Category: Cr P C

. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of Criminal Proceedings — High Court’s power to quash — Allegations in complaint, even if taken at face value, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused — High Court failed to exercise its power under Section 482 CrPC

2026 INSC 481 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARAYANA HEALTH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe,…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Investigation and Chargesheet Filing — Interim order restraining police from filing chargesheet is unsustainable if based on misinterpretation of law regarding High Court’s power under Article 226 and Section 528 of BNSS — Investigation may continue, but further steps depend on legal applicability of quashing provisions.

2026 INSC 482 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRIKANT OJHA Vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 161 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 157 and 145 — Hostile Witness — Evidence of a hostile witness remains admissible and can be accepted to the extent that their version is found dependable on careful scrutiny, and can be used to acquit the accused if it inspires credibility when read with other evidence — Such evidence can be employed to discredit the prosecution case.

2026 INSC 486 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TALARI NARESH Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…..of…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Registration of FIR — Mandatory upon disclosure of cognizable offence (Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P.) — No preliminary inquiry generally permissible — Remedies for non — registration under Section 154(3) and 156(3) are efficacious.- Magistrate’s power to direct FIR registration and investigation is pre-cognizance — Sanction under Sections 196 & 197 CrPC operates at cognizance stage, not investigation stage.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 943…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Anticipatory Bail — Power of Court to Direct Surrender — When an anticipatory bail application is rejected, the court does not have the jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to surrender — The rejection of anticipatory bail means that an application for pre-arrest bail has been denied, and the subsequent steps regarding arrest and regular bail should follow the normal procedure as per law.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH OM PRAKASH CHHAWNIKA @ OM PRAKASH CHABNIKA @ OM PRAKASH CHAWNIKA Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498A and 494 read with Section 34 — Cruelty and bigamy — Family members of husband — Allegations against in-laws must disclose specific acts of demand, threat, or physical assault, not mere generalised statements of presence or encouragementPenal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 494 — Bigamy — Liability for bigamy does not extend to persons other than the spouse who contracted the second marriage, unless there is evidence of their active participation, facilitation, or encouragement of the marriage — Mere knowledge of the second marriage is insufficient.

2026 INSC 412 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SIVARAMAN NAIR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 306 — Abetment of Suicide — Essential Ingredients — For a charge under Section 306, the prosecution must prove that the accused contributed to the suicide through a direct or indirect act of instigation or incitement — This act must reveal a clear intention (mens rea) to abet suicide and leave the victim with no other option — The act of instigation must be in close proximity to the suicide and form a direct nexus, indicating the suicide was a direct result of the instigation.

2026 INSC 375 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BALAJI JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF CHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER ( Before : K.V. Viswanathan and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3 and Section 7(3) — Prosecution for ‘giving’ dowry — Protection to ‘person aggrieved’ — Wife and her family members made statements alleging ‘giving’ of dowry in a dowry harassment case against husband — Held, these statements, being made by ‘persons aggrieved’, cannot be the sole basis for prosecuting them for the offence of ‘giving’ dowry under Section 3 of the Act, due to the protection under Section 7(3) which states that their statements shall not subject them to prosecution.

2026 INSC 374 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAHUL GUPTA Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Special Leave…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings by High Court — High Court quashed FIR and proceedings at a nascent stage when Magistrate had merely directed investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC — Sale deeds relied upon by accused were examined by High Court, treating them as determinative of the dispute, and criminal proceedings were quashed on the ground that the dispute was predominantly civil in nature and sale deeds were not cancelled under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Such exercise by High Court was beyond the permissible scope of scrutiny in a petition under Section 482 CrPC, as it involved delving into defence material and adjudicating disputed questions of fact, which is the domain of investigation and trial — This approach stifled the investigative process and ran contrary to well-settled principles — High Court fell into error.

2026 INSC 362 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ACCAMMA SAM JACOB Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 468, 469, 470, 472, 473 and 341 — Limitation for taking cognizance of offence — Relevant date for computation of period of limitation is date of filing of complaint or date of initiation of criminal proceedings, not date on which Magistrate takes cognizance — Constitution Bench decision in Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases [(2014) 2 SCC 62] holds good law.

2026 INSC 336 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ROMA AHUJA Vs. THE STATE AND ANOTHER ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal Nos.…

You missed