Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Unlawful Assembly–Common Object–Expression “Knew”– Even if the offence committed is not in direct prosecution of the common object of the assembly, it may yet fall under Section 141 IPC, if it can be held that the offence was such as the members knew was likely to be committed.

Apr 8, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC)  1071 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta Criminal Appeal No. 359 of…

I P C

Murder—Essential ingredients to bring a case under Section 300″thirdly” IPC; enumerated.Even if the intention of accused was limited to the infliction of a bodily injury sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, and did not extend to the intention of causing death, the offence would be murder.

Apr 8, 2017 sclaw

  2007(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 853 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia Criminal Appeal No. 214…

You missed

Constitution Service

Judicial Services – Judicial Appointment – Minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test for appointment to the District Judiciary in the States of Bihar and Gujarat – The petitioners argue that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is arbitrary and unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution – The respondents argue that the selection process is legally valid and in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations – The court concludes that the prescription of minimum qualifying marks for viva voce is permissible and is not in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others – The court also finds that the impugned selection process in the State of Bihar and Gujarat is legally valid and is upheld – The court further concludes that the non-consultation with the Public Service Commission would not render the Gujarat Rules, 2005 (as amended in 2011) void – The writ petitions are dismissed without any order on cost.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
Matrimonial

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1)(ia) – Divorce based on irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Ground of Irretrievable Breakdown – The court recognized irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a valid ground for divorce, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – This expands the scope of grounds for divorce and provides a more compassionate approach to ending a marriage that has irreparably broken down.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 – Murder of Wife – The court held that the prosecution successfully established the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt – The court pointed out that the incident occurred inside the appellant’s house, and the deceased was found in a pool of blood- The court also noted that the appellant failed to disclose the involvement of any unknown intruders to the police – The court rejected the defence’s argument that the incident was a result of a sudden fight, stating that the appellant took undue advantage and acted in a cruel manner.- The court applied Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, which places the burden of proof on the person who claims to have special knowledge of the facts.The case was based on circumstantial evidence, and the court found the appellant guilty of murder – False Explanation – The appellant’s false explanation regarding the incident was considered an additional incriminating circumstance.

May 11, 2024 sclaw
Cr P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 406, 498A and 506 – Cruelty – Quashing of Chargesheet based on an FIR lodged by the appellant’s wife – The main issue is whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant should be quashed based on the allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty – The appellant argues that the FIR is vague, general, and lacks specific instances of criminal conduct – It is claimed to be a counterblast to a divorce petition and a domestic violence case, with an unexplained delay in filing the FIR indicating malice – The respondent contends that the allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offence and the truthfulness of these allegations should be determined by the trial court – The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, finding them to be an abuse of process and a travesty of justice – The Court reasoned that the allegations were made with an oblique motive and that continuing the proceedings would be unjust – The Court applied the principles from previous cases, emphasizing the need to scrutinize allegations in matrimonial disputes carefully and to prevent misuse of legal provisions – The Court concluded that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should have been exercised by the High Court to quash the proceedings and called for a relook at the relevant legal provisions to address the pragmatic realities of matrimonial disputes.

May 11, 2024 sclaw