Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Bail Declined

Bail Declined Prevention of Money Laundering Act

Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Sections 3 and 4 – Offences of Money Laundering – Cancellation of Bail – Merely because, for the predicated offences the chargesheet might have been filed it cannot be a ground to release the accused on bail in connection with the scheduled offences under the PML Act, 2002.

May 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT — Appellant Vs. ADITYA TRIPATHI — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 1401…

Bail Declined

Rape of a minor by Inspector – High Court ought to have been to confine itself to the acceptance/rejection of the prayer for bail made by the accused under Section 439 of the Code; however the High Court, being satisfied that there were, in its opinion, grave lapses on the part of the police/investigative machinery, which may have fatal consequences on the justice delivery system, could not have simply shut its eyes.

May 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAY DUBEY — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. )…

Bail Declined

(IPC) – Sections 302, 307, 201, 120B – Murder – Despite and without taking into consideration any of the material forming part of the charge sheet and without even considering the seriousness of the offences alleged; material collected during the investigation, the High Court has by a nonspeaking order has directed to release the accused on bail – Order HC quashed

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAHUL GUPTA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal…

Bail Declined Default Bail

Default bail – Filing of a charge sheet is sufficient compliance – where the accused fails to apply for default bail when the right accrues to him, and subsequently a chargesheet, or a report seeking extension of time is preferred before the Magistrate or any other competent court, the right to default bail would be extinguished

May 7, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JUDGEBIR SINGH @ JASBIR SINGH SAMRA @ JASBIR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y.…

Bail Declined

There is absolutely no warrant for the High Court to direct that the investigation of a person who has been interrogated as a suspect in the conspiracy should be in the printed or written form – or questionnaire may also be handed over to the respondent – Appeal allowed anticipatory bail rejected

Apr 28, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUNEETHA NARREDDY — Appellant Vs. Y S AVINASH REDDY AN ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI. and Pamidighantam Sri…

Bail Declined Narcotics

(NDPS) – Ss 8, 20, 27-A, 29, 32 and 37 – Recovery of ganja – no person accused of an offence involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail unless the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail – Bail cancelled.

Mar 30, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. AJAY KUMAR SINGH @ PAPPU — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal…

Bail Declined

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 354, 354-B, 376 and 506 – Cancellation of anticipatory bail – sufficient material in the FIR that would prima facie attract the provision of Section 376, IPC – These factors ought to have dissuaded the High Court from exercising its discretion in favour of the respondent No.2/accused for granting him anticipatory bail – Impugned orders, granting anticipatory bail to the respondent No. 2/accused, cannot be sustained – Appeal allowed.

Mar 21, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MS. X — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Hima Kohli, JJ. ) Criminal…

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