Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Acquittal

Acquittal

Extra ­Judicial Confession – Evidentiary value of such confession also depends on the person to whom it is made. Going by the natural course of human conduct, normally, a person would confide about a crime committed by him only with such a person in whom he has implicit faith – Normally, a person would not make a confession to someone who is totally a stranger to him –

Mar 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAWAN KUMAR CHOURASIA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal

HELD where a reversal of acquittal is sought, the courts must keep in mind that the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused – mother of the deceased, an interested witness evidence was not reliable – F S L Report, no blood was present on the weapons recovered except for traces of blood on one lathi, and even that could not be linked with the blood of the deceased – Order of acquittal is upheld

Mar 2, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ROOPWANTI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 376 – Rape – False promise to marry – Acquittal – It would be a folly to treat every breach of promise to marry as a false promise and to prosecute a person for the offence of rape under Section 376 – There is a difference between giving a false promise and committing breach of promise by the accused

Jan 31, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAIM AHAMED — Appellant Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal

(CrPC) – Ss 213 and 313 – (IPC) – Ss 148, 302, 307 r/w section 149 – by reason of omission to frame a proper charge in terms of Section 213 of CrPC, and by reason of not putting important circumstances appearing in the evidence in the statement under Section 313 caused serious prejudice to the accused – Appeal allowed

Dec 18, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KALICHARAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. )…

Acquittal

(IPC) – Sections 149 and 302 – Murder – Acquittal – admissions given by PW8 that she along with PW1 were lying down for a period of one hour on the spot where they were assaulted and that fatal assault was made on the deceased after he ran away from the spot, a serious doubt is created whether both of them had seen the actual assault on the deceased – Moreover, there is a serious discrepancy about the weapons of assault –

Dec 10, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMCHARAN (DEAD) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka, JJ.…

Acquittal

Rajeev Gandhi assassination case – HELD therefore, direct that all the appellants/applicants be deemed to have served their respective sentences in connection with Crime No. 329 of 1991. The appellants/applicants are, therefore, directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.

Nov 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH R.P. RAVICHANDRAN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and…

Acquittal

Test Identification Parade (TIP) – even if held, cannot be considered in all the cases as trustworthy evidence on which the conviction of an accused can be sustained – Conduct of the TIP, coupled with the hovering presence of the police during the conduct of the TIP vitiated the entire process

Nov 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GIREESAN NAIR AND OTHERS ETC. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. )…

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