Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Penal Code, 1860

3,190 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1,401–1,600.

HARIBHAI MALAVIYA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2019 INSC 114616 October 2019Disposed off

An FIR alleging land‑grab and extortion was filed in 2009, leading to a police investigation and a charge‑sheet. After the magistrate took cognizance and issued summons, the accused applied under s.173(8) CrPC for further investigation and for the magistrate to order a fresh FIR; the magistrate rejected these applicati

BALU @ BALA SUBRAMANIAM & ANR.versusSTATE (U.T. OF PONDICHERRY)

2015 INSC 78916 October 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellants Balu@Balasubramaniam and Raja were convicted of murder and assault under Sections 302, 326 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had proved a common intention among the accused as required by s.34. While eye‑witness testimony established that the appe

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.versusGUJARAT REVENUE TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION AND ANR.

2012 INSC 47616 October 2012Dismissed

The State of Gujarat appointed the Secretary to the Government as President of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, a move challenged on the ground that the post is a judicial office and requires the High Court's consultation under Article 234 of the Constitution. The Gujarat High Court held that the Tribunal is a "court" and

KANWAR SINGH MEENAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2012 INSC 47716 October 2012Disposed off

The appellant, brother of the murder victim, challenged the Rajasthan High Court’s order granting bail to the accused, Khushi Ram Meena, in a case involving murder and related offences (IPC ss.147,148,149,364,302). The Supreme Court examined the principles governing bail under Section 439(2) of the CrPC, emphasizing th

SELVAMversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2012 INSC 47516 October 2012Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a land dispute that led to an assault on 16 November 2006, during which the accused A‑1, A‑6 and A‑7 struck the victim's head with the blunt side of an aruval and a stick, causing injuries that led to the victim's death after nine days. The trial court and the High Court had convicted the three accu

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT, JODHPURversusAKASHDEEP MORYA & ANR.

2021 INSC 48516 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Akashdeep Morya applied for appointment as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) in Rajasthan. Four FIRs were lodged against him, charging him with offences under sections 324, 323, 341, 148, 149, 504 and 34 of the IPC; he was acquitted in all cases, but the acquittals were based on compromise and hostile witnesses, not on a

NEETU KUMAR NAGAICHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 54916 September 2020Case Allowed

Neetu Kumar Nagaich, the mother of a 21‑year‑old law student who died under suspicious circumstances, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a de novo investigation of the homicide after alleging serious deficiencies in the Rajasthan police investigation and the filing of a closure report. The Supreme Court not

JUGUT RAMversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2020 INSC 54716 September 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Jugut Ram, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder after assaulting the deceased with a lathi during a land dispute, the victim dying a day later. He appealed, arguing that a lathi is a common village implement and that the prosecution failed to prove an intention to cause death, relying on relate

TATTU LODHI@ PANCHAM LODHIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2016 INSC 87616 September 2016Dismissed

The appellant, Tattu Lodhi, was convicted of kidnapping, rape, and murder of a seven‑year‑old girl. The trial court relied on circumstantial evidence, including the victim's last seen with the accused, forensic evidence of blood on a gunny bag and clothing, and a post‑mortem report showing injuries consistent with sexu

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusNEELAM NAG

2016 INSC 87816 September 2016Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a senior assistant of State Bank of India, was alleged to have caused a loss of over Rs.44 lakh by facilitating fraudulent credit and misplacing clearing instruments in May 2006. A criminal case under Sections 409 and 34 of the IPC was filed in 2007, but the trial progressed slowly, with only three of e

STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI)versusNITIN GUNWANT SHAH

2015 INSC 66416 September 2015Dismissed

The State of NCT of Delhi appealed against the High Court's acquittal of Nitin Shah and Om Prakash Srivastava in the murder of Lalit Suneja (2 August 1992). The prosecution alleged that Shah, as Suneja's employer, conspired with Srivastava and others to kill Suneja, basing its case on a complaint (Ext. PW15/A1) purport

EDMUNDS LYNGDOHversusSTATE OF MEGHALAYA

2014 INSC 63616 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the procurement of Damp Proof Cement by North Eastern Hill University (NEHU) where the Chief Engineer (A‑1) and other officials were alleged to have colluded to obtain the material at an inflated price of Rs.42.75 per kg, far above the market rate of Rs.5‑10 per kg. The prosecution proved that A‑1, a

K. SARAVANAN KARUPPASAMY & ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2014 INSC 63516 September 2014Disposed off

The petitioners, leaders of a human‑rights NGO, filed a writ of mandamus under Article 32 seeking a CBI or SIT investigation into the violent clash between Dalit and Thevar students at Dr. Ambedkar Government Law College, Chennai on 12 November 2008, alleging police inaction and subsequent harassment. They also complai

MUNNAversusSTATE OF M.P.

2014 INSC 63316 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Munna was convicted under Sections 376 and 450 IPC for allegedly raping the prosecutrix at knife point, based primarily on the testimonies of the prosecutrix, her husband (PW‑2) and a village Kotwar (PW‑3). The High Court upheld the conviction, but the Supreme Court examined whether the prosecutrix's test

DILAWAR SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 63416 September 2014Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Narinder Singh, for which nine persons were charged under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the IPC. The prosecution's case hinged on the testimony of the victim's father (PW‑6) and his brother (PW‑7), who identified Dilawar Singh (A‑1), Yash Pal (A‑3) and Shamsher Singh (A‑7) as the assailan

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. & ORS.versusBABU LAL JANGIR

2013 INSC 62416 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation retired Babu Lal Jangir compulsorily in 2002 under its standing orders after a screening committee found his service record unsatisfactory. Jangir challenged the retirement, arguing that the misconduct cited dated from 1978‑1990 was too old and that his more recent record

ABDUL GHAFOOR & ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 69116 September 2011Disposed off

Abdul Ghafoor and another were convicted under Sections 323, 447 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment, with other sentences running concurrently. Their appeal was dismissed and they filed a criminal revision petition more than fifteen months after conviction, seeking condona

SUNDER SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2010 INSC 62116 September 2010Dismissed

The appellant Sunder Singh was convicted for the murder of six members of his cousin's family by setting their house on fire with petrol, closing the door, and slashing one victim with a sword. The prosecution relied on the surviving victim's eyewitness testimony, the dying declarations of two victims, and forensic evi

SURENDRA PAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2010 INSC 62216 September 2010Dismissed

The appellants, who had earlier demanded a compromise in a kidnapping case, allegedly opened fire with country‑made pistols and a rifle, killing three members of the victim's family and injuring three others. The first informant, PW‑1, lodged an FIR within five hours of the incident and identified the accused in both m

MAKHAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2022 INSC 83116 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Makhan Singh was convicted under Section 304‑B IPC for the death of his wife Manjit Kaur based on two dying declarations. The first declaration, recorded by Judicial Magistrate Vani Gopal Sharma, was made after a medical officer certified the deceased was fit and conscious, and the magistrate satisfied he

RAMESHWAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2019 INSC 93116 August 2019Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Ram Autar on 8 January 1984, for which appellants Rameshwar and Balaram were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that Rameshwar, armed with an axe, and Balaram, armed with a rifle, acted in concert to kill the deceased, with

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusP. RAVIKUMAR @ RAVI ETC.

2018 INSC 71616 August 2018Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed the acquittal of accused No.2 (P. Ravi Kumar) and accused No.3 (D.B. Savitha) in a murder case where the deceased, Mohan Kumar, was allegedly killed by a conspiracy involving accused No.1, accused No.2, and accused No.3, who were said to have an illicit relationship. The trial court had

RAKESH KUMAR PAULversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2017 INSC 75416 August 2017Disposed off

Rakesh Kumar Paul was arrested under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and remained in custody for more than 60 days without a charge‑sheet. The State argued that because the offence could attract imprisonment of up to ten years, the 90‑day period under clause (i) of proviso (a) to Section 167(2) CrPC applied, den

VIKASversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 54016 August 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Vikash, was implicated in an abduction case where a girl was allegedly kidnapped by several accused. The trial court, after taking cognizance under sections 363, 366(A), 1208 and 376 of the IPC, issued a non‑bailable warrant to secure his attendance under section 319 of the CrPC. Vikash applied to have t

RAVI KAPURversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2012 INSC 33316 August 2012Dismissed

The appellant Ravi Kapur was charged under IPC sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A for a bus accident that caused multiple deaths and injuries. The trial court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution failed to prove his identity as the driver and that procedural lapses, such as the absence of a test identification para

PATHAN HUSSAIN BASHAversusSTATE OF A.P.

2012 INSC 33716 August 2012Case Partly allowed

The husband (Pathan Hussain Basha) and his mother‑in‑law were convicted under Sections 304‑B (dowry death) and 498A of the IPC for the suicide of the wife, who had been harassed for unpaid dowry. The Supreme Court examined whether the statutory ingredients of a dowry death were satisfied and whether the onus of proving

CHAKALI MADDILETY & ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2010 INSC 51716 August 2010Dismissed

The deceased Harijana Ayyanna was attacked and stabbed by a group of accused (A1‑A7) who were armed with daggers and a stick. The FIR was lodged promptly and named all the accused. Eye‑witnesses, the deceased's son (PW‑1) and wife (PW‑2), testified that the accused surrounded and stabbed the victim, and their statement

VIRENDER PRASAD SINGHversusRAJESH BHARDWAJ & ORS.

2010 INSC 51816 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Virender Prasad Singh filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking re‑investigation of offences (IPC ss. 302, 201, 120‑B) alleged against Rajesh Bhardwaj after a charge‑sheet had already been filed. The Patna High Court, instead of examining the charge‑sheet, directed that a Director General of Police exam

BALJINDER KUMAR @ KALAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 85616 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Baljinder Kumar, accused of murdering his wife, two children and sister‑in‑law, was convicted by the Trial Court and sentenced to death under Sections 302, 308 and 325 IPC. The High Court upheld the conviction, relying mainly on the testimonies of three witnesses despite contradictions and lack of forensic linkage. On

BYLURU THIPPAIAH @ BYALURU THIPPAIAH @ NAYAKARA THIPPAIAHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2025 INSC 86216 July 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Byluru Thippaiah, brutally murdered his wife, sister‑in‑law and three children on 25 February 2017, alleging that his wife and the children were not his and accusing them of promiscuity. He was tried under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted and sentenced to death by the trial court, a senten

JAI PRAKASHversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2025 INSC 86116 July 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Jai Prakash, was convicted of raping and murdering a 10‑year‑old girl. Evidence included the victim’s body recovered from his hut, the last‑seen testimony of child witnesses, and DNA matches linking the appellant to the victim’s underwear and hair. The trial and High Courts affirmed conviction under IPC

DILIP SUDHAKAR PENDSE & ANR.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 46916 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 420, 468, 471, 477-A and 120-B IPC for alleged offences. During the trial before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, one co‑accused turned approver and was granted pardon under Section 306 CrPC, after which the magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions.

SUSHILA TIWARY AND OTHERSversusALLAHABAD BANK AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 28416 July 2012Dismissed

Shri Ravindra Nath Tiwary, a Special Assistant of Allahabad Bank, was suspended and charged with offences under IPC sections 468 and 477A. He was convicted, dismissed from service under Clause 19.6(a) of the 1966 Bi‑partite Settlement, and later acquitted on appeal by the benefit of doubt. The Bank then issued a notice

MS. P XXXversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR

2022 INSC 64816 June 2022Dismissed

Ms. P (appellant) alleged that her fiancé, respondent No.2, raped her in Delhi in February‑March 2016 (IPC s.376) and later, in November 2016, threatened and abused her over telephone in Chamoli (IPC s.504, s.506). The Sessions Judge, Chamoli, discharged the accused of the rape charge for lack of territorial jurisdicti

MAJOR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2022 INSC 130616 June 2022Case Partly allowed

Major Singh, the appellant, struck his uncle Makhan Singh with a wooden cot leg ("bahi") after a quarrel the previous day, causing a head injury that led to the uncle's death a day later. The trial court acquitted Singh, but the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted him under Section 302 I

P KRISHNA MOHAN REDDYversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2025 INSC 72516 May 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, former public servants, were charged in a large‑scale corruption case involving alleged manipulation of liquor allocations and kickbacks. They applied for anticipatory bail, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court denied relief, relying on confessional statements recorded from co‑accused under Section 161 of

BALJINDER SINGH ALIAS AMANversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2025 INSC 79616 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Baljinder Singh, alleged that the respondents, Mandeep Singh and Narinder Kumar, attacked him and his driver with wooden sticks, leading to the driver’s death. The respondents were charged under Sections 302, 323, 34, 427, 120B (with 148 and 149 later deleted) of the IPC and sought regular bail under Sec

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S HYUNDAI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. & ORS.

2024 INSC 43116 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. issued a Contractor's All Risk policy for a bridge project that collapsed during construction, killing 48 workers. The insurer repudiated the claim, invoking an exclusion clause covering loss due to faulty design, workmanship and construction defects, and relied on a surveyor's report an

M/S. D. N. SINGHversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, PATNA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 54316 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a common carrier, was assessed under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act for short delivery of bitumen, with the assessing officer deeming the bitumen as an "other valuable article" owned by the appellant. The Supreme Court examined whether a carrier can be considered the owner of goods for tax purposes an

VINUBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATELversusRAJIVBHAI DUDABHAI PATEL & OTHERS

2018 INSC 52116 May 2018Disposed off

The case concerned an attack in which three persons were killed and five injured, allegedly committed by a group of seventeen accused. The Sessions Court convicted four accused and acquitted the rest, but the charges were found to be improperly framed under CrPC sections 211‑213, lacking specific allegations for each d

ADAMBHAI SULEMANBHAI AJMERI & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2014 INSC 39916 May 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of six accused in the 2002 Akshardham temple terrorist attack, which were based largely on confessional statements recorded under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), testimony of accomplices, and two Urdu letters allegedly recovered from the terrorists' pockets. The Court

KRISHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 40016 May 2014Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code for raping and intimidating the prosecutrix. The trial court and the High Court upheld the conviction based on medical testimony that semen was found on the victim's underwear and that the accused sustained injuries consistent with a strugg

MOTI LAL SONGARAversusPREM PRAKASH @ PAPPU AND ANR.

2013 INSC 34616 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant lodged an FIR and later informed the magistrate that another person, Prem Prakash, had not been made an accused. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC and summoned the accused, leading to charges being framed by the Sessions Judge. Prem Prakash challenged th

BIRENDER PODDARversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2011 INSC 40316 May 2011Dismissed

Birender Poddar was convicted under Sections 302/34 and 498‑A of the IPC for the death of his wife in their matrimonial home. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including testimonies of the deceased's relatives, letters complaining of ill‑treatment, and a post‑mortem report showing incised injuries to t

RIKHAB BIRANI & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 51216 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Rikhab Birani and Sadhna Birani, entered into an oral agreement to sell a godown for Rs 1.35 crore, which the buyer, Shilpi Gupta, failed to fully pay, leading the sellers to re‑sell the property at a lower price. The buyer subsequently approached the Metropolitan Magistrate to register an FIR alleging

KAMAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2025 INSC 50416 April 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellants, comprising a husband and his parents-in-law, sought to quash an FIR filed by the wife shortly after divorce proceedings were initiated, alleging offences under Sections 498-A and 114 of the IPC. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the allegations, however vague, would be tested at trial.

N. ESWARANATHANversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

2025 INSC 50916 April 2025

The petitioner N. Eswaranathan, convicted of several offences, filed a first Special Leave Petition (SLP) which was dismissed by the Supreme Court with an order to surrender. He subsequently filed a second SLP on the same grounds, with the same Advocate-on-Record (AOR) P. Soma Sundaram and counsel S. Muthukrishnan fili

NAVANEETHAKRISHNANversusTHE STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2018 INSC 34316 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of a driver, John Bosco, and his companion Madhan, based largely on circumstantial evidence, including the testimony of a taxi driver who claimed to have last seen the accused with the victims, a retracted confession by one accused, and the recovery of a mobile phone and cam

ASHWANI KUMAR @ ASHU & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2015 INSC 32716 April 2015Disposed off

The case involved the murder and kidnapping of Jaswinder Kaur (Jassi) and the assault on her husband Sukhwinder Singh. The prosecution alleged that Ashwani Kumar, Anil Kumar, Joginder Singh, and others conspired to kill Jassi because her marriage was opposed by her family. The trial court convicted seven accused, inclu

BIVASH CHANDRA DEBNATH @ BIVASH D & OTHERSversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 29716 April 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Ajit Nath during a dispute over land excavation, with the trial court finding them guilty under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The Supreme Court examined whether an unlawful assembly of at least five persons existed, given that 27 co‑accused were acquitted,

KIRITI PALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

2015 INSC 32916 April 2015Disposed off

Kiriti Pal was accused of murdering Anjali Goswami, a widow who was last seen alive with him on the evening of 11 November 2008 before being found dead the next morning in a jungle 25 km away. The trial court convicted Pal and three co‑accused (Siddique Mia, Mustaque Mia, and Durga Sutradhar) under sections 302, 120B,

VINAY&ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA&ANR.

2015 INSC 32816 April 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellants, brothers of the complainant, were convicted for assaulting the complainant and his associates with sickles and talwars, causing grievous injuries. The trial court sentenced them under Sections 307 and 427 IPC read with Section 34, which the High Court modified to Section 326 IPC with reduced imprisonmen

OM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 27816 April 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of seven accused under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Prabhu Dayal. The appellants argued that the FIR was unduly delayed, that there was no proof that Om Prakash ran over the victim with a tractor, and that no specific ove

DILIPversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2013 INSC 25916 April 2013Dismissed

The appellant was convicted for raping a girl who was later found to be 14 years old at the time of the offence. The trial court had acquitted him on the basis that the girl was not below 16 years and had allegedly consented, but the High Court reversed this finding and sentenced him to seven years imprisonment. On app

BHOLA MAHTOversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 25716 March 2026Case Partly allowed

Bhola Mahto was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC in 2002 and appealed the conviction in 2003. The appeal remained pending for over two decades while he was on bail, and when it was finally listed, no counsel appeared on his behalf, prompting the High Court to appoint an amicus curiae without informing the appe

SHIVALEELA AND OTHERS A1: SHIVALEELA A2: KUMARI KAVYA A3: KUMARI PURNIMA A4: KUMARI SHRAVYA A5: MASTER VEERESH A6: K. H. M. SHIVAMURTHAIAHversusTHE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & OTHERS R1: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. R2: SRI. GIRISH B. R3: DR. BASAVARAJA

2025 INSC 35716 March 2025Case Partly allowed

The deceased, K.H.M. Shivamurthaiah, died in a motor vehicle accident, leaving behind a family dependent on his earnings from agriculture, milk‑vending and tractor‑hiring. The Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT) awarded compensation based on a notional monthly income of Rs.10,000, which the High Court reduced to Rs.8

PRADEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2023 INSC 24216 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Pradeep Kumar was convicted for the murder of Umesh Chowdhary based on an alleged extra‑judicial confession, alleged animosity between the parties, and the recovery of keys and money. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the reliability of the confession, the credibility of witnesses who were themselves

NARENDRASINH KESHUBHAI ZALAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2023 INSC 24116 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Narendrasinh Keshubhai Zala, was convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and for offences under the Arms Act based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑3, who claimed to have seen the shooting. The Supreme Court examined the credibility of PW‑3, noting inconsistencies,

UDAYAKUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2023 INSC 23916 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Udayakumar (A‑2) was convicted for the murder of Purushothaman under Section 302 IPC, based primarily on the identification by a single eyewitness, PW‑1. The trial court and the High Court upheld his conviction despite acquitting the alleged conspirators (A‑1 and A‑3) and finding no material linking Udaya

RAVASAHEB @ RAVASAHEBGOUDA ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2023 INSC 23816 March 2023Dismissed

The victim Satyappa was murdered in broad daylight; eight men were accused. The trial court and the Karnataka High Court convicted all eight based primarily on the testimony of a single eyewitness, PW‑1, the brother of the deceased, despite most other prosecution witnesses turning hostile. The appellants challenged whe

GUNA MAHTOversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2023 INSC 24016 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Guna Mahto was convicted for murdering his wife under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, based largely on the testimony of a few eyewitnesses and an undisclosed statement of the investigating officer. The prosecution alleged that he killed his wife, disposed of her body in a village well, and later filed a false missing‑

NAHAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2022 INSC 31416 March 2022Dismissed

The victim of a rape alleged that, besides the two persons named in the FIR, a third individual, Nahar Singh, participated in the offence; his name appeared only in the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, taking cognizance of the offence under Section 190(1)(b) of t

SRI RAMESHWAR YADAV & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2018 INSC 23916 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent lodged a complaint under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband and his parents. The accused filed an application under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking exemption from personal appearance, citing the 1,750 km distance between their resi

BIMAL GURUNGversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 24016 March 2018Dismissed

Bimal Gurung, president of the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the transfer of investigation of all FIRs (over 100 cases) lodged against him and other GJM members to an independent agency such as the CBI or NIA, alleging political bias and threat to life. The State of West Bengal

TARAMANI PARAKHversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2015 INSC 22116 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Taramani Parakh, filed a criminal complaint under Sections 498A and 34 IPC alleging dowry harassment and cruelty by her husband and his parents. The husband and his parents moved the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the proceedings, claiming the allegations were vague, omnibus and amount

R. DINESHKUMAR @ DEENAversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE & OTHERS

2015 INSC 22216 March 2015Disposed off

The appellant, one of seven accused in a murder case, sought to have PW64, a prosecution witness who had earlier given statements implicating himself in the conspiracy, summoned as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that PW64’s testimony was protected b

N. MANOGAR & ANR.versusTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS.

2024 INSC 13016 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed an application under Sections 216 and 319 of the CrPC seeking the summoning and impleadment of two appellants as accused in a case involving offences under Sections 452, 294(b), 323 and 506(1) IPC. The trial court rejected the application, finding no sufficient evidence against the appellants, but

KRISHNAMURTHY @ GUNODU AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2022 INSC 19016 February 2022Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of Venkatarama, where Krishnamurthy, Gopala and Thimmappa were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Evidence showed Krishnamurthy brutally assaulted the victim after he fell, causing fatal injuries, establishing his liability for murder. The Court held that Gopala

SHAJAHANversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2018 INSC 15816 February 2018Case Partly allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 396 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for dacoity with murder after a robbery at a pawn‑broking shop in 2002, during which one victim was strangled. The trial court sentenced them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, but the High Court enhanced the sentence to lif

T. A. KATHIRU KUNJUversusJACOB MATHAI & ANR.

2017 INSC 126516 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an advocate, was charged by his client for failing to return a cheque handed over for filing a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and for not obtaining an acknowledgment of its return. The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India found him guilty of gross neg

OM PRAKASH AMBADKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2025 INSC 13916 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a police officer, was ordered by a Judicial Magistrate to register an FIR under Sections 323, 294, 500, 504 and 506 IPC after a complainant filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC alleging humiliation and assault. The Magistrate, relying on the complainant’s narrative, directed police investigatio

IRFAN ALIAS BHAYU MEVATIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 15016 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants Irfan and Asif Mevati were convicted of kidnapping, rape, and related offences and sentenced to death based largely on a DNA profiling report (Exhibit‑157). The trial court and the High Court relied on the report without examining any of the scientific experts who prepared it, and the appellants were giv

VIJAY @ VIJAYAKUMARversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2025 INSC 9016 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant Vijayakumar, together with friends, was returning from a movie late at night when they encountered the deceased, who was allegedly drunk and slapped the appellant. In a sudden altercation, the appellant picked up a cement brick and struck the deceased on the head, causing death, and later set the body on

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & OTHERSversusVIKASH TIWARY @ BIKASH TIWARY @ BIKASH NATH

2025 INSC 7916 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Vikash Tiwary, a life convict serving a sentence for multiple offences, was transferred by the Inspector General of Prisons from Hazaribagh Central Jail to Central Jail, Dumka on 17 May 2023 after the jail superintendent warned of a potential gang war and insufficient staff to control notorious inmates. The respondent

MAHENDRA AWASEversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 7616 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Mahendra Awase was charged under Section 306 of the IPC for allegedly abetting the suicide of Ranjit Singh, who had taken a loan and was reportedly harassed by the appellant for repayment. The prosecution relied on a suicide note and audio transcripts of heated conversations, but the Supreme Court examine

NARA CHANDRABABU NAIDUversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 4116 January 2024Matter referred to larger bench

The former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, N. Chandrababu Naidu, was added as accused No.37 in FIR No.29/2021 alleging massive misappropriation of funds related to skill development projects, invoking offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the IPC. He sought quashing of the FIR and the remand order

BIMLA TIWARIversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 4516 January 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, Bimla Tiwari (informant), challenged a Patna High Court order that granted pre‑arrest bail to the accused in a dowry‑related case (IPC §§406, 420; Dowry Act §§3, 4) subject to the accused’s payment of Rs 75,000. The Supreme Court examined whether bail can be conditioned on monetary payment and whether

THE STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusT. GANGI REDDY @ YERRA GANGI REDDY

2023 INSC 4416 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the CBI, sought cancellation of the default bail granted to T. Gangi Reddy under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. after the CBI filed a chargesheet for the murder of former MLA Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy. The High Court dismissed the application, holding that bail granted on default could not be canc

EX-CONST/DVR MUKESH KUMAR RAIGARversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 4216 January 2023Dismissed

Mukesh Kumar Raigar, a constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), was found to have suppressed details of a pending criminal case in his verification form at the time of appointment. Disciplinary proceedings under CISF Rules 36 and 54 led to his removal from service after a fresh departmental enquiry. R

NAGARAJA RAOversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2015 INSC 95416 January 2015Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a postal sorting assistant, was convicted of theft of a registered insured parcel containing a gold chain under Section 381 IPC and of a breach of duty under Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act. Both offences arose from the same incident and were tried together, resulting in separate six‑month simpl

PARMINDER ALIAS LADKA POLAversusSTATE OF DELHI

2014 INSC 2716 January 2014Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under IPC sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) for forcibly raping a 14‑year‑old girl. He argued that only an attempt to rape occurred and that, under the proviso to Section 376(1), the sentence could be reduced below the statutory minimum of seven years for adequate and speci

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSHOBHA RAM

2013 INSC 3716 January 2013Disposed off

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted two brothers, A-1 and A-2, for murdering Trilokchand under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, alleging a long‑standing dispute over a well. The trial court, relying on the sole eye‑witness PW‑6, convicted both brothers, holding that A‑1 threw stones while A‑2 sat on the victim’s chest, th

MAULANA MOHD. AMIR RASHADIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2012 INSC 3216 January 2012Dismissed

The appellant, president of a political party, alleged that the second respondent, a sitting Member of Parliament, attacked his convoy on 12 August 2009, resulting in one death and one injury. The second respondent was arrested and later filed a bail application, which the High Court granted conditionally despite the a

JAIKAM KHANversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 89615 December 2021Disposed off

Six members of a family were murdered in a house on 23 January 2014. The prosecution relied primarily on the ocular testimony of two interested witnesses, PW‑1 (Ali Sher Khan) and PW‑2 (Jaan Mohammad), who were closely related to both the deceased and the accused. The Supreme Court held that because the witnesses were

SMT. S. VANITHAversusTHE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT & ORS.

2020 INSC 70115 December 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Smt. S. Vanitha, sought to remain in a house that she claimed was her matrimonial home and a "shared household" under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act). Her parents‑in‑law, invoking the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Senior Citizens Act

TEESTA ATUL SETALVADversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

2017 INSC 123915 December 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the police could lawfully freeze the bank accounts of Teesta Atul Setalvad, Javed Anand and related trusts under Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) without prior notice to the account holders. The investigation, stemming from an FIR alleging misappropriation of donation

HALAPPAversusMALIK SAB

2017 INSC 124915 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 28‑year‑old agriculturist, suffered total paralysis when a tractor at a demonstration turned turtle and fell on him. He claimed compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which awarded Rs.8,66,000 based on his disability and loss of earning capacity. The insurer contended that the appellan

NATIONAL CAMPAIGN ON DALIT HUMAN RIGHTS & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 114015 December 2016Disposed off

The National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights and other NGOs filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking enforcement of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and its 1995 Rules, alleging widespread non‑implementation by State and Central authorities. They pleaded for directions

H.D. SIKAND (D) THROUGH LRS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR.

2016 INSC 114615 December 2016Dismissed

The case concerned the death of Kishan Sikand, who was killed by a parcel bomb on 2 October 1982. The prosecution alleged that Lt. Col. S.J. Chaudhary, the ex‑husband of Rani Chaudhary, manufactured the bomb out of motive to prevent her living with Sikand. The trial court convicted Chaudhary under Section 302 IPC and S

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusSANJAY KUMAR @ SUNNY

2016 INSC 114915 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed the acquittal of Sanjay Kumar, the paternal uncle of a nine‑year‑old girl, who was convicted by a trial court for raping the girl under IPC s.376(2)(j) and for criminal intimidation under s.506. The High Court set aside the conviction, relying on the three‑year delay in filing the

ANAND KUMAR MOHATTA AND ANR.versusSTATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) DEPARTMENT OF HOME AND ANR.

2018 INSC 106015 November 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

Anand Kumar Mohatta and his wife entered into a 1993 development agreement with Ansal Properties, under which the developer deposited Rs.1 crore as a security to be refunded upon handing over possession. The agreement became impossible to perform due to new building regulations, and the Mohattas retained the security w

U.P. JAL NIGAM & ORS.versusAJIT SINGH PATEL & ORS.

2018 INSC 106115 November 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

U.P. Jal Nigam (appellant) had declared the appointments of 122 candidates void on 11 August 2017, but the Allahabad High Court set aside that order, holding it violated natural justice and that the authority had not distinguished between tainted and untainted candidates. The High Court granted the appellant liberty to

CHANDRAMANI NANDAversusSARAT CHANDRA SWAIN AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 77715 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Chandramani Nanda, suffered severe head injuries in a motor vehicle accident on 16 January 2014, resulting in 100% functional disability and loss of earning capacity. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him ₹20,60,385, which the High Court enhanced to ₹30,99,873 by treating his disability as 100%

STATE OF U.P.versusGAYATRI PRASAD PRAJAPATI

2020 INSC 60115 October 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The former minister Gayatri Prasad Prajapati, accused of offences under Sections 376D, 376, 511, 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, was admitted to King George Medical University (KGMU) for treatment of multiple ailments and later shifted to the super‑specialty Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institu

K.A. KOTRAPPA REDDY AND ANR.versusRAYARA MANJUNATHA REDDY@N.R. MANJUNATHA & ORS.

2015 INSC 77615 October 2015Dismissed

The case arose from a quarrel on 13 September 2005 between the President of Nandigavi Village Panchayat and several villagers over alleged road‑repair work, which led to the formation of an unlawful assembly that beat the deceased to death. The accused were charged under multiple IPC sections including murder, unlawful

KRISHIKA LULLA & ORS.versusSHYAM VITHALRAO DEVKATIA & ANR.

2015 INSC 78115 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta filed a criminal complaint under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 alleging that the film "Desi Boyz" infringed the copyright in the title of his story synopsis "Desi Boys". The accused filed applications under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the complaint; the Bombay High Court dismissed

KHUMBARAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2015 INSC 103215 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Khumbha Ram, sought to challenge the acquittal of his daughter’s husband and others for the death of his daughter Kamla, which occurred within seven years of marriage and was alleged to involve dowry harassment. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding insufficient evidence of harassment and no med

RAM SUNDER SENversusNARENDER @ BODE SINGH PATEL

2015 INSC 77515 October 2015Dismissed

The case involved the alleged rape and murder of a 12‑year‑old girl, Anita, whose father Ram Sunder Sen filed a criminal complaint against Narendra @ Bode Singh Patel. The trial court convicted Patel under IPC sections 302, 376(2)(f) and 201, imposing death, life imprisonment and a seven‑year term respectively. On appe

YASHPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR

2022 INSC 96615 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Yashpal Singh alleged that a land dispute led the accused, including respondent No.2 Mehtab, to drive a tractor over standing crops and attack him and his family, resulting in the death of his brother and serious injuries to others. The FIR named the accused and they were arrested; the trial court denied

VIJAYAversusSTATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2022 INSC 96415 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Vijaya, allegedly ingested a poisonous substance and gave it to her 10‑month‑old daughter, who later died. A statement recorded by a Judicial Magistrate on 11‑Oct‑2012 was treated as a dying declaration, but the appellant survived and subsequently denied making the statement. The trial court and High Cou

MOHD. RAFIQ @ KALLUversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2021 INSC 48115 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a truck driver, was stopped by Sub‑Inspector D.K. Tiwari who attempted to board the vehicle; the appellant pushed the officer, causing him to fall off and be run over by the truck's rear wheels, resulting in the officer's death. The trial court convicted the appellant of murder under Section 302 IPC and

RATANLALversusPRAHLAD JAT & ORS.

2017 INSC 95415 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a murder trial where the charge sheet under IPC sections 302, 201, 342 and 120B was filed against two accused. Twenty‑eight witnesses, including PW4 (Sawarmal) and PW5 (Chandri), had given statements that supported the prosecution. After about fourteen months, PW4 and PW5 filed applications under Se

GOVINDASWAMYversusSTATE OF KERALA

2016 INSC 87015 September 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant was convicted of murder (Sec. 302 IPC), rape (Sec. 376 IPC), robbery (Sec. 394 read with Sec. 397 IPC) and assault (Sec. 447 IPC) for the assault and death of a 23‑year‑old woman on a moving train. DNA evidence linked the appellant's seminal stains and blood to the victim, establishing the rape beyond dou

STATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCHversusR. VASANTHI STANLEY &ANR.

2015 INSC 102215 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State, represented by the Inspector of Police (Central Crime Branch), appealed against the Madras High Court's order quashing criminal proceedings against R. Vasanti Stanley and her husband for allegedly forging documents to obtain loans from several banks. The High Court had set aside the charges on the basis that

SRI SAMBHU DAS @ BIJOY DAS & ANR.versusSTATE OF ASSAM

2010 INSC 61315 September 2010Dismissed

The appellants were convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC based primarily on the testimony of the deceased's wife, corroborated by the investigating officer and a post‑mortem report. They challenged the conviction on several grounds, including that the FIR was lodged after the inquest report and ther

M/S COAL INDIA LIMITED & ORS.versusCOAL CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION & ORS.

2010 INSC 61515 September 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL) could suspend coal supplies to 45 industrial consumers under a Fuel Supply Agreement (FSA) when no FIR had been filed against those consumers. The Court noted that Clause 4.4 of the FSA and the 2007 New Coal Distribution Policy permit suspension only

SURENDERA PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 61615 September 2010Case Allowed

Surendra Pratap Singh filed an FIR alleging that his brother was murdered by four persons, including MLA Brijesh Mishra. While three accused were arrested, the MLA evaded arrest and later secured a transfer of the investigation to the CBI, after which the Uttar Pradesh government withdrew eight cases against him. The p

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.versusALOK FUELS (P) LTD. THROUGH DIRECTOR

2010 INSC 61215 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Alok Fuels Ltd. and others, were supplied coal by Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL) under a Fuel Supply Agreement (FSA) that required the coal to be used only in their plants. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) lodged an FIR alleging that the respondents were diverting the allotted coal to the open

PRADEEP BHARDWAJversusPRIYA

2025 INSC 85215 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty, but the Family Court dismissed it and the High Court upheld that dismissal. The parties had been living separately since October 2009, amounting to over sixteen years of estrangement, and the appellant

G. MOHANDASversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS

2025 INSC 85415 July 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a building owner, conspired with officials of the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation and an architect to obtain a spurious renovation permit and then demolish an existing structure to erect a four‑storeyed commercial building in a zone where such construction is prohibited. A vigilance enquiry esta

KATTAVELLAI @ DEVAKARversusSTATE OF TAMILNADU

2025 INSC 84515 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death for murder, rape and robbery based on circumstantial evidence, a last‑seen theory, confessions, recovered items and DNA evidence. The Supreme Court examined whether these evidentiary pillars were proved beyond reasonable doubt and whether the investigation complied wit

RAM PRAKASH CHADHAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2024 INSC 52215 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Prakash Chadha, was charged in a custodial death case (FIR No.371/1993) with offences including murder and criminal conspiracy, and he sought discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.PC. The trial court rejected his discharge application, relying on alleged suspicions that he had facilitated the police’

BABA NATARAJAN PRASADversusM. REVATHI

2024 INSC 52315 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, husband of the first accused, filed a private complaint alleging that his wife, while still married to him, contracted a second marriage and bore a child, constituting bigamy under s.494 IPC. The trial court convicted the two accused and sentenced them to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a Rs.2,000

SHAILENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2024 INSC 52915 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a double murder in 1994 for which ten persons were charged under several IPC sections. One accused, Chhote Singh, was elected MLA in 2007 and the trial court allowed his prosecution to be withdrawn under Section 321 CrPC, citing his good public image, while rejecting similar applications of the other

KIRAN JYOT MAINIversusANISH PRAMOD PATEL

2024 INSC 53015 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant-wife filed criminal and civil proceedings alleging cruelty, hurt and dowry demands by her husband, leading to multiple interim maintenance orders. After nine years of separation, failed reconciliations and pending litigations, the parties mutually agreed that the marriage was irretrievably broken. The Sup

MEKALA SIVAIAHversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2022 INSC 72715 July 2022Dismissed

Mekala Sivaiah, harboring a grudge against the deceased agriculturalist, attacked him on 6 September 2006 by sprinkling chilli powder in his eyes and stabbing him with a knife, causing fatal injuries. The prosecution presented four eyewitnesses and medical evidence, leading the Trial Court to convict Sivaiah under Sect

JOGENDRA YADAV & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR &ANR.

2015 INSC 49615 July 2015Dismissed

The appellants were added as accused under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a murder trial and were later discharged by the trial court under Section 227. The High Court set aside the discharge, prompting a Supreme Court appeal. The Court examined whether a person summoned as an accused under Section 31

C.K. DASEGOWDA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 48815 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a group of ten accused, were charged with offences including voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC, among other sections. The trial court acquitted them, finding reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses and lack of corrobo

SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENTversusKAMTA PRASAD MISHRA AND OTHERS

2026 INSC 64415 June 2026Dismissed

The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, constituted under the 1947 Act to investigate corruption‑related offences, was directed by the High Court to disclose information sought by a Town Inspector under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI). The appellant argued that a 2011 State Government notific

A. SRINIVASULUversusTHE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 97115 June 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved senior officials of BHEL and private individuals accused of conspiring to award a contract for a desalination plant through a restricted tender, allegedly causing a loss of Rs.4.32 crore to the PSU. The prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of an approver who had been granted pardon under Sectio

MASSIMILANO LATORRE AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 30615 June 2021Disposed off

In February 2012 two Indian fishermen were killed when Italian marines aboard the vessel M.V. Enrica Lexie opened fire. An FIR was lodged in Kerala and the marines were arrested, leading to criminal proceedings under sections 302, 307, 427 and 34 of the IPC and the 2002 Suppression of Unlawful Acts Act. The parties inv

TANVI SARWALversusCENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND . ORS.

2015 INSC 100015 June 2015Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined petitions under Article 32 challenging the All India Pre‑Medical and Pre‑Dental Entrance Test 2015, alleging that a criminal syndicate used electronic gadgets to transmit answer keys to candidates during the exam. Investigation reports identified a network involving over 300 devices, 358 mobi

ROHIT CHATURVEDIversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

2026 INSC 49015 May 2026Disposed off

The petitioner, Rohit Chaturvedi, was convicted for murder under Sections 120B and 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2007. After serving more than twenty‑two years, he sought premature release, which was recommended by the Uttarakhand State Government but rejected by the Ministry of Home Affairs in a letter

VIRENDER PAL @ VIPINversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 71015 May 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Virender Pal, was convicted under Section 304‑B of the IPC for the dowry death of his wife, Punita, who allegedly died after being harassed for dowry demands. The prosecution presented testimony that the husband and his relatives repeatedly demanded money, subjected the victim to physical and mental crue

C. SUBBIAH @ KADAMBUR JAYARAJ AND OTHERSversusTHE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 41615 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant, a government teacher, alleged that the accused induced him to invest in benami land deals and later failed to deliver the promised plots and profits, leading him to file both a civil suit and a criminal FIR. The accused sought quashing of the FIR and charge sheet, arguing that the dispute was purely ci

PRABIR PURKAYASTHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2024 INSC 41415 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on 3 October 2023 without the arrest memo containing the specific grounds of arrest, only generic reasons. He was presented before a Remand Judge on 4 October 2023 and remanded to police custody, but the copy of the remand application and

RAJENDRA S/O RAMDAS KOLHEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2024 INSC 42215 May 2024Dismissed

The appellant, Rajendra Kolhe, was convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly setting his wife Rekha on fire with the aid of his brother‑in‑law. The conviction was based primarily on Rekha's dying declaration (Ex. 59) recorded in the hospital, which implicated the appellant and

MANOJ KUMAR V. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2018 INSC 51515 May 2018Disposed off

The case arose from a long-standing land dispute in Himachal Pradesh where the deceased, Prem Dass, was attacked by a group of seven accused while returning from a nearby village. The assault with weapons caused a scalp injury that later led to hemorrhage and death. The trial court convicted all seven under Sections 30

RUPINDER SINGH SANDHUversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS

2018 INSC 51415 May 2018Disposed off

In 1988 a road‑rage incident in Patiala resulted in the death of Gurnam Singh after alleged fist blows by Navjot Singh Sidhu (A‑1). Rupinder Singh Sandhu (A‑2) was also alleged to have been present. The Sessions Court acquitted both accused; the Punjab & Haryana High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting them under

RAMANLAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 42515 May 2015Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a violent incident on 2 July 1998 in a village in Haryana where Gopal was killed after a quarrel over trespass of a paddy field. The prosecution charged ten persons under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325 and 302 IPC, alleging an unlawful assembly that murdered Gopal. The trial court convicted all ten und

ABDUL RAZAK & ORSversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY SHO, HUTTI PS

2015 INSC 42215 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State alleged that Abdul Razak and others tied, assaulted and caused the death of Basavaraj, invoking sections 304 Part II and 34 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the brother and mother of the deceased, who claimed to be eye‑witnesses, unreliable. The High Court reversed the acquittal and

RANJEET KUMAR RAM@ RANJEET KUMAR DASversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2015 INSC 42615 May 2015Disposed off

The case involved the kidnapping of a five‑year‑old boy, Vicky, for ransom and his subsequent murder. The child’s sister, a seven‑year‑old witness, identified the primary kidnappers (A‑3 and A‑5) and testified consistently, while the father’s testimony corroborated her account. The Supreme Court held that the child’s t

SHABNAMversusSTATE OF U. P.

2015 INSC 99915 May 2015Dismissed

The appellants, Shabnam and Saleem, were convicted under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the pre‑planned murder of seven members of Shabnam's family, including a ten‑month‑old infant. The trial court sentenced them to death, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the case qual

JAFAR IMAM NAQVIversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

2014 INSC 39615 May 2014Dismissed

Jafar Imam Naqvi, a practising advocate, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Election Commission of India to take stern action against politicians and parties making hate speeches during the election campaign, including cancellation of party recognition and candidature. The petitione

SHYAM NARAINversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2013 INSC 34515 May 2013Dismissed

Shyam Narain was convicted under IPC s.376(2)(f) for raping an eight‑year‑old girl. The trial court relied on the child's testimony, corroborating medical evidence of genital injuries, and the accused's conduct, and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Delhi High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. On appeal

THOTI MANOHARversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2012 INSC 23715 May 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Thoti Manohar (A‑2), was convicted along with his brother (A‑1) and cousin (A‑3) for the murder of Kuppuswamy Modali and related offences. The prosecution alleged that A‑1 had an illicit relationship with the victim's cousin, leading to a series of disputes, cattle raids, and a violent confrontation on 2

SURESH KUMAR AGARWALversusM/S HALDIA STEELS LIMITED & ANR

2025 INSC 63615 April 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, Suresh Kumar Agarwal, was accused by M/s Haldia Steels Ltd. of fraud and criminal misappropriation relating to a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the transfer of a mining lease and share transfer. The complaint, filed six years after the alleged breach, alleged that an advance of Rs.50 lakh was paid

JANSHRUTI (PEOPLE’S VOICE)versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 53615 April 2025Dismissed

The petitioners, Janshruti (People’s Voice), filed a writ under Article 32 seeking gender‑neutral guidelines for domestic violence complaints and a declaration that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) is unconstitutional. The Court examined whether the provision violate

SUSHILA & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2025 INSC 50515 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who are relatives of a husband, were summoned in a complaint under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and Dowry Act s.4 after the husband’s marriage had been dissolved by an ex‑parte divorce decree on 31‑05‑2012. The complaint, filed three years after the divorce, alleged that the appellants had visited t

S.C. GARGversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2025 INSC 49315 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.C. Garg, Managing Director of Ruchira Papers Ltd., was charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating respondent R.N. Tyagi after the parties had already resolved a dispute over seven dishonoured cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The earlier NI Act case resulted in Tyag

MD. ALLAUDDIN KHANversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2019 INSC 53115 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a criminal complaint under Sections 323, 327, 379 read with Section 34 of the IPC alleging assault and theft by the respondents, who were also parties to a pending civil landlord‑tenant dispute. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the complaint, but the High Court quashed it on the ground tha

ASHOK KUMAR MEHRA & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB ETC.

2019 INSC 52515 April 2019Disposed off

The father (Ashok Kumar Mehra) and son (Kushwant Kumar Mehra) were convicted of murder under IPC s.302/34 by the High Court, overturning an earlier acquittal. The son was 17 years and 5 months old at the time of the offence (born 14‑06‑1980, offence on 04‑01‑1998) and raised a plea of juvenility for the first time befo

BIHARI LALversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2019 INSC 52815 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The accused persons (respondent Nos. 2‑4) were charged with offences under Sections 307, 323, 325, 336 and 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They contended that the two medical reports filed by the prosecution did not establish a case under Section 307, and the trial court discharged them from that cha

NATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITYversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 27515 April 2014Case Allowed

The Supreme Court considered writ petitions filed by the National Legal Services Authority and a transgender association seeking legal recognition of transgender persons' self‑identified gender and the status of a "third gender" under the Constitution. The Court examined constitutional provisions (Arts. 14, 15, 16, 19,

PRAKASHversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2014 INSC 27115 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Prakash was accused of murdering Gangamma on 5 November 1990 and of stealing her ornaments. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: his alleged presence in the victim's house at 1 p.m., a fingerprint on a plastic cover, blood‑stained clothes matching the victim's blood group, recovery of orname

SHANKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 23415 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Rahul Pundlik Meshram was last seen with the accused at the house of PW‑8 and later found dead with multiple stab wounds. The trial court convicted the three surviving accused under IPC sections 302 and 34 based solely on circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory, recovery of a weapon, and

THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT & ORS. ETC.versusK. CHANDRAN ETC.

2022 INSC 31015 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a government employee convicted of corruption, with a criminal appeal pending, is entitled to his death‑cum‑retirement gratuity (DCRG) under the Kerala Service Rules. The Court held that Rule 3A cannot be read in isolation; it must be read together with Rule 3, Note 2 and Ruling 3, wh

FAKHREY ALAMversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2021 INSC 18315 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR was lodged against Fakhrey Alam under several IPC sections, the Arms Act and Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The police filed a charge sheet for the IPC and Arms offences within the 180‑day period but delayed the UAPA charge sheet beyond that period, filing it after 211 days. The a

SARTAJ SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR. ETC.

2021 INSC 18515 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Sartaj Singh, the injured eye‑witness, was attacked by several persons and lodged an FIR naming the private respondents. The investigating officer filed charge‑sheets against other accused but not the private respondents. During trial Singh testified, again naming the private respondents, and filed an application under

NAVEEN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 18215 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Naveen Singh, filed a criminal appeal challenging the Allahabad High Court's order that granted regular bail to the accused Mahesh Singh (Respondent No.2), who was charged under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B for allegedly forging and manipulating a court order and benefitting from it in a sep

HARVEER SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P.

2019 INSC 39115 March 2019

Harveer Singh and another were acquitted by a Judicial Magistrate of offences under Sections 323, 324, 452, 504 and 506 IPC. The State appealed, and the Appellate Court convicted them on three of those sections, imposing rigorous imprisonment and fines. The convicts filed a criminal revision before the Allahabad High C

NANDLALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 38515 March 2019Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Nandlal Baviskar, was convicted of murder (Sec. 302 IPC) for causing the death of his cousin's brother during a dispute over a common wall. The incident involved an exchange of abuse, a stick blow on the appellant, his retreat to his house, and a return armed with a gupti, which he used to inflict a sing

SUGREEV KUMARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2019 INSC 38615 March 2019Case Partly allowed

The prosecution, in a trial for three accused under the IPC and Arms Act, sought to summon eight additional persons under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure based on a witness statement that eleven persons were involved. The trial court summoned only one of the eight and dismissed the rest; the High Court af

RAFIQ AHMEDBHAI PALIWALAversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2019 INSC 38415 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat appealed a Gujarat High Court order that, under Section 482 of the CrPC, quashed an FIR in part for serious offences of dacoity (IPC ss. 392, 395, 397) while upholding it for lesser offences. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in exercising its inherent powers to quash the FIR at a pr

DAUWALAL @ GANESH DEVANGAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF CHHATTISGARH)

2019 INSC 38915 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the murder of Parasram Yadav, Deputy Sarpanch, allegedly committed by a mob of 25‑30 persons. The FIR named several individuals, and 17 persons, including the four appellants, were tried and convicted under sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149, 323, 342 and 450 of the IPC. The appellants appealed, ar

S. SREESANTHversusTHE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 38215 March 2019Case Partly allowed

S. Sreesanth, a registered cricketer, was alleged to have participated in spot‑fixing during an IPL match on 9 May 2013, accepting Rs 10 lakh to concede 14 runs in an over. A one‑man BCCI commission prepared a preliminary report based on video and telephone recordings, and after Sreesanth’s release from police custody,

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusANIL KUMAR SARKAR

2013 INSC 16615 March 2013Dismissed

The respondent, a senior accounts officer in the North‑East Frontier Railway, was placed on the extended select panel for promotion to Group A (Junior Scale) by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) in February 2002. When his batch‑mates were promoted on 21‑April‑2003, he was not promoted. He claimed that the DPC’

RAJESH PATELversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2013 INSC 16715 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajesh Patel, was convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for raping his class‑mate who was working as a nurse. The prosecution's case rested solely on the prosecutrix's testimony, allegedly corroborated by her mother, while key witnesses – a friend who claimed to have rescued the victim and

JITENDRA RAGHUVANSHI & ORS.versusBABITA RAGHUVANSHI & ANR.

2013 INSC 16415 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act after a matrimonial dispute. While the criminal case was pending, the parties reached a mutual settlement, and the complainant wife filed an affidavit supporting the settlement. The trial court rejected the application to d

KAMLENDRA SINGH @ PAPPU SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2013 INSC 16515 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kamlendra Singh (Pappu Singh), was convicted under IPC sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 341 (wrongful restraint) with a common intention charge. He contended that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence (27 August 1993) and produced a high‑school mark‑sheet and admission register showing a date

BHAJJU @ KARAN SINGHversusSTATE OF M.P.

2012 INSC 13315 March 2012Dismissed

The appellant Bhajju (Karan Singh) was convicted of murder for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her ablaze. The sole direct evidence against him was the victim's dying declaration recorded by an executive magistrate and attested by a doctor, supported by medical, forensic and material evidence. The ap

GOVINDARAJU@ GOVINDAversusSTATE BY SRIRAMAPURAM P.S. & ANR.

2012 INSC 13515 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court reviewed an appeal by Govindaraju against a Karnataka High Court conviction for murder under s.302 IPC read with s.34, which had overturned a trial court acquittal. The Court found that the High Court did not show the trial court's judgment to be perverse and that the prosecution's case suffered from

AJAI ALIAS AJJU ETC. ETCversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2023 INSC 12715 February 2023Dismissed

The case involved the murder of four members of the Vijay Pal family and the grievous injury of Smt. Pinky (PW‑1) in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. The accused – Ajai alias Ajju, Braj Pal, Ravi and Mukesh – were convicted under IPC sections 302, 149 and 307 and under the Arms Act, with the trial court imposing death sentenc

SATYE SINGH & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2022 INSC 18515 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Shashi Devi, a married woman, was found burnt in the hut of her husband Satye Singh; her father filed a complaint implicating the husband, his mother and sister‑in‑law. The Sessions Court convicted the husband and his mother under Sections 302, 34 and 201 of the IPC based solely on circumstantial evidence,

MEHBOOB-UR-REHMAN (D) THR. LRS.versusSUDHA SEETHARAM & ANR

2019 INSC 21615 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants sought to quash a FIR filed by the first respondent alleging offences under Sections 405, 406, 415 and 420 IPC read with Section 34, claiming the complaint was a civil dispute disguised as a criminal case. The High Court had rejected the petition and stayed the proceedings pending a civil suit. On appeal

GAURAV KUMAR @ MONUversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

2019 INSC 20815 February 2019Disposed off

Gaurav Kumar (Monu) was convicted for murder under IPC 302 for an incident that occurred on 23-24 May 2000. He claimed he was a juvenile at the time, relying on a school certificate showing a date of birth of 17 August 1982, while the municipal birth certificate recorded 17 August 1981. The Sessions Judge, after an inq

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusDATTARAJ & OTHERS

2016 INSC 16815 February 2016Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed the acquittal of the father, mother and brother of Dattaraj in a dowry death case where the victim, Savita, died of burn injuries within seven years of marriage. The trial court had convicted all four accused under Sections 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3, 4 and

VIVEK KALRAversusSTATE .OF RAJASTHAN

2013 INSC 10415 February 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Vivek Kalra, was convicted of murdering his 13‑14‑year‑old cousin, Ankit Kalra, based solely on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution alleged that Kalra lured the boy under the pretext of obtaining a cassette, used a dantli (sharp weapon) purchased from a blacksmith, and caused multiple fatal injuries

SANAULLAH KHANversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 10515 February 2013Case Partly allowed

Sanaullah Khan was charged with the kidnapping and murder of three persons—Ravindra Prasad, his son Sunny Kumar, and a servant Arvind—following a dispute over milk supply payments. The prosecution relied on three linked circumstances: the appellant’s servant luring the victims to his premises, the discovery of the bodi

SURENDRA KOLIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2011 INSC 12715 February 2011Dismissed

Surendra Koli, a servant of Maninder Singh Pandher, was convicted of multiple murders of children in Nithari, Noida, where he allegedly lured, strangulated, dismembered and ate the victims. He gave a voluntary confession before a magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC, which was corroborated by the recovery of skulls

SHEO SHANKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2011 INSC 12515 February 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellants Sheo Shankar Singh and Umesh Singh were convicted for the murder of MLA Gurudas Chatterjee, who was shot from a motorcycle while riding pillion. The prosecution relied on the eye‑witness testimony of two riders, corroborated by seizure of the motorcycles, blood‑stained clothing, empty cartridges and medi

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusCHAMAN LAL

2026 INSC 5715 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh prosecuted Chaman Lal for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife Saro Devi and setting her on fire, leading to her death. The trial court convicted him based largely on the wife's dying declaration recorded by a Tehsildar, but the High Court acquitted him, extending the benefit of doubt du

BISWAJIT DASversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2025 INSC 8515 January 2025Case Partly allowed

Biswajit Das, a Development Officer of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, was convicted under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act for fraudulently obtaining insurance settlements by falsely claiming the insured were dead. He was sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonm

RATNESH KUMAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2015 INSC 95315 January 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Ratnesh Kumar Pandey, was convicted of murdering his wife Suman under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including a knife and a blood‑stained sweater recovered from the scene, and a post‑mortem report showing twenty incised wounds. The appellant clai

STATE OF PUNJABversusBAWA SINGH

2015 INSC 4515 January 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab appealed against the High Court’s order reducing Bawa Singh’s sentence for assault with a gandasa (IPC s.326) to the period already served. The trial court had convicted Singh and his wife under sections 326, 323 and 34 IPC, imposing rigorous imprisonment of three years and one year respectively; th

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusROSHAN KHAN & ORS.

2014 INSC 2515 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan prosecuted six accused for gang rape and kidnapping of a 14‑year‑old mentally deficient girl, relying on the victim's testimony, her father's eyewitness account, medical examination, and forensic evidence showing semen on the victims' clothing. The trial court convicted all six under IPC sections

DARSHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2010 INSC 4515 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a land‑dispute in which Gurcharan Singh attacked Bakhtawar Singh with a gandasa, after which Darshan Singh, the son of Bakhtawar, fired two shots from his licensed gun, killing Gurcharan Singh. The accused pleaded private defence, claiming a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous hurt. The tri

SAUMYA CHAURASIAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2023 INSC 107314 December 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Saumya Chaurasia, a Deputy Secretary in the Chhattisgarh Chief Minister’s Office, was arrested in connection with an extortion‑linked money‑laundering case investigated by the Enforcement Directorate. She sought bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., but the High Court rejected her application, prompting

KALICHARAN & ORSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 127714 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a 2000 incident in which several accused were convicted of murder and related offences. The trial court framed charges alleging that the victim, Harpal Singh, was killed by bullet injuries from accused No.2, although the evidence showed he died from injuries inflicted by sharp weapons wielded by acc

LOCHAN SHRIVASversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2021 INSC 88214 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a 23‑year‑old resident of Chhattisgarh, was convicted of kidnapping, rape, murder and related offences after a missing‑child case led to his confession and the recovery of the victim’s body from a concealed sack. The trial court sentenced him to death for murder and to rigorous imprisonment for the other

MIRZA IQBAL @ GOLU & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 89014 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The father of a married woman filed a complaint alleging that her husband, brother‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law demanded dowry, beat her and eventually hanged her. The FIR named all of them and the prosecution charged the husband, the brother‑in‑law (first appellant) and the mother‑in‑law (second appellant) under IPC secti

GUPTESWAR BEHERAversusSTATE OF ODISHA AND ANOTHER

2018 INSC 121114 December 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The victim Raghumani was allegedly attacked by five persons and, while dying, named the assailants in separate statements to his brother (PW1) and the investigating officer (PW15). The prosecution relied on these dying declarations, eye‑witness testimony recorded days later, and medical evidence indicating fourteen inj

MANOHAR LAL SHARMAversusNARENDRA DAMODARDAS MODI & ORS.

2018 INSC 121614 December 2018Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard a group of writ petitions filed as public‑interest litigations challenging the Government of India's procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets, seeking registration of an FIR, a court‑monitored investigation and quashing of the Inter‑Governmental Agreement on alleged corruption, pricing irregulariti

MADAN MOHANversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 123314 December 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Madan Mohan filed an application under Section 193 CrPC seeking the summoning of Ashish Meena and Vimal Meena as accused in a case already pending against two other persons. The Sessions Judge issued non‑bailable warrants against the two respondents. They filed a revision under Section 197 CrPC in the High Court, but t

JOSEPHversusSTATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE .

2017 INSC 122714 December 2017Disposed off

The case arose from a violent clash between two factions at a funeral in Perumanal village, where eleven accused attacked the complainant party, resulting in the death of the deceased (son of PW‑2). The trial court and the Madras High Court convicted all the accused under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC, invo

SHAMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2016 INSC 121114 December 2016Dismissed

The appellant Shama was convicted for murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, based primarily on the dying declaration of the deceased, Naurang, recorded by Police Inspector Mam Chand after a medical certification of fitness. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the declaration was improperly reco

SHARAT BABU DIGUMARTIversusGOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

2016 INSC 113114 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sharad Babu Digumarti, was charged under IPC Sections 292 and 294 and IT Act Section 67 for alleged possession of obscene material in electronic form. He was discharged of the IT Act charge but the trial court framed a charge under IPC Section 292, which the High Court upheld. The Supreme Court examined

ABHIJIT PAWARversusHEMANT MADHUKAR NIMBALKAR & ANR.

2016 INSC 121214 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a magistrate must conduct an enquiry or direct an investigation under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before issuing summons to accused persons residing outside the magistrate's territorial jurisdiction. The case arose from a criminal defamation complaint against the man

KARMA DORJEE & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS

2016 INSC 112314 December 2016Disposed off

The petitioners, a group of advocates, filed a public‑interest writ under Article 32 seeking a court‑directed mechanism to curb racial discrimination against citizens from India's North‑Eastern states. Citing several media‑reported incidents and invoking Articles 15, 32 and 51A(e) of the Constitution, the International

SOMANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2012 INSC 61614 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant, a retail vendor, was convicted for selling spurious liquor adulterated with methyl alcohol that caused one death and serious illness to many. The trial court sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment on each count; the High Court enhanced the term to five years, citing the death as an aggravating

ATTAR SINGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 62014 December 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Attar Singh, was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for killing his wife by striking her with a wooden log, and was also tried under Section 498A IPC for cruelty. The trial court relied heavily on the testimony of the couple's daughter, who later turned hostile, but the court also considered medic

RAM VISWASversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2012 INSC 61314 December 2012Dismissed

The appellant, Ram Viswas, was convicted of murdering his wife by pouring kerosene on her and setting her ablaze. The victim, Maladeep, gave a dying declaration naming her husband as the perpetrator, which was recorded by a Naib Tahsildar after medical certification of her fitness to testify. The appellant challenged t

KUMAR ETC. ETC.versusKARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL COOP. BANK LTD. & ANR.

2012 INSC 61414 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka Industrial Co-operative Bank alleged that the appellants obtained loans by pledging fake gold ornaments and secured convictions in a criminal revision proceeding. The trial court had acquitted the appellants, but the High Court, exercising its revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC

LAHU KAMLAKAR PATIL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 61814 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted for the murder of a man named Bhau Harishchandra Patil based on the testimony of PW‑2, an alleged eye‑witness, and PW‑1, an informant who later turned hostile. The Supreme Court examined whether the hostile witness’s evidence could be wholly rejected, whether the investigating officer shou

DEEPTI BHANDARIversusNITIN BHANDARI & ANR.

2011 INSC 84414 December 2011Disposed off

The case involved a matrimonial dispute between Depti Bhandari and Nitin Bhandari, centering on visitation rights to their minor daughter after the mother shifted residence from Jaipur to Delhi. The father had been granted visitation rights in Jaipur, but the mother sought to modify the order to allow visitation in Del

STATE OF A. P.versusM. SOHAN BABU & ANR.

2010 INSC 87414 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The accused entered a residential house at midnight armed with knives, intending to commit robbery. When confronted by the deceased, a scuffle ensued; A2 stabbed the deceased in the abdomen and a witness, while A1 also stabbed the deceased and threatened other occupants. The deceased died on the way to the hospital. Th

GOVINDversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 131814 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Govind was convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC and for illegal possession of a firearm under Section 25 of the Arms Act based primarily on the recovery of a country‑made pistol and two live cartridges from an iron box in his house and a forensic report linking the cartridges to the bullets recovere

ANIL KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR.

2017 INSC 111114 November 2017Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by six accused, including Anil Kumar Yadav, against the cancellation of bail granted by the Sessions Court in a murder‑related case (Sections 302, 308 IPC read with 34 IPC). The Court held that the Sessions Court had improperly merged the framing of charges with the grant of bail in a

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