Supreme Court of India Judgements

46650 Judgements hosted as on 11/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Evidence Act

Evidence Act I P C

Criminal Jurisprudence–If a person is charged under a grave Section, but however, if acquitted under the said grave section by the Trial Court, then it would amount to travesty of Justice if in his own appeal he is convicted under that grave section, without there being any appeal from the State and without there being prior notice of enhancement issued by the appellate Court.  

Jul 7, 2020 sclaw

Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Altamas Kabir The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mukundakam Sharma Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 2872 of 2008) Jarnail…

Evidence Act

Confession–Recovery of foreign exchange–Confession by accused later retracted–Burden to prove that confession was voluntary would be on Department. Burden of proof–Parliament did not make any provision placing the burden of proof on the accused/proceedee—The Act does not provide for a ‘reverse burden’–No presumption of commission of an offence is raised under the Act.

Jul 6, 2020 sclaw

Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Civil Appeal No. 7407 Of 2008 Vinod Solanki v. Union of India {Decided on 18/11/2008} Important Point…

Evidence Act

Extra judicial confession–Confession before PW3 after a week of occurrence–PW3 is the former President of the Village Panchayat–He had not chosen to reduce into writing the extra judicial confession of the accused or produce him at the police station–Confession not reliable.

Jul 5, 2020 sclaw

Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mukundakam Sharma Criminal Appeal No. 177 of 2003 Inspector Of Police, T.N. v. Palanisamy @ Selvan {Decided…

Evidence Act

Application Not Necessary For Producing Secondary Evidence : SC HELD foundation of leading of secondary evidence, either in the plaint or in evidence, the secondary evidence cannot be ousted for consideration only because an application for permission to lead secondary evidence was not filed.”

Mar 27, 2020 sclaw

Application Not Necessary For Producing Secondary Evidence : SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 27 March 2020 3:38 PM In a judgment delivered on March 19, the Supreme Court has…

Evidence Act

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420, 467 and 468 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 45 – Forged signature – Indira Vikas Patra – Hand-writing expert – It is fairly well settled that before acting upon the opinion of the hand-writing expert, prudence requires that the court must see that such evidence is corroborated by other evidence either direct or circumstantial evidence

Jan 14, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PADUM KUMAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Evidence Act

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 109, 120B, 394, 395, 396 and 449 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 9 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 162 – Test Identification Parade – It is trite to say that the substantive evidence is the evidence of identification in court. The facts, which establish the identity of the accused persons, are relevant under Section 9 of the Evidence Act.

Dec 12, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJA — Appellant Vs. STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Indu Malhotra, JJ. ) Criminal…

Evidence Act

Contents Of Memory Card Will Be ‘Document’ And Not ‘Material Object’ HELD “we hold that the contents of the memory card/pen drive being electronic record must be regarded as a document. If the prosecution is relying on the same, ordinarily, the accused must be given a cloned copy thereof to enable him/her to present an effective defence during the trial.

Nov 29, 2019 sclaw

Contents Of Memory Card Will Be ‘Document’ And Not ‘Material Object’ : SC [Read Judgment] The contents of a memory card in relation to a crime amount to a ‘document’…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw