Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: I P C

I P C

Complaint to SDM — Held, no case is made out to put the appellant to trial for the alleged offence — No defamation as such — Exception 8 to Section 499 clearly indicates that it is not a defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with regard to the subject-matter of accusation.

Aug 15, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before: J.B. Pardiwala & Manoj Misra, JJ. Criminal Appeal No.2291 of 2011 Decided on: 02.08.2023 Kishore Balkrishna Nand – Appellant(s) Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr.…

I P C

Abkari Act – Offence in question is 2003, Final report after delayed investigation was submitted in 2006, Accused-appellant was convicted in 2008, and that more than 20 years have passed since the commission of the offence – It fit to modify the sentence of the Accused-appellant to serve a period of three months – Appeal partly allowed.

Aug 13, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATHYAN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2363…

Cr P C I P C

Release of rosewood logs and lorry – Illicit rosewood logs. 37 such logs were found beneath 92 bunches of bananas and 26 bags of rice husk – Lorry nor the rosewood logs are available as both have been sold by the state and the amount is lying with the exchequer, hence cannot be returned back – Release order upheld.

Aug 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASSISTANT WILD LIFE WARDEN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. K. K. MOIDEEN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh…

Cr P C I P C

Quashing of FIR – Rape – Victim has not furnished any information in regard to the date and time of the commission of the alleged offence – Investigation is over and charge sheet is ready to be filed before the competent court – Although the allegations levelled in the FIR do not inspire any confidence more particularly in the absence of any specific date, time, etc. of the alleged offences – Quashed

Aug 10, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH IQBAL @ BALA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ.…

Cr P C I P C

If the entire case of the prosecution is believed or accepted to be true, none of the ingredients to constitute the offence of dacoity punishable under Section 395 of the IPC is made out – None of the ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 365, 342 and 506 respectively of the IPC are disclosed on plain reading of the FIR – FIR is nothing but abuse of the process of law – FIR quashed.

Aug 10, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HAJI IQBAL @ BALA THROUGH S.P.O.A. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala,…

I P C

Weapon used in the crime is a stick which was lying in the house, and which, by no means, can be called a deadly weapon – Possibility of accused causing the death of the deceased while being deprived of the power of self-control, due to the provocation on account of the deceased not agreeing to pay Rs.500/- to daughter, cannot be ruled out – Sentence already undergone would serve the ends of justice – Appeal allowed.

Aug 6, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NIRMALA DEVI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 – Ss 302 & 304-I – Army Act, 1950 – Section 69 – Murder – Conviction and Sentence – Alteration of – Appellant-accused contended that case will be governed by exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC as the incident was an outcome of a sudden fight and he acted in a heat of passion – Conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC is altered to the one under Part 1 of Section 304 of IPC

Jul 30, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NO.15138812Y L/NK GURSEWAK SINGH — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw