Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Acquittal

Acquittal

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sections 7 and 13 (1)(d) read with Section 13(2) – Demand of illegal gratification – Proof of – A case where the demand of illegal gratification by the appellant was not proved by the prosecution – Thus, the demand which is sine quo non for establishing the offence under Section 7 was not established – Appellant acquitted.

Feb 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. SHANTHAMMA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal

Murder – Acquittal – Circumstantial evidence – Burden of proof — Prosecution having failed to prove the basic facts as alleged against the accused, the burden could not be shifted on the accused by pressing into section 106 of the Evidence Act HELD gross error of law in convicting the accused for the alleged crime, merely on the basis of the suspicion, conjectures and surmises – Accused are acquitted.

Feb 26, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATYE SINGH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Belam. Trivedi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal

(IPC) 307 – PWs-1 & 2 have not contradicted between themselves being the eye-witnesses. Merely because they are related witnesses, in the absence of any material to hold that they are interested, their testimonies cannot be rejected. The High Court has rightly set aside the conviction rendered by the trial court for the charge under Section 307 IPC. PWs-1 & 2 have not spoken about the presence of the injured witness

Feb 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH YADAV AND ANOTHER ETC. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. )…

Acquittal

(CrPC) – Section 482 – (IPC) – Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Misappropriation of amount – Main allegations are against the co-accused and others – There are no allegations that the appellants are related to the co-accused and others – It cannot be said that there is any prima facie case made out against the appellants for the offences – Quashed

Feb 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SMT. REKHA JAIN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V.…

Acquittal

Acquittal – Use of the gun itself is not established by the FSL report – Ingredients of Section 307/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act have not been proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt – Trial Court and High Court committed error in convicting the appellant for the charge under Section 307/34 IPC read with Section 27 Arms Act – Conviction and sentence set­ aside.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VASUDEV — Appellant Vs. STATE OF M.P. — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 388 of…

Acquittal

Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 – Section 56(1)(a)(b) – Order of externment – Impugned Judgment and order of the High Court shows that unfortunately, the Division Bench did not notice that an order of externment is not an ordinary measure and it must be resorted to sparingly and in extraordinary circumstances – Order of externment set aside.

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEPAK S/O LAXMAN DONGRE — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka,…

Acquittal

Finding recorded by the Trial Court against appellant that he also dragged the dead body and thrown into the courtyard of the deceased is not supported by any evidence – Trial Court as well as the High Court have committed a grave error in convicting appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC – Appeal allowed

Jan 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MUKESH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Acquittal

(IPC) – Sections 302 and 34 – Arms Act, 1878 – Sections 25 and 4 – Murder – Death penalty – Acquittal – Prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt –A greater degree of care and caution would be required and a corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct or circumstantial, would be necessary to pass an order of conviction – Criminal trial is not like a fairy tale wherein one is free to give flight to one’s imagination and phantasy – Conviction and death sentence imposed on the accused is totally unsustainable in law – Accused persons acquitted.

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH JAIKAM KHAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Acquittal

(CrPC) – Section 378 – Appeal in case of acquittal – – An Appellate Court shall not expect the trial court to act in a particular way depending upon the sensitivity of the case – Rather it should be appreciated if a trial court decides a case on its own merit despite its sensitivity – District judiciary is expected to be the foundational court, and therefore, should have the freedom of mind to decide a case on its own merit

Dec 16, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHAN @SRINIVAS @ SEENA @TAILOR SEENA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh,…

Acquittal

(IPC) – Section 477A – Falsification of accounts – the prosecution must, therefore, prove—(a) that the accused destroyed, altered, mutilated or falsified the books, electronic records, papers, writing, valuable security or account in question; (b) the accused did so in his capacity as a clerk, officer or servant of the employer; (c) the books, papers, etc. belong to or are in possession of his employer or had been received by him for or on behalf of his employer; (d) the accused did it wilfully and with intent to defraud.

Dec 16, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH  N. RAGHAVENDER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CBI — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI, Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, 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