Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: February 2024

Acquittal

Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 – Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) – Quashing of FIR – Member of gang – For framing a charge for the offence under the Gangsters Act and for continuing the prosecution of the accused under the above provisions, the prosecution would be required to clearly state that the appellants are being prosecuted for any one or more offences covered by anti-social activities as defined under Section 2(b) – FIR and criminal proceedings were quashed – Appeal allowed.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FARHANA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

High court had not applied the correct standard of proof for invoking Section 319 CrPC, which requires more than a prima facie case but short of evidence that would lead to conviction – The supreme court also noted that the allegations against the appellants were vague and omnibus and that the trial court order was well reasoned and not perverse.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH N. MANOGAR AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma,…

Constitution

Electoral Bond Scheme, the proviso to Section 29C(1) of the Representation of the People Act 1951 (as amended by Section 137 of Finance Act 2017), Section 182(3) of the Companies Act (as amended by Section 154 of the Finance Act 2017), and Section 13A(b) (as amended by Section 11 of Finance Act 2017) are violative of Article 19(1)(a) and unconstitutional

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.,…

Service Matters
Service

Class-IV employee, when in financial hardship, may represent directly to the superior but that by itself cannot amount to major misconduct for which punishment of termination from service should be imposed – It is trite law that ordinarily the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer should not be interfered by the appellate authority or by the writ court – Appellant is reinstated in service with all consequential benefits – Order of termination set-aside – Appeal allowed.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHATRAPAL — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. )…

Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) – Sections 138 and 141 – Dishonour of cheque – Insufficient funds – Liability – According to Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a director who resigns from a company before a cheque is issued cannot be held responsible for cheque bouncing offenses.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH VIREN SHAH — Appellant Vs. REDINGTON (INDIA) LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…2024…

Acquittal

Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 – Sections 18(A), 18(c), 27 (b)(ii) and 28 – Conviction and sentence – Imposing a sentence of imprisonment would be unjustified, particularly when the intent to sell/distribute under Section 18(c) of the Act has been held unproven – It fit to modify the impugned judgment, set aside the sentence of imprisonment as awarded, and instead thereof, impose a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the Appellant – Appeal allowed.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PALANI — Appellant Vs. THE TAMIL NADU STATE — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No….of 2024…

Cr P C I P C

Forging a power of attorney and a sale deed – High Court erred in assuming that there was no criminality involved in the alleged offences and that the matter was purely civil in nature – The Supreme Court also clarifies that the Sub-Registrar had the authority to initiate prosecution under the Registration Act, 1908, and that the quashing of the circular on which the Sub-Registrar relied did not affect the merits of the case.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAVIN KUMAR RAI — Appellant Vs. SURENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

Respondent appears to have been hurt in view of the statements made by the petitioner generally about Gujarati people – Now, after the petitioner has explained the context in which he made the statements and after withdrawal of those statements, in the facts of the case, it is unjust to continue the prosecution – No purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution – Defamation complaint quashed – Appeal

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TEJASHWI PRASAD YADAV — Appellant Vs. HARESHBHAI PRANSHANKAR MEHTA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Transfer Petition…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw