I P C Archives - Supreme Court of India Judgements

August 21, 2026 5:27 pm

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 405 and 406 — Criminal Breach of Trust — Entrustment — Refundable security deposit paid under Joint Development Agreement (JDA) — Held, mere payment of refundable security deposit as consideration for GPA does not amount to “entrustment” of property — FIR and chargesheet silent on manner of misappropriation/conversion — Bald, omnibus allegation of dishonest retention, unsupported by cogent material, insufficient to sustain charge under S. 405 — Mere non-refund of money does not constitute criminal breach of trust.

Aug 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 772 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH G. SAMINATHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and…

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita I P C

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 45, 53 — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 2(17), 4 — “Life imprisonment” — Meaning — Life imprisonment under Section 53 read with Section 45 IPC (and correspondingly under the BNS) means imprisonment for the rest of the convict’s natural life, terminable only by commutation or remission by competent authority, and not a fixed term of 14 years.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 764 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMASREY @ FAKKAD Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Writ Petition…

I P C

Multiple FIRs across States cannot be quashed or clubbed under Article 32 where they relate to distinct transactions, victims, and offences despite similar modus operandi. A. Cyber Fraud — Multiple FIRs across States — Clubbing declined — Clubbing/consolidation of FIRs registered in different States was declined where each FIR was lodged by a different complainant induced to part with money on separate occasions, with distinct victims, amounts and transactions, notwithstanding a common bank account and similar modus operandi; clubbing at a nascent investigation stage involving complex cyber-forensic tracing would impede fair investigation and cause hardship to complainants.

Jul 25, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 740 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RUTVIJ BHAGAT SINGH WAKHARE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 294(b) — Obscenity — Distinction between “obscene” and “abusive”/”vulgar” language — Test of — Held, to attract S. 294(b) IPC, prosecution must prove: (i) an obscene act done, or obscene word/song/ballad uttered, in or near a public place; and (ii) such act/utterance caused annoyance to others — Word “obscene” undefined under IPC but judicially construed, in the context of S. 292 IPC, to mean material which, taken as a whole, is lascivious, appeals to prurient interest, and tends to deprave and corrupt persons likely to be exposed to it — “Community standard test” (Aveek Sarkar) applicable, not the Hicklin test — Mere vulgarity, abuse or profanity, however distasteful, uncivil or shocking, does not ipso facto constitute obscenity — Vulgarity may evoke disgust or revulsion but lacks the depraving/corrupting tendency essential to obscenity — Appellant’s utterance of abusive and expletive-laden words against complainant during a quarrel, though coarse and offensive, held neither lascivious nor appealing to prurient interest nor shown to have caused annoyance to others in the public place — Conviction under S. 294(b) IPC set aside.

Jul 19, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 719 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANI @ SUBRAMANIYAM Vs. STATE REP BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi,…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 — Forgery and use of forged documents in judicial proceedings — Appeal confined to quantum of sentence, conviction upheld — Occurrence of offence in 2014, appellant facing proceedings for over a decade, no prior or subsequent criminal antecedents, forged document detected at early stage, no irreversible consequences — These factors warrant reconsideration of substantive sentence on grounds of proportionality and mitigating circumstances.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 654 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ISRAFIL @ PAPPU @ NAIMUDDIN KHAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.…

I P C

Criminal Law — Kidnapping for ransom under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Essential ingredients for conviction — The act of stopping children at pistol point and forcibly abducting a child satisfies the condition of threatening to cause death or hurt. –Proof of ransom demand — While Call Detail Records (CDRs) and Section 65-B of the Evidence Act are valuable, their absence is not fatal if the demand is established through cogent and corroborated oral testimonies of multiple witnesses, including the victim’s family and the investigating officer.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 569 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARJINDRA SINGH ETC. Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of criminal proceedings — High Court’s power to quash proceedings is distinct from compounding offences under Section 320 CrPC and can be invoked even for non-compoundable offences — Inherent power to be exercised to secure ends of justice or prevent abuse of process of court — Nature and gravity of offence to be considered — Heinous offences generally not quashed, but cases with overwhelming civil flavour, particularly arising from commercial/financial transactions, may be quashed if parties have settled disputes and conviction is remote, to prevent oppression and injustice.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 588 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIJAY KUMAR KELA AND ANOTHER Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 147, 148, 436, 302/149, 324/34, 323, 379, 302/109, 436/109, 379/109, 324/109, 323/109 — Conviction for offences related to mass violence, murder, arson, and causing injury — Affirmation of conviction and sentence by High Court — Supreme Court found no merit in appeals and dismissed them, upholding concurrent findings of lower courts.

May 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 560 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHENDRA RAI @ HARENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND OTHER ETC. Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam…

Acquittal I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304-A — Causing death by negligence — Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 134(b) and Section 187 — Duty of driver in case of accident and injury to a person and Punishment for offences relating to accident — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Driver convicted under Section 304-A IPC and Sections 134(b) and 187 MVA — High Court partly allowed revision, setting aside conviction for Section 279 IPC but maintaining conviction for Section 304-A IPC.

May 24, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 504 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHADEVANNA D.M. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 307 — Attempt to Murder — Essential ingredients are intention/knowledge to commit murder and an overt act in pursuance of that intention/knowledge. The nature of the injury is a relevant consideration, but not determinative; intention can be inferred from circumstances like weapons used, motive, etc.

May 24, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 524 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ROSHAN LAL Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal…

You missed

Accident

Legal Representatives Can Claim Motor Accident Compensation Even Without Financial Dependency On Deceased

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw

Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Execution Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell Does Not Terminate Subsisting Landlord-Tenant Relationship Nor Entitle Tenant To Section 53A TP Act Protection A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111(e) & (f) — Landlord and Tenant — Determination of lease by express or implied surrender — Execution of agreement to sell by landlord in favour of tenant — Effect on jural relationship — Held, mere execution of an agreement to sell between landlord and tenant does not ipso facto determine the subsisting tenancy — Tenancy is determined only when terms of agreement or unequivocal conduct of parties disclose express or implied surrender — Where agreement to sell contained clause for cancellation and restoration of possession in case loan was not sanctioned, existing possession was referable to tenancy and not to agreement to sell — Landlord-tenant relationship continued to subsist.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw

C P C

Appellate Courts Should Not Remand Cases Under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC As A Matter Of Course When Sufficient Evidence Is Available On Record. A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rules 23 and 24 — Power of Appellate Court to remand — Remand of case to Trial Court for framing of additional issues and fresh evidence — Permissibility — High Court remitted suit regarding one item of property for framing issues on whether sale deed was sham, limitation, and possession — Held, remand is not to be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and reflects incorrect exercise of discretion when sufficient evidence is available on record — Issues already framed by Trial Court were comprehensive enough to cover core disputes — Appellate Court is fully empowered to decide issues on merits or admit additional evidence if warranted, rather than remitting matter to cause unnecessary delay — Remand set aside and appeals restored to High Court for fresh disposal on merits.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw

Customs & Excise

Extended Period Of Limitation Under Proviso To Section 11A, Central Excise Act Cannot Be Invoked When Facts Are Known To Department Without Wilful Suppression A. Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 35L — Maintainability of appeal before Supreme Court — Preliminary objection raised by Department that appeal does not come under Section 35L as issue had no relation to rate of duty or valuation — Held, issue raised regarding extended period of limitation on ground of non-inclusion of certain costs in assessable value has an inextricable link with valuation of goods for purposes of assessment — Issue raised in show cause notice fundamentally dealt with valuation of goods — Supreme Court declined to relegate matter to High Court after almost a decade of pendency — Preliminary objection rejected.

Aug 16, 2026 sclaw

Category: I P C

You missed