Supreme Court of India Judgements

47080 Judgements hosted as on 15/04/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Cr P C

Additional Accused Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 319 — Summoning additional accused — Trial Court rejected application to summon additional accused — High Court set aside order and directed summoning — Supreme Court found Trial Court applied stricter standard than necessary — Trial Court erred in isolating inconsistencies and not considering cumulative weight of evidence — Supreme Court held testimony of complainant and two other witnesses, despite inconsistencies, met strong and cogent evidence standard for summoning under Section 319 — Judgments of lower courts set aside and persons directed to be produced as additional accused.

Mar 18, 2026 sclaw

  2026 INSC 251 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH MOHAMMAD KALEEM Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Essential conditions — If allegations in FIR or complaint, even if taken at face value, do not prima facie constitute an offence or make out a case against the accused, quashing is justified — Vague and general allegations are insufficient to establish a prima facie case.

Mar 18, 2026 sclaw

2025 INSC 1168 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SANJAY D. JAIN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI., K. Vinod Chandran and…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — High Court quashed proceedings against sister-in-law on ground of general and omnibus allegations, but declined relief to father-in-law and mother-in-law (appellants) — Allegations against appellants were similarly general and omnibus, with no specific role or overt act attributed to them — Delay in lodging FIR, coupled with lack of specific allegations, suggested possibility of FIR being a counter-blast to divorce petition filed by husband — High Court erred in applying different standards to similarly situated accused — Proceedings against appellants quashed.

Mar 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 212 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. SUSHIL KUMAR PURBEY AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta,…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 468, 469, 473 — Limitation bars taking cognizance — Offence punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year (Section 27(d) of Act) falls under Section 468(2)(c) of Cr.P.C. with limitation expiring after 3 years from the date the identity of the offender becomes known to the aggrieved party or police officer.

Feb 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 200 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. PANACEA BIOTEC LTD. AND ANOTHER ( Before : Ahsanuddin Amanullah and S.V.N. Bhatti,…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 197 — Sanction for prosecution — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 217 — Delay in granting sanction — High Court’s direction for deemed sanction if authority fails to decide within one month — Supreme Court notes that the earlier judgment in Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs. Manmohan Singh (2012) 3 SCC 64 does not support the concept of deemed sanction, and a Coordinate Bench had also rejected such an argument in Suneeti Toteja Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 433). Supreme Court finds it appropriate to refer the matter to a larger Bench due to persistent complaints of lethargy or apathy in granting sanction. The High Court’s direction on deemed sanction is stayed until further orders

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE Vs. M.MUNEER AHAMED AND ANOTHER ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Admissibility of information received from accused in custody leading to discovery of fact — Recovery of dead body and Scooty at the instance of the accused, based on memorandum statement, considered a distinct fact and sufficient to prove guilt when connected to other circumstances.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 173 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEELU @ NILESH KOSHTI Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ.…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 164 — Recording of confession — Duty of Magistrate — Magistrate must inform the accused of their right to legal assistance before recording confession — Failure to do so can render the confession suspect — In this case, Magistrate failed to inform the accused of their right to a lawyer, contributing to the unreliability of the confession.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 85 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BERNARD LYNGDOH PHAWA Vs. THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 439 — Bail — Cancellation of bail — Supreme Court’s power to interfere with High Court’s bail order — Supreme Court ordinarily does not interfere with High Court orders granting bail, but will intervene if discretion was exercised without due application of mind or contrary to law — Factors to consider include prima facie view of guilt, nature/gravity of offence, and likelihood of obstruction/evasion of justice — Grant of bail balances public interest in justice with individual liberty.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 98 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH USMAN ALI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. ) Criminal…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 154 — Information as to the commission of cognizable offence — Mandatory registration of FIR — Court reiterates the mandatory duty to register an FIR upon disclosure of a cognizable offence and reminds educational institutions of their civic and legal obligation to promptly lodge an FIR in case of a student suicide on campus. (Para 1)

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 62 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AMIT KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Criminal…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 2(s) and 2(o) — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 — Sections 2(f), 100, 101, 102 — Quashing of FIRs — Jurisdiction of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) Police Station post-bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh — High Court quashed Anti-Corruption Bureau FIRs on hyper-technical ground of lack of specific notification under Section 2(s) CrPC for the relocated ACB office (Vijayawada) after the State Reorganisation — Held: The High Court’s approach leads to a travesty of justice by nipping investigations in the bud on hyper-technical grounds — Pre-bifurcation Government Order (G.O.Ms. No. 268 dated 12.09.2003) declaring ACB offices as Police Stations, coupled with the express provisions of the 2014 Act (Sections 100 and 102), ensures continuity of “law” (which includes notifications/orders) in the successor State of Andhra Pradesh without requiring fresh adoption or notification — Section 102 of the 2014 Act facilitates courts/authorities to construe the existing law to apply to the new State, even absent specific adoption — Subsequent clarificatory G.O.Ms. No. 137 (14.09.2022) merely restates the position and its non-retroactive application reasoning by High Court is untenable — Hyper-technical reasoning, ignoring the spirit of the law and the continuity mandated by the Reorganisation Act, cannot be sustained. (Paras 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 16, 17, 21, 22, 24)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 37 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE JOINT DIRECTOR (RAYALASEEMA), ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, A.P. AND ANOTHER ETC. Vs. DAYAM PEDA RANGA RAO ETC. ( Before : M. M.…

You missed

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 13(1)(d) — Disproportionate Assets — Chargesheet splitting — Allegations of acquiring disproportionate assets and tribal lands misuse — Two separate chargesheets filed from the same FIR, R.C — Case No 04(A)/2010-AHD-R(B) and R.C — Case No 04(A)/2010-AHD-R(C) — Overlapping allegations in both cases — Plea of double jeopardy raised — Supreme Court noted overlapping allegations and previous conviction with suspended sentence, inclined to grant bail in the present case as well.

Apr 15, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1991 — Section 12 — Set-off of losses — Accumulated losses of amalgamating company cannot be set-off against income of amalgamated company as it had not suffered the losses itself.

Apr 15, 2026 sclaw
Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B — Divorce by Mutual Consent — Settlement agreement reached in mediation — Wife withdrew consent before Second Motion for divorce — Held, while ordinarily consent can be withdrawn, when a settlement agreement has been entered into for full and final settlement of disputes, it is not open for a party to resile from its terms without demonstrating fraud, force, or undue influence — Wife failed to prove her allegations of fraud or compulsion by Husband, and her claims about substantial jewelry not mentioned in the settlement were unsubstantiated and raised suspicion due to delayed assertion — Held, wife’s withdrawal of consent was not justified.

Apr 15, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 36 — Enforcement of Consent Award — Construction of compromise deed and consent award — Promoters undertook to defend proceedings and ensure no liability recovered from Appellants by any forum — Deposit of an amount by Appellants to prevent execution of award against their properties constituted a liability that triggered Promoters’ obligation under the consent award — High Court erred in deferring enforceability of consent award until final confirmation by the highest court of appeal — Appeal allowed, impugned judgment set aside.

Apr 15, 2026 sclaw