Supreme Court of India Judgements

46990 Judgements hosted as on 15/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Mischief–Accused forcibly entered sugarcane fields of complainant and destroyed the crop–Accused used derogatory words against him–Complainant belongs to Scheduled Tribe–Accused rightly convicted under Section 427 I.P.C. under Section 3(1)(iv) and (v) of Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Jul 5, 2020 sclaw

Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mukundakam Sharma Criminal Appeal No. 1967 of 2008 Kashiben Chhaganbhai Koli v. State of Gujarat {Decided on…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 114 and 307 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 25(1)(B)(a) – Bombay Police Act, 1951 – Section 135(1) – Attempt to Murder – Sentence enhanced from Six to Seven Years by High Court – Appeal against – Minor discrepancies in evidence and inability to recall details of the description of houses, roads and streets after several years, do not vitiate the evidence of recovery itself

Jun 20, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MUSTAK @ KANIO AHMED SHAIKH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and Indira Banerjee, JJ. )…

I P C

ACQUITTAL ::: Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 34, 394, 460 and 302 – Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Avam Vyapharan Adhiniyam, 1981 – Sections 11 and 13 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 313 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 27 and 114 -Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 34 – Common intention – Prosecution has to establish by evidence, whether direct or circumstantial, that there was plan or meeting of minds of all the accused persons to commit the offence for which they are charged with the aid of Section 34, be it pre-arranged or on the spur of the moment; but it must necessarily be before the commission of the crime.

May 30, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SONU @ SUNIL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and K.M. Joseph, JJ. )…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 147, 148, 149, 300, 304, 304 Part I, 323, 307, 326 and 302 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 377(3) – Murder – Restoration of conviction – As the death of deceased was caused by the act of accused No. 5 giving one fatal blow on the head, which was with the intention of causing his death or causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, the case would be covered by Section 304 Part I, IPC. This Court disapprove that approach of the High Court – Appeal allowed.

May 8, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Appellant Vs. MEHRAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 34, 302, 363, 364A – Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 65(B) and 114 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 313 – Kidnapping and death – Modification in sentence – Motive of the accused to take life was to become rich by not doing hard work but by demanding ransom after kidnapping a young, innocent boy of 8 years – Present case falls short of the “rarest of rare” cases where a death sentence alone deserves to be awarded to the appellants – SC Commutes Death Sentence To Life Imprisonment Without Remission For 25 Yrs

Apr 26, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ARVIND SINGH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra and Hemant Gupta, JJ.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 307 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 25 – Culpable homicide – Appellant aimed the gun towards the roof and then fired. It was an unfortunate case of mis­firing. HELD The appellant is, thus, guilty of an act, the likely consequences of which including causing fatal injuries to the persons being in a close circuit, are attributable to him. The offence committed by the appellant, thus, would amount to ‘culpable homicide’ within the meaning of Section 299,

Mar 18, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BHAGWAN SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI., B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant., JJ. )…

I P C

Medical Professionals Should Not Be Dragged Into Criminal Proceedings Unless Negligence Of A High Order Is Shown: SC HELD in case of criminal negligence against a medical professional it must be shown that the accused did something or failed to do something in the given facts and circumstances of the case which no medical professional in his ordinary senses and prudence would have done or failed to do

Feb 16, 2020 sclaw

Medical Professionals Should Not Be Dragged Into Criminal Proceedings Unless Negligence Of A High Order Is Shown: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 16 Feb 2020 7:22 PM The Supreme…

I P C

Criminal Trial Law Does Not Taboo Adopting Of The Alternate Pleas By Accused HELD a murder accused can take a plea that he was not at all involved in the act which resulted in the death of the deceased, but that does not deprive him/her of the right to establish the fact that the case against him would still be embraced within any of the exceptions under Section 300 IPC.

Jan 26, 2020 sclaw

[Criminal Trial] Law Does Not Taboo Adopting Of The Alternate Pleas By Accused: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 26 Jan 2020 8:27 PM The law does not taboo adopting…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 25 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 313 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 27 and 106 – Murder of wife – Burden of Proof – Where an offence like murder is committed in secrecy inside a house, the initial burden to establish the case would undoubtedly be upon the prosecution, but the nature and amount of evidence to be led by it to establish the charge cannot be of the same degree as is required in other cases of circumstantial evidence.

Jan 22, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAWAB — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 884 of…

You missed

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — Claim Petition — Standard of Proof — In motor vehicle accident claims, the standard of proof is based on preponderance of probabilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt — However, claimants must establish three elements: (i) occurrence of accident; (ii) involvement of the specific offending vehicle; and (iii) rash and negligent act of the driver — Mere occurrence of the accident alone is insufficient if the involvement of the vehicle and negligence are not established. (Paras 5, 7, 8, 16)

Dec 15, 2025 sclaw
Service

Service Law — Compassionate Appointment — Nature of right — Appointment on compassionate bases is a concession, not a matter of right, and serves as an exception to the general rule of public employment under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India — Core objective is to enable the dependent family to tide over sudden financial crisis following the death of the employee, providing relief against destitution — It is not intended to provide a post much less a post held by the deceased or a higher post based on educational qualification. (Paras 3, 7, 7.1, 7.3, 11)

Dec 15, 2025 sclaw
G S T

Goods and Services Tax (GST) — Exemption Notification — Notification No. 9/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 — Entry 13 — Exemption on services by way of renting of residential dwelling for use as residence — Renting residential property as hostel to students/working professionals — Conditions for exemption: renting service, residential dwelling, and use as residence — The term “residential dwelling” is not defined under GST laws but refers to any residential accommodation for long-term stay, excluding commercial places, hotels, guesthouses for temporary stay — Property comprising 42 rooms rented out and sub-leased for use as hostel accommodation is considered a “residential dwelling” as its nature and use remain residential, not commercial accommodation like a hotel. (Paras 36, 46, 47, 50)

Dec 14, 2025 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 31(7)(a) and (b) — Power of Arbitral Tribunal to grant interest — Party Autonomy — Pre-award (pendente lite) interest — Section 31(7)(a) mandates that the Arbitral Tribunal’s discretion to award interest on the sum awarded (from date cause of action arose till date of award) is subject to the agreement between the parties (“unless otherwise agreed by the parties”) — When parties specify a contractual rate of interest in the agreement, subject to no legal bar, this stipulation takes precedence over the Arbitrator’s discretion to deem a rate “reasonable” — Arbitral Tribunal is bound by the contractual terms regarding interest once agreed upon, and the borrower cannot later challenge the rate as unconscionable or against public policy, especially in commercial transactions between parties of equal bargaining power — Post-award interest is governed by Section 31(7)(b) (Paras 51, 53, 56, 64, 65, 70).

Dec 14, 2025 sclaw