Supreme Court of India Judgements

47260 Judgements hosted as on 24/05/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bail Declined Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bail — Grant of — High Court’s order reversed — High Court granted bail without considering material facts and circumstances, particularly the FIR, post-mortem report, recovery of weapon, and witness statements, relying solely on absence of allegations in inquest proceedings.

May 24, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 527 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHAGAT SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. )…

Acquittal Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 223(1) first proviso — Applicability of — Proceedings under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) filed before commencement of BNSS — Cognizance taken after commencement of BNSS — Accused not given opportunity of hearing at cognizance stage — Provision mandates hearing of accused before taking cognizance — Non-compliance is an illegality vitiating cognizance order — High Court judgment set aside.

May 23, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 519 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PARVINDER SINGH Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ( Before : M. M. Sundresh and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No……..of…

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 432 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 72 & 161— Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 473 & 477 — Premature release of a prisoner — Rejection of recommendation — Non-speaking order — Order rejecting premature release must provide reasons and reflect due application of mind — Absence of reasons renders the order bald and impossible to ascertain if relevant factors were considered — Violates principles of natural justice and frustrates judicial review.

May 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 490 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ROHIT CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Criminal)…

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 175(4) — Complaints against public servants alleged to have committed offenses in discharge of official duties — Interpretation — This provision is not a standalone provision, nor is it a proviso to Section 175(3) — It must be read in harmony with Section 175(3), with Section 175(4) forming an extension of Section 175(3) — The power to order investigation under Section 175(3) is conferred upon a judicial magistrate, while Section 175(4) also confers such power but prescribes a special procedure for complaints against public servants — The expression “complaint” in Section 175(4) does not encompass oral complaints and must be understood in the context of a written complaint supported by an affidavit, as required by Section 175(3) — This interpretation ensures that the procedural safeguard of an affidavit, mandated by Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P., is not undermined even when dealing with public servants — The intention is to provide a two-tier protection: first, at the threshold stage under Section 175(4) with additional safeguards, and second, at the post-investigation stage under Section 218(1) regarding previous sanction. (Paras 26, 31, 37.1, 37.2, 37.4, 37.5, 37.6, 37.8, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44)

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 88 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH XXX Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 4629 of…

Bail Granted Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Cr P C

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 528 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376, 376(2)(n), and 507 — Allegation of rape based on false promise of marriage — Relationship continued for three years; physical relations established multiple times — Complainant, an educated and married woman, engaged in the relationship voluntarily and without protest or complaint until the break-up — Lodging of FIR three months after the last physical contact, subsequent to the appellant refusing a demand for money — Held, the relationship was consensual; physical intimacy in a long-standing, functioning relationship, which later turns acrimonious, cannot be retrospectively branded as rape — Refusal to fulfill a monetary demand led to the institution of criminal proceedings, amounting to an abuse of the court machinery — FIR and Charge-sheet quashed. (Paras 6, 7, 9, 16, 23, 28, 29, 32, 33, 40, 41)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1351 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAMADHAN S/O SITATRAM MANMOTHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASTHRA AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal…

Advocates Act Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Constitution

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — Section 179 — Summoning of Advocate by Investigating Agency — Advocate representing accused cannot be summoned directly to elicit case details as it violates advocate-client privilege and constitutional rights of the accused, unless specific exceptions under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) apply.

Nov 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1275 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 3 JUDGES BENCH IN RE: SUMMONING ADVOCATES WHO GIVE LEGAL OPINION OR REPRESENT PARTIES DURING INVESTIGATION OF CASES AND RELATED ISSUES. ( Before…

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 (Corresponding to Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 528) — Inherent power of High Court — Recall or review of own judgment — Criminal courts do not have the power to recall or review their own judgments, except for correcting clerical errors under Section 362 CrPC (Section 403 BNSS) — Invoking inherent powers to bypass statutory bars is impermissible — High Court reviewing its earlier order dismissing a petition as withdrawn, under the guise of correcting a clerical error, is illegal and without jurisdiction.

Oct 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1205 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. PARMESHWAR RAMLAL JOSHI AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Constitution Narcotics Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial.

May 24, 2026 sclaw