Category: 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.

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…

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.

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.…

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.

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. )…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420, 498A and 506 – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – Sections 3 and 4 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Phenomenon of false implication by way of general omnibus allegations in the course of matrimonial disputes is not unknown to this Court – A bare perusal of the complaint, statement of witnesses’ and the charge-sheet shows that the allegations against the Appellants are wholly general and omnibus in nature; even if they are taken in their entirety, they do not prima facie make out a case against the Appellants

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAMIDI ANIL KUMAR REDDY — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 – Murder – Unlawful Assembly with Common Object – An overt act of some of the accused persons of an unlawful assembly with the common object to kill the deceased and to cause grievous hurt to the other family members is enough to rope in all of them for an offence under Section 302 IPC in aid with Section 149 IPC

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HAALESH @ HALESHI @ KURUBARA HALESHI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ.…

Rape – Consensual relationship -The appellant contended a valid Nikah with the second respondent and sought the quashing of the proceedings – The court examined the evidence, emphasizing the consensual nature of the relationship from 2013 to 2017 – The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant in a case of rape and other offences

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHEIKH ARIF — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. )…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 482 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420, 468, 471 read with Section 34 – Passports Act, 1967 – Section 12(b) – Quashing of FIR – Wife forged her husband’s signatures in order to obtain a passport for their minor child – In order to attract the provisions of Section 420 IPC, the prosecution has to not only prove that the accused has cheated someone but also that by doing so, he has dishonestly induced the person who is cheated to deliver property – FIR quashed – Appeal allowed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MARIAM FASIHUDDIN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE BY ADUGODI POLICE STATION AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and Dipankar Datt,…

The court found the prosecution’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for kidnapping, attempted murder, and robbery, but had doubts about the evidence’s sufficiency to prove the intention of demanding ransom. The court acquitted the appellants of the charge under Section 364A of the IPC while upholding their convictions for other offences.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEERAJ SHARMA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.…

You missed