Supreme Court of India Judgements

46855 Judgements hosted as on 16/09/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Cr P C

Cr P C

Summons—Revision under S 397(2) Cr PC against order of issue of process is maintainable Cognizance of Offence—While taking cognizance of an offence under Section 190 (1) (b) CrPC, the Magistrate does not has to record reasons for its satisfaction of sufficient grounds for issuance of summons

Mar 21, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 511 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 598 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Baumathi Criminal Appeal No. 224…

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.456–Forcible Dispossession-Restoration of Possession—Limitation-Limitation of 30 days filing an application would apply only if the Trial Court had not passed any order in respect of the case property while convicting the accused—No limitation has been provided for the higher courts to make an order for restoration of possession while disposing the proceedings before it. 

Mar 17, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 535 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 60O IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta Criminal Appeal No. 1104 of 2011 Mahesh Dube v.…

Cr P C

Additional Evidence—Criminal Appeal—Filing application for additional evidence at appellate stage cannot always be termed as delaying tactics. Additional Evidence—Criminal Appeal—Due to lapse on the part of appellant and his counsel the document which was a photocopy and was centre point of dispute/allegation could not be proved and accused was convicted—In appeal application for placing on record certified copy of said document ought to be allowed by High Court

Mar 3, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 370 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 545 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Honrble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph Criminal Appeal No.l48of2019 Brig.…

Cr P C

Second Complaint—There is no provision in the Criminal Procedure Code or any other statute which debars a complainant from making a second complaint on the same allegations, when the first complaint did not lead to conviction, acquittal or discharge Second Complaint—The failure to mention the first complaint in the subsequent one is inconsequential—Mentioning of reasons for withdrawal of an earlier complaint is also not a condition precedent for maintaining a second complaint.

Mar 3, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 134 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 2049 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Criminal Appeal No. Ill…

You missed

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 223(d) — Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be charged and tried together — Legislative intent is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, avoid conflicting judgments, and promote judicial economy while ensuring fairness — Segregation without legally recognized grounds like distinct facts, severable evidence, or demonstrated prejudice, is impermissible.

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 — Offences relating to cheating and forgery — Anticipatory bail — Rejection challenged — Appellants, public servants at the time, accused of certifying mutation entries based on forged documents — High Court rejected anticipatory bail — Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s decision

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended) — Challenge to constitutional validity of amendments — Petitioners contended that amendments are ultra vires the Constitution, violating fundamental rights including Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A. Respondents argued for legislative competence and presumption of validity of enactments. Court emphasized that statutes should only be declared unconstitutional if there is a clear, glaring, and undeniable violation of constitutional principles or fundamental rights, or if manifestly arbitrary, and that courts must strive to uphold legislative validity.

Sep 16, 2025 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw