Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Acquittal

Acquittal

Illegal gratification – presumption of innocence as would be there in the case of acquittal – High Court decision is based on totally erroneous view of law by ignoring the settled legal position – High Court in dealing/non – dealing with the evidence was patently illegal leading to grave miscarriage of justice – Matter deserves to be remanded

Feb 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH STATE OF GUJARAT — Appellant Vs. BHALCHANDRA LAXMISHANKAR DAVE — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M. R. Shah, JJ.…

Acquittal

Possession of Indian Flap Shell Turtle — the Turtle which has been seized is not that which is included in Part II of Schedule I. In the facts of the present case, on the face of it, the Turtle seized is not included in Schedule I Part II and the Turtle having already been freed on the second day of its seizure, the High Court did not commit any error in quashing the criminal proceedings

Dec 15, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TITTY ALIAS GEORGE KURIAN — Appellant Vs. THE DEPUTY RANGE FOREST OFFICER — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Indu Malhotra, JJ. )…

Acquittal

Acquittal – Dowry death – Presumption – Ingredients of the offence are well-settled – A marriage performed within seven years before the death of the wife – Death must be unnatural – Soon before the death, the deceased wife must have been at the receiving end of cruelty or harassment, on account of demand for dowry – It is described as dowry death – Relatives concerned, including husband, become liable – Section 113B of the Evidence Act comes to the rescue of the prosecutor by providing for a presumption that a person has caused dowry death

Dec 4, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SANDEEP KUMAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, K.M. Joseph and Aniruddha…

Acquittal

Food Adulteration – Complaint filed against Directors of the Company – Held Therefore, in the absence of the Company, the Nominated Person cannot be convicted or vice versa -to convict the Company renders the entire conviction of the Nominated Person as unsustainable – Complaint dismissed.

Nov 22, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi,…

Acquittal

(IPC) – S 302, 34 – Refusal to undergo Test Identification Parade (TIP) – Guilt cannot be based purely on the refusal to undergo a (TIP) – Ballistics evidence connecting the empty cartridges & the bullets recovered from the body of the deceased with an alleged weapon of offence is contradictory and suffers from serious infirmities. Appeal allowed.

Nov 3, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAJESH @ SARKARI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and Indira…

Acquittal

Criminal Law–Unlawful assembly–Common object–Mere presence in an unlawful assembly cannot render a person liable unless there was a common object and he was actuated by that common object and that object is one of those set out in Section 141–Where common object of an unlawful assembly is not proved, the accused persons cannot be convicted with the help of Section 149–|Penal Code, 1860, Section

Aug 23, 2020 sclaw

2009(3) LAW HERALD (SC) 1652 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly Criminal Appeal No. 472 of…

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