Supreme Court of India Judgements

467730 Judgements hosted as on 20/04/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corruption

Corruption

Period of three months, extended by one more month for legal consultation, is mandatory – Consequence of non-compliance with this mandatory requirement shall not be quashing of the criminal proceeding for that very reason – The competent authority shall be Accountable for the delay and be subject to judicial review and administrative action by the CVC under Section 8(1)(f) of the CVC Act.

Oct 14, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIJAY RAJMOHAN — Appellant Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBI, ACB, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai…

Corruption

Disproportionate income in the period between 1974 and 1988, FIR filed after twelve years the charge sheet after 7 years, application for discharge dismissed after decade, SLP decided after 6 years HELD superannuated from service in 2010 – now 72 years – Continuation of the prosecution, unjust – Discharge application allowed.

Sep 20, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH KANCHAN KUMAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) – It is for the accused to account satisfactorily for the money/assets in his hands – Onus in this regard is on the accused to give satisfactory explanation – Accused cannot make an attempt to discharge this onus upon him at the stage of Section 239 of the CrPC. State appeal allowed.

Sep 12, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH STATE THROUGH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE — Appellant Vs. R. SOUNDIRARASU ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…

Acquittal Corruption

PCA & IPC – HELD the recovery of the tickets is found to have not been made in accordance with law, nor the seized tickets could be connected to the three different buses and the conductors manning the said buses (the appellants), it would not be safe to rely upon the unconfirmed tickets to connect them to the appellants – Prosecution did not proceed with application for secondary evidence qua enquiry report.

Jul 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH JARNAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Corruption

(CrPC) – S 482 – (IPC) – Ss 420 and 120B – P C Act, 1988 – Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) – Allegations of corruption while allotting 10 plots arbitrarily to their family members by hatching the criminal conspiracy by public servant – powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the court to be more cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on the Court – While quashing the criminal proceedings the High Court has not at all adverted to itself the aspects and has embarked upon an enquiry as to the reliability and genuineness of the evidence collected during the investigation as if the High Court was conducting the mini-trial – Impugned order passed by the High Court quashing the criminal proceedings against the respondents is unsustainable – Appeal allowed.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF ODISHA — Appellant Vs. PRATIMA MOHANTY ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal Nos.…

Corruption

Jammu and Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 – Section 5(1)(d) r/w 5(2) – Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 – Section 120B – – Merely because the offence of the conspiracy may be involved, investigation into the substantive offence, i.e., in the present case, offence under the PC Act which is cognizable is not required to await a sanction from the Magistrate, as that would lead to a considerable delay and affect the investigation and it will derail the investigation – Therefore, the High Court has erred in quashing the criminal proceedings on the ground that as the offence under Section 120B which is a non-cognizable, prior sanction as required under Section 155 of J&K Cr.P.C. is not obtained – Appeal allowed.

Nov 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DR. SALEEM UR REHMAN — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S.…

Corruption

Preliminary Enquiry by CBI – Institution of a Preliminary Enquiry in cases of corruption is not made mandatory before the registration of an FIR under the CrPC, PC Act or even the CBI Manual, for this Court to issue a direction to that affect will be tantamount to stepping into the legislative domain – In case the information received by the CBI, through a complaint or a “source information” under Chapter 8, discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, it can directly register a Regular Case

Oct 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THOMMANDRU HANNAH VIJAYALAKSHMI @ T. H. VIJAYALAKSHMI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before :…

Corruption

Demand of bribe – At the stage of framing of the charge and/or considering the discharge application, the mini trial is not permissible – At this stage, it is to be noted that even as per Section 7 of the PC Act, even an attempt constitutes an offence – Therefore, the High Court has erred and/or exceeded in virtually holding a mini trial at the stage of discharge application

Apr 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Appellant Vs. ASHOK KUMAR KASHYAP — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, JJ. ) Criminal…

Corruption

Enquiry at the Stage of Pre-Registration of FIR – Permissibility – Such a preliminary enquiry would be permissible only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not and only thereafter FIR would be registered – Therefore, such a preliminary enquiry would be in the interest of the alleged accused also against whom the complaint is made.

Mar 28, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHARAN SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, JJ. )…

You missed

I P C

Defamation — Imputation in Good Faith for Protection of Interests — Exception 9 to S. 499 IPC engrafts the principle of qualified privilege, stating it is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another, provided it is made in good faith for the protection of the interest of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw
Corporate

ESI – The definition of ‘principal employer’ under Section 2(17) is wide and includes not only the owner or occupier of a factory (or head of department in government establishments) but also the managing agent or any person responsible for the supervision and control of the establishment — Designation is immaterial if the person functions as a managing agent or supervises/controls the establishment

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail

Habitual Offender/Criminal Antecedents — Consideration of Nature of Current Offence — While the criminal antecedents and alleged status of an accused as a habitual offender are extremely relevant factors that ordinarily weigh against the grant of anticipatory bail, the High Court’s discretion in granting such bail may not warrant interference

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw
Circumstantial Evidence I P C

Murder (Filicide) vs. Suicide — In cases based on circumstantial evidence where the question is whether the death was homicidal (filicide) or suicidal, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances that points exclusively to the guilt of the accused and is inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw