Supreme Court of India Judgements

47020 Judgements hosted as on 04/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Acquittal

Acquittal

(IPC) – Ss 147, 148, 149, 201 and 302 – Unlawful assembly – Acquittal – Role assigned to appellant was only of having pointed out the house where the victim was hiding – Mere fact that the appellant was not brave enough to conceal where the victim was hiding did not make him a part of the unlawful assembly – Appellant is entitled to a clean acquittal in the given facts – Appeal allowed.

Dec 5, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TAIJUDDIN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 307 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 27 – Attempt to murder – Using arms – Appellant-accused was admittedly a police official – Illegal use of a licensed or sanctioned weapon per se does not constitute an offence under Section 27, without proving the misdemeanour under Section 5 or 7 of the Arms Act. At best, it could be a ‘misconduct’ under the service rules, the determination of which was not the subject of the trial – No motive or element of planning has been proved by the Prosecution –

Nov 29, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SURINDER SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE (UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH) — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI, Surya Kant and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…

Acquittal

HELD ” The evidence adduced is not separable and the common findings rendered shall be made applicable to all the accused. There are too many loopholes which cannot be filled up, nor is there any evidence to come to a different conclusion including that of exceeding the right of private defence. What emerged as a civil dispute between two groups of villagers turned into a criminal case, thus inclined to hold that the Accused-Appellants are entitled to the benefit of doubt as we also give our imprimatur to the plea of private defence as possible and plausible with due discharge of onus.

Nov 23, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ARVIND KUMAR @ NEMICHAND AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…

Acquittal I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 392 and 397 – Disclosure statement – where the prosecution fails to inspire confidence in the manner and/or contents of the recovery with regard to its nexus to the alleged offence, the Court ought to stretch the benefit of doubt to the accused – Its nearly three centuries old cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that “it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer”. The doctrine of extending benefit of doubt to an accused, notwithstanding the proof of a strong suspicion, holds its fort on the premise that “the acquittal of a guilty person constitutes a miscarriage of justice just as much as the conviction of the innocent” .

Nov 9, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BIJENDER @ MANDAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI, Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, JJ. )…

Acquittal

Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950 – it is crystal clear that the complaint does not satisfy the mandate of sub-section (1) to Section 22C of the Act as there are no assertions or averments that the appellant before this Court was in-charge of and responsible to the company M/s. Writer Safeguard Pvt. Ltd. in the manner as interpreted by this CourtThe proviso to sub-section (1) in the present case would not apply. It is an exception that would be applicable and come into operation only when the conditions of sub-section (1) to Section 22C are satisfied. Notably, in the absence of any specific averment, the prosecution in the present case does not and cannot rely on Section 22C(2) of the Act.

Nov 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DAYLE DE’SOUZA — Appellant Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (C) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy…

Acquittal

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 – Section (16)(1)(a)(i)(ii)- HELD High Court has recorded a finding of refusal on the part of the appellant to accept the report. The said finding is obvious erroneous as the endorsements on the postal envelope were not proved by examining the Postman. Moreover, the High Court has glossed over the mandatory requirement under subsection (2) of Section 13 of serving a copy of the report on the accused. Evidence adduced by the prosecution was of mere dispatch of the report. Hence, the mandatory requirement of sub-section (2) of Section 13 was not complied with. Therefore, the conviction and sentence of the appellant cannot be sustained.

Oct 31, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARAYANA PRASAD SAHU — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. )…

Acquittal

Kerala Forest Act, 1961 – Section 27 – Illegal possession of sandalwood oil -HELD in holding that the presumption that the seizure of forest produce belonging to the State, automatically can result in a presumption of culpable mental state of the accused- in other words, that seizure of the goods ipso facto meant that the appellant had conscious knowledge about their illicit nature or origin, or that the accused’s inability to account for a transit pass, implied that they procured the goods illegally, thus attracting Section 27 – given that the appellants had furnished a series of documents explaining how they had sourced the oil in question – State’s absence of diligence in producing those materials (which were in its possession) and proving that they were without credibility, cannot result in a conviction – Appeal allowed

Oct 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARATH BOOSHAN AGGARWAL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal

(IPC) – Sections 107 and 306 – ‘Abetment’ involves mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, no one can be convicted for offence under Section 306, IPC. To proceed against any person for the offence under Section 306 IPC it requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide, seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide. There is nothing on record to show that appellant was maintaining relation with the deceased and further there is absolutely no material to allege that appellant abetted for suicide of the deceased within the meaning of Section 306, IPC

Sep 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  KANCHAN SHARMA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…

Acquittal

Abetment of Suicide – Harassment -Mere harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to the suicide would not amount to an offence under Section 306 IPC – High Court as well as the learned trial Court have committed an error in convicting the accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC – Appeal allowed.

Sep 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VELLADURAI — Appellant Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal…

Acquittal

HELD Prosecution stands proved against accused-P and accused-S and their appeals deserve to be dismissed while the appeals preferred by accused-I and accused-K deserve acceptance – Accused-I and accused-K be released forthwith unless their custody is required in connection with any other offence – Ordered accordingly.

Sep 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANDEEP — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 1613…

You missed

Education

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw