Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 376(2)(n) and 506 – Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the FIR, holding that the complainant was a mature and intelligent woman who consented to the relations with the appellant during the subsistence of her earlier marriage – The Court also relied on a similar case, Naim Ahamed v. State (NCT of Delhi), where the accused was not held guilty of rape on false promise of marriage.

Mar 9, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH XXXX — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Acquittal I P C SC/ST

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 306 – Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 3(2)(v) – Abetment of suicide – Necessary ingredients – This court ruled that the charge under the SC/ST Act was unwarranted because the prosecution did not allege that the offence under the IPC was committed based on the deceased’s caste – The court also found that the allegations in the suicide note were not sufficient to establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC – Appeal Allowed.

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRABHAT KUMAR MISHRA @ PRABHAT MISHRA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep…

Food Safety and Standards Act I P C

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) – Sections 3(zz), 59 and 89 – Penal Code, 1860(IPC) – FSSA is a comprehensive and exhaustive legislation on all aspects of food and food safety, and that Section 89 of the FSSA gives an overriding effect to its provisions over any other law, including the IPC, in so far as the law applies to the aspects of food covered by the FSSA

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAM NATH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ.…

I P C

High court had not applied the correct standard of proof for invoking Section 319 CrPC, which requires more than a prima facie case but short of evidence that would lead to conviction – The supreme court also noted that the allegations against the appellants were vague and omnibus and that the trial court order was well reasoned and not perverse.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH N. MANOGAR AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma,…

Cr P C I P C

Forging a power of attorney and a sale deed – High Court erred in assuming that there was no criminality involved in the alleged offences and that the matter was purely civil in nature – The Supreme Court also clarifies that the Sub-Registrar had the authority to initiate prosecution under the Registration Act, 1908, and that the quashing of the circular on which the Sub-Registrar relied did not affect the merits of the case.

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAVIN KUMAR RAI — Appellant Vs. SURENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I P C

Respondent appears to have been hurt in view of the statements made by the petitioner generally about Gujarati people – Now, after the petitioner has explained the context in which he made the statements and after withdrawal of those statements, in the facts of the case, it is unjust to continue the prosecution – No purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution – Defamation complaint quashed – Appeal

Feb 25, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TEJASHWI PRASAD YADAV — Appellant Vs. HARESHBHAI PRANSHANKAR MEHTA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Transfer Petition…

I P C

Deposition would reveal that after the other accused assaulted the deceased with sword, A-3 came thereafter and assaulted the deceased with stone lying there – Prosecution has not been in a position to establish that A-3 shared the common intention with the other accused to cause the murder of the deceased – Appeal of A-3 is allowed by altering the conviction under Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC.

Feb 18, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VELTHEPU SRINIVAS AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF TELANGANA) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai…

I P C

Rape with a 7 year old girl in temple – Petitioner-convict was aged 40 years on the date of occurrence and he took the victim to a temple, unmindful of the holiness of the place disrobed her and himself and then committed the crime – in terms of the provisions under Section 376 AB, IPC when a sentence of imprisonment for a term not less than 20 years which may extend upto life imprisonment is imposed, the convict is also liable to suffer a sentence of fine which shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim – Conviction under Section 376 AB, IPC was upheld with the sentence modified to 30 years of rigorous imprisonment – Petition partly allowed.

Feb 18, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHAGGI @ BHAGIRATH @ NARAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, JJ.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323 and 325 – Grievous injury – Reduction of sentence – Taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, coupled with the fact that underlying incident occurred in 2010, the appeal is allowed in part and the Impugned Order is modified to the extent that the Appellants’ sentence is reduced to the period already undergone i.e., 1 (one) month; and 3 (three) days.

Feb 18, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ABDUL JABBAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw