Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: December 2023

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 389 – Suspension of sentence – Appellate Court is unambiguously vested with the power to suspend implementation of the sentence or the order of conviction under appeal and grant bail to the incarcerated convict, for which it is imperative to assign the reasons in writing – In order to suspend the conviction of an individual, the primary factors that are to be looked into, would be the peculiar facts and circumstances of that specific case, where the failure to stay such a conviction would lead to injustice or irreversible consequences

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH AFJAL ANSARI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UP — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

CBI

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 16 Rule 21 – There is no difference between a party to a suit as a witness and a witness simpliciter – Production of documents for both a party to the suit and a witness as the case may be, at the stage of cross-examination, is permissible within law – Function performed by either a witness or a party to a suit when in the witness box is the same

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHAMMED ABDUL WAHID — Appellant Vs. NILOFER AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B. R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Bail Declined Prevention of Money Laundering Act

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 439 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 186, 204, 353, 384 and 120-B – Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Sections 3, 4 and 45 – Bail – Money Laundering – Merely because accused is a woman should not be granted the benefit of the first proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA and grant bail

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAUMYA CHAURASIA — Appellant Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 and 149 – Murder – Acquittal – Appeal against – A sole eyewitness, happens to be the most interested witness being the father of the deceased and having long enmity with the group to which the accused persons belong, therefore, his testimony was to be examined with great caution and the High Court was justified in doing so and in doubting it so as to uphold the conviction on his solitary evidence

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHHOTE LAL — Appellant Vs. ROHTASH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Service Matters
Service

Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 – Sections 14 and 31(1) – Formation of policy – Jurisdiction – A Tribunal functioning within the strict boundaries of the governing legislation, would not have the power to direct the formation of a policy – it cannot be questioned that disputes in respect of promotions and/or filling up of vacancies is within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, it cannot direct those responsible for making policy, to make a policy in a particular manner.

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. AIR COMMODORE NK SHARMA (17038) ADM/LGL — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay…

Food Safety and Standards Act

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Sections 52 and 89 – Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 – Section 16 – Penalty for misbranded food – Punishment under PFA and the penalty under the FSSA cannot be imposed on the violator for the same misbranding because it will amount to double jeopardy – in such a situation, in view of the overriding effect given to the provisions of the FSSA, the violator who indulges in misbranding cannot be punished under the PFA and he will be liable to pay penalty under the FSSA in accordance with Section 52 thereof.

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANIK HIRU JHANGIANI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF M.P. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law – Transfer Order – A person aggrieved by the order of transfer cannot sit at home and decide on his own that the order is illegal or erroneous and he will not comply with the same – If the workman had any grievance, he could have availed of his remedy available against the same; otherwise, he was duty-bound to comply with the same

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH U.P. SINGH — Appellant Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK — Respondent ( Before : Hima Kohli and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 5494…

Arbitration Contract Act Stamp Act

Stamp Act, 1899 – Section 35 – Contract Act 1872 – Section 2(g) – Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sections 8 and 11 – Arbitration – Enforceability of Unstamped Agreements – Unstamped Arbitration Agreements Not Void – Agreements which are not stamped or are inadequately stamped are inadmissible in evidence under Section 35 of the Stamp Act – Such agreements are not rendered void or void ab initio or unenforceable

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SEVEN JUDGE BENCH IN RE: INTERPLAY BETWEEN ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS UNDER THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 AND THE INDIAN STAMP ACT 1899 ( Before : Dr…

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 304-Part II – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – The appellant is entitled to an acquittal as the prosecution cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accusation of culpable homicide is not murder – HELD If the evidence is inseparable and attempting to separate it would destroy the prosecution’s foundation, the court can discard the entire evidence – The court must assess the evidence on record, considering the legal limits of separating the evidence and determining if the evidence is sufficient to prove guilt.

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SEKARAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Dipankar Datta and Aravind Kumar, JJ. ) Criminal…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw