Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Penal Code, 1860

3,190 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 3,001–3,190.

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusARJUN SINGH & ORS. ETC

2011 INSC 6432 September 2011Dismissed

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

BHUSHAN KUMAR MEENversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2011 INSC 6332 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

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

ARUN KUMAR AGGARWALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

2011 INSC 6442 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF PUNJABversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS.

2011 INSC 6392 September 2011Dismissed

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

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

2011 INSC 6342 September 2011Disposed off

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

RAMACHANDRAN & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2011 INSC 6452 September 2011Disposed off

The accused formed an unlawful assembly of seventeen persons armed with swords, choppers, knives and iron rods to attack Sobhanan (PW2) and his father Kuttappan, resulting in Kuttappan's death and injuries to others. The trial court convicted all accused under various offences read with Section 149 IPC, and the High Co

PREM SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2011 INSC 6462 September 2011Matter referred to larger bench

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

SUDEEP CHATTERJEEversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2024 INSC 5672 August 2024Disposed off

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

KISHORE BALKRISHNA NANDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2023 INSC 6752 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kishore Balkrishna Nand, filed a written complaint with the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate alleging that the respondent had encroached land and set up a shop that caused nuisance. The respondent subsequently lodged a private defamation complaint before a Judicial Magistrate, relying on the appellant's complai

WAZIR KHANversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2023 INSC 6742 August 2023Dismissed

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

DAUVARAM NIRMALKARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2022 INSC 7862 August 2022Case Partly allowed

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

BANKA SNEHA SHEELAversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS.

2021 INSC 3712 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged a preventive detention order issued under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 against the detenu, who was accused in five FIRs for cheating amounting to over Rs. 50 lakh. The State argued that the detenu's alleged activities threatened public order and that bail had bee

UNION OF INDIAversusYASMEEN MOHAMMAD ZAHID @ YASMEEN

2019 INSC 8562 August 2019Disposed off

The trial court convicted Yasmeen Mohammad Zahid under Section 120B of the IPC and Section 38 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for conspiring to wage war and associating with ISIS, sentencing her to three years and seven years respectively. The Kerala High Court acquitted her of the charges under Sect

COL. RAJNISH BHANDARI, VSMversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 8572 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Col. Rajnish Bhandari appealed against the Union of India challenging the constitutionality of Section 497 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) and the continuation of prosecution under Section 63 of the Army Act after an acquittal subject to confirmation. The Court, relying on the Joseph Shine judgment, held that Section 49

NEERA YADAVversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATON

2017 INSC 6982 August 2017Case Partly allowed

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

RAJIV KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2017 INSC 6992 August 2017Case Partly allowed

The case involved the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of NOIDA, Rajiv Kumar, and the Chairperson‑Chief Executive Officer, Neera Yadav, who were accused of conspiring to illegally convert a government guest‑house plot into a residential plot and allot it to Kumar at a substantially lower premium, thereby obtaining a valu

RAVINDRA TUKARAM HIWALEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 4632 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ravindra Tukaram Hiwale, was convicted for abetment of suicide under IPC s.306 and cruelty under s.498‑A after his wife Alka died by self‑immolation following a domestic quarrel. The trial court sentenced him to four years for s.306 and one year for s.498‑A. The State appealed, and the High Court enhance

COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY) & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 5682 July 2018Disposed off

The petitioners, including Common Cause, challenged the appointments of K.V. Chowdary as Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) and T.M. Bhasin as Vigilance Commissioner (VC) on the ground that the selections violated the constitutional principles of impeccable and institutional integrity. They alleged that Chowdary had

DEVIDAS LOKA RATHODversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2018 INSC 5602 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

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

SONVIR @ SOMVIRversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2018 INSC 5622 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

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

S.R. SUKUMARversusS. SUNAAD RAGHURAM

2015 INSC 4732 July 2015Dismissed

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

DAYA RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 4722 July 2015Dismissed

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

PUNDAPPA YANKAPPA PUJARIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 4552 July 2014Dismissed

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

RISHIPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2014 INSC 4612 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

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

SEENA@ SRINIVASAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 4522 July 2014Disposed off

The case concerned the murder of Channegowda, who was attacked with choppers by three accused. The trial court convicted accused No.2 (Seena @ Srinivasa) under Section 302 IPC and accused No.3 under the same section. The High Court modified the conviction of accused No.2 to Section 326 IPC and acquitted accused No.3, p

ARJUN JADAVversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2014 INSC 4642 July 2014Dismissed

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

ARNESH KUMARversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2014 INSC 4632 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

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

SURYAKANT DADASAHEB BITALEversusDILIP BAJRANG KALE & ANR.

2014 INSC 4582 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF PUNJABversusGURMIT SINGH

2014 INSC 4542 July 2014Dismissed

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

PRADEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 4592 July 2014Dismissed

The appellant, Pradeep Kumar, was convicted under Sections 304‑B (dowry death) and 498‑A (cruelty) of the IPC for the death of his wife Manju, who died from burns nine months after marriage. The prosecution relied on her dying declaration, which contained an initial statement of accident that was later found to be tuto

DAVINDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2014 INSC 4602 July 2014Dismissed

The appellant, Davinder Singh, was married to Amarjit Kaur who died within seven months of marriage from severe burns. Prior to her death, she had telephonically complained of harassment and dowry demands by her husband and in‑laws, a fact corroborated by her brother and maternal uncle who witnessed the incident. The p

RAFIQUE @ RAUF & OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 4102 July 2013Dismissed

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

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

2013 INSC 4122 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

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

VIKRAM SINGH@ VICKY & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 4062 July 2013Matter referred to larger bench

The appellants, convicted of murder under Section 302 and kidnapping for ransom under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code, were sentenced to death. They challenged the constitutional validity of Section 364A on the grounds that prescribing death for kidnapping for ransom violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitutio

SHEO SHANKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

2013 INSC 4072 July 2013Dismissed

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

BISHNUPADA SARKAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2012 INSC 2562 July 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Bishnu Sarkar and his brother Madhab Sarkar, were convicted under Section 304 Part I read with Section 34 of the IPC for the death of Shyamalendu, an Income Tax Inspector, after a verbal altercation escalated into a physical assault. The trial and High Courts upheld a ten‑year rigorous imprisonment for

JITENDRA NATH MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR

2023 INSC 5762 June 2023Dismissed

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

UTTAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2022 INSC 6342 June 2022Appeal(s) allowed

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

OMPRAKASH SAHNIversusJAI SHANKAR CHAUDHARY & ANR. ETC.

2023 INSC 4782 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

NARSINGH ISPAT LTDversusORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

2022 INSC 5022 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Narsingh Ispat Ltd. had a Standard Fire and Special Perils policy with Oriental Insurance. After a violent intrusion on 23 March 2010 caused extensive damage to its factory, the insurer denied the claim invoking an exclusion clause that barred loss caused by "acts of terrorism". The Consumer Commission upheld the denia

PAWAN KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2022 INSC 4992 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Pawan Kumar, was selected as a constable in the Railway Protection Force (RPF) but was discharged during training for allegedly suppressing information about a criminal case in his attestation form. The FIR registered against him was later found to be false and he was acquitted, yet the employer claimed

STATE OF GUJARATversusKALUSINH @ HARPALSINH

2019 INSC 14152 May 2019Dismissed

On 23 November 1997, while ploughing a disputed piece of land, accused No.1 (Ashok Singh) and accused No.2 (Kalusinh) allegedly fired three shots, killing Somiben (wife of PW‑5) and injuring PW‑6 and PW‑7. The trial court convicted both accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to lif

TULARAMversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2018 INSC 4442 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Tularam was convicted of murder for stabbing Bhadri Lodhi with a spear during a sudden quarrel that escalated into a violent altercation. The key issue was whether Tularam had the intention to cause death or only knowledge that his act could likely cause death. The Supreme Court examined Exception 4 to Se

MURUGANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2018 INSC 4402 May 2018Dismissed

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

STATE OF U.P.versusSUNIL

2017 INSC 4282 May 2017Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh alleged that Sunil, along with his brother‑in‑law Suresh Pal Singh, murdered the complainant's father, mother and two sisters. A confessional statement by the deceased brother‑in‑law led to the recovery of a knife and blood‑stained clothing, but the prosecution could not directly link Sunil t

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

2014 INSC 3542 May 2014Dismissed

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

LAL KISHORE JHAversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2011 INSC 3462 May 2011Dismissed

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

SATYAVIR SINGH RATHIversusSTATE THR. C.B.I

2011 INSC 3472 May 2011Dismissed

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

SHANKARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2026 INSC 3152 April 2026Dismissed

The appellant, Shankar, was convicted for brutally beating his wife, Sugna Bai, pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire, resulting in her death. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC and a year under Section 342 IPC, relying heavily on the victim's dying declaration. On appeal

STATE (NCT) OF DELHIversusRAJEEV SHARMA

2025 INSC 4562 April 2025Dismissed

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

BALLU @ BALRAM @ BALMUKUND AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2024 INSC 2582 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

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

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCYversusZAHOOR AHMAD SHAH WATALI

2019 INSC 4562 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

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

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.versusTUNCAY ALANKUS & ANR.

2013 INSC 2032 April 2013Dismissed

National Fertilizers Ltd. (NFL) paid $38 million for urea to a Turkish company, Karsan, but never received the product. The manager of Karsan, Tuncay Alankus, was extradited to India and faced criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court, on 4 September 2006 and again on 14 December 2006, restrained Alankus from withdrawing

STATE OF HARYANAversusBASTI RAM

2013 INSC 2082 April 2013Disposed off

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

KULWANT SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 2052 April 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the death of Rachhpal Kaur, who died of aluminium phosphide poisoning within seven years of her marriage while staying at her in‑laws' house. The deceased had repeatedly complained of harassment and cruelty by her husband Kulwant Singh and his parents for allegedly insufficient dowry, includi

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusEX-GNR AJEET SINGH

2013 INSC 2062 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAJNISH SINGH @ SONIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 3082 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

SHABEEN AHMADversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 3072 March 2025Disposed off

The appellant, brother of the deceased, filed FIRs alleging that the deceased wife was subjected to relentless dowry demands and cruelty by her in‑laws, culminating in her death by strangulation within two years of marriage. The trial court denied bail to the accused in‑laws, but the High Court later granted bail to al

KARAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS

2022 INSC 2532 March 2022Dismissed

The appellant Karan Singh was convicted along with five others for murder, attempted murder and criminal conspiracy arising from a dispute over a buffalo price that led to a shooting on 8 April 1980. The prosecution alleged that all six accused, armed with rifles and guns, opened fire, killing Brahmapal Singh and injur

SHIVAJI CHINTAPPA PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2021 INSC 1362 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 2482 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

PARVAT SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2020 INSC 2442 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2020 INSC 2512 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

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

M. G. ESHWARAPPA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2017 INSC 1982 March 2017Dismissed

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

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusGOLOO RAIKWAR AND ANR.

2016 INSC 2392 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that reduced the conviction of Golu Raikwari and co‑accused from murder (s.302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (s.304 Part I IPC) and cut their life sentences to ten years rigorous imprisonment. The deceased, Hari Choudhary, was attacked

SHAHID KHANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2016 INSC 2382 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

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

SAMPATH KUMARversusINSPECTOR OF POLICE, KRISHNAGIRI

2012 INSC 1242 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

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

PRAHALAD PATELversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2011 INSC 1712 March 2011Dismissed

Prahalad Patel was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering Daulat, the brother of two witnesses, after a petty dispute over thrown bushes. The prosecution presented eye‑witness testimony, corroborative statements from the victim's brothers, medical reports indicating homicidal injuries, seizure of the axe, and fo

SURESH SINGHALversusSTATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

2017 INSC 972 February 2017Case Partly allowed

The appellant Suresh Singhal and his father attended a meeting to resolve a property dispute, during which a scuffle broke out and the appellant was allegedly strangled by the deceased Shyam Sunder and his brothers. In the ensuing struggle the appellant drew his revolver and fired, killing Shyam Sunder; the second brot

BALU S/O ONKAR PUND & OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2015 INSC 852 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2025 INSC 272 January 2025Dismissed

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

PREM SINGHversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2023 INSC 32 January 2023Dismissed

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

RAM CHANDER & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2017 INSC 52 January 2017Dismissed

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

ABHIRAM SINGHversusC.D. COMMACHEN (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.

2017 INSC 32 January 2017

The Supreme Court was asked to interpret Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, specifically the meaning of the pronoun "his" and whether the provision bars appeals based on religion, race, caste, community or language of the candidate, rival candidate, or the voter. The majority, led by Justice

SAVARALA SAI SREEversusGURRAMKONDA VASUDEVARAO & ORS.

2014 INSC 8972 January 2014Disposed off

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

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

2023 INSC 10361 December 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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

PHOOL SINGHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2021 INSC 8121 December 2021Dismissed

The victim was alone at night when the accused entered her room and raped her. She reported the incident to her sister‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law, who did not believe her and even beat her, forcing her to go to her parental home where an FIR was lodged three days later. The trial court convicted the accused under Section

TAIJUDDINversusSTATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2021 INSC 8091 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

A land dispute led to a mob assault on Abdul Wahab, resulting in his death. Thirty‑two persons were convicted under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201 and related provisions of the IPC. The appellant, Taijuddin, was alleged to have merely pointed out the house where the victim was hiding; he was present at the scene beca

CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND REFORMSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 10911 December 2017Dismissed

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms filed a public‑interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Supreme Court to constitute a Special Investigation Team, headed by a retired Chief Justice of India, to probe an FIR (RCIO(A)/2017‑AC.III) alleging conspiracy and bribes to obtain a favourab

KHOKAN GIRI @ MADHABversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2016 INSC 10861 December 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Khokan Giri, was convicted along with three others for the murder and robbery of an elderly couple in Kolkata, based largely on the confessional statement of an accomplice, Raju Rao, who became an approver. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the High Court gave undue weight to the appr

MADAN RAZAKversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 8801 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF M.P. & ORS.versusPARVEZ KHAN

2014 INSC 8231 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant State of Madhya Pradesh challenged a Division Bench order that had set aside the Superintendent of Police’s refusal to grant a compassionate appointment to the respondent, Parvez Khan, who sought recruitment to the police service after his father’s death in service. The respondent had two criminal cases p

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSHERA RAM @ VISHNU DUTTA

2011 INSC 8301 December 2011Dismissed

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

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusVIMAL KUMAR SURANA AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 8401 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

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

ANIL KUMARversusTHE STATE OF KERALA

2023 INSC 9651 November 2023Dismissed

Anil Kumar was convicted of murder and dowry harassment for setting his wife on fire after she poured kerosene on herself during a quarrel. The prosecution proved that Kumar, under the influence of alcohol, assaulted his wife, after which she drenched herself in kerosene to deter further violence, and Kumar deliberatel

ARUN KUMAR AGRAWALversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 7441 November 2013Dismissed

The petitioner challenged the appointment of U.K. Sinha as Chairman of SEBI on grounds that he failed to satisfy the statutory requirement of "high integrity" under Section 4(5) of the SEBI Act, alleging mis‑representation, irregular deputation, false declarations, and a conspiracy to secure his selection. The Court ex

HARSHAD GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2024 INSC 7761 October 2024Dismissed

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

PARVEZ NOORDIN LOKHANDWALLAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2020 INSC 5731 October 2020Disposed off

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

M/S. MAGMA FINCORP LTD.versusRAJESH KUMAR TIWARI

2020 INSC 5741 October 2020Case Allowed

M/S. Magma FinCorp Ltd., the financier, entered into a hire‑purchase agreement with Rajesh Kumar Tiwari for a vehicle. Tiwari paid seven instalments before the financier repossessed the vehicle without a notice addressed to his correct address and later sold it. Tiwari filed a consumer complaint alleging unfair trade p

GURCHARAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2020 INSC 5701 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gurcharan Singh was convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code for abetting the suicide of his wife, Shinder Kaur, who died after ingesting aluminium phosphide. The trial court and the High Court upheld the conviction despite the absence of direct evidence of cruelty, dowry harassment, or wilful

SUDAM @ RAHUL KANIRAM JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 11071 October 2019Case Partly allowed

Sudam @ Rahul Kaniram Jadhav was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 IPC for the murder of his wife Anita and their four children, based largely on circumstantial evidence, two extra‑judicial confessions and motive. The petitioner sought a review of the Supreme Court's affirmation of his conviction and death sentence,

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

2018 INSC 9171 October 2018Disposed off

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

SUDHIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 7251 October 2015Dismissed

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

KISHAN RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013 INSC 6651 October 2013Dismissed

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

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusJAGJIT SINGH

2013 INSC 6641 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

2012 INSC 4391 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

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

TARUN SHARMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 11391 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

SUSHIL KUMAR TIWARIversusHARE RAM SAH & ORS.

2025 INSC 10611 September 2025Disposed off

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

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

2025 INSC 10601 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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

HARENDRA RAIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2023 INSC 8061 September 2023Disposed off

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

BHADRESH BIPINBHAI SHETHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT &ANOTHER

2015 INSC 6231 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

ABDUL WAHEEDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2015 INSC 10101 September 2015Dismissed

Abdul Waheed, aggrieved by a civil suit and contempt petition, went armed with a pistol and firearms to the chabutra of Abbas Khan, where he and co‑accused fired shots and assaulted the complainants with lathis, resulting in the deaths of Abbas Khan and Israr Khan and injuries to several others. The prosecution relied

SURENDRA PRASAD SHUKLAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2011 INSC 6301 September 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a Head Constable with 34 years of service, was dismissed after his son and two others were arrested for stealing a car under Section 392 IPC, the car being recovered from the government quarters occupied by the appellant. The disciplinary authority held the appellant guilty of negligence, indiscipline, a

AJITSINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2011 INSC 6291 September 2011Matter referred to larger bench

Ajit Singh, the appellant, assaulted Laxmi Devi after a quarrel over her cutting fodder in his field, ordering his servant to fetch a spade and then striking her twice on the neck, causing grievous injuries from which she died after four days. The trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to lif

SANTOKH SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2010 INSC 5671 September 2010Dismissed

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

MYLADIMMAL SURENDRAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2010 INSC 5681 September 2010Dismissed

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

SHASHI BHUSAN PRASADversusINSPECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE & ORS.

2019 INSC 8501 August 2019Dismissed

Shashi Bhushan Prasad, a constable of the Central Industrial Security Force, was charged criminally under Section 25(1) of the Arms Act for allegedly supplying an unlicensed revolver used in a murder, and was acquitted when prosecution witnesses turned hostile. Simultaneously, a departmental inquiry under Rule 34 of th

BAIJU KUMAR SONI & ANR.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2019 INSC 8541 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for kidnapping, rape, and murder of a three‑year‑old girl based largely on circumstantial evidence, including telephone call records, a scarf, a drawing book, a rexin bag, and chocolate wrappers. The prosecution alleged that the appellants made threatening calls, possessed the bag in which

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

2019 INSC 8511 August 2019Disposed off

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

DR. SR. TESSY JOSE AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KERALA

2018 INSC 6671 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The victim, a minor at the time of rape, became pregnant and delivered a child at a hospital where three staff members – a gynecologist, a pediatrician and a hospital administrator – were later charged under Sections 19(1) and 21(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and Sections 201 and 34

RAJKISHORE PUROHITversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 6911 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a politically motivated attack on a Congress Sewa Dal president who was campaigning against the removal of a mayoral candidate. Four accused, including the nephew of one accused, arrived together in a car; one accused (A‑2) fired a revolver at the deceased while the others provided cover and later f

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusM. SIVAMANI

2017 INSC 6951 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAMESHversusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2014 INSC 5151 August 2014Dismissed

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

NEERAJ GUPTAversusPARDEEP KUMAR BANSAL & ORS.

2026 INSC 6601 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

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

CHANDRIKABEN KISHOR DAFDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2026 INSC 6651 July 2026Disposed off

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

PARVEEN KUMAR @ PARVEEN CHAUHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2026 INSC 6671 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

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

ASIM SHARIFFversusNATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

2019 INSC 7091 July 2019Dismissed

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

MUMTAZ @ MUNTYAZversusSTATE OF U.P. (NOW UTTARAKHAND)

2016 INSC 4831 July 2016Disposed off

The appellants Mumtaz alias Muntyaz and Dilshad alias Pappu were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 IPC for setting fire to the victim Pawan Kumar, who later died of burn injuries. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony and a dying declaration recorded by a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, which was endorsed by a do

STATE OF M.P.versusASHOK & OTHERS ETC.

2015 INSC 4511 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Tikaram was attacked, had petrol poured on him and was set ablaze. While burning, he was surrounded by the accused, who prevented his escape, threw a burning tyre and a sword at him, and later he died of his injuries. The trial court convicted all accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian

BRANCH C.1.0., TIRUNELVELI RANGE, TAMILNADUversusMARIYAANTONVIJAY

2015 INSC 4631 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF M.P.versusMADAN LAL

2015 INSC 4581 July 2015Case Partly allowed

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

STATE OF U.P.versusSATVEER & ORS.

2015 INSC 4501 July 2015Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the High Court’s acquittal of Satveer and others for the murder of an eight‑year‑old boy. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW2, who claimed to have seen the accused take the child into a baithak and later find his dead body there. The Supreme Cou

STATE OF J & KversusWASIMAHMED MALIK@ HAMID AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 4551 July 2015Case Partly allowed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir appealed the acquittal of two accused in a bomb‑blast case that killed eight people and injured eighteen. The trial court had dismissed the confessional statement of Ghulam Nabi Guide because it was recorded in Hindi, not in the accused's native language, and consequently acquitted both Ghu

AMAR SINGH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

2014 INSC 4451 July 2014Disposed off

Amar Singh Yadav, a police constable, was convicted for murdering his wife and three of his children by locking them in a van and setting it ablaze. The trial court relied on the dying declarations of the wife and two daughters, which were corroborated by injured eyewitnesses, to uphold convictions under Sections 302,

MANOHAR LALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 4391 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

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

RAM KUMAR & ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P.

2014 INSC 4411 July 2014Dismissed

The appellant and four others were accused of attacking the father of the complainant with weapons, causing fatal injuries that led to his death. The trial court convicted them under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the IPC, while the High Court altered the murder conviction to Section 302/34 and acquitted them of the Sect

UMAKANT & ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATISGARH

2014 INSC 4471 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

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

PARAMSIVAM & ORS.versusSTATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2014 INSC 4441 July 2014Dismissed

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

DURYODHAN ROUTversusSTATE OF ORLSSA

2014 INSC 4431 July 2014Case Partly allowed

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

KRISHNAN @ RAMASAMY & ORS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2014 INSC 4401 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Manikandan, who was allegedly abducted, beaten, and strangulated by accused persons 1 to 3, with the body later recovered from a borewell. The trial court convicted accused 1, 2 and 3 under IPC sections 364, 302 and 201 read with section 34, relying mainly on circumstantial evidence, th

HARIVADAN BABUBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2013 INSC 4001 July 2013Case Partly allowed

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

MAJENDRAN LANGESWARANversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2013 INSC 4011 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

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

B. RAGHUVIR ACHARYAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 3801 July 2013Disposed off

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

BIRENDRA DAS & ANR.versusSTATE OF ASSAM

2013 INSC 3831 July 2013Dismissed

The appellants, Birendra Das and another, were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Matilal Das. The prosecution proved that the deceased was hacked to death, that the appellants were present armed with deadly weapons, and that they dragged the dead body to Birendr

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

2013 INSC 3761 July 2013Dismissed

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

JARNAIL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2013 INSC 3781 July 2013Dismissed

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

SHARANJIT KAUR & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 3791 July 2013Dismissed

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

SARABJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2013 INSC 3751 July 2013Dismissed

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

DOLIBEN KANTILAL PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 3861 July 2013Dismissed

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

STATE OF M.P.versusNAJAB KHAN AND ORS.

2013 INSC 3881 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Najab Khan and three others for grievous hurt with common intention under IPC s.326 read with s.34. The trial court sentenced them to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The High Court, noting a compromise between the accused and the victim, reduced the sentence to th

PRAMOD KUMARversusSTATE (GNCT) OF DELHI

2013 INSC 3901 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant, a proclaimed offender, was apprehended in a house where he allegedly assaulted a police constable, was grappled with, and then fired a country‑made pistol, killing the constable. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 332, 186 of the IPC and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act. On appeal, the accu

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSHIV CHARAN & ORS.

2013 INSC 3911 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted Shiv Charan and others for the murder of Prahlad, alleging that five armed men, including the accused, formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the victim, leading to his death. The trial court convicted them under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the IPC and sentenced them to life impris

SHANMUGAM @ LAKSHMINARAYANANversusHIGH COURT OF MADRAS

2025 INSC 6191 May 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a criminal contempt case where three appellants were accused of forging and using bogus interim orders of the Madras High Court to obstruct the execution of a decree. The High Court had convicted them of contempt and sentenced each to six months’ imprisonment, based on investigations by the C

AMAN BHATIAversusSTATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

2025 INSC 6181 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a licensed stamp vendor, was caught in a sting operation after demanding Rs 12 for a Rs 10 stamp paper and was convicted under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The key issue was whether a licensed stamp vendor qualifies as a “public servant” under Section 2(c)(i)

SHARIF AHMED AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 3631 May 2024Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined three criminal appeals arising from chargesheets filed in Uttar Pradesh that were alleged to lack sufficient factual detail and evidence under Section 173(2) of the CrPC. It considered whether a chargesheet must contain detailed facts and material evidence to enable a magistrate to take cogni

SHILPA SAILESHversusVARUN SREENIVASAN

2023 INSC 4681 May 2023Reference answered

The Constitution Bench examined the scope of Article 142(1) of the Constitution, holding that the Supreme Court may depart from statutory procedure and even substantive law to achieve "complete justice" provided the exercise is guided by fundamental public policy. It ruled that, in cases of settlement between parties,

PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYAversusNEELAM PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA

2019 INSC 6151 May 2019Disposed off

The appellant and respondent were married in 1998 and later lived separately, leading the husband to file a suit for dissolution of marriage which was dismissed by the trial, district and high courts. While the appeal was pending before the Supreme Court, the parties reached an amicable settlement through mediation, ag

RAJESH & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 6131 May 2019Dismissed

The appellants were among ten persons named in an FIR for a violent incident but were not listed in the charge‑sheet after the investigating officer concluded they were not present at the scene. The investigating officer and the SHO later applied to a magistrate for their release from judicial custody, which the magist

CHANDRA BHAWAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2018 INSC 4351 May 2018Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Satyawati, who was allegedly killed by her in‑laws for refusing to pay dowry. Four family members were tried; Jwala Singh was acquitted while Tribhuwan Singh, Makoi Devi and Chandra Bhawan Singh were convicted by the trial court. The High Court upheld the convictions of Tribhuwan Singh a

ARUN KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2017 INSC 4191 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, son of the deceased, challenged the acquittal of four accused persons charged with murder, attempt to murder and rioting under Sections 302, 34, 201 and 307 IPC. The trial court had acquitted all accused despite the prosecution's evidence from 13 witnesses. The High Court dismissed the appeal without a d

SAVITRI PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 9921 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Savitri Pandey and Raju Pandey were named in an FIR filed in 2014 by their sister‑in‑law alleging fraudulent sale deeds executed in 1994 concerning joint family land. The High Court dismissed their writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of the FIR. The Supreme Court examined whether such a writ

MAHENDRA NATH DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 2941 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Mahendra Nath Das was convicted of two murders, one of which attracted a death sentence that was confirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. He filed a mercy petition under Article 72 of the Constitution seeking commutation to life imprisonment, but the petition was rejected after a twelve‑year delay. The appell

HABIBversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2013 INSC 2991 May 2013Dismissed

The accused Habib and Manuwa were acquitted by the trial court for murder under IPC s.302, but the Allahabad High Court set aside the acquittal of Habby and Manuwa, convicting them based on eyewitness and medical evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether an appellate court may re‑appreciate evidence in an appeal aga

SAMARENDRA NATH KUNDU & ANR.versusSADHANA DAS & ANR.

2026 INSC 3041 April 2026Dismissed

The complainant, wife of a deceased, filed a criminal complaint against three police officials—Assistant Commissioner Sankaran Moitra and two subordinate officers, S.M. Kundu and Sudhir Sikdar—alleging that the latter two murdered her husband on the direction of Moitra. The trial court took cognizance and the accused w

MAUKAM SINGH & OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 4351 April 2025Dismissed

The appellants entered the deceased's house armed with an axe and a cutting weapon to dispute a place of worship on contested land, leading to a scuffle that resulted in the grandfather's death and injuries to three grandchildren. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 302, 323 and 324 read with Sectio

VINAY AGGARWALversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2025 INSC 4331 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vinay Aggarwal, was charged under several IPC offences for allegedly impersonating an IB officer and extorting money. The complainant filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking transfer of the investigation from the Haryana police to the CBI, which the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed, d

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusSUBHASH @ PAPPU

2022 INSC 3821 April 2022Case Partly allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against the High Court's acquittal of Subhash @ Pappu for offences under Sections 302 and 148 of the IPC. The facts involved six to seven persons attacking a shop servant, Bengali, with a knife and a hockey stick, resulting in a stab wound; the victim died thirty days later of septic

MANIversusSTATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 4481 April 2019Disposed off

The case arose from a violent incident on 28 September 2005 near Rosy School, Chozhiyamkod, where the appellant Mani stabbed a victim, Soman, who later died, and eight persons were injured. The trial court convicted Mani under Section 302 IPC and the other three accused under Sections 324 and 341 read with Section 34,

KUMAR @ SHIVA KUMARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2024 INSC 1561 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly abetting the suicide of his former tenant, X, who died after consuming organophosphate poison. The prosecution's case relied on testimonies of family members and neighbours, alleging that the appellant had threatened X to marry him and

ANIL MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2024 INSC 1891 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant lodged an FIR in 1999 alleging assault, abduction and other offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 364 IPC against three accused. During trial, the accused entered into a settlement agreement with one victim (Respondent No.5) but the original complainant (the appellant) was neither a party to nor

THE STATE OF CHATTISGARH & ANRversusAMAN KUMAR SINGH & ORS. ETC. ETC

2023 INSC 1891 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Chhattisgarh filed criminal appeals against the Chhattisgarh High Court’s order quashing FIR No. 9/2020, which alleged that Aman Kumar Singh (AS) and his wife Yasmin Singh (YS) had amassed assets disproportionate to their known sources of income under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court

RAVI DHINGRAversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 1821 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The appellants kidnapped a 14-year-old boy for ransom. The trial court and High Court convicted them under Section 364A IPC (kidnapping for ransom) with life imprisonment. The Supreme Court examined the ingredients of Section 364A, particularly the requirement of a threat to cause death or hurt. The Court found that th

SONU @ SUBHASH KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 1341 March 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellant, Sonu, was charged under Section 376 IPC after the second respondent lodged an FIR alleging that he had promised to marry her, maintained a consensual sexual relationship for one and a half years, and later refused to marry, leading to the complaint. The appellant sought to quash the charge‑sheet under Se

KAPIL AGARWAL AND OTHERSversusSANJAY SHARMA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 1321 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a terminated distributorship agreement between Varun Beverages Ltd. and the complainant, who alleged non‑payment of commissions and issued a cheque that later bounced. The complainant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and later a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

STATE OF M.P.versusUDAIBHAN

2016 INSC 2271 March 2016Case Partly allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted three accused—Rajaram, Udaibhan and Hakim Singh—for assaulting a complainant and his brother with weapons, resulting in multiple grievous injuries. The trial court convicted them under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) and Section 307/34, imposing ten years’ rigorous imprisonmen

M. MOHANversusTHE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2011 INSC 1681 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Kamatchi committed suicide by hanging herself four days after being denied the use of a family car, an incident for which her husband and sister‑in‑law were initially charged under Sections 304‑B, 498‑A and 306 IPC. The appellants – the husband’s brothers and mother‑in‑law – were also charged under the sam

ASHOK KUMAR TODIversusKISHWAR JAHAN & ORS.

2011 INSC 1701 March 2011Disposed off

Rizwanur Rahman married Priyanka Todi under the Special Marriage Act. After the marriage, police officials repeatedly interfered, threatened the couple and later the deceased was found dead on railway tracks. The mother and brother of the deceased filed a writ petition seeking transfer of the investigation from the Sta

DATTATRAYAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 1671 February 2024Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Dattatraya, was convicted for the death of his nine‑month‑pregnant wife after he allegedly poured kerosene on her during a drunken quarrel, causing severe burns, a still‑born child and her eventual death. The prosecution relied on the dying declaration of the deceased, testimony of the maternal grandmoth

STATE OF U.P.versusVEERPAL & ANR.

2022 INSC 1331 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Veerpal and another accused who were charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly burning the deceased after a money dispute. The deceased had given two dying declarations: one to a police officer on 20‑12‑2011 and another to a Sub‑Division

VASUDEVversusSTATE OF M.P.

2022 INSC 1351 February 2022Case Partly allowed

The police, acting on information that an absconding accused Rajesh Shukla was hiding in a village house, confronted him and his associate Vasudev Shukla. After Rajesh opened fire, the police retaliated and both accused eventually surrendered, surrendering a rifle and a 12‑bore double‑barrel gun. The trial court convic

SUBHASHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 1271 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a murder under IPC sections 302, 149 and 148, where six accused were convicted based largely on the testimonies of two eyewitnesses, PW‑1 Vedram and PW‑2 Jagdish. The post‑mortem report showed only one firearm injury and a single neck injury, contradicting the prosecution’s claim that all pistol‑arme

THE STATE OF SIKKIMversusJASBIR SINGH & ANR.

2022 INSC 1281 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Sikkim appealed against a High Court order that directed the accused army personnel, Jasbir Singh and another, to be tried by a court‑martial for a murder under IPC sections 302 and 308. The Supreme Court examined whether the offence fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of a court‑martial or within the c

UNION OF INDIAversusK. A. NAJEEB

2021 INSC 501 February 2021Dismissed

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) appealed against the Kerala High Court’s order granting bail to K. A. NajeeB, who was charged under multiple IPC offences, the Explosive Substances Act and several provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The High Court had released the undertrial on bail, c

NAJABHAI DESURBHAI WAGHversusVALERABHAI DEGANBHAI VAGH & ORS.

2017 INSC 911 February 2017Case Partly allowed

The incident occurred on 24 March 1998 when fourteen accused, armed with axes, iron pipes and spears, attacked the complainant Najabhai Desurbhai Wagh near his house after he rebuked them for damaging an electric pole. The assault resulted in the death of the complainant's brother, Unadbhai Desurbhai. The trial court c

GITA RAM & ANR.versusSTATE OF H.P.

2013 INSC 701 February 2013Dismissed

The appellants were convicted for publicly exhibiting obscene blue films to a young audience under Section 292 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Cinematograph Act. The trial court sentenced them to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine; the appellate court reduced the imprisonment

MULTANI HANIFBHAI KALUBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2013 INSC 691 February 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant’s Eicher truck was seized by police for transporting 28 buffalo calves, and the appellant sought its release under Section 451 of the CrPC. The lower courts rejected the application, invoking Section 68(3) of the Gujarat Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act, 2011, which bars release of a seized vehicle for

ROY FERNANDESversusSTATE OF GOA AND ORS.

2012 INSC 621 February 2012Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a dispute over the erection of a fence around a chapel in Goa, during which the appellant Roy Fernandes and four others intervened, assaulting the deceased and his companions. One of the accused stabbed the deceased, causing his death. The trial court convicted all five under Sections 143, 148, 323,

LEE KUN HEE & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2012 INSC 611 February 2012Dismissed

The appellant companies, foreign nationals who were ultimate beneficiaries of a bill of exchange, were summoned by a Ghaziabad magistrate on a criminal complaint alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust and related offences under the IPC. The complaint arose from a commercial transaction in which goods were supplied

STATE OF PUNJABversusDALBIR SINGH

2012 INSC 661 February 2012Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed the acquittal of CRPF constable Dalbir Singh, who had been charged under Sections 302, 307 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for firing a self‑loading rifle that resulted in the death of a senior officer. The High Court acquitted him on the basis of irreconcilable inconsistencies in the pr

R.S. MISHRAversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

2011 INSC 871 February 2011Dismissed

The appellant, a retired Additional Sessions Judge, was criticised by a High Court Single Judge for not framing a charge under Section 302 IPC in a murder trial, instead framing only Section 304 and 323 IPC without recording any reasons. The Supreme Court examined the interplay between Sections 227 and 228 of the CrPC,

KOLLA VEERA RAGHAV RAOversusGORANTALA VENKATESWARA RAO AND ANR.

2011 INSC 881 February 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kolla Veera Raghav Rao, had been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He was later prosecuted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code for the same set of facts. The central issue was whether Section 300(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which bars a person from b

B.A. UMESHversusREGR.GEN.HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2011 INSC 891 February 2011Dismissed

The appellant B.A. Umesh was convicted of rape, murder and robbery (IPC ss.376, 302, 392) and sentenced to death. The Supreme Court examined the prosecution's case, which relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence, eyewitness testimony, a test identification parade, fingerprint evidence, forensic reports and an extra

KIM WANSOOversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 81 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a foreign national serving as Project Manager for Hyundai Engineering & Construction India LLP, was named in FIR No.64/2020 alleging conspiracy and cheating in a Rs 9‑crore payment default involving multiple subcontractors. The appellant sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that the allegations were

DALJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 211 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Daljit Singh, was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. for failing to appear after summons in a cheque‑related criminal case filed in 2010. He was later acquitted of the underlying offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and an FIR under Section 174A IPC was filed for his

B.N. JOHNversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 41 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, B.N. John, owned a hostel for underprivileged children and alleged that officials raided it illegally on 3 June 2015, falsely accusing him of assaulting them. An FIR was lodged under IPC s.353, and a charge‑sheet later added s.186, leading the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to take cognizance and issue

M/S NARESH POTTERIESversusM/S AARTI INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 11 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Naresh Potteries (appellant) filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M/s Aarti Industries (respondent No.1) for the dishonour of a cheque issued in the appellant's favour. The complaint was filed by the manager, Neeraj Kumar, who held a power of attorney from the sole proprieto

SANJAY DUTT & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2025 INSC 341 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Range Forest Officer alleged that the directors and office bearers of a company illegally uprooted trees using a JCB, violating Section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900, and sought prosecution under Section 19. The Special Environment Court took cognizance of the complaint and issued process against 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