Supreme Court of India Judgements

46635 Judgements hosted as on 02/10/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 376 – Disclosure of identity of victim – Permissibility – Section 228 – A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) makes disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences punishable. Printing or publishing name of any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under Sections 376, 376 – A, 376 – B, 376 – C, or 376 – D is alleged or found to have been committed can be punished

May 28, 2017 sclaw

  AIR 2003 SC 4684 : (2004) CriLJ 1 : (2003) 2 JT 493 Supp : (2003) 8 SCALE 735 : (2003) 8 SCC 551 : (2003) 4 SCR 792…

I P C

Murder and Robbery—Accused threw deceased in the canal—No evidence that there has been any intention to cause death—Case falls under Section 304, Part II IPC. FIR—Delay in lodging of—Mere delay in lodging the first information report, cannot be held to be fatal to the prosecution case.

May 21, 2017 sclaw

2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 2914 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia The Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.Sudershan Reddy Criminal Appeal No. 1107 of 2007…

I P C

The Trial Court has found that when the version, as regards the recovery was truthfully and fully corroborated, was acceptable and there was no reason to reject the version of the witness – The medical evidence substantially establishes the intention of the accused to eliminate the deceased and the injuries sustained by the deceased discloses the coordinated vengeance with which the assault was caused by the Appellants, in order to ensure that the deceased did not survive – Appeals dismissed.

May 14, 2017 sclaw

  (2013) 5 ABR 841 : (2013) 7 AD 664 : AIR 2013 SC 3510 : (2013) CriLJ 4011 : (2013) 8 SCALE 131 : (2013) 12 SCC 721 SUPREME…

I P C

Common Intention–Only be inferred from the circumstances appearing from the proved facts of the case and the proved circumstances. Common Intention–The acts may be different in character, but must have been actuated by one and the same common intention in order to attract the provision.

May 14, 2017 sclaw

  2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 2829 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (VACATION BENCH) Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain Criminal Appeal No.…

I P C

Delay in lodging of FIR was bound to occur as the FIR was filed after return of prosecutrix from Jaipur after one and a half years remaining under the ordain of accused/appellant – She had been forced to indulge in prostitution during this period – Prosecutrix had become habitual to sexual intercourse – In such a fact-situation, question of having any physical injury marks would not arise – Offences punishable under Section 366 and 376 proved beyond reasonable doubt – Appeal dismissed.

May 14, 2017 sclaw

  AIR 2009 SC 2729 : (2009) CriLJ 3942 : (2009) 7 JT 491 : (2009) 8 SCALE 801 : (2009) 15 SCC 543 : (2009) AIRSCW 4182 SUPREME COURT…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) read with Section 11(9) —Dispute over a contractual agreement — The main issue is whether the contract was breached and if so, what remedies are available —The petitioner argues that the respondent failed to fulfill their obligations under the contract —The respondent contends that they met all contractual requirements and that any issues were due to the petitioner’s actions —The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, finding that the respondent breached the contract —The court based its decision on the evidence presented, which showed that the respondent did not meet the contractual terms —The court applied principles of contract law, focusing on the obligations and duties outlined in the agreement —The court awarded damages to the petitioner and ordered the respondent to fulfill their contractual obligations.

Oct 2, 2024 sclaw
Advocates Act Constitution

In view of the said Notice/Circular dated 30.12.2022 and in furtherance of the afore-stated order passed by the Coordinate Bench, it is directed that the Advocates on-Record may mark the appearances of only those Advocates who are authorized to appear and argue the case on the particular day of hearing. Such names shall be given by the Advocate on Record on each day of hearing of the case as instructed in the Notice. If there is any change in the name of the arguing Advocate, it shall be duty of the concerned Advocate-on-Record to inform the concerned Court Master in advance or at the time of hearing of the case. The concerned Officers/Court Masters shall act accordingly.

Oct 2, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 420 — Passports Act, 1967 — Section 12(2) — The appellant was convicted for abetting the issuance of a second passport to a person already possessing a passport — The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and acquitted appellant due to insufficient evidence proving her guilt beyond reasonable doubt — Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires each circumstance to be proven beyond reasonable doubt and the circumstances taken together should lead to an irresistible inference of guilt — Under Section 12(2), the prosecution bears the burden of proving that the accused knowingly furnished false information or suppressed material information with the intent to secure a passport or travel document — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court, and acquitted appellant of the offences alleged against her.

Oct 2, 2024 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) read with Section 11(9) —Dispute over a contractual agreement — The main issue is whether the contract was breached and if so, what remedies are available —The petitioner argues that the respondent failed to fulfill their obligations under the contract —The respondent contends that they met all contractual requirements and that any issues were due to the petitioner’s actions —The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, finding that the respondent breached the contract —The court based its decision on the evidence presented, which showed that the respondent did not meet the contractual terms —The court applied principles of contract law, focusing on the obligations and duties outlined in the agreement —The court awarded damages to the petitioner and ordered the respondent to fulfill their contractual obligations.

Oct 2, 2024 sclaw