Supreme Court of India Judgements

46755 Judgements hosted as on 29/03/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Civil Dispute vs. Criminal Offence — The court emphasized that the dispute was essentially civil in nature (related to employment termination) and that initiating criminal proceedings was an abuse of the legal process. – Civil Dispute vs. Criminal Offence — The court emphasized that the dispute was essentially civil in nature (related to employment termination) and that initiating criminal proceedings was an abuse of the legal process.

Jan 26, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 105 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADHUSHREE DATTA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Prashant…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 415 and 420 — Cheating — The court found that the elements of cheating under Section 415 were not met — The appellant did not deceive the 4th respondent, nor did the sale deeds cause harm or damage to the 4th respondent — The appellant did not claim to be or represent the 4th respondent, nor did the appellant try to transfer the rights of the 4th respondent — The court cited a previous case, Mohd. Ibrahim vs. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751 , stating that while a seller can be accused of defrauding a purchaser if they sell property that does not belong to them, a third party who is not the purchaser may not be able to make such a complaint

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 31 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JIT VINAYAK AROLKAR Vs. STATE OF GOA AND OTHERS ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Criminal…

I P C

Minor inconsistencies in witness testimony do not invalidate the entire testimony, the principle of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not applicable in Indian law, a faulty investigation does not automatically lead to acquittal, and testimony of interested witnesses can be relied upon if it is credible

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 28 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH EDAKKANDI DINESHAN @ P. DINESHAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERELA ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 326 — Compromise Despite Non-Compoundability — Even though section 326 is a non-compoundable offense under the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court can still allow the compounding of such an offense when there is a genuine and voluntary settlement between the parties — This is an exception to the general rule and is invoked in special circumstances.

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 37 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH H. N. PANDAKUMAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.…

I P C

Railways Act, 1989 — Section 143 — The creation of multiple user IDs is not explicitly criminalized under Section 143, but unauthorized procurement and supply of tickets is — The court stated that penal provisions must be read strictly and narrowly and since the act does not mention multiple IDs, it cannot be penalized — The court found that while an authorized agent who engages in unauthorized actions would not be penalized under this law, an unauthorized person who engages in such actions would be penalized.

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 51 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH INSPECTOR, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, KOTTAYAM Vs. MATHEW K CHERIAN AND ANOTHER ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

I P C

Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 — Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 can be applied even when a conviction has been upheld — Even though appellant’s conviction under Sections 326, 325, 452, and 323 of the IPC was affirmed by the High Court, the Supreme Court extended the benefit of the Probation Act — The fact that appellant was acquitted of more serious charges (Sections 307, 148, and 149 IPC) and that he had already served a significant portion of his sentence was also taken into consideration. — The age of the accused, the length of the criminal proceedings, and the absence of a prior criminal record can justify the application of the Probation Act — The court took into account appellant’s age (approximately 70 years old), the prolonged nature of the proceedings, and the fact that he had no prior convictions, in deciding to apply the Probation Act to him.

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 46 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMESH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No….of 2025 (@…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 304 Part I — Murder — Appeal against conviction — Appellants were initially convicted of murder but the charge was later modified to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC — The court upheld this modification, citing the lack of clear motive, premeditation, and definitive intent to kill, despite the fatal injuries inflicted — The judgment considered the credibility of the sole eyewitness, the timing of the FIR, and the overall weight of the evidence, ultimately reducing the sentence to the time already served and imposing a fine of Rs. 50,000 each.

Jan 11, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 47 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH GOVERDHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ( Before : B. R. Gavai, K.V. Viswanathan and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. )…

Accident I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304A — Rash and Negligent Driving — The court found that the accused was driving his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, which caused the death of one person and injuries to another — The prosecution presented evidence demonstrating that the accused’s vehicle hit the motorcycle from behind — This is corroborated by witness testimony and the fact that the motorcycle was dragged a considerable distance — The court dismissed the defence’s argument that the incident was due to contributory negligence, pointing out that the road was wide enough for the accused to avoid the collision and that there was no evidence of a sudden turn by the victim — The courts also noted the accused’s failure to provide a reasonable explanation when questioned about the incriminating evidence — The fact that the victim suffered 19 wounds also supports the court’s conclusion that the accused’s driving was rash and negligent —The court rejected the petitioner’s plea for leniency due to his family circumstances, emphasizing that the accused’s actions caused a death — Based on the above points, the court upheld the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and confirmed by the High Court.

Dec 27, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 1038 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAMES Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No….of 2024…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 324 and 326 — Murder — Intent for Murder — The Court reaffirmed that intent for murder can be inferred from the circumstances of the incident, including the nature of injuries and the choice of weapon, even if there was no prior premeditation – Exception 2 to Section 300 — Private Defense — The Court clarified that the right of private defense under Exception 2 to Section 300 IPC does not apply if the accused was the aggressor or if the force used was excessive and disproportionate.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 937 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUNHIMUHAMMED@ KUNHEETHU — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.…

Cr P C I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of Criminal Proceedings under Section 482 in Cases with Predominantly Civil Character — The court reiterated the principle that criminal cases with overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions, matrimonial relationships, or family disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves — This principle is applied in the present case, where the dispute involved a loan transaction between the accused persons and the bank, and the parties had settled the matter through the One Time Settlement (OTS).

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 750 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. BHARTHI DEVI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and…

You missed

Cr P C

In a case involving cross-FIRs (alleging offences u/s 294(b), 323, 506(1) IPC) arising from a dispute between two practicing advocates pending since 2017, the Supreme Court, in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution, quashed the FIR against the appellants and also quashed the connected proceedings

Mar 29, 2025 sclaw
I P C

Conviction under Section 302 requires proof of premeditation or intention to kill; absence of such elements may lead to reduced charges, such as under Section 304 IPC, with sentencing considerations potentially based on time already served

Mar 25, 2025 sclaw
I P C

Mere presence at a crime scene, without evidence of an overt act or specific role, is insufficient to convict an individual as a member of an unlawful assembly, especially in cases involving large crowds and public disturbances

Mar 25, 2025 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Extension of period of limitation in certain circumstances — Courts may liberally condone delays in appeals, especially by the State

Mar 25, 2025 sclaw