC.B.I. AND ANR.

2013 INSC 6968 October 2013Dismissed

Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Nupur Talwar, accused of murdering their daughter Arushi and domestic help Hemraj, sought under CrPC s.233 read with s.91 the production of narco‑analysis, brain‑mapping, polygraph and other scientific test reports of three persons who had earlier been suspected in the case, as well as other docum

SUSHIL SHARMAversusTHE STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

2013 INSC 6908 October 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Sushil Sharma, was convicted of murdering his wife Naina Sahni and conspiring with an employee, A2, to burn her body in the tandoor of his restaurant. The prosecution proved the murder and the disposal of the body through a chain of circumstantial evidence, forensic analysis, and the recovery of the appe

TOFAN SINGHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 7008 October 2013Matter referred to larger bench

Tofan Singh was convicted under Sections 8(c) r/w 21(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for allegedly trafficking 5.250 kg of heroin. The conviction rested primarily on a statement recorded by an investigating officer under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, which the appellant claimed was

MAYAKAUR BALDEVSINGH SARDAR AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 10148 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved the murder of four members of a matrimonial family and the attempted murder of the sole eye‑witness, Rajvinder Kaur, who had secretly married a man of a lower caste. The prosecution relied on her testimony, which was given only after eight days due to trauma, and on the recovery of weapons and identit

HARIOM AGRAWALversusPRAKASH CHAND MAL VIYA

2007 INSC 10128 October 2007Dismissed

The appellant Hariom Agrawal sought to admit a photocopy of a tenancy agreement as secondary evidence after the original was allegedly stolen. The agreement, required to bear a Re.1 stamp, instead had a notarial stamp of Rs.4, i.e., a stamp of sufficient amount but improper description. The trial court admitted the pho

R.V.F VENKATACHALA GOUNDERversusARULMIGU VISWESARASWAMI AND V.P. TEMPLE AND ANR.

2003 INSC 5328 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a hereditary trustee of a temple, claimed ownership of a shop adjoining the temple and sued for declaration of title, possession and three years' rent arrears. The trial court and first appellate court upheld his claim based on oral testimony, rent agreements, ledger books and a charity commissioner’s or

CITI BANK N.A.versusSTANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ORS.

2003 INSC 5348 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Citibank N.A. bought GOI 2009 bonds from Canbank Mutual Fund (CMF) and issued two Bankers Receipts (BRs) to Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) in exchange for Rs.50 crore. SCB asked for CMF's Subsidiary General Ledger (SGL) forms in lieu of the bonds; Citibank delivered the dishonoured SGLs and received the BRs back, which

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusSH. KESHAV RAM AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11628 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against a decree that had declared the respondents, Sh. Kesha v Ram and others, as owners in possession of a disputed land parcel (Khasra No. 153/1). The respondents had relied on an alleged order of the Assistant Settlement Officer directing a correction in the revenue register,

SRI NARAYAN SAHA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TRIPURA

2004 INSC 5058 September 2004Dismissed

The appellants, Sri Narayan Saha and another, were convicted under IPC sections 376 read with 34 for raping a married woman (PW‑3). The victim reported the crime five days after the incident, and the medical examination was inconclusive due to profuse bleeding. Both the trial court and the High Court upheld the convict

SMT. SHAKILA ABDUL GAFAR KHANversusVASANT RAGHUNATH DHOBLE AND ANR.

2003 INSC 4578 September 2003Dismissed

The petitioner's husband died after alleged police beating in custody; the petitioner filed a private complaint more than a year later alleging custodial violence by the accused police officer. The trial court convicted the accused, but the High Court acquitted him, finding the delay, lack of credible evidence, materia

BALRAJ TANEJA AND ANR.versusSUNIL MADAN AND ANR.

1999 INSC 3858 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Balraj Taneja and others appealed against a Delhi High Court decree granting specific performance to Sunil Madan. The High Court had passed the decree under Order 8 Rule 10 of the CPC solely because the defendants failed to file a written statement, without examining a material factual dispute concerning an Income‑Tax

ALLARAKHA HABIB MEMON ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2024 INSC 5908 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 120B of the IPC based on the testimony of two alleged eyewitnesses – a police constable (PW‑12) and the first informant (PW‑11). The Supreme Court found that PW‑12, who had actually brought the weapons to the police station, never lodged a formal complaint

KRISHAN KUMAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 6798 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Sections 201, 300 and 302 IPC read with Section 34 for the murder of Devinder based largely on circumstantial evidence, including a disputed 'last seen' theory, an alleged extra‑judicial confession, a claimed motive, and the recovery of a chunni as the murder weapon. The Supreme Cour

VARSHA GARGversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2022 INSC 8078 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from the murder of an advocate, for which several accused were tried. During trial the prosecution sought the production of decoding registers of cellular companies to link the accused’s location with cell towers, and to summon the nodal officers as witnesses under Sections 91 and 311 of the CrPC. The tr

STATE OF A.P. & ORS.versusD. RAGHUKUL PERSHAD (D} BY LRS & ORS.

2012 INSC 3248 August 2012Case Partly allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh filed a suit for eviction against D. Raghukul Pershad and others, alleging that the appellants had failed to pay rent since 1986 and that the lease had not been renewed. The appellants contended that the lease deed and rent payments were made by mistake of fact and that they were the true ow

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusM/S. AMRITSAR BEVERAGES LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 4968 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab Sales Tax Department seized a hard disk containing the dealer's books and documents under Section 14(3) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. The dealer failed to cooperate, and the High Court ordered the return of the seized material and imposed personal costs on the officers. On appeal, the Supreme Co

THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHIversusJASPAL SINGH

2003 INSC 3778 August 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed the Delhi High Court’s acquittal of Jaspal Singh (A4) for offences under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Section 120B IPC. The Supreme Court held that the High Court had misapplied the law, especially the evidentiary value of a co‑accused’s confession and the statutory presump

UTTAM SINGH DUGAL AND CO. LTD.versusUNITED BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 3808 August 2000Dismissed

The petitioner, a construction company, entered into a project financed by a consortium of banks. The first bank filed a suit for recovery and, within that suit, sought a judgment on admission under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC, relying on a board resolution and minutes that admitted liability for a specified sum. The p

DHARMENDRA KUMAR @ DHAMMAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 4808 July 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Dharmendra Kumar, was convicted for murder under s.302 read with s.34 IPC for stabbing Tillu during a dispute over a wall construction, with additional convictions under s.147, 148 and 149 later set aside. The Supreme Court examined whether alleged contradictions in witness testimonies, the inconclusive

LAL MOHAMMAD MANJUR ANSARIversusTHE STATE OF GUJRAT

2024 INSC 4758 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based on eyewitness testimony, an alleged extra‑judicial confession to his employer (PW‑19), and a dying declaration by the victim (PW‑24). The Supreme Court examined the credibility of the extra‑judicial confession, noting that the appellant had worked for th

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusRAJENDRA & ORS.

2014 INSC 4778 July 2014Case Partly allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of six accused under Sections 498‑A, 304‑B and 306 of the IPC. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had established the essential ingredients of a dowry death and the presumption under Section 113‑B of the Evidence Act. It held that the prosecution proved, b

MAQBOOL @ ZUBIR @ SHAHNAWAZ AND ANR.versusSTATE OF AP.

2010 INSC 3758 July 2010Dismissed

The appellants Maqbool, Zubir and Shahnawaz were convicted for murder (Sec. 302 IPC) and conspiracy (Sec. 120B IPC) based on eyewitness testimony, medical evidence and entries from a diary recovered during investigation. They challenged the convictions alleging that the witnesses were interested, the identification par

SANATAN NASKAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 3768 July 2010Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Phool Guha and robbery of her house, for which Sanatan Naskar and another accused were arrested after they allegedly led police to stolen wrist watches and a camera. The trial court and the High Court convicted them under Sections 302, 34, 392 and 411 IPC, relying on a chain of circumsta

UDAY CHAKRABORTY & ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2010 INSC 3778 July 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Uday Chakraborty and his relatives for dowry death under Sec. 304B IPC read with Sec. 498A IPC. Although the FIR did not explicitly mention a dowry demand, the Court held that the cumulative documentary and oral evidence, including the execution of a "Chuktiparta" at the time

DHARNIDHARversusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 3828 July 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murders of Bahadur Singh and his father Pyare Lal. The prosecution proved that four accused, armed with guns and a spear, killed Bahadur Singh, after which all five accused, including Dharnidhar, proceeded to kill Pyare Lal with guns and a kulhari. The defence argued that the key e

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S. PROTECTION MANUFACTURERS PVT. LTD.

2010 INSC 3898 July 2010Dismissed

The insured's factory suffered a fire and the insurer, New India Assurance Co., appointed a surveyor, joint surveyors, and later an investigator who alleged arson, before seeking the opinion of former Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud who concluded the fire was accidental. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissi

MALKHAN SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2003 INSC 3088 July 2003Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of gang rape and criminal intimidation of a tribal school teacher under IPC sections 376(2)(G) and 506 and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution’s case rested on the victim’s identification of the three accused in court, despite no test identification parade being condu

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.versusRANJAN KUMAR & ORS.

2026 INSC 4668 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant State of Jharkhand sought to uphold the dismissal of Constable Ranjan Kumar, who was found to have obtained dual appointments in Jharkhand and Bihar police forces using forged documents and assumed a false identity. The respondent contested the dismissal, alleging lack of evidence, procedural irregulariti

RENUKA PRASADversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2025 INSC 6578 May 2025

The case concerns the murder of Ramkrishna, allegedly orchestrated by his son A1 and associates over a sibling rivalry concerning assets. The trial court acquitted six accused (A1‑A6) because the majority of the 87 witnesses turned hostile and the prosecution failed to prove motive, conspiracy, preparation, or identifi

ALAGUPANDI @ ALAGUPANDIANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2012 INSC 2088 May 2012Dismissed

Alagupandi was convicted for murdering his step‑mother Tamilarasi. The prosecution relied on the testimony of the deceased's brother (PW‑1), corroborative statements of other witnesses, forensic evidence linking the accused's blood to the crime scene, and a confession that led to the recovery of the knife. The appellan

SAHADEVAN & ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2012 INSC 2098 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder conviction of three accused, two of whom appealed while the third did not. The prosecution's case relied heavily on an extra‑judicial confession and the theory that the accused were last seen with the deceased, but the confession was found unreliable, contradictory, and uncorrobora

JITENDER KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 2108 May 2012Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of Indra, who was strangulated to death by her father‑in‑law, brother‑in‑law and others. Five accused were tried; four were convicted under s.120‑B, s.302 and s.34 IPC and one (Jitender Kumar) under s.120‑8 IPC. The appellants challenged the convictions on several grounds, including that J

JOYDEEP NEOGI @ BUBAIversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2009 INSC 7608 May 2009Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of a boy who disappeared on 6 November 2001. Four accused were seen at the spot where the child was last seen and were alleged to have misled the search by directing witnesses away from the area and by making a threatening telephone call. The trial court convicted all four based on circums

JAVED ALAMversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR.

2009 INSC 7628 May 2009Disposed off

The case concerns the murder of a college student, Ku Preeti, who was run over by a jeep driven by Samar Vijay Singh on a college campus. The driver (prime accused) and three co‑accused were convicted by the trial court and the High Court; the driver under s.302 IPC and the co‑accused under s.302 read with s.34 IPC. On

NINGAPPA YALLAPPA HOSAMANI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2009 INSC 7648 May 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Namadev, whose body was recovered from a gunny bag after the accused voluntarily disclosed its location. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and statements under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, asserting that the accused who provided the information must have been

ABUTHAGIR AND ORS.versusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MADURAI

2009 INSC 7658 May 2009Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Assistant Jailor Jayaprakash near Madurai Central Jail on 29 August 1997. The accused, including Abuthagir, were convicted under IPC sections 302 read with 34, 120B and 148 based largely on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses (PW‑3 and PW‑4) who gave statements after a delay, having seen

BIBHACHHAversusSTATE OF ORISSA

2001 INSC 2628 May 2001Dismissed

The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC after the dead body of the deceased was found near the Hati River. The prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence, such as the last sighting of the accused and the deceased together, recovery of blood‑stained clothing, the missing gold chain, and for

SAMBASIVAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

1998 INSC 2258 May 1998Dismissed

On 21 April 1983, members of a rival trade union threw bombs at an industrial estate in Kerala, killing Nanukuttan and injuring several others. The trial court acquitted all twenty‑two accused, but the State appealed against the acquittal of three accused (A‑1 to A‑3). The Kerala High Court, on re‑appraisal of the evid

MAJOR R.S. BUDHWARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6488 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved Major R.S. Budhwar and two other soldiers who were convicted by a General Court Martial for abetment and commission of murders of senior army officers under Sections 302, 34 and 109 of the IPC read with Section 69 of the Army Act. The appellants challenged the convictions on the ground that the eviden

DHANUULALAND OTHERSversusGANESHRAMANDANOTHER

2015 INSC 2958 April 2015Dismissed

The dispute concerned a property inherited by Phoolbasa Bai after her husband's death and a subsequent sale of a portion of that property to Mukesh Kumar Chourasia. The plaintiff, Ganeshram, challenged both the validity of a 1977 will favouring Phoolbasa Bai's brothers and the 1987 sale deed, alleging that Phoolbasa Ba

MAJOR SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2015 INSC 9868 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Karamjit Kaur died of phosphorus poisoning within two and a half years of her marriage, and the prosecution alleged that her husband and in‑laws harassed her over a dowry demand for a scooter. The trial court convicted the husband, father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law under Section 304B (referred to as 3048) IP

RUMI DHARversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2009 INSC 4608 April 2009Dismissed

Rumi Dhar and her husband, along with several bank officials, were charged under Sections 120‑B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC for conspiring to defraud a bank. The bank recovered the loan amount through a settlement before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, and the accused paid Rs. 25.51 lakh. Rumi Dhar filed an application unde

LAKSHMI & ANR.versusCHINNAMMAL @ RAYYAMMAL & ORS.

2009 INSC 4668 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, co‑sharers, filed a suit to cancel a partition deed and also lodged an FIR alleging the deed was forged. The deed and the appellant’s signatures were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, which produced reports on the signature and on the thumb impression. While the trial court allowed the applicatio

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusPAWAN KUMAR

2005 INSC 1938 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against the acquittals of Pawan Kumar in two criminal appeals, challenging the High Courts' findings that Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act was not complied with during the search of a bag carried by the accused. The Supreme Court examined whe

DALBIR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2004 INSC 2438 April 2004

Dalbir Singh was tried for the murder of his wife and two daughters and was convicted under Sections 302 and 498A of the IPC, while being acquitted of Section 304B. The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 498A and found that the evidence supported a conviction under Section 306 (abetment of suicide) but held

ACHUTANANDA BAIDYAversusPRAFULLYA KUMAR GAYEN AND ORS.

1997 INSC 3888 April 1997Dismissed

Achutananda Baidya sold land to Prafullya Kumar Gayen, who later claimed the sale was made under distress and that an oral agreement existed for reconveyance, invoking the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Lands Act, 1973. The Special Officer allowed restoration, but the appellate authority set aside that order, fin

M/S. TARAKNATH AND ANR.versusSUSHIL CHANDRA DEY BY LRS. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 4958 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The property of the late Syed Md. Mahibullah passed to his widow, five daughters and five sons. After the widow's death, the five sisters relinquished their shares in favour of their five brothers, an oral gift that the Supreme Court held to be valid under Muslim personal law with constructive delivery deemed sufficien

KRISHNA LAL CHAWLA & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2021 INSC 1608 March 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellants, Krishna Lal Chawla and others, challenged a private complaint filed in 2018 by their neighbour (Respondent No.2) under Section 200 CrPC, which alleged offences arising from a 2012 altercation. The complaint was filed six years after the incident, despite a charge‑sheet already being filed against the co

V. KISHAN RAOversusNIKHIL SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL & ANOTHER.

2010 INSC 1298 March 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's wife was admitted to Nikhil Super Speciality Hospital with intermittent fever; the hospital failed to diagnose malaria and treated her for typhoid, leading to her death after being transferred to another hospital. The District Consumer Forum held the hospital negligent and awarded Rs. 2 lakh compensatio

M/S. SRIRAM INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.versusMAHAK SINGH AND ORS.

2007 INSC 2668 March 2007Dismissed

The workmen claimed they were illegally retrenched because they had completed at least 240 days of service in a calendar year, satisfying the condition precedent to retrenchment under Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The employer produced only an extract of the attendance register for the twelve mo

ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH AND ANR .versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1438 March 2006Dismissed

In a communal violence case in Gujarat, the trial court acquitted the accused after several witnesses, including Zahira Habibullah Sheikh, turned hostile. Zahira later alleged intimidation and coercion before various bodies, prompting the Supreme Court to order a retrial in Maharashtra. During the retrial she publicly

ARIVAZHAGANversusSTATE, REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2000 INSC 1288 March 2000Disposed off

Arivazhagan was charged under Section 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 109 of the IPC. He filed a defence list of 267 witnesses. The Special Judge examined the list and, on the ground of avoiding delay, allowed only a few witnesses from each division. The Madras High Court slightly i

BHANABHAI KHALPABHAIversusTHE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS AND ANR.

1994 INSC 1088 March 1994

The police and customs officials recovered 101 silver ingots worth over Rs. 18 lakh from the appellant's wadi, which lay within the 50‑km specified area and the ingots were notified as specified goods. The appellant admitted the recovery but claimed he did not know how the ingots came to be there and had not filed any

ATMARAM S/O RAYSINGH RATHODversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 878 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Atmaram, was convicted under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC for the alleged suicide of his second wife, Purnabai, based on the presumption of abetment under Section 113A of the Evidence Act. The trial court and High Court held that the appellant had subjected the deceased to cruelty, relying on a writt

BACHNI DEVI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA THROUGH SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT

2011 INSC 1088 February 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Bachni Devi and her son, convicted under Section 304B of the IPC for the dowry death of the son’s wife, Kanta, who died by hanging within three months of marriage. The prosecution proved that Kanta’s death was unnatural, occurred within seven years of marriage, and that she was s

PARIMALversusVEENA @ BHARTI

2011 INSC 1108 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Parimal filed a divorce suit against his wife Veena. The wife repeatedly refused to accept the court's notice, after which the trial court proceeded ex‑parte and granted a decree of divorce. Four years later she applied under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set aside the decree, alleging improper service, fraud and lack of suf

MULLA & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2010 INSC 898 February 2010Disposed off

The appellants Mulla and Guddu were convicted for abducting and murdering five villagers for ransom, based on the testimony of injured eye‑witnesses and a test identification parade (TIP) conducted after a delay. The Supreme Court held that the TIP was properly conducted and its evidence admissible, and that the eye‑wi

STATE OF U.P.versusSATISH

2005 INSC 688 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh prosecuted Satish for the rape and murder of a six‑year‑old girl, relying on circumstantial evidence that the accused was last seen carrying the victim on a bicycle and on the recovery of both parties' undergarments. The trial court convicted Satish under sections 302, 376(2), 363, 366 and 20

J.J. LAL PVT. LTD. AND ORS.versusM.R. MURALI AND ANR.

2002 INSC 738 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords sought eviction of the tenants under Section 10(2)(vii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, alleging non‑payment of rent and a denial of the landlords' title that was not bona‑fide. The tenants counter‑claimed that the municipal corporation, not the landlords, was the true owne

CHEERANTHOODIKA AHMED KUTTY AND ANR.versusPARAMBUR MARIAKUTTY UMMA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 578 February 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two appeals (Civil Appeals Nos. 3067 and 8475 of 1997) filed by the office‑bearers of Vallarnbram Juma Masjid against the order of the Kerala High Court which had upheld the Taluk Land Board's determination that certain parcels of land, claimed by the mosque as having been transferred befor

STREE ATYACHAR VIRODHI PARISHAD ETC. ETC.versusDILIP NATHUMAL CHORDIA & ANR.

1989 INSC 478 February 1989Case Partly allowed

Chanda, a newly married woman, died from severe burns after a fire broke out in her in-laws' house; neighbours rescued her but she later succumbed to her injuries. Her parents alleged dowry harassment and filed a police report; the investigation led to a charge sheet under s.306 IPC read with s.34 against her brother D

RAM PYAREYversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2025 INSC 718 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the brother‑in‑law of the deceased woman, was convicted under Sections 306 and 498‑A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for abetment of suicide, while being acquitted of the dowry‑death charge under Section 304B. The deceased had set herself on fire after alleged harassment and dowry d

SADASHIV DHONDIRAM PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 938 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sadashiv Dhondiram Patil, was charged with murdering his wife Lata. The prosecution relied on an alleged extra‑judicial confession made to the village Police Patil, the discovery of an iron rod, motive, and the fact that the crime occurred inside the house. The trial court acquitted him, holding the conf

DEVI LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2019 INSC 298 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Dharam Chand, for which four persons were charged. Babu Lal and Devi Lal were convicted by the trial court and the High Court on the basis of three eyewitness testimonies and an extra‑judicial confession by Babu Lal, while the other two accused were acquitted. On appeal, the Supreme Cou

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusRAJ KUMAR

2018 INSC 98 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Meena Devi lived with her two children and her brother‑in‑law Raj Kumar in a joint family house. On the night of 23 August 2007, Raj Kumar, in a drunken state, assaulted Meena Devi, took her to another accused’s house, and she was later found dead, hanging from a tree. The trial court convicted Raj Kumar u

VINOD KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 158 January 2015Dismissed

Vinod Kumar, a domestic servant, was accused of kidnapping his employer's 3‑year‑old son for ransom. The trial court acquitted him and co‑accused Joginder, but the High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting Vinod Kumar under IPC sections 363, 364A and 109. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court was entitl

VENKATESHAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2013 INSC 198 January 2013Dismissed

The appellant Venkatesha (A‑2) and co‑accused G. Venkatesh Murthy (A‑1) were convicted under IPC sections 302, 307, 427 read with s.34 and under the Explosive Substances Act, s.3 read with s.34 for planting a bomb in a hair‑salon to kill Muniraju (PW‑14). The bomb, placed by approver Hanif (A‑3) on their instructions,

RISHIPALversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013 INSC 218 January 2013Dismissed

Rishipal was convicted by the trial court of murder (Sec. 302 IPC) and several offences under Sections 171, 201, 364, 420 IPC based largely on circumstantial evidence, with the victim's body never recovered. The High Court acquitted him of the murder charge while upholding the other convictions and altered the 364 conv

MANIversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2008 INSC 198 January 2008Case Allowed

Mani and another accused were charged with murdering Sivakumar under IPC s.302, s.34 and s.201. The prosecution alleged that Mani had taken the deceased to his house, where blood was later found and blood‑stained clothes and a koduval were recovered based on the accused’s own statement. The trial and High Courts convic

SAT NARAINversusSTATE OF HARYANA TH. MINISTRY OF HOME

2008 INSC 208 January 2008Dismissed

The dispute arose between Sat Narain and the complainant party over a family quarrel. On the night of 17 June 1999, Sat Narain and his accomplices blocked the complainant's jeep, attacked them and Sat Narain fired three shots from a licensed gun, killing Chhotu Ram and injuring his wife Sakeela; a second shot aimed at

REEMA AGGARWALversusANUPAM AND ORS.

2004 INSC 258 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Reema Aggarwal married Anupam while his first wife was alive and was subsequently harassed for dowry by Anupam, his parents and brother, who forced her to ingest poison. She reported the incident and the accused were charged under IPC Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 498A (dowry harassment). The trial court acquitt

DARSHAN SINGH AND ORS.versusGUJJAR SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2002 INSC 98 January 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a suit by Gujjar Singh, a sixth‑degree collateral of Jagjit Singh, seeking declaration of his right to succeed to Jagjit Singh's land. The trial court had dismissed the suit on the ground that the appellants (descendants of Rulia Singh) were in adverse possession, but the appellate courts rev

DEREK A C LOBO & ORS.versusULRIC M A LOBO (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.

2023 INSC 10937 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants sought probate of a Will dated 10‑Nov‑1992 executed by their mother, Cecelia Gertrude Lobo, which was contested by one brother (defendant No.5) on grounds of alleged suspicious circumstances. The trial court found that the Will was duly executed, satisfying Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and Sec

PARVEEN @ SONUversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2021 INSC 8357 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parveen @ Sonu, was convicted along with other accused for offences including criminal conspiracy (s.120‑B IPC) and murder (s.302 IPC) arising from an alleged attempt to rescue four prisoners being escorted by police on a train. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on the eye‑witness constable’s depositi

MAYA DEVI & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 8927 December 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the appeal of Maya Devi and others convicted under Sections 3048 and 498A of the IPC for the death of their daughter-in‑law, Kavita. The Court reiterated that to establish a dowry death, the prosecution must prove (i) death within seven years of marriage, (ii) death caused by burns, bodily in

RITESH SINHAversusTHE STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH & ANR.

2012 INSC 5717 December 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant was summoned by a Chief Judicial Magistrate to give a voice sample to aid the investigation of an alleged recruitment scam. He challenged the summons on the ground that it violated Article 20(3) of the Constitution and that no statutory provision empowered a magistrate to order a voice sample. The Supreme

BALASAHEB @ RAMESH LAXMAN DESHMUKHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2010 INSC 8547 December 2010Dismissed

The appellant was recorded as a witness under Section 161 of the CrPC in a police case concerning an assault, and later named as an accused in a separate complaint case arising from the same incident. He sought to invoke Article 20(3) of the Constitution to refuse to give testimony in the police case, claiming a blanke

DISTRICT BASIC EDUCATION OFFICERversusDHANANJAI KUMAR SHUKLA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 12507 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was appointed headmaster of a recognised school despite being the son of the school's manager, which is prohibited by Rule 6 of the Uttar Pradesh Recognised Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) Rules, 1978. The manager had taken temporary leave, but the Supreme Court held that this did not terminate his s

PANCHDEO SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2001 INSC 6007 December 2001Appeal(s) allowed

On 20 December 1980 a bomb attack injured Sriram Singh, who later died. His dying declaration, recorded by a magistrate in the presence of a doctor, implicated Panchdeo Singh as being present at the scene. The magistrate asserted the deceased was in a fit state of mind, but no medical certification or doctor's signatur

JAMAAT-E-ISLAMI HINDversusUNION OF INDIA

1994 INSC 5797 December 1994Directions issued

The Central Government declared Jamaat‑e‑Islami Hind an unlawful association under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, based on alleged statements questioning India's sovereignty. The declaration was referred to a Tribunal, which, relying on a résumé of intelligence reports and affidavits from officials who

SAMIULLAHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 12927 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the Bihar Registration Rules, 2008 amendments that introduced sub‑rules (xvii) and (xviii) to Rule 19, which made the production of jamabandi or holding‑allotment proof a condition precedent for registering sale or gift documents. The High Court of Patna dismissed the writ petitions, holding t

HARIPRASAD @ KISHAN SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 9867 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Hariprasad, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly poisoning Bisahu Singh by mixing a herb in liquor, based largely on the deceased's dying declaration and a forensic report that arrived a year later. The Supreme Court examined whether the more than one‑year delay in filing the FIR was fatal t

MOHD. ABDULLAH AZAM KHANversusNAWAB KAZIM ALI KHAN

2022 INSC 11787 November 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan, was elected to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly in 2017, but the election petitioner challenged his eligibility on the ground that he was under 25 years of age at the time of filing his nomination. The dispute centered on conflicting birth dates shown in two birth certific

RAHULversusSTATE OF DELHI MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS & ANR.

2022 INSC 11767 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Rahul and two co‑accused were convicted for kidnapping, rape and murder of a girl, and sentenced to death and other terms. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had established the identity of the accused and proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It found that no identification parade was con

KALU ALIAS LAXMINARAYANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 12187 November 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Kalu alias Laxminarayan, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the death of his wife, who was found strangulated inside their home. The trial and High Courts held the death homicidal, though the High Court initially described it as hanging. The Supreme Court examined the forensic findings, the presence

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKASHI RAM

2006 INSC 7947 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan charged Kashi Ram with the murder of his wife and two infant daughters, alleging that the victims were last seen alive with him on 3 February 1998 and that the house was found locked thereafter, with the bodies discovered on 6 February. The trial court convicted him based on medical evidence of s

R.M. YELLATTIversusTHE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

2005 INSC 5457 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a daily‑wage worker appointed on 26‑Nov‑1988, was terminated on 20‑Jun‑1994 and claimed that he had worked continuously for more than 240 days in the preceding year, invoking section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The labour court held him to be a workman, found that he had satisfied the 240‑

RAJENDRA SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL ETC.

2025 INSC 11937 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a father, son and son‑in‑law, were accused of murdering Pushpendra Singh and were acquitted by the trial court but later convicted by the High Court on the basis of alleged ocular testimony and the recovery of swords and a kanta. The Supreme Court examined whether the appellants could be positively iden

DHARMRAO SHARANAPPA SHABADI AND OTHERSversusSYEDA ARIFA PARVEEN

2025 INSC 11877 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Syeda Arifa Parveen, claimed ownership of 24 acres of agricultural land on the basis of being the sole daughter of Khadijabee and of an oral gift (hiba) of 10 acres made by her mother. The trial court rejected the oral gift but granted her a 3/4 share of the remaining land, while the Karnataka High Court

NILESH BABURAO GITTEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 11917 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nilesh Baburao Gitte, was convicted of murdering his mother, Sunanda Gitte, under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including alleged recovery of a nylon rope, post‑mortem findings of strangulation marks, and a purported motive of property gain. The Supreme Court

SMRITI MADAN KANSAGRAversusPERRY KANSAGRA

2021 INSC 6327 October 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the custody of a minor child, Aditya, between his mother Smriti and father Perry, who had obtained custody in India based on a judgment dated 28 Oct 2020 and a subsequent order on 8 Dec 2020. The Court found that Perry had concealed material facts, failed to disclose the dismis

V. PRABHAKARAversusBASAVARAJ K. (DEAD) BY LR. & ANR.

2021 INSC 6267 October 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought declaration and possession of a house based on a registered Will (Exhibit P4) executed by the deceased in his favour, which was attested by his brother and witnessed by his sister. The respondents admitted the existence of Exhibit P4 but contested it by producing an unregistered Will (Exhibit D1) a

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusGIRDHARI LAL

2013 INSC 6807 October 2013Dismissed

The daughter of the complainant was married to Girdhari Lal and died of severe burn injuries within seven years of marriage. The prosecution alleged that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and in‑laws in connection with dowry demands, leading to her death. The trial court convicted the husband u

GULAM SARBARversusSTATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)

2013 INSC 6777 October 2013Dismissed

The appellants, Gulam Sarbar and Dhiren Mahto, were convicted of murder under s.302 IPC and criminal conspiracy under s.120‑B IPC for the killing of Sant Kumar Sinha. The prosecution relied primarily on the testimony of a single eye‑witness (Dr. Gopal Prasad Sinha) and corroborative ocular and medical evidence to estab

STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, A.P.versusK. NARASIMHACHARY

2005 INSC 4957 October 2005Dismissed

The State appealed the acquittal of K. Narasimhachary, a former Mandal Revenue Inspector, who had been convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act for taking a bribe of Rs.600. The High Court set aside the conviction on the ground that the order of sanction issued by the Governor was not proved in accordance with

SAROOP SINGHversusBANTO AND ORS.

2005 INSC 5007 October 2005Dismissed

The appellant, Saroop Singh, claimed ownership of suit properties that had been gifted to him by the widow, Indira Devi, who possessed only a life interest under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The respondents, Banto and others, were reversioners who sued for possession, asserting that the widow's gift did not affect t

ZILE SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 5857 October 2004Leave Granted & Dismissed

Zile Singh, a sitting municipal member, was held disqualified under Section 13A(1)(c) of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 after the birth of his third child in August 1995. The disqualification arose from the First Amendment (1994) which barred persons with more than two living children, but its proviso contained a draf

RAJ KISHORE JHAversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2003 INSC 5257 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns the murder of Nawal Kishore Jha on 9 April 1980, for which fifteen persons were originally charged. The trial court convicted several of them under sections of the IPC and the Arms Act, but the Patna High Court later acquitted all the convicted persons. The informant appealed, challenging the High Cou

SHIV KUMARversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2022 INSC 9337 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Shiv Kumar was convicted under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly receiving stolen household articles looted from a truck, based on police seizure and the testimony of co‑accused. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution proved the essential element of knowledge that t

M. CHANDRAversusM. THANGAMUTHU & ANR.

2010 INSC 5787 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M. Chandra, was elected from a Tamil Nadu assembly seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, but the election petitioner challenged her eligibility on the ground that she was a Christian and not a member of the Hindu Pallan Scheduled Caste. The High Court shifted the burden of proof onto the appellant to demon

RANVIR SINGH AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

2005 INSC 4087 September 2005Disposed off

The Union of India issued four notifications under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land in Delhi’s village Rithala. Different compensation rates were awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, enhanced by a Reference Court, and further increased by the Delhi High Court relying on circle‑rate not

MAHESH KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 8727 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Mahesh Kumar was convicted under Section 304-B IPC for the death of his wife, Omwati, alleged to be a dowry death. The prosecution's case relied mainly on statements of the deceased's father and brother, and on several letters written by the deceased, asserting continuous harassment and dowry demands. The Supreme Court

RAMAIAH @ RAMAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 5367 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ramaiah, was charged with dowry‑related offences (IPC 498‑A, 304‑B, 201, 176) and violations of the Dowry Prohibition Act (ss.3,4) after his wife Laxmi died an unnatural death within six months of marriage. The trial court acquitted him, finding no evidence of dowry demand, harassment, or that the presum

METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusV. VENKATESAN

2009 INSC 10327 August 2009Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether V. Venkatesan, a former employee of Metropolitan Transport Corporation who was terminated in 1996 and later reinstated in 2004, was entitled to full back wages under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act despite having been enrolled and practicing as an advocate from December

MEENABEN PANKAJKUMAR JOSHI & ORS.versusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

2009 INSC 10337 August 2009Case Partly allowed

The widows of Raj Kumar Joshi, a director and proprietor of a clearing and forwarding business, claimed compensation under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 after his death in a motor accident. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 49.25 lakh with interest, which the High Court modified, questioning

MALAY KUMAR GANGULYversusDR. SUKUMAR MUKHERJEE AND OTHERS

2009 INSC 10257 August 2009Disposed off

The case concerned the death of Anuradha Saha, who was treated for Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) by several doctors in Kolkata and Mumbai. The complainant alleged that the doctors prescribed excessive doses of the steroid Depomedrol and failed to provide essential supportive care, constituting criminal negligence un

THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MANGALOREversusBELEKAL KRISHNA BHAT

1996 INSC 8457 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State acquired 11 cents of land for a post office. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation at Rs. 2,50,000 per acre, which the Civil Judge enhanced to Rs. 4,50,000 per acre. The High Court further raised it to Rs. 6,00,000 per acre, relying on a sale deed (Exhibit P‑9) that showed a price of Rs. 48,000 for

RAM SINGH & ORS.versusCOL. RAM SINGH

1985 INSC 1697 August 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition challenging the election of Col. Ram Singh on allegations of corrupt practice, including booth‑capturing and intimidation at two polling stations in the 1982 Haryana Assembly election. The petitioners relied heavily on oral testimony and tape‑recorded statements taken by

VIKRAM SINGH @ VICKY WALIA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2017 INSC 5947 July 2017Dismissed

The petitioners Vikram Singh, Jasvir Singh and a third accused were convicted under Sections 302, 364A, 201 and 120B of the IPC and sentenced to death, with the death sentence of the female co‑accused later commuted to life imprisonment. They filed review petitions challenging the Supreme Court’s 2010 judgment on groun

PRADIP BURAGOHAINversusPRANATI PHUKAN

2010 INSC 3707 July 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Pradip Buragohain, challenged the election of Pranati Phukan to the Assam Legislative Assembly on the ground that she committed seven acts of corrupt practice, chiefly bribery of Rs.500 per voter and organizing a feast on polling day. The High Court dismissed the election petition, finding the oral testi

KUSUMA ANKAMA RAOversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2008 INSC 7777 July 2008Dismissed

Kusuma Ankama Rao was convicted for murdering Gottapu Adilakshmi after the prosecution presented circumstantial evidence that the accused and the deceased were last seen together and the body was found the next day. The accused also made an extra‑judicial confession before a Village Administrative Officer admitting to

CITIBANK N.A.versusSTANDARD CHARTERED BANK

2004 INSC 3947 July 2004

Citibank sold IRFC bonds to Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) and issued a Banker’s Receipt (BR) which SCB later returned with an endorsement, also handing over a non‑transferable BR issued by CANFINA. SCB then demanded delivery of the bonds from Citibank, leading to suits in a Special Court. The Special Court held Citiban

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusWAKTENG

2007 INSC 6917 June 2007Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Wakteng and two others for murder, relying on a statement recorded two days after the assault (Exb.P-10) as a dying declaration and on the recovery of a sword allegedly used in the crime. The High Court acquitted the accused, holding that the statement could not be treated as a dying d

SUKHPAL SINGHversusNCT OF DELHI

2024 INSC 3857 May 2024Dismissed

The appellant Sukhpal Singh was convicted of murdering his wife Usha under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution relied heavily on the sworn statement of the complainant, Ashok Kumar Pathak, recorded under Section 299 of the CrPC, as well as a confession note and handwriting expert report. The appellant challenged the admis

JAYAMMA & ANRversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2021 INSC 2877 May 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the death of Jayamma, who suffered extensive burns and allegedly named four accused in a dying declaration. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution failed to prove the homicide beyond reasonable doubt, especially given doubts about the victim’s fitness to make a statement and t

MANGALA WAMAN KARANDIKAR (D) TR. LRSversusPRAKASH DAMODAR RANADE

2021 INSC 2887 May 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the heirs of Mangala Waman Karandikar, entered into a 1963 agreement with the respondent to transfer the operation of the "Karandikar Brothers" stationery business for a royalty of Rs.90 per month. The dispute arose when the appellant sought possession, alleging the agreement was a business transfer, whi

ACHHAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2021 INSC 2897 May 2021Dismissed

The appellants, Achhar Singh and Budhi Singh, were acquitted by the trial court of charges including murder, grievous hurt and rioting, but the Himachal Pradesh High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted them based on eye‑witness testimony and medical evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court co

NEEL KUMAR @ ANIL KUMARversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2012 INSC 2047 May 2012Disposed off

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

SUNDER LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2007 INSC 5227 May 2007Case Partly allowed

The deceased Heeralal was attacked at night while sleeping; Sunder Lal struck him on the head with a gandasi and Laxmi Narain injured his legs. He died a few hours later and gave a dying declaration identifying the assailants. The trial court convicted both under Section 302 IPC, a conviction affirmed by the High Court

STATE OF M.P.versusMOHAN LAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6397 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State prosecuted Mohan Lal and others for murder under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC, alleging that they dragged the deceased, Mangi Lal, out of his hut, assaulted him with sticks and a gun, and threw acid on him. The deceased gave a dying declaration to a Judicial Magistrate while in a fit state of mind, which w

SEYAKA PERUMAL, ETCversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

1991 INSC 1337 May 1991Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the convictions and death sentences of Sevaka Perumal and Isakkimuthu for the pre‑meditated murder of four young boys, committed for cash and jewellery. The Court held that the dead bodies were positively identified by the victims' mother and forensic evidence, so corpus delicti was established

BOLLAVARAM PEDDA NARSI REDDY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1991 INSC 1347 May 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged with murder under IPC sections 302 and 149. The trial court acquitted them, rejecting the testimony of five eyewitnesses and finding the identification parades perfunctory. The High Court reversed the acquittal, relying on the two eye‑witnesses and the identification parades, and convicted t

GAUTAM SATNAMIversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2026 INSC 3257 April 2026Appeal(s) allowed

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

KARAM KAPAHI & OTHERSversusM/S. LAL CHAND PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST & ANOTHER

2010 INSC 2007 April 2010Dismissed

The Lal Chand Public Charitable Trust leased property to the South Delhi Club and later terminated the lease for non‑payment of rent. The Trust sued for possession; the Club contested the Trust’s title and sought relief under Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, while also admitting non‑payment of rent in its s

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BARODAversusUNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD.

2000 INSC 2037 April 2000Dismissed

United Phosphorus Ltd., a manufacturer of insecticides, produced three intermediate chemicals during its process. The Collector of Central Excise held these intermediates liable for excise duty, but the Collector (Appeals) reversed the decision, finding them non‑marketable. The Revenue appealed to the Central Excise an

RAJENDER SINGH AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

2000 INSC 2027 April 2000Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Kameshwar Singh, where appellants Rajendra Singh and Triloki Singh were convicted under Sections 302/34, 307 and 324 of the IPC. The appellants challenged the conviction on five grounds: (1) the prosecution’s failure to explain a grievous injury sustained by Rajendra Singh; (2)

GAUTAM SARUPversusLEELA JETLY AND ORS.

2008 INSC 3227 March 2008Case Allowed

Gautam Sarup filed a suit to declare his title to property bequeathed to him by a will and to obtain a permanent injunction. Respondent No.6, Leela Jetly, initially filed a written statement admitting the plaintiff's claims, but later denied having signed that statement and sought to withdraw it by filing a second writ

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF TELANGANA)versusA. P. STATE WAKF BOARD & ORS.

2022 INSC 1557 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh (now Telangana) challenged an errata notification issued by the A.P. State Wakf Board that added 1,654 acres and 32 guntas of land to the list of Wakf properties, claiming the Board had not complied with the procedural requirements of the Wakf Act, 1995. The High Court had dismissed the Stat

VIJAYversusLAXMAN AND ANR.

2013 INSC 817 February 2013Dismissed

The appellant Vijay lodged a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that respondent Laxman had issued a cheque to repay a personal loan of Rs.1,15,000, which was later dishonoured for insufficient funds. Laxman contended that the cheque was a security deposit taken as part of a customary

UMESHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2007 INSC 1117 February 2007Dismissed

Umesh was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Dilip Ganpatrao Shirbhate on 26 November 1997. The prosecution’s case rested on two eyewitnesses who saw Umesh stab the victim, forensic evidence showing the victim’s blood group on Umesh’s shirt, and the recovery of the alleged murder weapon at Umesh’s reside

SANJAY @ KAKAversusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2001 INSC 777 February 2001Dismissed

The appellants Sanjay, Nawabuddin and Vinod were convicted for murder and robbery after the police recovered a weapon, blood‑stained clothes and stolen jewellery based on their disclosure statements made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The defence argued that the statements were inadmissible because they containe

ANAYATULLAH AND ORS.versusCOMMISSIONER OF MUSLIM WAKF OF JAMMU

1991 INSC 267 February 1991Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether two State Government orders of 1955 and 1958 granted land to the Ziarat Shareef of Hazrat Baba Ibrahim (a Wakf) or to the father of the defendants in his personal capacity. The Committee of Muslim Wakf sued the managers of the Ziarat, alleging they were treating the land as personal p

RAJESH PRASADversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. ETC.

2022 INSC 197 January 2022Case Partly allowed

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

PURSHOTTAM CHOPRA & ANR.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI)

2020 INSC 57 January 2020Dismissed

The victim Sher Singh was set on fire after being doused with kerosene by the accused Purshottam Chopra and Suresh (telwala). While in critical condition with 100% burns, he gave two statements – one to Dr. Sushma (recorded in an MLC) and another to SI Rajesh Kumar – which were treated as dying declarations. The trial

SUDIP KR. SEN @ BILTUversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2016 INSC 277 January 2016Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Saikat Saha under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑6, who described how the accused acted in concert to kill the victim. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the sole witness's evide

HEMAversusSTATE, THR. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MADRAS

2013 INSC 97 January 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a clerk in a travel agency, was convicted under sections 120B, 420, 511, 465 and 471 of the IPC for conspiring to obtain 42 passports using forged applications and documents. The prosecution alleged that the travel agency, run by a co‑accused, submitted ante‑dated applications with duplicate file numbers

PREM KANWARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2009 INSC 57 January 2009Dismissed

The deceased daughter‑in‑law was burnt to death within four years of her marriage. The prosecution alleged that the mother‑in‑law, husband and uncle repeatedly harassed and tortured her for not providing sufficient dowry. A post‑mortem showed ante‑mortem burns and fractured skull bones, indicating she was killed before

DEEN DAYAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2009 INSC 67 January 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the death of Asha Devi, who was found dead in a well after 15 months of marriage to Amar Singh. Medical evidence showed two distinct head injuries inconsistent with a fall, indicating she was beaten before being dumped in the well. Witnesses, including the deceased's father, brother, and moth

BRINDABAN DAS AND ORS.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2009 INSC 97 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a murder FIR filed on 29‑11‑2002 in which, besides the named assailant Laxman Murmu, the complainant alleged that several other persons might have been involved. The appellants were granted anticipatory bail, later discharged from the case on 30‑6‑2004, and were not named in the charge‑sheet. Two ye

RAMESH KRISHNA MADHUSUDAN NAYARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2008 INSC 137 January 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Ramesh Krishna Madhusudan Nayar, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC based solely on the testimony of a single eye‑witness, PW‑5, who claimed to have seen Nayar strike the deceased with a wooden log during a quarrel. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that a single witness's testi

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusM.V. MANJUNATHEGOWDA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 37 January 2003Case Partly allowed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted M.V. Manjunathegowda (A‑1) and others for the murder of his wife Kamalamma, alleging that she was killed within seven years of marriage after the accused demanded a dowry of Rs 10,000 and three sovereigns of gold, of which only Rs 8,000 was paid. The trial court convicted A‑1 under Sec

KUNHIMUHAMMED@KUNHEETHUversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2024 INSC 9376 December 2024Dismissed

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

SRI BHAGWANversusSTATE OF U.P.

2012 INSC 5686 December 2012Dismissed

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

AKIL@ JAVEDversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2012 INSC 5676 December 2012Dismissed

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

ISRARversusSTATE OF U.P.

2004 INSC 6966 December 2004Dismissed

The appellant Israr and his co-accused Afzal were convicted for the murder of Zamil Ahmad under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on the dying declaration of the deceased and the testimony of four eye‑witnesses, who were relatives or friends of the victim, as well as medical evidence s

THAYARAMMAL (DEAD) BY LR.versusKANAKAMMAL AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6986 December 2004Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over property dedicated as a Dharmachatram (choultry) by a Hindu donor in 1805. The plaintiffs claimed occupancy as trustees, while the defendants asserted title obtained through a court sale. The Court held that such dedication creates a charitable endowment, not a trust, and there

GURA SINGHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2000 INSC 5746 December 2000Dismissed

Gura Singh was convicted of murdering his father under IPC 302. The prosecution relied on the appellant’s extra‑judicial confession to several relatives (PW 2, 5, 6, 7) and on the recovery of the murder weapon and a blood‑stained sheet disclosed by the accused. Some of the witnesses were later declared hostile, and the

P. ANJANAPPA (D) BY LRSversusA.P. NANJUNDAPPA & ORS.

2025 INSC 12866 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a joint family property dispute among descendants of Pillappa, concerning the validity of two registered release deeds (1956 and 1967) and an unregistered palupatti (partition) deed of 1972. The plaintiffs argued that the releases were ineffective and that the palupatti could not be relied upon, while

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusDILIP PAUL

2023 INSC 9756 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns Dilip Paul, a former Area Organizer of the Service Selection Board, who was penalised with a 50% pension withholding after a Central Complaints Committee (CCC) found him guilty of sexual harassment based on a first complaint and a later second complaint filed by a female employee. The appellant (Union

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

2023 INSC 9886 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

ADITI ALIAS MITHIversusJITESH SHARMA

2023 INSC 9816 November 2023Disposed off

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

MANJUNATH & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 9786 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAKESH MOHINDRAversusANITA BERI AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8366 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs filed a suit under the Specific Relief Act seeking a declaration of title over a property. The defendant sought to prove a disclaimer letter by secondary evidence because the original was allegedly misplaced in the custody of the DEO, Ambala, and submitted a photocopy along with a witness from the DEO. T

MD. ANKOOS & ORS.versusTHE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, H!GH COURT OF A.P.

2009 INSC 12186 November 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The accused (MD. Ankoos & others) were charged with murder, rioting, house trespass and related offences for the killing of five villagers suspected of sorcery. The trial court acquitted all 77 accused, finding the eye‑witness testimonies (PW‑2 to PW‑4) unreliable and noting contradictions. The High Court set aside the

SUCHAND PALversusPHANI PAL AND ANR.

2003 INSC 6076 November 2003Dismissed

The appellant, Suchand Pal, appealed against the Calcutta High Court's acquittal of the accused Phani Pal for murder and related offences. The trial court had convicted Phani Pal based on the prosecution's claim that a gun was fired from a short range and on a dying declaration of the deceased, Bhanumati, which was rec

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