Supreme Court of India Judgements

47060 Judgements hosted as on 01/02/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Cr P C

Cr P C

Summoning order–Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against summoning order–Petition dismissed by High Court stating that remedy of revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. also available–Held; it is difficult to conceive that jurisdiction of High Court would be held to be barred only because the revisional jurisdiction could also be availed of.

Jul 5, 2020 sclaw

Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Criminal Appeal No. 2055 of 2008 Dharimal Tobaco Products Ltd. v. Sate of Maharashtra {Decided on 17/12/2008}…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 156(3) and 173 – Protest petition – When a complaint sent to police under/S 156(3) for investigation and then a protest petition is filed, the Magistrate after accepting the final report of the police under Section 173 and discharging the accused persons has the power to deal with the protest petition.

Jun 28, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHASH SAHEBRAO DESHMUKH — Appellant Vs. SATISH ATMARAM TALEKAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ. )…

Cr P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B, 220, 323, 330 348, 506B and 34 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 197, 245 and 482 – Karnataka Police Act, 1963 – Section 170 – Cognizance of offence – Quashing of proceedings – Want of sanction – Whether sanction is necessary or not may have to be determined at any stage of the proceedings. HELD application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is maintainable to quash proceedings which are ex facie bad for want of sanction, frivolous or in abuse of process of court. Proceedings quashed.

Jun 20, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH D. DEVARAJA — Appellant Vs. OWAIS SABEER HUSSAIN — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and Indira Banerjee, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Cr P C

V IMP – DEFAULT BAIL ::: HELD This Court are of the view that neither this Court in its order dated 23.03.2020 (Extension of Limitation) can be held to have eclipsed the time prescribed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. nor the restrictions which have been imposed during the lockdown announced by the Government shall operate as any restriction on the rights of an accused as protected by Section 167(2) CrPC to get to get a default bail

Jun 20, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH S.KASI — Appellant Vs. STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SAMAYNALLUR POLICE STATION MADURAI DISTRICT — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, M.R.…

Cr P C

Accused Can Challenge Conviction In Appeal Filed By The State Even If He Did Not Prefer A Formal Appeal: SC HELD The accused No. 5 (Mehram S/o Chhagna Ram) is justified in contending that it is open to the said accused to challenge the finding and order of conviction under Section 326/148, IPC recorded against him in the appeal filed by the State, assailing the impugned judgment of the High Court.

May 7, 2020 sclaw

Accused Can Challenge Conviction In Appeal Filed By The State Even If He Did Not Prefer A Formal Appeal: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 7 May 2020 11:09 AM…

Cr P C

We are inclined to accept the contention that the High Court could not have directed the registration of an FIR with a direction to the police to investigate and file the final report in view of the judgment of this Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Others.” HELD that section 156(3) CrPC is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of an FIR and of ordering a proper investigation

Mar 21, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M. SUBRAMANIAM AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. S. JANAKI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar And Sanjiv…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 433-A – Army Act, 1950 – Section 69 – Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 – Section 302 – Civil offence of murder – Benefit of remission – Section 433­A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 would also be applicable to a case tried for offence under Section 69 of the Army Act, 1950 and a person who has been imposed with a life sentence cannot be released unless he has actually served 14 years’ of imprisonment, without taking into consideration the remissions earned by him in jail

Mar 20, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH EX-GUNNER VIRENDER PRASAD — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI., B.R. Gavai and Surya…

You missed

Bail Granted

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 108, 80, 103, 85 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3, 4 — Offences — Abetment to suicide, Dowry death, Murder — Allegations of extra-marital relationship, demand of money/dowry — Deceased died of poisoning/injection — Autopsy findings — Prosecution case not strong at bail stage.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 33(1) — Requirement for employer to seek permission before altering service conditions or stopping work of workmen during pendency of dispute — Failure to do so constitutes a breach of the Act.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 10(1), 12 — Reference of industrial dispute — Apprehended dispute — Appropriate Government’s power to refer — The appropriate Government has the power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication if it is of the opinion that such dispute exists or is apprehended. The initiation of conciliation proceedings under Section 12 does not statutorily require a prior demand notice to the employer as a pre-condition to approaching the Conciliation Officer. The management’s argument that a prior demand notice is essential, based on certain previous judgments, fails as it ignores the provision for referring an apprehended dispute, which can be invoked to prevent industrial unrest

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw
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