Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Section 22(3) – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 121A, 122, 123, 124A and 120B – Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 16, 18, 18B, 20, 38, 39 and 43D – The case involves the State of West Bengal appealing against a High Court judgment that quashed UAPA proceedings against the respondent due to jurisdiction issues – The Court reasoned that the Sessions Court had jurisdiction as per Section 22(3) of the NIA Act since the State had not constituted a Special Court – The Court discussed the modified application of Section 167 CrPC under Section 43D of UAPA and the definition of ‘Court’ under Section 2(1)(d) of UAPA. – The Supreme Court concluded that the City Sessions Court had the jurisdiction to pass the order adding UAPA offences and permitted the continuation of the trial.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 313 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL — Appellant Vs. JAYEETA DAS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.…

Cr P C I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – 147, 342, 323, 307 and 506 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 173(2) , 190 (1)(b) and 200 – Protest Petition – Magistrate to treat the Protest Petition as a complaint, proceeding according to Chapter XV of the Cr.P.C – The Court’s reasoning focused on the proper procedure for taking cognizance of an offence and the treatment of a Protest Petition when additional affidavits are filed – The conclusion emphasizes the Magistrate’s liberty to treat the Protest Petition as a complaint and the need to follow due process – The judicial opinion clarified the legal position regarding the Magistrate’s options upon receiving a closure report from the Investigating Officer.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 316 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MUKHTAR ZAIDI — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420,120B and 34 – Territorial jurisdiction for the FIR -The Supreme Court quashed the FIR and all proceedings, concluding that the matter was civil, not criminal, and that Arunachal Pradesh lacked territorial jurisdiction – The Court found no evidence of a cognizable offence and deemed the dispute to be of a civil nature, suitable for resolution in a civil court – The Court applied the principle that civil disputes should not be converted into criminal complaints unless there is clear evidence of criminal intent or action – The FIR and subsequent proceedings were quashed, with the Court questioning why the State of Arunachal Pradesh pursued the case when the complainant did not challenge the Rajasthan High Court’s order.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw

(2024) INSC 317 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. KAMAL AGARWAL AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Vikram…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 30 – Court found the eyewitnesses’ testimonies reliable and corroborated by medical evidence, dismissing the trivial contradictions raised by the appellant – The Court upheld the conviction based on the credibility of the eyewitnesses and the medical jurist’s testimony, despite the appellant’s claims of a fabricated case – The Supreme Court concluded that the impugned judgments were without infirmity and dismissed the appeal accordingly.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 308 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMVIR @ SAKET SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Dispute over a blocked pathway – The Court found no evidence of provocation by the deceased that would justify the appellants’ brutal attack, nor any exercise of the right to private defence – The Court applied principles from previous judgments to determine the lack of private defence and the presence of intention to cause harm – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellants’ actions were not in self-defence and that their intention was to inflict harm, affirming the lower courts’ decisions.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 294 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHASH @ SUBANNA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and…

CBI I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420 and 120B – Cheating in Land Mortgage -Court found no evidence of intentional deceit or conspiracy by the appellants, as the AICTE was aware of the mortgage from the first application – The Court referenced legal definitions of cheating and criminal conspiracy, emphasizing the lack of dishonest inducement and absence of AICTE’s complaint – The appellants were discharged from the alleged offences, with the Court concluding that the essential elements of cheating were not present.

Apr 13, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 284 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIPIN SAHNI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar,…

CBI I P C

CBI investigation for justice – The Court finds the investigation ineffective and is inclined to transfer the case to the CBI, noting the need for a credible investigation and the fundamental rights of the appellants – The Court discusses the circumstances under which investigations can be transferred to the CBI, emphasizing the sparing use of this power and the need for complete justice – The Court sets aside the High Court’s order dismissing the transfer to the CBI and directs the CBI to take over the investigation, ensuring a thorough inquiry and the pursuit of justice.

Mar 26, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AWUNGSHI CHIRMAYO AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Sudhanshu Dhulia,…

I P C

Information Technology Act, 2000 – Sections 67 and 67A – The appellants, involved in the creation of the web-series ‘College Romance,’ are accused of publishing obscene content under Sections 67 and 67A of the IT Act, leading to an FIR against them – “FIR Quashed, Content Upheld: Supreme Court Rejects Charges Against “College Romance” webseries for Vulgarity”

Mar 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH APOORVA ARORA AND ANOTHER ETC — Appellant Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER. — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 153A, 500, 501, 504, 34 and 120B – Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace – – The primary issue is whether the allegations in the FIR disclose any cognizable offence justifying the continuation of the investigation – The Court refers to precedents to determine the absence of necessary ingredients for the alleged offences and the applicability of the principles for quashing criminal proceedings – The Court quashes the FIR and all proceedings against the appellant, citing the absence of necessary ingredients for the cognizable offences alleged.

Mar 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHIV PRASAD SEMWAL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 354D, 376(2)(n), 504 and 506 read with 34 – Supreme Court found inconsistencies in the appellant’s statements and lack of evidence for the alleged forced abortion at Nursing Home – The Court referenced previous judgments to establish that consent vitiated by a false promise of marriage does not constitute rape under Section 375 of IPC unless the promise was proven to be false at inception – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the High Court that continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of the legal process and result in miscarriage of justice.

Mar 23, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MS. X — Appellant Vs. MR. A AND OTHERS ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Rajesh Bindal and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No……of…

You missed

Constitution Election Laws

EVM and VVPAT – Reliability – The petitioners challenged the reliability of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) systems, suspecting potential manipulation and demanding transparency in the voting process – The core issues revolved around the integrity of EVMs, the adequacy of VVPAT verification, and the fundamental right of voters to know their votes are correctly recorded and counted – Petitioner argued for a return to paper ballots, provision of VVPAT slips to voters, or 100% counting of VVPAT slips alongside electronic counts, citing concerns over EVM transparency and voter confidence – The Election Commission of India (ECI) defended the EVMs’ success in ensuring free, fair, and transparent elections, highlighting technological safeguards against tampering and the benefits over paper ballots – The Court upheld the current EVM and VVPAT system, dismissing the petitions and suggesting improvements for transparency without disrupting the ongoing electoral process – The Court relied on past precedents, the ECI’s robust procedures, and the absence of cogent material evidence against EVMs to reject the petitions – The judgment referenced constitutional provisions, electoral laws, and previous rulings to support the ECI’s position and the current electoral practices – The Supreme Court concluded that the EVMs and VVPAT systems are reliable, and the petitions were dismissed based on the lack of substantial evidence against the current electoral process.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302, 304 and 34 – Acquittal – Benefit of Doubt – The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, citing unreliable witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence – The Court’s reasoning focused on the credibility of the key witnesses and the absence of corroborative material to support the prosecution’s case – The legal reasoning included the principle of ‘falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus’ not being applicable in Indian jurisprudence – The conclusion was that the appellant deserved acquittal due to the benefit of doubt – The judicial opinion emphasized the quality of evidence over quantity in determining the truth.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw
I P C

National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Section 22(3) – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 121A, 122, 123, 124A and 120B – Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 16, 18, 18B, 20, 38, 39 and 43D – The case involves the State of West Bengal appealing against a High Court judgment that quashed UAPA proceedings against the respondent due to jurisdiction issues – The Court reasoned that the Sessions Court had jurisdiction as per Section 22(3) of the NIA Act since the State had not constituted a Special Court – The Court discussed the modified application of Section 167 CrPC under Section 43D of UAPA and the definition of ‘Court’ under Section 2(1)(d) of UAPA. – The Supreme Court concluded that the City Sessions Court had the jurisdiction to pass the order adding UAPA offences and permitted the continuation of the trial.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Tenders & Contracts

The Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench’s order, restored the Single Judge’s order, and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the principles of delay and latches in judicial proceedings – The Court reasoned that the writ petitioner’s delay in asserting rights and acquiescence to the Corporation’s actions warranted dismissal of the writ petition – The Court cited precedents stating that delay defeats equity and that the High Court may refuse to exercise its extraordinary powers if there is negligence or omission on the part of the applicant – The appeal was allowed, and the writ petition was dismissed on the grounds of delay and latches, with no order as to costs.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw