Category: I P C

Penal Code, 1860 — Section 304 Part-II — Culpable homicide not amounting to murder — Sentence — Appeal against High Court’s reduction of sentence from 10 years to 8 years rigorous imprisonment — Appellant was 20 years old at the time of the incident — Victim was an innocent intervenor — Supreme Court held that the sentence imposed by the High Court was balanced and principled and did not warrant interference, emphasizing the need to maintain public confidence in the justice system and avoid excessive leniency.

2025 INSC 1250 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KOTRESH @ KOTRAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Criminal…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Conversion of conviction — Where evidence shows that though accused had knowledge that injuries would cause death, there is no material to prove intention to kill, conviction under Section 302 IPC is not tenable and should be converted to Section 304 Part I IPC.

2025 INSC 1172 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAGHAV PRASHAD AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. ( Before : B.R.Gavai, CJI. and K. Vinod Chandran, J. ) Criminal Appeal…

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — Quashing of FIR — Abuse of process of law — FIR filed by respondent-wife after divorce proceedings initiated by appellant-husband and a foreign court order for child’s return — Respondent’s conduct questionable regarding child’s return to Australia and allegations in the complaint not supporting the offence of cruelty under Section 498A IPC as defined — FIR quashed as a retaliatory measure and abuse of process.

2025 INSC 1128 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NITIN AHLUWALIA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 376(2)(g), 201 – Conviction and sentence for rape and murder – Appeal against – Circumstantial evidence – Prosecution failed to establish complete chain of incriminating circumstances beyond reasonable doubt – Testimony of prosecution witnesses contained contradictions and improbabilities – Suspicious conduct of accused attributed as improvement – Reliance on DNA reports found unjustified due to failure to establish sanctity and chain of custody of samples – Supplementary DNA report inadmissible as expert was not recalled and report not put to accused.

2025 INSC 1042 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PUTAI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ( Before : Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No(s).…

Penal Code, 1860 — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — Allegations in FIR were vague, general, and filed one year after admitted separation of the parties — No specific instances of cruelty were mentioned — Criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Court can quash FIR if allegations, taken at face value, do not constitute any offence — Vague and general allegations of marital discord, without specific instances, do not prima facie constitute an offence under Section 498A IPC.

2025 INSC 926 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ANURAG VIJAYKUMAR GOEL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI., K. Vinod Chandran and N. V.…

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 376(2), 450 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Sexual assault on a minor — Evidence of prosecutrix — Conviction can be based solely on the prosecutrix’s testimony if it inspires confidence — Corroboration of testimony of prosecutrix is not a requirement of law, but a guidance of prudence — Minor contractions or small discrepancies should not be a ground for throwing out the evidence of the prosecutrix.

2025 INSC 929 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEPAK KUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. …..of…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 307, 436 — Murder, Attempt to murder, Mischief by fire or explosive substance — Appreciation of evidence — High Court reversed trial court’s conviction, finding prosecution failed to prove charges beyond doubt — Supreme Court found High Court erred in treating case as purely circumstantial and misappreciating evidence — Supreme Court held evidence, including eyewitness testimony, spot punchanama, and post-mortem reports, supported prosecution’s case of explosion, fire, burn injuries, and deaths — High Court’s assumption that no remains of bomb were found was erroneous, as explosive substance causing fire was sufficient — Supreme Court also disagreed with High Court’s view that parents would not leave children during fire, citing principle of varying human reactions under stress — Supreme Court restored trial court’s conviction for respondents Nilu Ganjhu and Mahboob Ansari

2025 INSC 942 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF BIHAR NOW JHARKHAND Vs. NILU GANJHU @ NILKANT RAM GANJHU AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — Conviction on circumstantial evidence requires a chain of events to be fully established, consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt, conclusive in nature, excluding all other hypotheses, and leaving no reasonable ground for innocence.

2025 INSC 936 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAIL KUMARI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : B.R.Gavai, CJI. and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2189…

Criminal proceedings can be quashed if a civil dispute is disguised as a criminal offense, indicating an abuse of process. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 — Cheating, Forgery, Using Forged Document — Abuse of process of law — Civil dispute disguised as criminal offence — Complaint filed after significant delay following dismissal of objections and failure to pursue civil remedies — Allegations of fabrication of will and circumvention of sale deed not prima facie made out — Continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and not serve ends of justice — High Court erred in refusing to quash — Order set aside and proceedings quashed.

2025 INSC 915 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH URMILA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. BALRAM AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

You missed