Supreme Court of India Judgements

46800 Judgements hosted as on 29/06/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 34 – Murder – Applicability of Section 34 of the IPC – For applying Section 34 IPC there should be a common intention of all the co-accused persons which means community of purpose and common design – Common intention does not mean that the co-accused persons should have engaged in any discussion or agreement so as to prepare a plan or hatch a conspiracy for committing the offence

Dec 2, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAM NARESH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

I P C Prevention of Money Laundering Act

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 120B – Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Section 3 – Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) not be applicable to criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unless the conspiracy is specifically related to money laundering – PMLA to be invoked, the conspiracy must have a direct connection to money laundering activities

Dec 2, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAVANA DIBBUR — Appellant Vs. THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

(CrPC) – Sections 482, 378 and 407 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 448, 454 and 380 – Theft – Discharge application – When coupled with the fact that the police did not find any offences having been made out against the appellants under Sections 454 and 380, IPC, the case against the appellants under Section 448, IPC finds itself on shaky ground – There is no suspicion, much less strong or grave suspicion that the appellants are guilty of the offence alleged

Nov 29, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VISHNU KUMAR SHUKLA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin…

I P C

(IPC) – Sections 307, 323 and 324 – Attempt to murder – Intention of the accused can be ascertained from the actual injury, if any, as well as from surrounding circumstances – the injuries on complainant and his mother have been found to be simple in nature, which is an additional point in the appellants’ favour – Only offences under Sections 323 and 324 of the IPC can be made out – Conviction under Section 307, IPC is unsustainable

Nov 29, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SIVAMANI AND DINESH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.…

I P C

Held, the appellant may have accidentally caused the death of the deceased while intoxicated, there is no evidence to prove that the appellant, due to intoxication – The absence of such evidence, combined with the appellant not claiming to have been intoxicated against his will, leads to the conclusion that Section 86 of the (IPC) does not apply – Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to a reduction of the sentence from Section 302 IPC (murder) to a charge falling under Part II of Section 304 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) – Appeal Dismissed.

Nov 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NANHE — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2791…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302, 307, and 326 read with Section 120B – Abkari Act, 1077 – Section 55(a), 55 (h), 55 (i) and 57(A)(1)(ii) – Deadly conspiracy of liquor poisoning by mixing noxious substances likely to endanger human life -Conspiracy is when two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act or legal act by illegal means – Offence of criminal conspiracy is an exception to the general law, where intent alone does not constitute crime – It is the intention to commit a crime and join hands with persons having the same intention –

Nov 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAJEEV — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 1134…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 149 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 25 – Murder – Death sentence – Criminal history of the convict by itself cannot be a ground for awarding him death penalty – Past conduct does not necessarily have to be taken into consideration while imposing death penalty – Present case is not a case wherein it can be held that imposition of death penalty is the only alternative

Nov 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MADAN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. ) Criminal…

Dying Declaration I P C

Murder of wife – First Information Report and the dying declarations on record clearly contain the statement of the deceased that when she had poured kerosene upon herself to deter the appellant from fighting and assaulting, he lighted a matchstick and with the intention to kill her, threw it upon her by saying “You Die” – Conviction and Sentence upheld.

Nov 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANIL KUMAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Cr P C I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 457, 380 and 506 – Lurking house trespass or house breaking at night, theft and criminal intimidation – FIR quashed by High Court – Appeal against – Assets and belongings inside the shop in question were in joint possession of the appellant as also the respondent and there was an injunction granted by the Competent Court that the assets and belongings of the shop in question would be preserved, removal of the same without consent or knowledge of the appellant would amount to theft – There was breaking open of the locks of the premises wherein the property was stored for the purposes of theft – All these offences are cognizable in nature and basic ingredients being there in the FIR, the High Court clearly erred in quashing the FIR – Appeal allowed.

Oct 24, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RUCHIR RASTOGI — Appellant Vs. PANKAJ RASTOGI AND OTHERS ETC. @ RESPONDENT ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

You missed

POCSO

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Section 376 (3) IPC — Rape — Conviction upheld — Evidence of victim’s mother and medical evidence — Reliability of victim’s mother’s testimony confirmed despite lengthy cross-examination, finding it natural and trustworthy and corroborated by other witnesses and medical evidence — Medical evidence, though partially presented by defense, conclusively supported sexual assault, citing perineal tear and abrasions around anus

Jun 29, 2025 sclaw
Joint Family Property Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 6 (as amended by Amendment Act, 2005) — Retrospective application — Validity of pre-amendment sale deeds — The prohibition contained in the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, does not affect registered sale deeds executed prior to December 20, 2004 (date of introduction of the amending provision) — This principle aligns with the judgment in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1.

Jun 28, 2025 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail Cr P C

Judicial Process — Misuse of process — Challenging bail conditions previously offered voluntarily — Accused offering substantial deposits to secure bail and subsequently challenging the onerous nature of conditions or the counsel’s authority to make such offers — This practice is condemned for undermining the judicial process and preventing consideration of bail applications on their merits — Such conduct leads to setting aside of bail orders and remittal for fresh consideration.

Jun 28, 2025 sclaw
Cr P C

Social Media Posts — Content-Related Offenses — Retaliatory Action — Quashing of Proceedings — While the court made no final determination on the nature of the petitioner’s social media posts, it acknowledged the petitioner’s counsel’s submission that the tweets were ‘retaliatory’ and were made in response to an incident involving a social media influencer. This assertion formed part of the petitioner’s argument for quashing or consolidating the numerous FIRs, suggesting a motive beyond simple offensive content.

Jun 28, 2025 sclaw