Criminal Law Supreme Court of India Judgments

Posted on July 31, 2023 by MediumPulse Medium Pulse News

Criminal Law Supreme Court of India Judgments

1MS. INDIRA JAISING Vs SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 434
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH,ARAVIND KUMAR
proceedings of the case; pro bono work done by the advocate concerned; domain expertise of the applicant advocate in various branches of law, such as Constitutional law, Inter-State Water Disputes, criminal law , Arbitration law, Corporate law, Family law, Human Rights, Public Interest
Date of decision : 12-05-2023 | Case Number : MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION/709/2022 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
2  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SANJAY DUBEY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 939
Judge Name: KRISHNA MURARI,AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
tests viz. lie detection, brain-mapping and narco-analysis was not only in contravention of the first principles of criminal law jurisprudence but also a violation of statutory requirements and thus, the bail granted to the accused was cancelled. The facts of the instant case are quite
Date of decision : 11-05-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1466/2023 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
3SRI GULAM MUSTAFA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 354
Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
of a very stringent statute, like the SC/ST Act, which imposes serious penal consequences on the concerned accused – Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – criminal law . Allowing the appeal, the Court Held: 1.1 The mere fact that the offense is covered
Date of decision : 10-05-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1452/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
4DIGAMBAR Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 96
Judge Name: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,VIKRAM NATH,SANJAY KAROL
A B C D E F G H 96 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 4 S.C.R.[2023] 4 S.C.R. 96 96 DIGAMBAR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (Criminal Appeal Nos. 221-222 of 2022) APRIL 28, 2023 [B. R. GAVAI, VIKRAM NATH AND SANJAY KAROL, JJ.] criminal law – ‘Rarest of rare’ case – When not – One ‘P’ was
Date of decision : 28-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/221/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
5P. V. NIDHISH & ORS. Vs KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD & ANR. – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 547
Judge Name: S. RAVINDRA BHAT,DIPANKAR DATTA
oblivion or of pardon. They are certainly retrospective, and literally both concerning and after the facts committed. But I do not consider any law ex post facto within the prohibition that mollifies the rigour of the criminal law , but only those that create or aggravate the crime, or increase the
Date of decision : 28-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/309/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
6RAVINDER SINGH Vs THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 480
Judge Name: ABHAY S. OKA,SANJAY KUMAR
of his conviction for the offences under Sections 376, 377 and 506 IPC. 6. Section 376(2) IPC, prior to its amendment with retrospective effect from 03.02.2013 by the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013, consisted of clauses (a) to (g). Section 376(2)(f), as it stood then, provided that whoever
Date of decision : 25-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1031/2023 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
7  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SURENDRA SINGH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 354
Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,C.T. RAVIKUMAR
High Court set aside – Judgment of the Trial Court convicting the respondent for offences u/ss. 147, 323 and 302/149, IPC restored – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.319. criminal law – Delay in lodging FIR – Plea of the accused that there was delay of 3 ½ days in lodging FIR – Held: Delay
Date of decision : 11-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1059/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
8PRAMOD SINGLA Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 793
Judge Name: KRISHNA MURARI,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
the relevant statutory provisions allowing for submitting a representation are vitiated – In cases of preventive detention, every procedural irregularity, keeping in mind the principles of Article 21 and 22(5), must be accrued in favour of the detenue. criminal law – Preventive detention laws
Date of decision : 10-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1051/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
9  English           ਪੰਜਾਬੀ – Punjabi Disclaimer
STATE OF PUNJAB Vs DIL BAHADUR – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 766
Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,C.T. RAVIKUMAR
of law, depending on the concept of proportionality that the law recognises. It can never be forgotten that the purpose of criminal law legislated by the competent legislatures, subject to judicial scrutiny within constitutionally established parameters, is to protect the collective interest and
Date of decision : 28-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/844/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
10  English           ગુજરાતી – Gujarati Disclaimer
STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS Vs RAJESH AGARWAL & ORS – [2023] 7 S.C.R. 476
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,HIMA KOHLI
ultimate decision on fraud is rendered by a competent court of law. d. Principles of natural justice are not applicable at the stage of setting the process of criminal law in motion. Since the lender bank is an injured party in case of fraudulent accounts, it has the right to report the crime to
Date of decision : 27-03-2023 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7300/2022 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
11  English           മലയാളം – Malayalam Disclaimer
CARDINAL MAR GEORGE ALENCHERRY Vs STATE OF KERALA & ANR. – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 1014
Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,BELA M. TRIVEDI
(cognizance) is of indefinite import. It has no 1 (2008) 2 SCC 492 A B C D E F G H 1025 esoteric or mystic significance in criminal law . It merely means “become aware of” and when used with reference to a court or a Judge, it connotes “to take notice of judicially”. It indicates the point
Date of decision : 17-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/836/2023 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
12PAWAN KUMAR CHOURASIA Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 875
Judge Name: ABHAY S. OKA,RAJESH BINDAL
A B C D E F G H 875[2023] 2 S.C.R. 875 875 PAWAN KUMAR CHOURASIA v. STATE OF BIHAR (Criminal Appeal No. 2230 of 2010) MARCH 14, 2023 [ABHAY S. OKA AND RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.] criminal law – Evidence – Extra-Judicial Confession – Conviction based on, when not justified – Appellant was
Date of decision : 14-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2230/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
13PREMCHAND Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 119
Judge Name: S. RAVINDRA BHAT,DIPANKAR DATTA
on record that one of the injuries was grievous, yet, the criminal law was surprisingly not set in motion to bring to book those responsible for inflicting such injury. It was in a sudden quarrel, which could have been provoked by the victim and P.W.2, that blows followed from each side. Most
Date of decision : 03-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/211/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
14THE STATE OF CHATTISGARH & ANR Vs AMAN KUMAR SINGH & ORS. ETC. ETC – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 134
Judge Name: S. RAVINDRA BHAT,DIPANKAR DATTA
investigation to be taken to its logical conclusion and leave the aggrieved party to pursue the remedy made available by law at an appropriate stage. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Disproportionate assets case – Importance of preliminary enquiry – Discussed. criminal law – Inept drafting of FIR
Date of decision : 01-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/646/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
15ROYDEN HAROLD BUTHELLO & ANR. Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS. – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 150
Judge Name: A.S. BOPANNA,AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
A B C D E F G H 150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 3 S.C.R. [2023] 3 S.C.R. 150 150 ROYDEN HAROLD BUTHELLO & ANR. v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No.634 of 2023) FEBRUARY 28, 2023 [A. S. BOPANNA AND AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, JJ.] criminal law – Investigation by CBI
Date of decision : 28-02-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/634/2023 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
16SUNIL SAINI & ORS. Vs THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. – [2023] 1 S.C.R. 1105
Judge Name: K.M. JOSEPH,B.V. NAGARATHNA
State. One of the fundamental methods by which Rule of law is preserved consists of sanctions of which the criminal law is the A B C D E F G H 1109 principal branch. The criminal courts must be allowed to function in a manner by which at the end of the day the guilty are punished and
Date of decision : 30-01-2023 | Case Number : TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL)/125/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
17  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BIMLA TIWARI Vs STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. – [2023] 1 S.C.R. 501
Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,HRISHIKESH ROY
A B C D E F G H 501 501 BIMLA TIWARI v. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. (SLP (Criminal) No. 834 – 835 of 2023) JANUARY 16, 2023 [DINESH MAHESHWARI AND HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.] Bail – Pre-arrest bail and regular bail – Grant of – Considerations – Held: The process of criminal law cannot be
Date of decision : 16-01-2023 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/834/2023 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
18PRAKASH NAYI @ SEN Vs STATE OF GOA – [2023] 1 S.C.R. 823
Judge Name: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,M.M. SUNDRESH
to the law. The aforesaid provision is founded on the maxim, actus non reum facit nisi mens sit rea, i.e., an act does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty intention. It is a fundamental principle of criminal law that there has to be an element of mens rea in forming guilt with intention
Date of decision : 12-01-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2010/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
19PAWAN KUMAR GOEL Vs STATE OF U. P. & ANOTHER – [2022] 10 S.C.R. 102
Judge Name: KRISHNA MURARI,BELA M. TRIVEDI
before a person can be subjected to criminal process. A liability under Section 141 of the Act is sought to be fastened vicariously on a person connected with a company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A
Date of decision : 17-11-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1999/2022 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
20ASHOK KUMAR SINGH CHANDEL Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2022] 12 S.C.R. 1035
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
of justice. Appeal – Appeal against acquittal by trial court – Jurisdiction of the High Court – Discussed. criminal law – Motive – Sufficiency or insufficiency of motive does not have a direct bearing on the actual evidence against the accused, particularly when the prosecution relies on direct
Date of decision : 04-11-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/946/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
21THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Vs DR. MAROTI S/O KASHINATH PIMPALKAR – [2022] 8 S.C.R. 821
Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR
punishment and hence be held liable under the ordinary criminal law and prompt action be taken against them, in accordance with law.” 14. In Vijay Madanlal Choudhary’s case(supra), this Court observed that the length of punishment is not only the indicator of the gravity of offence and it is
Date of decision : 02-11-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1874/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
22THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs SHAILENDRA KUMAR RAI @ PANDAV RAI – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 1033
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,HIMA KOHLI
and is true. criminal law – Evidence –Witnesses – Victim raped and set on fire – Family members of the victim-deceased and other persons known to her were declared hostile – Effect of, if any on prosecution’s case – Factors responsible for witnesses turning hostile – Discussed. Penal Code
Date of decision : 31-10-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1441/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
23SUBRAMANYA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2022] 14 S.C.R. 828
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,J.B. PARDIWALA
legal approach must be adopted and suspicion, however, grave, must not be allowed to take the place of proof. As we have already indicated, it has been a recognised principle of administration of criminal law in this country for over half a century that the confession of a co-accused person cannot
Date of decision : 13-10-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/242/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
24RAMANAND @ NANDLAL BHARTI Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2022] 5 S.C.R. 162
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,J.B. PARDIWALA
fundamental and basic presumption in the administration of criminal law and justice delivery system is the innocence of the alleged accused and till the charges are proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of clear, cogent, credible or unimpeachable evidence, the question of indicting or
Date of decision : 13-10-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/64/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
25VIJAY RAJMOHAN Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBI, ACB, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU – [2022] 19 S.C.R. 563
Judge Name: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
sanctioning authority stultifies judicial scrutiny and determination of the allegations against corrupt official and thus the legitimacy of the judicial institutions is eroded. It, thus, deprives a citizen of his legitimate and fundamental right to get justice by setting the criminal law in motion and
Date of decision : 11-10-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1746/2022 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
26MUNIKRISHNA @ KRISHNA ETC. Vs STATE BY ULSOOR PS – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 415
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,SUDHANSHU DHULIA
Appellate Court wrongly placed reliance on the voluntary statements of the accused and their videography statements – Orders passed by Trial Court and High Court set aside – Appellants be released from jail, unless wanted in some other crime. criminal law – Evidence – Circumstantial Evidence
Date of decision : 30-09-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1597/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
27CHOTKAU Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2022] 9 S.C.R. 601
Judge Name: S. ABDUL NAZEER,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
keep the Magistrate in the loop of his ongoing investigation. The object is to avoid a possible foul play. The Magistrate has a role to play under Section 159 of Cr.PC. 27. The first information report in a criminal case starts the process of investigation by letting the criminal law into motion
Date of decision : 28-09-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/361/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
28S. P. MANI AND MOHAN DAIRY Vs DR.SNEHALATHA ELANGOVAN – [2022] 9 S.C.R. 634
Judge Name: SURYA KANT,J.B. PARDIWALA
the case of SMS Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla, (2005) 8 SCC 89. Relying on the said decision of this Court, the learned counsel would submit that the deeming fiction creating criminal lability and vicarious lability are a departure from the usual principles of criminal law and that a clear
Date of decision : 16-09-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1586/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
29VIJAYA Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2022] 7 S.C.R. 367
Judge Name: SURYA KANT,HRISHIKESH ROY
affords moral certainty to the judge. 11. Francis Wharton, a celebrated writer on criminal law in United States has quoted from judicial pronouncements in his book on “Wharton’s Criminal Evidence” as follows (at page 31, volume 1 of the 12th Edition): It is difficult to define the phrase
Date of decision : 15-09-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1573/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
30P. DHARAMARAJ Vs SHANMUGAM & ORS. – [2022] 9 S.C.R. 972
Judge Name: S. ABDUL NAZEER,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
criminal law would not have left the offences under the P.C. Act, out of the final report. The attempt of the I.O. appears to be of one, “willing to strike but afraid to wound” (the opposite of what Alexander Pope wrote in “Epistle to Dr.Arbuthnot”)15. 46. An argument was sought to be advanced
Date of decision : 08-09-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1514/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
31  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Vs PHOOL SINGH – [2022] 11 S.C.R. 140
Judge Name: S. RAVINDRA BHAT,SUDHANSHU DHULIA
departmental proceedings. The degree of proof which is necessary to order a conviction is different from the degree of proof necessary to record the commission of delinquency. The rule relating to appreciation of evidence in the two proceedings is also not similar. In criminal law , burden of proof is on
Date of decision : 02-09-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5930/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
32DIBAKER NUNIA & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM – [2022] 6 S.C.R. 1151
Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,BELA M. TRIVEDI
authors of the injuries – Order of High Court and Sessions Court set aside – Appellants acquitted. [2022] 6 S.C.R. 1151 1151 A B C D E F G H 1152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 6 S.C.R. criminal law – Concurrent findings of fact – Interference by Supreme Court – When appropriate – Held
Date of decision : 30-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/962/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
33HARKIRAT SINGH GHUMAN Vs PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT & ORS. – [2022] 11 S.C.R. 124
Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR
form bias affecting the impartial evaluation of the candidates in viva-voce and it may always be avoided – On facts, respondents to valuate the marks obtained of question nos. 1,2,3 and 5 of Paper V [2022] 11 S.C.R. 124 124 A B C D E F G H 125 ( criminal law ) (out of total 160 marks
Date of decision : 29-08-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5874/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
34RAJBIR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF PUNJAB – [2022] 11 S.C.R. 80
Judge Name: HEMANT GUPTA,VIKRAM NATH
below committed error in recording conviction – Appellant extended benefit of doubt – Judgments of the High Court and the Trial Court set aside – Appellant acquitted. criminal law – Case of poisoning – Circumstantial evidence – Principles laid down in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of
Date of decision : 24-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2152/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
35UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Vs M/s. GANPATI DEALCOM PVT. LTD. – [2022] 12 S.C.R. 320
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,KRISHNA MURARI,HIMA KOHLI
found in India. Broadly, forfeitures can be categorized as civil and criminal. On the civil side, there can be in rem or in personam forfeitures. Punitive forfeitures under the criminal law are in personam. Criminal forfeitures usually take place at the conclusion of a trial, when the guilt of
Date of decision : 23-08-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5783/2022 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
36RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. – [2022] 15 S.C.R. 730
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,J.K. MAHESHWARI,HIMA KOHLI
question of fact and not of untrammelled discretion as to whether in a particular case, the Court should condone the delay. Doctrines/Principles – Cherry picking principle – Selective disclosure is countenanced in law as it amounts to cherry-picking. criminal law – Difference between Legal advice
Date of decision : 05-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1167/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
37JAI PRAKASH TIWARI Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2022] 10 S.C.R. 198
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,KRISHNA MURARI,HIMA KOHLI
accused to have a fair and expeditious trial, the matter is decided on its own merit. [Para 27, 28][213-B-E] 1.10 It is an established principle of criminal law that the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable JAI PRAKASH TIWARI v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH A B C D E
Date of decision : 04-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/704/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
38HONNAIAH T.H. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS – [2022] 6 S.C.R. 1108
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.B. PARDIWALA
criminal law in motion. Rejection of the prayer of the Public Prosecutor to mark the statement as an exhibit would possibly imperil the validity of the FIR. In this background, the order of the trial court declining to mark the A B C D E F G H 1111 statement of the informant as an
Date of decision : 04-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1147/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
39DAUVARAM NIRMALKAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2022] 7 S.C.R. 5
Judge Name: SANJIV KHANNA,BELA M. TRIVEDI
All.E.R. 932 Ashworth, 1975 Criminal LR 558-559 – referred to. Paper on ‘Cumulative Provocation and Partial Defences in English criminal law ’ by George Mousourakis – referred to. Case Law Reference [1966] 1 SCR 134 relied on Para 5 [1962] 1 Suppl. SCR 567 relied on Para 10 [2012] 11 SCR 848
Date of decision : 02-08-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1124/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
40  English           ગુજરાતી – Gujarati Disclaimer
DAXABEN Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 295
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
aggrieved.” 45. In State of Tamil Nadu v. R. Vasanthi Stanley20, this Court held:- “14. … Lack of awareness, knowledge or intent is neither to be considered nor accepted in economic offences. The submission assiduously presented on gender leaves us unimpressed. An offence under the criminal
Date of decision : 29-07-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1061/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
41  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 403
Judge Name: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
with an intent to defraud, as required for conviction u/s.477A, IPC – Order of conviction and sentence passed by Special Judge and confirmed by the High Court set aside – Appellant acquitted of all the charges. criminal law – Concurrent findings of fact – Held: Cannot be interfered with unless
Date of decision : 28-07-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1050/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
42X Vs THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT & ANR. – [2022] 12 S.C.R. 246
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SURYA KANT
that criminal law should not be weaponized to interfere with the domain of personal autonomy. It was observed: “46. While there can be no doubt that in India, marriage is an important social institution, we must also keep our minds open to the fact that there are certain individuals or groups who
Date of decision : 21-07-2022 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)/12612/2022 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
43MOHAMMED ZUBAIR Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS – [2022] 18 S.C.R. 494
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SURYA KANT,A.S. BOPANNA
A B C D E F G H 494 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 18 S.C.R. 494 MOHAMMED ZUBAIR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. (Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 279 of 2022) JULY 20, 2022 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, SURYA KANT AND A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.] criminal law – Multiplicity of proceedings
Date of decision : 20-07-2022 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/279/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
44HIMANSHU KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS – [2022] 11 S.C.R. 724
Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,J.B. PARDIWALA
A B C D E F G H 724 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 11 S.C.R. 724 HIMANSHU KUMAR AND OTHERS v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS (Writ Petition (Criminal) No.103 of 2009) JULY 14, 2022 [A. M. KHANWILKAR AND J. B. PARDIWALA, JJ.] criminal law – Constitution of India – Article 32
Date of decision : 14-07-2022 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/103/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed | Direction Issue : Writ petition dismissed and Interlocutory application disposed of
45ABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYUM ANSARI Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2022] 12 S.C.R. 169
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,M.M. SUNDRESH
12.10.2005 – Held: When reference is made in a set off for adjustment of periods, the reference is to proceedings within the country – The criminal law of the land does not have any extra- territorial application – Conviction and sentence from 18.09.2002 in Portugal had nothing to do with the
Date of decision : 11-07-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/679/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
46DEEPAK YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. & ANR – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,KRISHNA MURARI,HIMA KOHLI
private rights of two individual parties, as in a civil proceeding. The proper enforcement of criminal law is a matter of public interest. We must, therefore, disapprove of the manner in which a succession of orders in the present batch of cases has recorded that counsel for the “respective
Date of decision : 20-05-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/861/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
47SURENDRAN Vs STATE OF KERELA – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 675
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,A.S. BOPANNA,HIMA KOHLI
or the distance of time is not spread over more than 3-4 months the statement may be admissible under Section 32. (3) The second part of clause (1) of Section 32 is yet another exception to the rule that in criminal law the evidence of a person who was not being subjected to or given an
Date of decision : 13-05-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1080/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
48DILIP HARIRAMANI Vs BANK OF BARODA – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 615
Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,SANJIV KHANNA
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. However, vicarious liability in the criminal law in terms of Section 141 of the NI Act cannot be fastened because of the civil liability. Vicarious liability under sub-section (1) to Section 141 of the NI Act can
Date of decision : 09-05-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/767/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
49NARSINGH ISPAT LTD Vs ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR. – [2022] 3 S.C.R. 151
Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,ABHAY S. OKA
applied Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 379, 427, 435 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 17 of the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1908 (for short, ‘the Amendment Act of 1908’). He submitted that it was a case of unlawful association as defined in Section 15 of the Amendment Act of
Date of decision : 02-05-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/10671/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
50ATBIR Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – [2022] 8 S.C.R. 1166
Judge Name: DINESH MAHESHWARI,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
. 15.11.12 – Impugned order passed by the High Court and the order of the Director General of Prisons are set aside – Case of the appellant for grant of furlough is restored for reconsideration of the Director General of Prisons. criminal law – Grant of furlough – Held:In furlough, the prisoner
Date of decision : 29-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/714/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
51JAFARUDHEEN & ORS. Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2022] 5 S.C.R. 721
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,M.M. SUNDRESH
only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters – Thus, appellate court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of trial court rendering acquittal. criminal law : FIR: Delay in sending FIR to Magistrate – FIR starts the process of investigation by setting criminal law into
Date of decision : 22-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/430/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
52DR. (MRS.) CHANDA RANI AKHOURI & ORS. Vs DR. M.A. METHUSETHUPATHI & ORS. – [2022] 5 S.C.R. 812
Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,ABHAY S. OKA
negligence within the domain of criminal law . Res ipsa loquitur has, if at all, a limited application in trial on a charge of criminal negligence.” DR. (MRS.) CHANDA RANI AKHOURI & ORS. v. DR. M.A. METHUSETHUPATHI & ORS. [AJAY RASTOGI, J.] A B C D E F G H 826 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022
Date of decision : 20-04-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6507/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
53VENKATESH @ CHANDRA & ANR. ETC Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 556
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
what A B C D E F G H 557 otherwise is the exclusive domain and function of Courts of law – Any such debate or discussion touching upon matters which are in the domain of Courts would amount to direct interference in administration of criminal justice. criminal law : Approach of Court
Date of decision : 19-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1476/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
54JAGJEET SINGH & ORS Vs ASHISH MISHRA @ MONU & ANR. – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 536
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,HIMA KOHLI
legal aid counsel with adequate experience in criminal law , at the State’s expense. [Paras 43, 44][554-C-F] Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) v. State of Karnataka & Ors. (2019) 2 SCC 752 : [2018] 13 SCR 1; Narendra K. Amin (Dr.) v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (2008) 13 SCC 584 : [2008] 6 SCR 1149
Date of decision : 18-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/632/2022 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
55KAMATCHI Vs LAKSHMI NARAYANAN – [2022] 5 S.C.R. 629
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
of the Special Judge set up under Section 6 of the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1952 (“the 1952 Act”). It was urged that the object underlying the 1952 Act was to provide for a more 18 (2003) 3 SCC 272 19 (2004) 8 SCC 312 20 (2005) 4 SCC 480] A B C D E F G H 649 speedy trial of
Date of decision : 13-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/627/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
56STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs BANWARI LAL AND ANOTHER – [2022] 5 S.C.R. 613
Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,B.V. NAGARATHNA
is observed thus: (SCC p. 674, para 84) STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. BANWARI LAL AND ANOTHER [M. R. SHAH, J.] A B C D E F G H 624 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 5 S.C.R. “84. Sentencing is an important task in the matters of crime. One of the prime objectives of the criminal law is imposition
Date of decision : 08-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/579/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
57MALLADA K SRI RAM Vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. – [2022] 3 S.C.R. 5
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SURYA KANT
jurisdiction u/Art. 226 extends to protecting the personal liberty of persons who demonstrated that the instrumentality of the State was being weaponised for using the force of criminal law . Constitution of India, 1950 – Art.22 – Object and purpose of – Held: Art.22 of the Constitution was specifically
Date of decision : 04-04-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/561/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
58THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR Vs UMESH – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 574
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SURYA KANT
a criminal trial. In a prosecution for an offence punishable under the criminal law , the burden lies on the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The accused is entitled to a presumption of innocence. The purpose of a disciplinary proceeding by an
Date of decision : 22-03-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1763/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
59NAHAR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 795
Judge Name: VINEET SARAN,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
two alternative modes in which the criminal law can be set in motion; by the filing of information with the police under Section 154 of the Code or upon receipt of a complaint or information by a Magistrate. The former would lead to investigation by the police and may culminate in a police
Date of decision : 16-03-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/443/2022 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
60SRI NARENDRA KUMAR A. BALDOTA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 969
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,J.K. MAHESHWARI
conspired with Regional Transport Officer to evade payment of road tax– Petition seeking quashing of proceedings– Dismissed by the High Court – On appeal, held: criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course – Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter – Before
Date of decision : 14-03-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/429/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
61PURAN MAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 859
Judge Name: VINEET SARAN,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
– Penal Code, 1860 – s.302. criminal law – Bail – Grant/rejection of – Guiding principles – Discussed. Niranjan Singh & Anr. vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote & Ors. (1980) 2 SCC 559 : [1980] 3 SCR 15; Ram Govind Upadhyay vs. Sudarshan Singh and Ors. (2002) 3 SCC 598 : [2002] 2 SCR 526; Jaibunisha
Date of decision : 10-03-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/398/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
62HORTICULTURE EXPERIMENT STATION GONIKOPPAL, COORG Vs THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION – [2022] 16 S.C.R. 485
Judge Name: AJAY RASTOGI,ABHAY S. OKA
in agreement with the aforesaid view and in our opinion, what applies to ‘tax delinquency’ equally holds good for the ‘blameworthy’ conduct for contravention of the provisions of FERA, 1947. We, therefore, hold that mens rea (as is understood in criminal law ) is not an essential ingredient for
Date of decision : 23-02-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2136/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
63M/S TRL KROSAKI REFRACTORIES LTD Vs M/S SMS ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 268
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,A.S. BOPANNA,HIMA KOHLI
Pharma (P} Ltd., (2002) 1 SCC 234, had taken note of an earlier decision of this Court in Vishwa Mitter vs. O.P. Poddar, (1983) 4 SCC 701 wherein it was held that anyone can set the criminal law in motion by filing a complaint of facts constituting an offence, before a Magistrate entitled to take
Date of decision : 22-02-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/270/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
64M/S APEX LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT – II – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 126
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT
-givers had breached Parliament’s privilege and been guilty of its contempt and it should be left to Parliament to deal with them. By the same sets of acts the alleged bribe-takers and the alleged bribe-givers committed offences under the criminal law and breaches of Parliament’s privileges and
Date of decision : 22-02-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1554/2022 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
65KRISHNAMURTHY @ GUNODU AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 433
Judge Name: SANJIV KHANNA,BELA M. TRIVEDI
resulting in his death. 8. The underlying basic assumption or foundation in criminal law is the principle of personal culpability. A person is criminally responsible for act or transactions in which he is personally engaged or in some other way had participated. However, there are various modes and
Date of decision : 16-02-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/288/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
66JAIKAM KHAN Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2021] 14 S.C.R. 767
Judge Name: L. NAGESWARA RAO,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,B.V. NAGARATHNA
A B C D E F G H 767[2021] 14 S.C.R. 767 767 JAIKAM KHAN v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (Criminal Appeal No. 434-436 of 2020) DECEMBER 15, 2021 [L. NAGESWARA RAO, B.R. GAVAI AND B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.] criminal law – Murder – Interested and related witnesses – Deceased had four
Date of decision : 15-12-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/434/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off | Direction Issue : Allowing the appeals filed by accused persons while dismissing that of the P.W-1, the Court
67N. RAGHAVENDER Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CBI – [2021] 12 S.C.R. 57
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,HIMA KOHLI
failed to prove charges u/ss.409, 420 & 477A, IPC against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction u/ s.13(2) r/w s.13(1)(d), PC Act also cannot be sustained. criminal law – Mixed questions of law and facts – Concurrent view taken by Courts below – Scope of interference – Discussed. A
Date of decision : 13-12-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/5/2010 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
68GULAB Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2021] 9 S.C.R. 678
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.S. BOPANNA,VIKRAM NATH
– Discussed. criminal law – Evidence – Eye-witnesses – Related witnesses – Held: Mere fact that relatives of the deceased are the only witnesses is not sufficient to discredit their cogent testimonies. criminal law – Use of firearm – Non-examination of ballistic expert – Held: Failure to produce a
Date of decision : 09-12-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/81/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
69SUNIL TODI & ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. – [2021] 9 S.C.R. 1086
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.S. BOPANNA
Mohammad Tunda21, this Court followed the dictum in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate22, and observed that setting the criminal law in motion against a person is a serious matter. Hence, there must be an application of mind by the Magistrate to whether the allegations in the complaint
Date of decision : 03-12-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1446/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
70BOMBAY HOSPITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE Vs ASHA JAISWAL & ORS. – [2021] 10 S.C.R. 1118
Judge Name: HEMANT GUPTA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
actions relating to negligence. It cannot be pressed in service for determining per se the liability for negligence within the domain of criminal law . Res ipsa loquitur has, if at all, a limited application in trial on a charge of criminal negligence.” 31. In another judgment reported as Arun Kumar
Date of decision : 30-11-2021 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1658/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
71SURINDER SINGH Vs STATE (UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH) – [2021] 10 S.C.R. 1061
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,A.S. BOPANNA
victim. A B C D E F G H 1062 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 10 S.C.R. criminal law – Evidence – Motive – Charge u/s.307, IPC – Absence of motive – When not fatal – Discussed – Penal Code, 1860 – s.307. Arms Act, 1959 – ss. 5, 7, 27 – Pre & post amendment – Held: Prior to amendment, s
Date of decision : 26-11-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2373/2010 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed | Direction Issue : Appeal partly allowed
72BHUPESH RATHOD Vs DAYASHANKAR PRASAD CHAURASIA & ANR. – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 319
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,M.M. SUNDRESH
or criminal law for setting the trial in motion. It would be too technical a view to take to defeat the complaint merely because the body of the complaint does not elaborate upon the authorisation. The artificial person being the Company had to act through a person/official, which logically
Date of decision : 10-11-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1105/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
73DAYLE DE’SOUZA Vs GOVERNMENT OF INDIA THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (C) AND ANOTHER – [2021] 11 S.C.R. 511
Judge Name: R. SUBHASH REDDY,SANJIV KHANNA
– relied on. 10. The initiation of prosecution and summoning of an accused to stand trial has serious consequences. They extend from monetary loss to humiliation and disrepute in society, sacrifice of time and effort to prepare defence and anxiety of uncertain times. criminal law should not be
Date of decision : 29-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1319/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
74  English           اُردُو – Urdu Disclaimer
THE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS Vs DR. SALEEM UR REHMAN – [2021] 10 S.C.R. 864
Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,A.S. BOPANNA
investigating agency is under an obligation to register an FIR on receipt of information revealing cognizable offence. An exception to this general principle of criminal law is recognised by this Court in the case of Lalita Kumari (supra), whereby a preliminary verification is permissible prior to the
Date of decision : 29-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1170/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
75MITESH KUMAR J. SHA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. – [2021] 8 S.C.R. 875
Judge Name: S. ABDUL NAZEER,KRISHNA MURARI
Indian Oil Corporation Vs. M/s. NEPC India Ltd & Ors.7, as under :- “14. While no one with a legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law , a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings
Date of decision : 26-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1285/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
76BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI) AND ANR. Vs THOMMANDRU HANNAH VIJAYALAKSHMI @ T. H. VIJAYALAKSHMI AND ANR. – [2021] 13 S.C.R. 364
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,VIKRAM NATH,B.V. NAGARATHNA
derives its power to investigate from this Act.” (emphasis supplied) However, the Court was also cognizant of the possible misuse of the powers under criminal law resulting in the registration of frivolous FIRs. Hence, it formulated “exceptions” to the general rule that an FIR 55 “CrPC” A B
Date of decision : 08-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1045/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
77M/S GIMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED Vs MANOJ GOEL – [2021] 11 S.C.R. 432
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,VIKRAM NATH,B.V. NAGARATHNA
action attracting liability under Section 138 of the NI Act and other remedies under civil law and M/S GIMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED v. MANOJ GOEL A B C D E F G H 434 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 11 S.C.R. criminal law . A contrary interpretation, which allows for the complainant to pursue
Date of decision : 08-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1068/2021 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
78MANOJ MISHRA @ CHHOTKAU Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2021] 8 S.C.R. 707
Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,A.S. BOPANNA
Children from Sexual Offences Act – s.4 – criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2018. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court Held: 1.1 In so far as the incident based on which the charge was framed against the accused, more particularly against the appellant, the parents of the prosecutrix and the
Date of decision : 08-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1167/2021 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
79BHARATH BOOSHAN AGGARWAL Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2021] 8 S.C.R. 671
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,S. RAVINDRA BHAT
– Kerala Forest Produce Transit Rules – rr.3 (iii), 23 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.378. criminal law – Mens rea – Held: Generally, there is a presumption that mens rea is an essential ingredient in every offence – That presumption can be displaced either by the phraseology of the law
Date of decision : 06-10-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/834/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
80RAVINDRANATHA BAJPE Vs MANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. & OTHERS ETC. – [2021] 6 S.C.R. 268
Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,A.S. BOPANNA
A B C D E F G H 268 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 6 S.C.R. RAVINDRANATHA BAJPE v. MANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. & OTHERS ETC. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1047-1048 of 2021) SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 [M. R. SHAH AND A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.] criminal law – Vicarious liability – Allegation that
Date of decision : 27-09-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1047/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
81UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs DALBIR SINGH – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 800
Judge Name: HEMANT GUPTA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
criminal law , burden of proof is on the prosecution and unless the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused “beyond reasonable doubt”, he cannot be convicted by a court of law. In a departmental enquiry, on the other hand, penalty can be imposed on the delinquent officer on a finding
Date of decision : 21-09-2021 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5848/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
82  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
GUMANSINH @ LALO @ RAJU BHIKHABHAI CHAUHAN & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT – [2021] 6 S.C.R. 24
Judge Name: S. ABDUL NAZEER,KRISHNA MURARI
as under :- “This provision was introduced by criminal law (Second) Amendment Act, 1983 with effect from 26.12.1983 to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married women were eliminated by being forced to commit suicide by the husband or in-laws and incriminating
Date of decision : 03-09-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/940/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
83MADHAV Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2021] 8 S.C.R. 451
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
the story of the prosecution has been disbelieved in entirety, to deny the benefit of the said conclusion to A1 merely on ground of a technicality that he is not on appeal would be unjustified – Conviction of A12 also set aside. criminal law : Alibi – Plea of – Effect on investigation – Held
Date of decision : 18-08-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/852/2021 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
84BANKA SNEHA SHEELA Vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. – [2021] 8 S.C.R. 978
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,HRISHIKESH ROY
accused who is involved in a criminal prosecution. It is not intended for the purpose of keeping a man under detention when under ordinary criminal law it may not be possible to resist the issue of orders of bail, unless the material available is such as would satisfy the requirements of the legal
Date of decision : 02-08-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/733/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
85THE STATE OF KERALA Vs K. AJITH & ORS. – [2021] 6 S.C.R. 774
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH
permission to the public prosecutor to withdraw the prosecution of the respondents u/s. 321 – High Court upheld the order – On appeal, held: Privileges and immunities are not gateways to claim exemptions from the general law of the land, particularly, the criminal law which governs the action of every
Date of decision : 28-07-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/697/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
86PRAKASH GUPTA Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2021] 4 S.C.R. 862
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH
, be expressly conferred by the statute which creates the offence. criminal law : Compounding of offences – Jurisprudential basis for – Discussed. Words and phrases: Expression “compounding crime” – Definition of. Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 Section 24A of the Securities and
Date of decision : 23-07-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/569/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
87SOMESH CHAURASIA Vs STATE OF M.P. & ANR. – [2021] 6 S.C.R. 692
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,HRISHIKESH ROY
ninety days. In adopting such a procedure, the High Court has clearly transgressed into an unusual domain. The High Court has in effect stultified the administration of criminal justice. [Para 29][714-C-D] 2. There are distinct doctrinal concepts in criminal law namely (i) the grant of bail
Date of decision : 22-07-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/590/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
88P MAHESH COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK SHAREHOLDERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs RAMESH KUMAR BUNG AND ORS. – [2021] 6 S.C.R. 850
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
events that preceded the lodging of the FIRs, as they throw some light on the first principle of criminal law that “witnesses may lie, but circumstances may not”. The sequence is as follows:- (i) The term of office of the erstwhile Board of Directors of the Cooperative Bank was to expire in April
Date of decision : 20-07-2021 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/3869/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
89AJIT MOHAN & ORS. Vs LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS. – [2021] 14 S.C.R. 611
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,DINESH MAHESHWARI,HRISHIKESH ROY
that the proper course of action for the State Government should have been to move the criminal law machinery with the filing of a complaint followed by investigation as contemplated under the Code of Criminal Procedure and thus, the Punjab Vidhan Sabha had exceeded its powers by expelling the
Date of decision : 08-07-2021 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/1088/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
90SATBIR SINGH & ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 269
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983) was passed wherein Chapter XX-A was introduced in the IPC, containing Section 498-A. 11. However, despite the above measures, the issue of dowry harassment was still prevalent. Additionally, there was a growing trend of deaths of young
Date of decision : 28-05-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1735/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
91ACHHAR SINGH Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – [2021] 5 S.C.R. 243
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner’s guilt was the “golden thread” throughout the web of English criminal law . Today, Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 6 of the European
Date of decision : 07-05-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1140/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
92SANJAY KUMAR RAI Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 143
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
of revisional jurisdiction – Secondly, Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing case while expressing concern regarding the need to tackle rampant pendency and delays in criminal law system, followed the ratio laid down in an earlier decision in Madhu Limaye wherein it is laid down that orders framing
Date of decision : 07-05-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/472/2021 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Matter remanded to High Court
93PATAN JAMAL VALI Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2021] 3 S.C.R. 470
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH
. 470 470 A B C D E F G H 471 s. 376(1) – Punishment under – Amendments to s. 376(1) – Parliament sought to take a tougher stand on crime against women and limited the discretion of the judiciary regarding imposition of sentences for offences involving rape – By criminal law Amendment
Date of decision : 27-04-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/452/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
94RAMESH BHAVAN RATHOD Vs VISHANBHAI HIRABHAI MAKWANA MAKWANA (KOLI) & ANR. – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 17
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH
two individual parties, as in a civil proceeding. The proper enforcement of criminal law is a matter of public interest. Thus, the manner in which a succession of orders in the present batch of cases has recorded that counsel for the “respective parties do not press for further reasoned order
Date of decision : 20-04-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/422/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
95NEEHARIKA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS – [2021] 4 S.C.R. 1044
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH,SANJIV KHANNA
reasons, the High Court would be justified in even staying the further investigation, by way of an interim order. It is submitted that misuse of criminal proceedings is not unknown and the criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course and therefore to take away the inherent powers
Date of decision : 13-04-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/330/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
96DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. Vs M/S. PEPSI FOODS LTD. (NOW PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.) – [2021] 4 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,HRISHIKESH ROY
] , Japani Sahoo [Japani Sahoo v. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty, (2007) 7 SCC 394 : (2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 388] and Vanka Radhamanohari [Vanka Radhamanohari v. Vanka Venkata Reddy, (1993) 3 SCC 4 : 1993 SCC (Cri) 571] . The object of the criminal law is to punish perpetrators of crime. This is in tune with the
Date of decision : 06-04-2021 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1106/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
97INDUS BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED Vs KOTAK INDIA VENTURE (OFFSHORE) FUND (EARLIER KNOWN AS KOTAK INDIA VENTURE LIMITED) & ORS. – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 112
Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
relate to sovereign functions of the State. Further, violations of criminal law are offences against the State and not just against the victim. Matrimonial disputes relating to the dissolution of marriage, restitution of conjugal rights, etc. are not arbitrable as they fall within the ambit of
Date of decision : 26-03-2021 | Case Number : WRIT TO PETITION (CIVIL)…/48/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
98  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PRITI SARAF & ANR. Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. – [2021] 2 S.C.R. 577
Judge Name: INDU MALHOTRA,AJAY RASTOGI
agreement in consequence was justified to forfeit the earnest money, it is simply a civil dispute. As there was a demand to refund the forfeited amount failing which FIR was registered to set the criminal law into motion obviously to settle the scores giving the colour of criminal proceedings
Date of decision : 10-03-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/296/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
99KRISHNA LAL CHAWLA & ORS. Vs STATE OF U.P. & ANR. – [2021] 2 S.C.R. 550
Judge Name: MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,R. SUBHASH REDDY
– and must be exercised with great caution, and after suitable judicial application of mind. Observations in a similar vein were made by this Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate, (1998) 5 SCC 749: “28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal
Date of decision : 08-03-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/283/2021 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
100  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHIVAJI CHINTAPPA PATIL Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2021] 2 S.C.R. 617
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
the burden of proof would lie upon the accused – In the instant case, the prosecution has even failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the death was homicidal. criminal law : Motive – Though in a case of direct evidence, motive would not be relevant, in a case of circumstantial evidence
Date of decision : 02-03-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1348/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
101P. MOHANRAJ & ORS. Vs M/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PVT. LTD. – [2021] 14 S.C.R. 204
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,NAVIN SINHA,K.M. JOSEPH
Authority stayed further proceedings in the two criminal complaints pending before the ACMM. In an appeal filed to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal [“NCLAT”], the NCLAT set aside this order, holding that Section 138, being a criminal law provision, cannot be held to be a “proceeding” within
Date of decision : 01-03-2021 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/10355/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
102PARMAR SAMANTSINH UMEDSINH AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – [2021] 13 S.C.R. 89
Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,M.R. SHAH,R. SUBHASH REDDY
framed against him in respect of heinous and serious offences including corruption cases under the criminal law . 59. We have analysed the provisions of Article 243R, 243S and have come to the definite conclusion that no limitation in Article 243S can be found of which contains any prohibition of
Date of decision : 24-02-2021 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/706/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
103  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
THE STATE OF ODISHA Vs BANABIHARI MOHAPATRA AND ANR. – [2021] 1 S.C.R. 612
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,HEMANT GUPTA
perversity – In this case, it cannot be said that the reasons given by the High Court to reverse the conviction of the accused were flimsy, untenable or bordering on perverse appreciation of evidence. criminal law : Case based on circumstantial evidence – Before a case against an accused can be said
Date of decision : 12-02-2021 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/1156/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
104UPENDRA CHOUDHURY Vs BULANDSHAHAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. – [2021] 1 S.C.R. 525
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH
would involve a supervision which does not lie within the province of judicial review – In view of the statutory [2021] 1 S.C.R. 525 525 A B C D E F G H 526 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 1 S.C.R. framework, both in terms of civil and criminal law and procedure, entertaining a petition
Date of decision : 11-02-2021 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/150/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
105PRAVAT CHANDRA MOHANTY Vs THE STATE OF ODISHA & ANR. – [2021] 4 S.C.R. 407
Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,AJAY RASTOGI
Khalanighrahanaya” (Sanskrit: “To protect good and to punish evil”), which needs to be respected. Those, who are called upon to administer the criminal law , must bear, in mind, that they have a duty not merely to the individual accused before them, but also to the State and to the community at large
Date of decision : 11-02-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/125/2021 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
106PRADEEP KUMAR SONTHALIA Vs DHIRAJ PRASAD SAHU @ DHIRAJ SAHU & ANR. – [2020] 14 S.C.R. 480
Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
criminal law , there is a vast difference between (i) the interpretation to be given to the expression “date”, while calculating the period of imprisonment suffered by a person and (ii) the interpretation to be given to the very same expression while computing the period limitation for filing an
Date of decision : 18-12-2020 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/611/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
107VIDYA DROLIA AND OTHERS Vs DURGA TRADING CORPORATION – [2020] 11 S.C.R. 1001
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SANJIV KHANNA,KRISHNA MURARI
functions and have erga omnes effect. Such grants confer monopoly rights. They are non-arbitrable. Criminal cases again are not arbitrable as they relate to sovereign functions of the State. Further, violations of criminal law are offenses against the State and not just against the victim
Date of decision : 14-12-2020 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2402/2019 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered | Direction Issue : Referred questions answered and appeals and SLPs disposed of
108JAYANT ETC. Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2020] 11 S.C.R. 665
Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,M.R. SHAH
observed and held as under: “19. The expression “cognizance” has not been defined in the Code. But the word (cognizance) is of indefinite import. It has no esoteric or mystic significance in criminal law . It merely means “become aware of” and when used with reference to a court or a Judge, it
Date of decision : 03-12-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/824/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
109ARNAB MANORANJAN GOSWAMI Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. – [2020] 11 S.C.R. 896
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,INDIRA BANERJEE
enacted legislation. As such, the citizen is subject to the edicts of criminal law and procedure. Section 482 recognizes the inherent power of the High Court to make such orders as are necessary to give effect to the provisions of the CrPC “or prevent abuse of the process of any Court or
Date of decision : 27-11-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/742/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
110SHATRUGHNA BABAN MESHRAM Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2020] 13 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,INDU MALHOTRA,KRISHNA MURARI
ought not to be commuted to life imprisonment – Adequate and sufficient opportunity afforded to the appellant to place all the relevant materials on record in the light of principle laid down in Dagdu v. State of Maharashtra. Penal Code, 1860 – s.376(1)(2) and s.376A – criminal law (Amendment
Date of decision : 02-11-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/763/2016 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
111  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
CHUNTHURAM Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2020] 8 S.C.R. 1071
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,KRISHNA MURARI,HRISHIKESH ROY
support the conviction. 16. We might also reiterate the well established principle in criminal law which propagates that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in a case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to their innocence, the view favourable to the accused
Date of decision : 29-10-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1392/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
112  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAVEEN KUMAR Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – [2020] 8 S.C.R. 1044
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,HRISHIKESH ROY
A B C D E F G H 1044 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 8 S.C.R. RAVEEN KUMAR v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH (Criminal Appeal Nos. 2187-2188 of 2011) OCTOBER 26, 2020 [N. V. RAMANA, SURYA KANT AND HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.] criminal law – Appeal against acquittal – Appellant acquitted u/s.20
Date of decision : 26-10-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2187/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
113GUJARAT MAZDOOR SABHA & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT – [2020] 13 S.C.R. 886
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,INDU MALHOTRA,K.M. JOSEPH
threatened by war or by external aggression or by internal disturbance”. These provisions recognise that disturbance of public peace or tranquillity may assume such grave proportions as to threaten the security of the State. 8. As Stephen in his criminal law of England observes: “Unlawful
Date of decision : 01-10-2020 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/708/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
114SUBED ALI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM – [2020] 8 S.C.R. 731
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,NAVIN SINHA,INDIRA BANERJEE
question – Resultantly, there is no reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence of the appellants. criminal law – Common intention – Held: Common intention consists of several persons acting in unison to achieve a common [2020] 8 S.C.R. 731 731 A B C D E F G H 732
Date of decision : 30-09-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1401/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
115PRAVIN KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2020] 7 S.C.R. 1078
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,S. ABDUL NAZEER,SURYA KANT
sufficient to take away his liberty under criminal law jurisprudence. Such distinction between standards of proof amongst civil and criminal litigation is deliberate, given the differences in stakes, the power imbalance between the parties and the social costs of an erroneous decision. Thus, in a
Date of decision : 10-09-2020 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6270/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
116SARIKA Vs ADMINISTRATOR, MAHAKALESHWAR MANDIR COMMITTEE, UJJAIN (M.P.) & ORS. – [2020] 9 S.C.R. 303
Judge Name: ARUN MISHRA,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,KRISHNA MURARI
) 5 SCC 786 : [2007] 6 SCR 939; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Sabir Ali AIR 1964 SC 1673 : [1964] 7 SCR 435; Ramnath Sardar v. Rekharani Sardar (1975) criminal law Journal 1139; Raj Kumari Vijh v. Dev Raj Vijh AIR 1977 SC 1101 : [1977] 2 SCR 997; Purushottam Das Dalmia v. State of West Bengal AIR
Date of decision : 01-09-2020 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4676/2018 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed | Direction Issue : Transfer Petitions dismissed.
117MUKESH SINGH Vs STATE (NARCOTIC BRANCH OF DELHI) – [2020] 9 S.C.R. 245
Judge Name: ARUN MISHRA,INDIRA BANERJEE,VINEET SARAN,M.R. SHAH,S. RAVINDRA BHAT
., the criminal law is set into motion either under Chapter XII which relates to information to police officers; or Chapter XV which relates to complaints to magistrates. The present case relates to Chapter XII, Cr.P.C. where the informant of the offence is a police officer; A B C D E F G
Date of decision : 31-08-2020 | Case Number : DIARYNO AND DIARYYR/39528/2018 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
118UNION OF INDIA Vs ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS – [2020] 10 S.C.R. 923
Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,K.M. JOSEPH
called upon to meet in the Court of Sessions. As far as a complainant setting the criminal law in motion is concerned, what is contemplated is that by the mechanism of cognizance under Section 200 read with Section 202, culminating in the issuance of summons or warrant under Section 204, there is
Date of decision : 28-08-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/200/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
119MOHD. ANWAR Vs THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) – [2020] 7 S.C.R. 150
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,S. ABDUL NAZEER,SURYA KANT
ingrained principles of our criminal law jurisprudence which mandates that substantive justice triumph limitations of procedure, this Court on 22.07.2020 tried to enquire into the mental health of the appellant, by requesting the learned Additional Solicitor General to get the appellant mentally
Date of decision : 19-08-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1551/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
120  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PARMINDER KAUR @ P.P. KAUR @ SONI Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2020] 6 S.C.R. 508
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SURYA KANT,KRISHNA MURARI
defense plea. [2020] 6 S.C.R. 508 508 A B C D E F G H 509 criminal law – Sexual Offences – Delay in FIR – Sweeping assumptions by Courts – Effect of – Discussed. criminal law – Re-appreciation of evidence by Supreme Court – Discussed. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD 1.1 The five
Date of decision : 28-07-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/283/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
121PYARE LAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2020] 6 S.C.R. 249
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,VINEET SARAN
issued any specific order regarding confinement. vi) Convicts under Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Official Secrets Act, 1923, Foreigners Act, 1948, Passport Act, 1967, Sections 2 & 3 of the criminal law Amendment Act, 1961 and Sections 121 to 130 of the Indian
Date of decision : 17-07-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1003/2017 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Matter referred to larger Bench.
122ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR Vs KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL AND ORS. – [2020] 7 S.C.R. 180
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
) & (t) – Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Interpretation of Statutes – Civil Evidence Act, 1968(UK) – ss.5, s.6(1) – Civil Evidence Act, 1995(UK) – ss.8, 9, 13 and 15(2) – criminal law . Information Technology Act, 2000 – s.67C – Held: General directions issued to cellular companies
Date of decision : 14-07-2020 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/20825/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
123SOMASUNDARAM @ SOMU Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE – [2020] 10 S.C.R. 27
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,K.M. JOSEPH,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
. criminal law : Principles laid down in *Dalbir Kaur – Discussed. criminal law : Destroying the corpus delicti by cremation – There cannot be medical evidence relating to murder in a case where the body stood cremated. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.306 – Procedure for making a person an approver
Date of decision : 03-06-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/403/2010 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
124ARNAB RANJAN GOSWAMI Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2020] 8 S.C.R. 222
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH
Judicial Magistrate [Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate, (1998) 5 SCC 749 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 1400] , a two- Judge Bench has held that summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course.” 47. In view of the
Date of decision : 19-05-2020 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/130/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
125WEST U.P. SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION & ORS. Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. – [2020] 9 S.C.R. 530
Judge Name: ARUN MISHRA,INDIRA BANERJEE,VINEET SARAN,M.R. SHAH,ANIRUDDHA BOSE
case of M. Karunanidhi (Supra), while examining the issue of repugnancy with respect to State enactment of Tamil Nadu Public Men (Criminal Misconduct) Act, 1973 in light of the Central enactments of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the criminal law (Amendment) Act
Date of decision : 22-04-2020 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7508/2005 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
126  English           ಕನ್ನಡ – Kannada Disclaimer
K. VIRUPAKSHA & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. – [2020] 2 S.C.R. 1020
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,S. ABDUL NAZEER,A.S. BOPANNA
before the DRT as also DRAT and having failed therein has set criminal law into motion which is not bonafide and not sustainable in law. It is contended that the learned A B C D E F G H 1027 Judge of the High Court of Karnataka has not appreciated the matter in its correct perspective
Date of decision : 03-03-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/377/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
127  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHRI SATISH KUMAR & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR. – [2020] 3 S.C.R. 1144
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,INDU MALHOTRA,HEMANT GUPTA
be staying near her house, to find out whereabouts of her father (victim-deceased) – The said motive had no foundation to stand – criminal law – Motive – Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 r/w s.34. SHRI SATISH KUMAR & ANR. v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR. A B C D E F G H 1146 SUPREME COURT
Date of decision : 02-03-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/19/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
128  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ARUN SINGH & OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ANOTHER – [2020] 3 S.C.R. 707
Judge Name: NAVIN SINHA,KRISHNA MURARI
the society that offender should be punished which acts as deterrent for others from committing similar crime. On the other hand, there may be offences falling in the category where the correctional objective of criminal law would have to be given more weightage than the theory of deterrent
Date of decision : 10-02-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/250/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
129  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
CHHOTA AHIRWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2020] 3 S.C.R. 776
Judge Name: INDIRA BANERJEE,S. RAVINDRA BHAT
appellant entitled to acquittal. Penal Code, 1860: s.34 – Common intention – It is a settled principle of criminal law that only the person who actually commits the offence can be held guilty and sentenced in accordance with law – However, s.34 lays down a principle of joint liability in a criminal
Date of decision : 06-02-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/238/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
130BASHEERA BEGAM Vs MOHAMMED IBRAHIM & ORS. – [2020] 3 S.C.R. 562
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,INDIRA BANERJEE
Procedure – ss.161, 313 – Constitution of India – Art.136. criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Held: Suspicion however strong cannot substitute proof beyond reasonable doubt – Burden of proving an accused guilty beyond all reasonable doubt lies on the prosecution
Date of decision : 31-01-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/417/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
131STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE Vs M. MURUGESAN & ANR. – [2020] 2 S.C.R. 553
Judge Name: L. NAGESWARA RAO,HEMANT GUPTA
on how the criminal justice system should function in the State. It was observed that the central aim of the criminal law is to reform the offender and to rehabilitate him in a bid to render him useful to society. The Court held as under: “16. The situation calls for a thorough revamping of the
Date of decision : 15-01-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/45/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
132  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PADUM KUMAR Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2020] 1 S.C.R. 57
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,A.S. BOPANNA
A B C D E F G H 57 PADUM KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2020) JANUARY 14, 2020 [R. BANUMATHI AND A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.] criminal law – Evidence – Opinion of hand writing expert – Appreciation of – Appellant-accused was working as Postman at the relevant
Date of decision : 14-01-2020 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/87/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed | Direction Issue : Appeal partly allowed
133  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
G H KANWAR PAL SINGH Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1158
Judge Name: S. ABDUL NAZEER,SANJIV KHANNA
authority, it was observed that the TOHO Act is a special law which deals with the subjects mentioned therein, viz., offences relating to the removal of human organs, etc. Ordinarily, any person can set the criminal law into motion but the legislature keeping in view the sensitivity and importance of
Date of decision : 18-12-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1920/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
134  English           తెలుగు – Telugu Disclaimer
G H KHAJA BILAL AHMED Vs STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1174
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,HRISHIKESH ROY
Court by Ms Bina Madhavan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Telangana. The chart is extracted below : S NO CASE NO UNDER SECTION CURRENT STATUS 1 305/2012 147,148,188,153 r/w Section 149 of IPC & Section 7 of criminal law Amendment Act, 1932 Transferred to SIT. Still
Date of decision : 18-12-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1876/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
135PRANAV VERMA & OTHERS Vs THE REGISTRAR GENERAL OF THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH & ANR. – [2019] 15 S.C.R. 43
Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,SURYA KANT
the corresponding increase in the stipulated ratio. 5. The Main Exam consisted of five papers – Civil Law – I, Civil Law – II, criminal law , English and Hindi. The first four papers were for 200 marks and Hindi was for 100 marks. In order to qualify for viva- voce examination, a candidate is
Date of decision : 13-12-2019 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/565/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
136SHAILENDRA RAJDEV PASVAN AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF GUJARAT ETC. – [2019] 14 S.C.R. 270
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,SANJIV KHANNA,KRISHNA MURARI
connecting them with the crime – Prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond doubt – Conviction and sentences of the appellants set aside –Arms Act – s.21(1)(a) – Indian Explosives Act – ss.3, 5. criminal law – Reversal of acquittal by the appellate court – Presumption of innocence in favour of
Date of decision : 13-12-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/333/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
137  English           తెలుగు – Telugu Disclaimer
GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs M/S. VISAKHA INDUSTRIES – [2019] 17 S.C.R. 661
Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,K.M. JOSEPH
in January, 2009. It related to an offence which was being perpetuated from 31.07.2008 onwards, i.e., since long before prior to the amendment of the said provision. It was finally found that there was no exemption of any criminal law in respect of a company which is a juristic person and which
Date of decision : 10-12-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1987/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
138G H P. GOPALKRISHNAN @ DILEEP Vs STATE OF KERALA AND ANR. – [2019] 17 S.C.R. 422
Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI
definitions have been adopted in legislation19. A document may be relied on as real evidence (where its 15 Fourth Edition, 2006 reissue, Vol. 11(3) criminal law , Evidence and Procedure 16 R v. Daye [1908] 2 KB 333 at 340, DC, per Darling J. 17 A tombstone bearing an inscription is in this sense
Date of decision : 29-11-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1794/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
139GURJIT SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2019] 14 S.C.R. 232
Judge Name: NAVIN SINHA,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
criminal law (Second) Amendment Act, 1983 with effect from 26-12-1983 to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married women were eliminated by being forced to commit suicide by the husband or in-laws and incriminating evidence was usually available within the four
Date of decision : 26-11-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1492/2010 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
140H MANOHARAN Vs STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARIETY HALL POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE (Review Petition (Crl.) Nos.446-447 of 2019) in – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1078
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,SANJIV KHANNA,SURYA KANT
in cases based on circumstantial evidence – criminal law . Sentence / Sentencing – Death penalty cases – Opportunity for oral arguments on the question of sentence – Held [per Surya Kant, J. (for R.F. Nariman, J. and himself)]: In cases of death penalty, since the punishment is irreversible and
Date of decision : 07-11-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1174/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
141ROHTAS & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF HARYANA – [2019] 16 S.C.R. 861
Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI
basis to reverse the concurrent view taken by two courts below, recording finding of guilt against the appellants – Order of conviction of appellants is not interfered with. criminal law : Benefit of doubt – Wrong benefit given to acquitted accused cannot enure to the advantage of the convicted
Date of decision : 05-11-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/764/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
142FAINUL KHAN Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER – [2019] 13 S.C.R. 924
Judge Name: NAVIN SINHA,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
regard to the individual assault made by each of them, it cannot be said in the facts of the case that any prejudice was caused to them – Appellants did not offer any explanation or desire to lead evidence except for stating that they were falsely implicated. criminal law : Absence of injury report
Date of decision : 04-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/937/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
143RAVISHANKAR @ BABA VISHWAKARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2019] 14 S.C.R. 285
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,R. SUBHASH REDDY,SURYA KANT
. State v. McKinney 74 S.W.3d 291 (Tenn. 2002); Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993) – referred to. Report of the Committee on Amendments to criminal law , headed by Justice J.S. Verma, former Chief Justice of India – referred to. RAVISHANKAR @ BABA VISHWAKARMA v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Date of decision : 03-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1523/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
144RAVI S/O ASHOK GHUMARE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2019] 15 S.C.R. 712
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,R. SUBHASH REDDY,SURYA KANT
being so, case for interference with the death sentence is not made out – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 363, 376 and 377. criminal law : Evidence – Motive – Though the High Court observed that ‘satisfaction of lust’ and ‘removal of trace’ was
Date of decision : 03-10-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1488/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
145NEVADA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. – [2019] 15 S.C.R. 223
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,DEEPAK GUPTA,SANJIV KHANNA
102 of the Code – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 102. criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 : Promulgation of – Held: Was to prevent disposal or concealment of property procured by means of offences specified in its Schedule, which include offences punishable u/ss. 406, 408, 409, 411
Date of decision : 24-09-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1481/2019 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
146SMT. GARGI Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2019] 13 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI
Edition, Page 598 – referred to. criminal law by C.S. Kenny – referred to. Modi: A textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology – referred to. Case Law Reference (2004) 12 SCC 77 referred to Para 8.5 [2018] 7 SCR 830 referred to Para 8.5 [2011] 4 SCR 585 referred to Para 8.5 [1974] 3 SCR 74
Date of decision : 19-09-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1046/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
147  English           ਪੰਜਾਬੀ – Punjabi Disclaimer
G H MANJIT SINGH Vs THE STATE OF PUNJAB – [2019] 11 S.C.R. 554
Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI
of persons forming it i.e. 5 and their common object. criminal law : Common Object – Determination of – Held: The course of conduct adopted by members of unlawful assembly; their behaviour and the arms carried by them are a few basic and relevant factors to determine the common object
Date of decision : 03-09-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1079/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
148  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
G H SHIV KUMAR JATIA Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – [2019] 11 S.C.R. 210
Judge Name: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE,R. SUBHASH REDDY
A B C D E F G H 210 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 11 S.C.R. SHIV KUMAR JATIA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI (Criminal Appeal No.1263 of 2019) AUGUST 23, 2019 [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.] criminal law – Doctrine of vicarious liability –Corporate criminal liability
Date of decision : 23-08-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1263/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
149VINOD KUMAR Vs ASHOK KUMAR GANDHI – [2019] 10 S.C.R. 1051
Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,K.M. JOSEPH
in mind the danger of disturbing retrospectively the basis on which contracts, settlements of property and fiscal arrangements have been entered into and also the especial need for certainty as to the criminal law .” 23. In V.Kishan Rao vs. Nikhil Super Specially Hospital and another, 2010(5
Date of decision : 05-08-2019 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3793/2016 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
150  English           हिन्दी – Hindi          ଓଡ଼ିଆ – Odia Disclaimer
SHASHI BHUSAN PRASAD Vs INSPECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE & ORS. – [2019] 10 S.C.R. 1098
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,AJAY RASTOGI
which is necessary to order a conviction is different from the degree of proof necessary to record the commission of delinquency. Even the rule relating to appreciation of evidence in the two proceedings is not similar. In criminal law , burden of proof is on the prosecution and unless the
Date of decision : 01-08-2019 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7130/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
151PRADEEP RAM Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. – [2019] 8 S.C.R. 824
Judge Name: ASHOK BHUSHAN,K.M. JOSEPH
Tandwa was lodged for offences under Sections 414, 384, 386, 387, 120-B I.P.C. read with Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17(1) and (2) of the criminal law Amendment Act. Apart from petitioner, there were 11 other named accused. The allegations made against the accused were
Date of decision : 01-07-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/816/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
152  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
CENTURY METAL RECYCLING PVT. LTD. AND Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – [2019] 8 S.C.R. 639
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,DEEPAK GUPTA,SANJIV KHANNA
beyond reasonable doubt’ in criminal law requires the prosecution to establish guilt and secure conviction of the accused by proving the charge ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Proof beyond ‘reasonable doubt’ is certainly not the requirement under proviso to Section 14 of the Act and Rule 12 of the 2007
Date of decision : 17-05-2019 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5011/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
153BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED Vs ADVENTZ INVESTMENTS AND HOLDINGS LIMITED & OTHERS – [2019] 7 S.C.R. 655
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,R. SUBHASH REDDY
COURT REPORTS [2019] 7 S.C.R. “28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have the criminal law set
Date of decision : 09-05-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/875/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
154ACCUSED ‘X’ Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2019] 6 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,INDIRA BANERJEE
, there is a strong international consensus against the execution of individuals with mental illness.4 3 Hale’s Pleas of the Crown Vol. I – p. 33; Coke’s Institutes, Vol. III, pg. 6; Black-stone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England Vol. IV, pages 18 and 19; , “An Introduction to criminal law ”, by
Date of decision : 12-04-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/680/2007 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
155YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR & ANR. – [2019] 5 S.C.R. 638
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,K.M. JOSEPH
most important aspect in a justice delivery system is the ability of a party to successfully establish the case based on materials. Subject to exceptions it is settled beyond doubt that any person can set the criminal law into motion. It is equally indisputable however that among the seemingly
Date of decision : 10-04-2019 | Case Number : REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL)/46/2019 | Direction Issue : Review petitions be adjudicated on merits
156  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RUPALI DEVI Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. – [2019] 6 S.C.R. 577
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,L. NAGESWARA RAO,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
Nenshi (1972) 2 SCC 890 : [1973] 3 SCR 1004 – relied on. 2. Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was introduced by the criminal law (second amendment) Act, 1983. In addition to the said amendment in the IPC, the provisions of Sections 174 and 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Date of decision : 09-04-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/71/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
157  English           தமிழ் – Tamil Disclaimer
PATTU RAJAN Vs THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2019] 5 S.C.R. 535
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,INDIRA BANERJEE
sets the machinery of criminal law in motion and marks the commencement of the investigation which ends with the formation of an opinion under Section 169 or 170 CrPC, as the case may be, and forwarding of a police report under Section 173 CrPC. Thus, it is quite possible that more than one
Date of decision : 29-03-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/680/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
158  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE Vs RAHUL MODI AND ANR. ETC. – [2019] 5 S.C.R. 91
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
decision noted the earlier decision in Navinchandra N. Majithia14and observed as under: “13. We are alive to the possible incongruities that are fraught in extrapolating decisions relating to civil law onto criminal law , which includes importing the civil law concept of “cause of action” to
Date of decision : 27-03-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/538/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
159ADJUDICATING OFFICER, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs BHAVESH PABARI – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 898
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,DEEPAK GUPTA,SANJIV KHANNA
subject to maximum penalty of Rs.1 crore, keeping in view the period of default as well as aggravating and mitigating circumstances including those specified in s.15-J. A B C D E F G H 901 criminal law – Offence – “Continuing offence” and “Repeat offence” – Distinction between – Held
Date of decision : 28-02-2019 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/11311/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
160  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs SURESH – [2019] 5 S.C.R. 836
Judge Name: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE,DINESH MAHESHWARI
sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed etc. This position was illuminatingly stated by this Court in Sevaka Perumal v. State of Tamil Nadu: (1991) 3 SCC 471. 13. criminal law adheres in general to the principle of
Date of decision : 20-02-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/319/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
161THANGASAMY Vs THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2019] 4 S.C.R. 600
Judge Name: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE,DINESH MAHESHWARI
benefit of probation or for reduction of sentence. On the question of sentencing, this Court re-emphasised as follows:- “84. Sentencing is an important task in the matters of crime. One of the prime objectives of the criminal law is imposition of appropriate, adequate, just and proportionate
Date of decision : 20-02-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/698/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
162  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SUNITA & ORS. Vs RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ANR. – [2019] 3 S.C.R. 329
Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,AJAY RASTOGI
make no difference atleast for the purposes of deciding the claim petition under the Act. This Court in Mangla Ram (supra), noted that the nature of proof required to establish culpability under criminal law is far higher than the standard required under the law of torts to create liability. 26
Date of decision : 14-02-2019 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1665/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
163STATE OF GUJARAT Vs AFROZ MOHAMMED HASANFATTA – [2019] 1 S.C.R. 1104
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,INDIRA BANERJEE
criminal court. It is not a mechanical process or matter of course. As held by this Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another v. Special Judicial Magistrate and others (1998) 5 SCC 749 to set in motion the process of criminal law against a person is a serious matter.” The above observations made in para
Date of decision : 05-02-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/224/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
164R. MUTHUKRISHNAN Vs THE REGISTRAR GENERAL OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS – [2019] 1 S.C.R. 589
Judge Name: ARUN MISHRA,VINEET SARAN
interference, in the political sense, with the delivery of services to the individual citizens in the state, particularly in fields of public and criminal law . The public interest in a free society knows no area more sensitive than the independence, impartiality, and availability to the general
Date of decision : 28-01-2019 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/612/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
165  English           ಕನ್ನಡ – Kannada Disclaimer
MUNISHAMAPPA & ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2019] 2 S.C.R. 386
Judge Name: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,VINEET SARAN
A B C D E F G H 386 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 2 S.C.R. MUNISHAMAPPA & ORS. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA (Criminal Appeal Nos. 96-97 of 2011) JANUARY 24, 2019 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND VINEET SARAN, JJ.] criminal law – Appeal against acquittal – Long-standing dispute between
Date of decision : 24-01-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/96/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
166  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ASHISH JAIN Vs MAKRAND SINGH AND ORS. – [2019] 1 S.C.R. 345
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
granted by High Court is well-reasoned – Appellants have failed to prove any substantial error in the order of High Court – The accused are entitled to be acquitted as a reasonable suspicion or doubt persists regarding the guilt of the accused – Acquittal order confirmed.. criminal law : Presumption
Date of decision : 14-01-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1980/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
167STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs WASIF HAIDER ETC. – [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1161
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
– Explosive Substances Act, 1908 – ss.4, 15 – criminal law Amendment Act, 1932. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The present case is ridden with multiple investigative laches and flaws which goes to the root of the matter. Firstly, out of the seven eye witnesses who participated in the
Date of decision : 10-12-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1702/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
168MAHENDER CHAWLA & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2018] 14 S.C.R. 627
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,S. ABDUL NAZEER
protection of persons who are involved directly or indirectly in providing assistance to criminal law enforcement agencies and overall administration of justice. 24. The affidavit further emphasises that the witnesses need to be given the confidence to come forward to assist law enforcement and
Date of decision : 05-12-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/156/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
169LOUREMBAM DEBEN SINGH & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. – [2018] 14 S.C.R. 299
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,UDAY UMESH LALIT
not dealing with individual cases but a systemic or institutional response relating to constitutional criminal law .” (Emphasis supplied by us) 7. Thereafter, having considered the case law and submissions made by the learned Amicus and learned counsel for the parties including the learned
Date of decision : 12-11-2018 | Case Number : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition/125554/2018 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
170HIMACHAL PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION & ANR. Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. – [2018] 13 S.C.R. 868
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
public of the State and are being used as such. Further, A B C D E F G H 871 filing of chargesheet and an order taking cognizance is not a final judicial order. It is a preliminary process in criminal law and is open to challenge in higher judicial fora. [Para 42][904-C-G] 4. The
Date of decision : 02-11-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1258/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
171ARJUN GOPAL AND OTHERS Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – [2018] 13 S.C.R. 464
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
law, family law, criminal law , free speech, procedure, legislation, public international law, the law of intellectual property, the rules governing the trial and appellate process, environmental law, the administrative process, the regulation of health and safety, the laws forbidding
Date of decision : 23-10-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/728/2015 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
172MALLIKARJUN KODAGALI (DEAD) REPRESENTED THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. – [2018] 13 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,S. ABDUL NAZEER,DEEPAK GUPTA
, progressive and beneficial to the victim of an offence. criminal law : Rights of victims of crime – Held: Rights of an accused far outweigh the rights of the victim of an offence in many respects – There needs to be some balancing of the concerns and equalising their rights so that the criminal
Date of decision : 12-10-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1281/2018 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
173KODUNGALLUR FILM SOCIETY & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 695
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
Court inter alia recommended amendments to the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for short ‘the PDPP Act’), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and other criminal law statutes; and also set out 1 (2009) 5 SCC 212 KODUNGALLUR FILM SOCIETY & ANR. v. U.O.I. & ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J
Date of decision : 01-10-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/330/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
174ROMILA THAPAR AND ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2018] 11 S.C.R. 951
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
are available under substantive or procedural provisions of the criminal law . But in the present case, it is necessary for the Court to bear in mind that recourse to its constitutional jurisdiction under Article 32 has been invoked not only by the petitioners but by the five individuals who were
Date of decision : 28-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/260/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
175JOSEPH SHINE Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2018] 11 S.C.R. 765
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R.F. NARIMAN,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR,INDU MALHOTRA
except where absolutely necessary – Penal Code, 1860 – s. 497. criminal law : Criminal sanction – When justified – Held:(Per: Indu Malhotra, J.) – Criminal sanction may be justified where there is a public element in the wrong – State must follow the minimalist approach in the criminalization
Date of decision : 27-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/194/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
176PUBLIC INTEREST FOUNDATION & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2018] 10 S.C.R. 141
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R.F. NARIMAN,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR,INDU MALHOTRA
Disqualifications”, Report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC); 170 th Report of Law Commission; Justice J. S. Verma Committee Report on Amendments to criminal law (2013) – referred to. PUBLIC INTEREST FOUNDATION & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. A B
Date of decision : 25-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/536/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
177S. NAMBI NARAYANAN Vs SIBY MATHEWS & OTHERS ETC. – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 51
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
initiated by the police was malicious – State police was dealing with an extremely sensitive case and after arresting the appellant and others, the State, on its own, transferred the case to CBI – criminal law cannot be set in motion without any basis, on some kind of fancy or notion – Public law
Date of decision : 14-09-2018 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6637/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
178SOCIAL ACTION FORUM FOR MANAV ADHIKAR AND ANOTHER Vs UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND OTHERS – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 19
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
criminal law , intends to control, if not altogether remove, the malady that gets into the spine of the society and gradually corrodes the marrows of the vertebrae of a large section of the society. A situation arises and the legislature, expressing its concern and responsibility, adds a new penal
Date of decision : 14-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/73/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
179  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ABDUL WAHAB K. Vs STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS – [2018] 11 S.C.R. 155
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
acting bonafide and having sufficient interest in the proceedings alone can initiate Public Interest Litigation and that the Court must not allow its process to be abused for oblique consideration. criminal law should not be allowed to be used as a weapon of vendetta between private individuals
Date of decision : 13-09-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1047/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
180ABDUL WAHAB K. Vs STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS – [2018] 11 S.C.R. 154
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
acting bonafide and having sufficient interest in the proceedings alone can initiate Public Interest Litigation and that the Court must not allow its process to be abused for oblique consideration. criminal law should not be allowed to be used as a weapon of vendetta between private individuals
Date of decision : 13-09-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1047/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
181MAQBOOL Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 885
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
– s.326B would be attracted in case the requirements specified are met on an attempted acid attack – Appeal dismissed – The criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013. Penal Code, 1860 – ss.326A and 326B – Difference between – Discussed. Interpretation of Statutes – Title of the provision and its
Date of decision : 07-09-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1143/2018 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Dismissed
182NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA THR. SECRETARY MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE – [2018] 7 S.C.R. 379
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R.F. NARIMAN,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR,INDU MALHOTRA
the rights and liberties granted by the Constitution, it would be for the Court to adjudicate upon validity of such a law. (Per Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud, J.) Jurisprudence – criminal law Theories – ‘Bentham’s Utilitarian Theory’ and ‘The Harm Principle’ – Discussed. (Per Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J
Date of decision : 06-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/76/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
183YASHWANT ETC. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 654
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
accompany them as he fell sick during the investigation and accordingly, went home. We need to examine the liability of accused A-10, with the above premise in mind. 27. It is wrought in our criminal law tradition that the Courts have the responsibility to separate chaff from the husk and dredge out
Date of decision : 04-09-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/385/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
184STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs PREETAM – [2018] 10 S.C.R. 627
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,VINEET SARAN
per proviso to s.376(1) (prior to 2013 amendment) to impose imprisonment for a term less than seven years, the sentence of imprisonment of seven years imposed on the respondent is reduced to four years– criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013. Penal Code, 1860 – s.375, Sixthly – Rape – Consent of
Date of decision : 29-08-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2229/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
185KRISHAN KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. – [2018] 10 S.C.R. 869
Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,VINEET SARAN
A B C D E F G H 869 KRISHAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (Criminal Appeal No. 1088 of 2018) AUGUST 28, 2018 [R. BANUMATHI AND VINEET SARAN, JJ.] criminal law – By impugned order, High Court set aside the order of acquittal of appellant and remitted the matter to trial
Date of decision : 28-08-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1088/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
186MOHANLAL Vs THE STATE OF PUNJAB – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 1006
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,R. BANUMATHI,NAVIN SINHA
be done also – Any possibility of bias or a predetermined conclusion has to be excluded – This requirement is all the more imperative in laws carrying a reverse burden of proof – Bias – criminal law – Fair trial – Investigation – Natural justice – Evidence – Reverse burden of proof. Narcotic
Date of decision : 16-08-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1880/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
187  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
UNION BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs C.G. AJAY BABU AND ANOTHER – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 995
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
made punishable under law. That is absolutely in the realm of criminal law . It is not for the Bank to decide whether an offence has been committed. It is for the court. Apart from the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the appellant- Bank, the Bank has not set the criminal law in motion either
Date of decision : 14-08-2018 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/8251/2018 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
188TEHSEEN S. POONAWALLA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 291
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
private individual can take law into his own hands for the enforcement of criminal law in accordance with his own judgment. 15. At the very inception, while delving into the rivalised submissions advanced at the Bar, it is necessary to understand that a controversy of the present nature deserves
Date of decision : 17-07-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/754/2016 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
189  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
MOTIRAM PADU JOSHI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 267
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,R. BANUMATHI
imprisonment imposed upon each of them is confirmed. criminal law – Evidence – FIR – Non-mention of names of eye-witnesses in FIR – Effect on prosecution case – Evidence of PWs 3 and 4 is sought to be assailed on the ground that their names were not mentioned in the First Information Report (FIR
Date of decision : 10-07-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1479/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
190VINUBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATEL Vs RAJIVBHAI DUDABHAI PATEL & OTHERS – [2018] 6 S.C.R. 1050
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
branch of torts, but is applied very sparingly in criminal law only when there is a clear legislative command. To be liable for punishment under any one of the provisions, the fundamental requirement is the existence of an unlawful assembly as defined under Section 141 made punishable under
Date of decision : 16-05-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1525/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
191RUPINDER SINGH SANDHU Vs STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS – [2018] 6 S.C.R. 479
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
– Principles & Practice, 6th Edition, Krishan Vij, Elsevier; Smith J.C. & Hogan Brian, The Elements of a Crime in criminal law 5th Edition, ELBS 1983 – referred to. RUPINDER SINGH SANDHU v. STATE OF PUNJAB A B C D E F G H 486 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 6 S.C.R. Case Law Reference
Date of decision : 15-05-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/58/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
192  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
KUMAR Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2018] 5 S.C.R. 343
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,S. ABDUL NAZEER
investigation in a neutral manner, without having regards to the ultimate result. criminal law : Injuries on the accused – A duty is cast on the prosecution to furnish proper explanation to the Court how the person who has been accused of assaulting the victim received injuries on his person in
Date of decision : 11-05-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/409/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
193BHASKARRAO & ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2018] 4 S.C.R. 751
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,S. ABDUL NAZEER
brought on record by the prosecution – In view of the shortcomings and discrepancies in the prosecution case, accused persons cannot be said to have formed unlawful assembly with a view to kill the deceased – Guilt of accused not proved beyond reasonable doubt – Acquittal justified. criminal law : Motive
Date of decision : 26-04-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/408/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
194SEEMA SINGH Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – [2018] 3 S.C.R. 355
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the
Date of decision : 18-04-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/569/2018 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
195  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NAVANEETHAKRISHNAN Vs THE STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2018] 6 S.C.R. 749
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,R.K. AGRAWAL
evidence against the appellants-accused, case for interference with order of conviction is made out – Evidence Act, 1872 – ss.26 and 27. criminal law : Circumstantial evidence – Last seen theory – Presumption of guilt – Burden to rebut on accused. [2018] 6 S.C.R. 749 749 A B C D E
Date of decision : 16-04-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1134/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
196ASIAN RESURFACING OF ROAD AGENCY PVT. LTD. & ANR.v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION – [2018] 2 S.C.R. 1045
Judge Name: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,R.F. NARIMAN,NAVIN SINHA
– Arts. 21, 215, 226 and 227 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.397(2), 482 – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 – [2018] 2 S.C.R. 1045 1045 A B C D E F G H 1046 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 2 S.C.R. criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1952 – Anti-Corruption Laws (Amendment) Act, 1964
Date of decision : 28-03-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1375/2013 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Referred questions answered
197SHAKTI VAHINI Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – [2018] 3 S.C.R. 770
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
this country do not countenance such an act and, in fact, the whole activity is illegal and punishable as offence under the criminal law . [Para 44] [797-F-G] 11. The ‘Khap Panchayats’ or such assembly should not take the law into their hands and further cannot assume the character of the law
Date of decision : 27-03-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/231/2010 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
198GORUSU NAGARAJU S/O APPARAO Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2018] 3 S.C.R. 60
Judge Name: R.K. AGRAWAL,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
– Effect on prosecution case – Held: It is a well settled principle of criminal law that some minor contradiction or inconsistency in evidence cannot affect the material evidence and such contradiction or inconsistency cannot be made basis to discard the whole evidence as unreliable – It is much
Date of decision : 23-03-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1032/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
199  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
DEV KANYA TIWARI Vs THE STATE OF U.P. – [2018] 4 S.C.R. 281
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,S. ABDUL NAZEER
report is hereby submitted. Necessary action may be taken”. 13. On the basis of the aforementioned two complaints, the criminal law was set into motion. The trial Court as well as the High Court mainly relied upon the evidence of the brother of the deceased (PW5) and the opinion of the Doctor (PW 6
Date of decision : 12-03-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/720/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
200COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY) Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER – [2018] 6 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,A.K. SIKRI,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR,ASHOK BHUSHAN
– Passive euthanasia – Legal principles governing criminal law on passive euthanasia – Report by Justice M Jagannadha Rao as Chairperson of 196 th Report of Law Commission of India, elucidated. (Per Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) Euthanasia – In Gian Kaur case, the Constitution Bench held, while
Date of decision : 09-03-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/215/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
201BHARATI REDDY Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. – [2018] 3 S.C.R. 137
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
under criminal law . Based on the statement declared by the appellant, the jurisdictional Tahasildar has issued verification certificate certifying that the appellant belongs to backward Class-B Category in terms of the notification dated 13.1.1995. It is not in dispute that the statements were
Date of decision : 06-03-2018 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1763/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
202TANIYA MALIK Vs THE REGISTRAR GENERAL OF THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI – [2018] 10 S.C.R. 348
Judge Name: ARUN MISHRA,AMITAVA ROY
– Revaluation of answer-sheet and moderation of marks – Petitioners sought re-valuation of the answer-sheet of criminal law paper of the main examination and further sought moderation of marks obtained by the candidates in the examination of 2015 – Held: Supreme Court in case of Sanjay Singh has
Date of decision : 16-02-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/764/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
203  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
DATARAM SINGH Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. – [2018] 1 S.C.R. 882
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,DEEPAK GUPTA
until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet
Date of decision : 06-02-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/227/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
204  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs RAJ KUMAR – [2018] 1 S.C.R. 102
Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,R. BANUMATHI
fact which [2018] 1 S.C.R. 102 102 A B C D E F G H 103 was within his knowledge, his failure to offer any explanation is a strong militating circumstance against him. criminal law – Last seen theory – Deceased was last seen alive in the company of accused – Accused did not
Date of decision : 08-01-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/31/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
205MOHAMMED ABDULLA KHAN Vs PRAKASH K. – [2017] 12 S.C.R. 9
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,S. ABDUL NAZEER
was argued on behalf of the respondent that there is no vicarious liability in criminal law and therefore the owner of a newspaper cannot be prosecuted for the offences of defamation. The High H Court concluded that prosecution of the respondent would lead MOHAMMED ABDULLA KHAN v. PRAKASH K
Date of decision : 04-12-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2059/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
206KOSHY JACOB Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2017] 11 S.C.R. 235
Judge Name: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT
offundamental right of the people for which suitable remedy is not available to the aggrieved victims. 4. Committees appointed by this Court in the above case recommended statutory amendments for making those sponsoring such agitations accountable and punishable under the criminal law and also
Date of decision : 28-11-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/55/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
207DINUBHAI BOGHABHAI SOLANKI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – [2017] 11 S.C.R. 979
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
G not be convicted”. Emphasis here is on ensuring that innocent person should not be convicted. Convicting innocence leads to serious flaws in the criminal justice system. That has remained one of the fundamental reasons for loading the processual system in criminal law with various safeguards
Date of decision : 30-10-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/492/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
208INDEPENDENT THOUGHT Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 821
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,DEEPAK GUPTA
with the D children whereas IPC is the general criminal law . Therefore, POCSO will prevail over IPC and Exception 2 in so far as it relates to children, is inconsistent with POCSO. [Para 801 1917-C-FI 7. Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC in so far as it relates to a girl child below 18 years is
Date of decision : 11-10-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/382/2013 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
209STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Vs BRIJESH SINGH @ ARUN KUMAR AND ANR. – [2017] 11 S.C.R. 899
Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,L. NAGESWARA RAO
___ _j_J-~~L~s>-~-~-_J –~—— 1 5 i 523/10 · / 62/09 & 81/09 U/s i ASJ – 3 Tribhuvan Singh 1 I I 147/148/149/307/ f Varanasi Sh. Brijesh Singh !, I ! 120-B IPC 7 !- Sanga M Lal S ushil Singh I 1 criminal law Act. j 20/12/10 Narcndcr @ , I ! PS Lanka Varanasi I Mama Ajay i ! I II sing h @ K
Date of decision : 09-10-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1750/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
210RAVI SINHA & ORS Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND – [2017] 12 S.C.R. 913
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 913 RAVI SINHA & ORS .. v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND (Criminal Appeal No. 1561 of2008) OCTOBER 05, 2017 [A. K. SIKRI AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.J criminal law Ame111;iment Ordinance, 1944: A B ss. 12 and 13 – Appellant:~ father-public servant involved in criminal
Date of decision : 05-10-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1561/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
211M/S. METERS AND INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. Vs KANCHAN MEHTA – [2017] 10 S.C.R. 66
Judge Name: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT
year may have to be awarded and compensation under s.357( 3) is considered inadequate, having regard to the amount of the cheque, the financial capacit); and the conduct of the accused or any other circumstances. criminal law : Compounding of offence .,… Held: Though E compounding requires
Date of decision : 05-10-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1731/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
212  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PARBATBHAI AAHIR @ PARBATBHAI BHIMSINHBHAI KARMUR AND ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. – [2017] 10 S.C.R. 12
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR
of society that the offender should be punished to deter others from committing a similar crime. On the other hand, there may be offences falling in the category where the correctional objective of criminal law would have to be given more weightage than the theory of deterrence.In such a case
Date of decision : 04-10-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1723/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
213SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs SHRI KANAIYALAL BALDEVBHAI PATEL – [2017] 14 S.C.R. 268
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,N.V. RAMANA
, is whether but for the representation of the facts made by the first person, the latter would not have acted in the manner he did. This is also how the word inducement is understood in criminal law . The difference between inducement G in criminal law and the wider meaning thereof as in the
Date of decision : 20-09-2017 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2595/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
214RATANLAL Vs PRAHLAD JAT & ORS. – [2017] 8 S.C.R. 682
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,S. ABDUL NAZEER
pressure were E allowed – Held: Anyone can set the criminal law in motion except where the statute enacting or creating an offence indicates to the contrary – This general principle is founded on a policy that an offence, that is an act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being
Date of decision : 15-09-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/499/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
215BUOY SINHA ROY (D) BY LR. Vs BISWANATH DAS & ORS. – [2017] 14 S.C.R. 558
Judge Name: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT
– Different in · Civil and criminal law – Held: What may he negligence in civil law may not he .w in criminal – In criminal law . element <?f mens rea may be required and degree of negligence has to be much higher – B Whereas. res ipsa loquitur operates in domain <?f civil law, hut has limited
Date of decision : 30-08-2017 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4761/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
216STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER Vs THE l.R.C.G. AND OTHERS – [2017] 11 S.C.R. 787
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
Lord Hutton expressed the view that such damages might have ‘a valuable role to play in dealing with outrageous behaviour. The authors point out that the boundaries between n c the civil and criminal law are not rigid or immutable and the criminal process alone is not an adequate mechanism to
Date of decision : 29-08-2017 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3249/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
217JUSTICE K S PUTIASWAMY (RETD.), AND ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2017] 10 S.C.R. 569
Judge Name: J.S. KHEHAR,JASTI CHELAMESWAR,S.A. BOBDE,R.K. AGRAWAL,R.F. NARIMAN,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,S. ABDUL NAZEER
context of criminal law and procedure in matters such as handcuffing and speedy trial. [Para 150][806-D-F] H Satwant Singh Sawhney v. D Ramarathnam APO New Delhi [1967] 3 SCR 525; Suni( Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978) 4 SCC 494 : [1979] 1 SCR 392; JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) v. UNION
Date of decision : 24-08-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/494/2012 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered | Direction Issue : Referred issue answered
218SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs CLASSIC CREDIT LTD. – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 559
Judge Name: J.S. KHEHAR,ARUN MISHRA
sentence, in which case the proceeding cannot be transferred from his Court. This provision D is not like the one in A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988) 2 SCC 602 where under Section 7(1) of the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 the offence was “triable by Special Judge only”. In the instant case it
Date of decision : 21-08-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/67/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
219SURESH CHANDRA JANA Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
declaration recorded. It is -~~~~~~~~- ‘The criminal law (Amendment)Act, 2013, No. XIII of2013. 2 Parivartan Kendra v. Union oflndia and Ors., (2016) 3 SCC 571. SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL 23 & ORS. [ N.V. RAMANA, J.] specifically admitted by the treating doctor that the LO
Date of decision : 11-08-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/31/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
220MAHENDRA SUBHASHBHAI VANKHEDE Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT ETC. – [2017] 7 S.C.R. 672
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
– Moreover, after the High Court enhanced the sentence, the accused has further undergone a sentence of six months (in all more than three years), which is sufficient to meet the ends of justice – Appellant to be released forthwith, if not required in any other F case – Sentencing – The criminal law (Amendment
Date of decision : 08-08-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1365/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
221EXTRA JUDL. EXEC. VICTIM FAMILIES ASSN. & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2017] 11 S.C.R. 363
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,UDAY UMESH LALIT
constitutional criminal law . Deaths investigated by Commissions of Inquiry 5. With regard to 35 deaths dealt with in reports given by Commissions constituted under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 we find that two of the deaths: in respect ofL.D. Rengtuiwan and N. Sanjita Devi were not mentioned in
Date of decision : 14-07-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/129/2012 | Disposal Nature : Hearing Adjourned
222GIRlSH KUMAR SUNEJA Vs C.B.l. – [2017] 9 S.C.R. 544
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,KURIAN JOSEPH,A.K. SIKRI
why Amar Nath is important is that it invokes the principle, in the context of criminal law , that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. Therefore, when Section 397(2) of the Cr.P.C. prohibits interference in respect of interlocutory orders, Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be
Date of decision : 13-07-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1137/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
223  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
MUKESH & ANR. Vs STATE FOR NCT OF DELHI & ORS. – [2017] 6 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R. BANUMATHI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
– Further, the scientific examination of the articles recovered completely place them in line with the chain of events described by the prosecution. (R. Banumathi, J.) criminal law : Plea of alibi – Burden lies upon the accused persons to establish the plea convincingly by adducing cogent evidence
Date of decision : 05-05-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/607/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
224PAWAN KUMAR Vs STATE OF H.P. – [2017] 3 S.C.R. 458
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,A.M. KHANWILKAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
Constable in the presence of Medical Officer and after the victim expired the post­ mortem was conducted and an FIR was registered. After the criminal law was set in motion, the investigating agency after completing the invesrigation laid the charge sheet before the competent court which, in C turn
Date of decision : 28-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/775/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
225HEERA LAL AND ANR. Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2017] 3 S.C.R. 259
Judge Name: R.F. NARIMAN,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
618 has stated the law as follows:- “This provision was introduced by the criminal law (Second) Amendment Act, 1983 with effect from 26-12-1983 to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married women were eliminated by being forced to commit suicide by the husband or
Date of decision : 24-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/790/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
226KANAKARAJAN @ KANAKAN Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2017] 5 S.C.R. 76
Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
these prosecution witnesses. [Para 18] [84-F-H; 85-A] H 78 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 5 S.C.R. A 3. In this case the High Court while convicting the accused has overlooked settled principles of criminal law and in a mechanical way based its conclusion on the premise that the injuries
Date of decision : 21-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/841/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
227STATE (THROUGH) CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs SHRI KALYAN SINGH (FORMER CM OF UP) & ORS. – [2017] 6 S.C.R. 946
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,R.F. NARIMAN
done shortly after its Judgment dated 12 February, 2001. B c 21. In the Antulay judgment, Section 7(1) of the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952, was under consideration. Section 7(1) is reproduced herein below: “7. Cases triable by Special Judges.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in
Date of decision : 19-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/75/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
228  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SUDHA RENUKAIAH & ORS. Vs STATE OF A. P. – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 454
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
convicted the accused persons reverting the order· of acquittal. E criminal law : Interference with order of acquittal – When two views are reasonably possible, one indicating conviction and other acquittal – Normally in such case, Supreme Court not to interfere with the order of acquittal
Date of decision : 13-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/119/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
229ROOPENDRA SINGH Vs STATE OF TRIPURA & ANR. – [2017] 1 S.C.R. 930
Judge Name: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT
not have much role in the court proceedings. They need to be given certain rights and compensation, so that there is no distortion of the criminal justice system.” He submitted that the Statement of Objects and Reasons clearly stressed that the administration of criminal law has tendency to
Date of decision : 11-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/690/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
230STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs NIRMALA DEVI – [2017] 2 S.C.R. 112
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN
important. Cases of murder, rape, or other sexual offences, etc. would clearly fall in this category. After all, justice requires long-term vision. On the other hand, there may be offences falling in the category where the “correctional” objective of criminal law would have to be given more
Date of decision : 10-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/667/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
231STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs NISAR RAMZAN SAYYED – [2017] 3 S.C.R. 909
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,R.F. NARIMAN
penalty for all the G crimes other than terrorism related offences and waging war (offences affecting National Security) – Today capital punishment has become a distinctive feature of death penalty apparatus in India which somehow breaches the reformative theory of punishment under criminal law – Therefore
Date of decision : 07-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/865/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
232  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
DR. SOU JAYSHREE UJWAL INGOLE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2017] 2 S.C.R. 865
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,DEEPAK GUPTA
India. (5) The jurisprudential concept of negligence differs in civil and criminal law . What may be negligence in civil law may not necessarily be negligence in criminal law . For negligence to amount to an offence, the element of mens rea must be shown to exist. For an act to amount to
Date of decision : 06-04-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/636/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
233IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS Vs . – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 673
Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,L. NAGESWARA RAO
[2017] 4 S.C.R. 673 IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING A INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS (Suo Motu Writ (Cr!.) No. l of2017) MARCH 30, 2017 [S. A. BOBDE AND L. NAGESWARA RAO, JJ.) B criminal law – Criminal trial – Common inadequacies and deficiencies
Date of decision : 30-03-2017 | Case Number : SUO MOTO WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/1/2017 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
234NEERAJ KUMAR SAINY AND ORS. Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 881
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,AMITAVA ROY
ofinstitution of prosecution and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance. In the course of deliberation, the larger Bench observed:- ” … The object of the criminal law is to punish perpetrators of crime. This is in tune with the well-known legal maxim nullum 14 AIR 1981 Gau 41
Date of decision : 21-03-2017 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/11974/2016 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
235K. SlTARAM & ANR. Vs CFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICE LTD. & ANR. – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 850
Judge Name: R.K. AGRAWAL,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
Instruments Act,1881 – s.138. H 850 K. SITARAM & ANR. v. CFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICE 851 LTD. & ANR. criminal law : A Criminal procedure – Complaint – Issuance of process – Conditions for – Held: The only condition requisite for the issue of process is that the complainant’s deposition
Date of decision : 21-03-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2285/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
236RAM KISHAN FAUJI Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 553
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,A.M. KHANWILKAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
petition in proceedings concerning civil rights. On the other hand, if these proceedings are concerned with rights in criminal law domain, then it can be saidthat the Single Judge was exercising his ‘criminal jurisdiction’ while dealing with such a petition filed under Article 226 of the
Date of decision : 21-03-2017 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4288/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
237RAVADA SASIKALA Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR. – [2017] 2 S.C.R. 379
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,R. BANUMATHI
. Surendra Singh”, reiterated the settled proposition oflaw that one of the prime objectives of criminal law is the imposition of adequate, just, proportionate punishment which is commensurate with the nature of crime regard being had to the manner in which the offence is committed. It has been further
Date of decision : 27-02-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/406/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
238STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs SELVI J. JAYALALITHA & ORS. – [2017] 5 S.C.R. 525
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,AMITAVA ROY
under the criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 – Permissibility of – Held: Permissible – In terms of s.5(6), Special Judge is . G authorised to exercise all powers and/unctions exercisable by a District Judge under the Ordinance – Jn the instant case, the o.f)ences at the trial were u/ss.13(1
Date of decision : 14-02-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/300/2017 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
239  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
AJAY SINGH AND ANR. AND ETC. Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR. – [2017] 1 S.C.R. 286
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,AMITAVA ROY
), Dhanwanti Devi (mother-in-law) and Kiran Singh (sister-in-law) foroffences punishable under Section 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and other offences. After the criminal law was set in motion, investigating agency after commencement of investigation and after completion thereof laid charge
Date of decision : 06-01-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/32/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
240MD. SAJJAD @ RAJU @ SALIM Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2017] 1 S.C.R. 265
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,UDAY UMESH LALIT
appellant and he is acquitted of all charges. criminal law : Acquittal of accused-appellant – Entitlement of non-appealing accused to claim acquittal – Held: If on evaluation of case, a conclusion is reached that no conviction of any accused was possible the benefit of that decision must be extended
Date of decision : 06-01-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1953/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
241ABHIRAM SINGH Vs C.D. COMMACHEN (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. – [2017] 1 S.C.R. 158
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,MADAN B. LOKUR,S.A. BOBDE,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,L. NAGESWARA RAO
election and a possible disqualification of the candidate from contesting an election or voting in an election for a period. An aggravated form of any such tendency could invite action under the criminal law of the land. 32. Although we are concerned with Section 123(3) of the Act as enacted in
Date of decision : 02-01-2017 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/37/1992 | Direction Issue : REFERRED QUESTION ANSWERED
242HDFC SECURITIES LTD. & ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2016] 8 S.C.R. 968
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,AMITAVA ROY
instant case is an abuse of process of law and isl iable to be quashed. He argued that it is a settled principle that summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and the criminal law cannot be set in motion as a matter of course. Therefore, the order of the magistrate must
Date of decision : 09-12-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1213/2016 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
243GURCHARAN SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2016] 8 S.C.R. 741
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,AMITAVA ROY
13A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, while observing that the criminal law amendment bringing forth this provision was necessitated to meet the social challenge B of saving the married woman from being ill-treated or forcing to commit suicide by the husband or his relatives demanding dowry, it
Date of decision : 02-12-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1135/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
244  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ANJAN DASGUPTA Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. – [2016] 12 S.C.R. 90
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,ASHOK BHUSHAN
A B c D E F G H [2016) 12 S.C.R. 90 ANJAN DASGUPTA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 298 of2006) NOVEMBER25, 2016 (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.] criminal law : Murder Case – Re-appreciation of evidence – Two possible views
Date of decision : 25-11-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/298/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
245RAMESH AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2016] 8 S.C.R. 936
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,AMITAVA ROY
the trial court is perverse on facts or law. Upon examination of the evidence before it, the appellate court should be fully convinced that the findings returned by the trial court are really erroneous and contrary to the settled principles of criminal law .” 953 A B c 23. The Court
Date of decision : 22-11-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2526/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
246K.V. PRAKASH BABU Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2016] 11 S.C.R. 509
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,AMITAVA ROY
MISRA, J.] necessary ingredients in order to attract the provision are established. In this regard, we may reproduce a passage from Pinakin Maltipatray Rawat (supra):- ” criminal law amendment and the rule of procedure was necessitated so as to meet the social challenge of saving the married
Date of decision : 22-11-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1138/2016
247BAIJNATH & OTHERS Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2016] 11 S.C.R. 764
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,AMITAVA ROY
– Evidence Act, 1872-s. JJ 3-B. B criminal law -ss.304-B, !PC and 113-B, Evidence Act, 1872- Scope and purport of – “soon before death” – Reiterated. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 Cruelty or harassment of the lady by her husband or his relative for or in connection with any demand for
Date of decision : 18-11-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1097/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
248YOGESH SINGH Vs MAHABEER SINGH & ORS. – [2016] 7 S.C.R. 713
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,AMITAVA ROY
evidence because they are afraid that giving evidence might invite the wrath of the assailants and might expose them to very serious risks. It is quite true that it is the duty of a citizen to assist the prosecution by giving evidence and helping the administration of criminal law to bring the
Date of decision : 20-10-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1482/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
249HIRAL P. HARSORA AND ORS. Vs KUSUM NAROTTAMDAS HARSORA AND ORS. – [2016] 9 S.C.R. 515
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,R.F. NARIMAN
clauses explain the various provisions contained in the Bill.” 14. A cursory reading of the statement of objects and reasons makes it clear that the phenomenon of domestic violence against women is widely prevalent and needs redressal. Whereas criminal law does offer some redressal, civil law does
Date of decision : 06-10-2016 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/10084/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
250A. AYYASAMY Vs A. PARAMASIVAM & ORS. – [2016] 11 S.C.R. 521
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
appellant to suspend the supply of its petroleum products to an erring dealer. The power exercised by the appellant in such a situation is a contractual power under the agreement and not a statutory one under the 1985 Act. The existence of dual procedure; one under the criminal law and the
Date of decision : 04-10-2016 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/8245/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
251SOMASUNDARAM @ SOMU Vs STATE REP. BY DY. COMM. OF POLICE – [2016] 7 S.C.R. 263
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,ARUN MISHRA
the offence of abetment by conspiracy as defined ins. 107 of the Indian Penal Code. Section I 20A which defines the offence of criminal conspiracy ands. 1208 which punishes the offence are in Ch. VA of the Indian Penal Code. This Chapter introduced into the criminal law of India a new offence
Date of decision : 28-09-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/403/2010 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
252SAMPELLY SATYANARAYANA RAO Vs INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED – [2016] 6 S.C.R. 531
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
, however refers to the c7ieques towards repayment of installments of loan – Ther(ore, once the loan was advanced and the installment had fallen due on the date of the cheque as per the agreement. dishonour of such cheques would-fall u_uder s.138. ·• criminal law – Quashing of complaint’- Held: While
Date of decision : 19-09-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/867/2016 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
253  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PANKAJ Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2016] 5 S.C.R. 816
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,R.K. AGRAWAL
– Moreover, the prosecution was~not able to prove the motive clearly – Appellant entitled to benefit of doubt – Conviction set aside. criminal law : Use of weapon – Held: In a case where death is due to injuries or wounds’caused by a lethal weapon, it is always the duty of the prosecution to
Date of decision : 09-09-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2135/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
254  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF GUJARAT Vs JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU – [2016] 3 S.C.R. 265
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,R.K. AGRAWAL
) [277- G-H] 3. The burden of proof in criminal law is beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and it is also the rule of justice in criminal law that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one
Date of decision : 11-07-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1236/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
255EXTRA JUDICIAL EXECUTION VICTIM FAMILIES ASSOCIATION (EEVFAM) & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2016] 4 S.C.R. 909
Judge Name: MADAN B. LOKUR,UDAY UMESH LALIT
criminal law remedy provides an adequate answer. A particular situation of internal disturbance has prevailed for decades and the ordinary citizens of Manipur have had little access and recourse to law in the situation that they find themselves placed in. To make matters worse, FIRs have been
Date of decision : 08-07-2016 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/129/2012 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Listed for further proceedings
256U. SUBHADRAMMA & ORS. Vs STATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUB. PROSECUTOR & ANR. – [2016] 3 S.C.R. 469
Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,AMITAVA ROY
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 469 U. SUBHADRAMMA & ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUB. PROSECUTOR & ANR. (Criminal Appeal No. 1596of201 I) JULY 04, 2016 [S.A. BOBDE AND AMITAVA ROY, JJ.] criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 -: Clause 3 – Application for attachment of property – Misappropriation
Date of decision : 04-07-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1596/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
257SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Vs UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW & ORS. – [2016] 3 S.C.R. 865
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
, and the controls, restrictions and constrictions, under the assumed power of”reasonableness” ingrained in the statutory provisions relating to criminal law to reviver and uphold one’s reputation. The assertion by the Union oflndia and the complainants is that tl1e reasonable restrictions are based
Date of decision : 13-05-2016 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/184/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
258STATE THROUGH CBI, CHENNAI Vs V. ARUL KUMAR – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 486
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,R.K. AGRAWAL
of the Code. Suh-section (2) of Section 306 makes it clear that this Section applies even to those offences which are triable exclusively by the Court of Session or hy the G Court of a Special Judge appointed under the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952. Thus, even where the cases are triable by
Date of decision : 13-05-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/499/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
259NIDHI KAIM Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS ETC. – [2016] 7 S.C.R. 822
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
qualified human resources which require enormous amounts of energy, time and other material resources to generate – Appellants whatever by their role in tampering of the examination process must have been juveniles and cannot be subjected to punishment under criminal law – For the said reasons
Date of decision : 12-05-2016 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1727/2016 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Matter referred to CJI
260HEMANT MADHUSUDAN NERURKAR Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 1052
Judge Name: J.S. KHEHAR,C. NAGAPPAN
is an unreasonable restriction. Learned counsel argued that in criminal law , the doctrine of vicarious liability is unknown and if a director is to be punished for some thing of which he is not actually guilty, it would violate his fundamental right as enshrined in Article 21 of the
Date of decision : 04-05-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/442/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
261  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
HARIJAN BHALA TEJA Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 203
Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,PRAFULLA C. PANT
– Burden to prove – Death of a women – Held: It was only the husband-appellant who was staying with his wife at the time of her death to show as to in what manner she died particularly when the prosecution proved successfully that F she died homicidal death. G criminal law : Acquittal by
Date of decision : 27-04-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2031/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
262STATE OF M.P. & ANR. Vs RAJVEER SINGH & ORS. – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 1047
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,ARUN MISHRA
. & ANR. v. RAJVEER SIN.GH & ORS. fARUN MISHRA, J.l “We are not prepared to say that the crime alleged to have been committed by the accused persons was a crime against an individual, on the other hand it was a crime against the society at large. criminal law is designed as a mechanism for
Date of decision : 25-04-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/446/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
263AMANULLAH AND ANR. Vs STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 1027
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,UDAY UMESH LALIT
that the case at hand related to the grave offence of murder and that the criminal proceedings related thereto should not lightly be interfered with. criminal law : Cognizance of offence – Duty of court at the stage of taking cognizance of offence – Held: At the stage of taking cognizance, the
Date of decision : 12-04-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/299/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
264  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ETC. – [2016] 4 S.C.R. 288
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
with a company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A clear case should be spelled out in the complaint against the person sought to be made liable. Section 141 of the Act contains the requirements for making
Date of decision : 06-04-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/271/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
265STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. Vs BRIJESHWAR SINGH CHAHAL & ANR. – [2016] 4 S.C.R. 685
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,KURIAN JOSEPH
who lack in adequate knowledge of criminal law being appointed. There is even the likelihood of some of such appointees not maintaining the highest standards of conduct expected of a Public Prosecutor. Thus, while consultation under sec. 24(4) with the Sessions Judge cannot be dispensed with, we
Date of decision : 30-03-2016 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3194/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
266  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ANANT PRAKASH SINHA @ ANANT SINHA Vs STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 128
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
the appellant-husband and the wife, the 2″‘ respondent herein, as a consequence of which she was compelled to set the criminal law in motion by lodging FIR No. 376 dated 23.11.2013 which was registered G for the offences punishable under Section 498A/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (!PC
Date of decision : 04-03-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/131/2016
267  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAM LAXMAN Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 123
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
of criminal law in India that only on account of detecting some falsehood in the statement of a witness who is otherwise consistent and reliable, his entire testimony should not be discarded. It is equally settled law that if a witness is found un-clependable and un-reliable his evidence
Date of decision : 03-03-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/140/2007
268FRAUD CELL Vs RAMESH GELL! AND OTHERS – [2016] 1 S.C.R. 762
Judge Name: RANJAN GOGOI,PRAFULLA C. PANT
, was amended in 1964 based on the recommendations of the Santhanan Committee. There are provisions in Chapter IX of the Indian Penal Code to deal with public servants and those who abet them by way of criminal misconduct. There are also provisions in the criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944, to
Date of decision : 23-02-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1077/2013 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
269  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
MUKUND DEWANGAN Vs ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ETC. – [2016] 3 S.C.R. 1075
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,ARUN MISHRA
assured, take an exception to pay the assured or a third party, they must prove a wilful violation of the law by the assured. In some cases, violation of criminal law , particularly violation of the provisions of the MV Act, may result in absolving the insurers but, the same may not necessarily
Date of decision : 11-02-2016 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5826/2011 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
270M/S. V. L. S. FINANCE LTD. Vs S. P. GUPTA AND ANR. – [2016] 1 S.C.R. 623
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA
labyrinthine that has the potentiality to divert the mind. Hence, it is D E F G H 628 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R. imperative to exposit facts after due filtration. The appellant set the criminal law in motion by filing an FIR No. 90 of2000 at Police
Date of decision : 05-02-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/99/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
271DHARAM PAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. – [2016] 1 S.C.R. 194
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
consequences in case she disclosed the incident. The incident, as alleged, occurred on 06.08.2012. Despite the threat, the daughter disclosed the incident to her parents. Keeping in view the future of the girl and the social repercussions, they G chose to suffer in silence rather than set the criminal law in
Date of decision : 29-01-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/85/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
272POOJA PAL Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2016] 11 S.C.R. 560
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,AMITAVA ROY
– criminal law – Investigation. Administration of Justice – Judiciary – Purpose of – Held: A court of lmv has to be an involved participant in the quest for truth and justice and is not expected only to officiate a formal ritual in a proceeding forseeing an inevitable end signaling travesty of
Date of decision : 22-01-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/77/2016 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
273PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF A.P. HYDERABAD, A.P. & ANR. Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS PUBLIC – [2016] 1 S.C.R. 103
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,A.K. SIKRI,R. BANUMATHI
a breach of criminal law and if one does then he/she will be liable for all the consequences of such breach. criminal law and matrimonial home are not strangers. Crimes committed in matrimonial home are as much punishable as anywhere else. In BOBBILI RAMAKRISHNA RAJU YADAV v. STATE OF A. P
Date of decision : 19-01-2016 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/45/2016 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
274GAUTAM KUNDU Vs MANOJ KUMAR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, EASTERN REGION, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT(PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT) GOVT. OF INDIA – [2015] 15 S.C.R. 499
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,R.K. AGRAWAL
, which imposes punishment for any contravention of the SEBI Act, Rules or Regulations and does not precisely define or specify any offence in particular. Inclusion F of Section 24 as a separate offence would be a violation of the basic principle of criminal jurisprudence that ‘ criminal law has to
Date of decision : 16-12-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1706/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
275STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. Vs BRIJLAL SADASUKH MODANI – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 1158
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
the Indian Penal Code to deal with public servants H and those who abet them by way of criminal misconduct. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. BRIJLALSADASUKH 1171 MODANI [DIPAK MISRA, J.] There are also provisions in the criminal law A Amendment Ordinance, 1944, to enable attachment of ill-gotten
Date of decision : 15-12-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1329/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
276YOGENDRA KUMAR JAISWAL ETC. Vs STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. – [2015] 14 S.C.R. 1037
Judge Name: ANIL R. DAVE,DIPAK MISRA
demonstrable that the State Government had sought assent of the President in · C respect of certain provisions of the 1988 Act, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944. On a perusal of the communication and the .finding recorded by the High Court and
Date of decision : 10-12-2015 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6448/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
277MAYA DEVI & ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2015] 11 S.C.R. 903
Judge Name: VIKRAMAJIT SEN,R.K. AGRAWAL
provision was introduced by the criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 to resolve the diffic;:ulty of proof where married women are forced to commit suicide but incriminating evidence is difficult to get as it is usually available within the four walls of the matrimonial home ….. ” B
Date of decision : 07-12-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1263/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
278UNION OF INDIA Vs V. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN & ORS. – [2015] 14 S.C.R. 613
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,UDAY UMESH LALIT,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
Schedule of the Constitution. What is prescribed in the proviso to Article 73(1 )(a) is in relation to “matters with respect to which the legislature of the State has also power to make laws” (Emphasis supplied). In other words, having regard to the fact that ‘ criminal law is one of the items
Date of decision : 02-12-2015 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/48/2014 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
279SUBRATA CHATIORAJ Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 660
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,C. NAGAPPAN
, this Court held that the mental agony, expense and strain which a person proceeded against in criminal law has to undergo and which, coupled with delay, may result in impairing the capability or ability of the accused G to defend himself have persuaded the constitutional court of the country in
Date of decision : 16-10-2015 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/401/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
280NEERU YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANR. – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 802
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
, Yashvir Yadav. On the basis of the lodging of the FIR, the criminal law was set in motion and eventually chargesheet was filed which D formed the subject matter of Case Crime No. 237 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 394, 411, 454, 506, 1208 read with
Date of decision : 29-09-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1272/2015 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
281INTERNATIONAL ADVANCED RESEARCH CENTRE FOR POWDER METALLURGY AND NEW MATERIALS (ARCI) &ORS. Vs NIMRA CERGLASS TECHNICS (P) LTD.&ANR. – [2015] 11 S.C.R. 299
Judge Name: J.S. KHEHAR,R. BANUMATHI
legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available G in criminal law , a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings are unwarranted and his remedy lies only in civil law, should himself be made accountable
Date of decision : 22-09-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2128/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
282STATE, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH Vs R. VASANTHI STANLEY &ANR. – [2015] 9 S.C.R. 772
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
erred in quashing the proceedings – The assertions as regards the ignorance are a mere .pretence and sans substance given the facts – Lack of awareness, knowledge or intent is neither to be considered nor accepted in economic offence -: An offence under the criminal law is an offence and it does
Date of decision : 15-09-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2006/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
283AG Vs SHIV KUMAR YADAV &ANR. – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 455
Judge Name: J.S. KHEHAR,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
trial as per the new scheme and design in accordance with his acumen and legal expertise.” 23. The High Court made a reference to the criminal law Amendment Act, 2013 providing for trial relating to offences under Section 376 and other specified offences being F completed within two months from
Date of decision : 10-09-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1187/2015 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
284DR. (SMT.) MANORAMA TIWARI AND OTHERS Vs SURENDRA NATH RAI – [2015] 9 S.C.R. 436
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
medical professional amounts to a rash or negligent act within the domain of criminal law 1 (2005) 6 sec 1 H p ~) c f) E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 9 S.C.R. under Section 304-A IPC. The criminal process once initiated subjects the medical professional to serious
Date of decision : 10-09-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1193/2015 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
285VIKRAM SINGH@ VICKY &ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 816
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,R.K. AGRAWAL,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
recommendations of the Law Commission appear to have languished for nearly two decades before the criminal law (Amendment) Bill, 1992 was presented to the Parliament by the Government proposing to add to the I PC Section 364A H in a form slightly different from the one in which the Law
Date of decision : 21-08-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/824/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
286RAJ BALA Vs STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC. ETC. – [2015] 9 S.C.R. 113
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
[2015] 9 S.C.R. be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross-cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and the courts are required to mould the sentencing system to meet the challenges. The contagion of lawlessness would
Date of decision : 18-08-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1049/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
287BABLU KUMARAND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAIR AND ANR. – [2015] 8 S.C.R. 512
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
. It was mentioned in the FIR that the D occurrence had taken place as the family of the informant and the accused persons were in litigating terms. On the basis of the FIR, criminal law was set in motion and eventually, the investigating agency submitted the charge-sheet for the offences which
Date of decision : 20-07-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/914/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
288S.R. SUKUMAR Vs S. SUNAAD RAGHURAM – [2015] 9 S.C.R. 1105
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,R. BANUMATHI
Ors., (2008) 2 SCC 492, considering the scope of expression “cognizance” it was held as under:- c “The expression “cognizance” has not been defined in the Code. Butthe word (cognizance) is of indefinite import. It has no esoteric or mystic significance in criminal law . It merely means
Date of decision : 02-07-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/844/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
289STATE OF M.P. Vs MADAN LAL – [2015] 7 S.C.R. 998
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
to her mother which led to lodging of an FIR by the mother of the prosecutrix. On the basis of the FIR lodged, E criminal law was set in motion, and thereafter the investigating agency examined number of witnesses, seized the clothes of the respondent-accused, sent certain articles for
Date of decision : 01-07-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/231/2015 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
290  English           हिन्दी – Hindi          தமிழ் – Tamil Disclaimer
STATE OF U.P. Vs SATVEER & ORS. – [2015] 8 S.C.R. 306
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,UDAY UMESH LALIT
(Fast Track Court), Bulandshahar in Sessions Trial No.516 of 2006 for having committed the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 7 of criminal law Amendment Act. The prosecution in support of its case examined seven witnesses including two E Doctors namely PWs3 and 7 and
Date of decision : 01-07-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/623/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
291DEVI DAS RAMACHANDRA TULJAPURKAR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA& ORS. – [2015] 7 S.C.R. 853
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
RAMACHANDRA TULJAPURKAR v. 877 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DIPAK MISRA, J.] have got no inspiration; they have got no thought. They A have got nothing. They are just filth and ought to be stamped out. But in our desire for a healthy society, if we drive the criminal law too far, further than it ought to
Date of decision : 14-05-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1179/2010 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
292  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PURUSHOTIAM DASHRATH BORATE &ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2015] 5 S.C.R. 1112
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,S.A. BOBDE,ARUN MISHRA
for. Sentence/Sentencing: Death sentence – Aggravating and mitigating circumstances – Discussed. criminal law : Rule of proportionality – Held: criminal law requires strict rule of proportionality in awarding punishment and same must be in accordance with the culpability of criminal act
Date of decision : 08-05-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1439/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
293  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NANDA GOPALAN Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2015] 4 S.C.R. 563
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
, mitigating and extenuating and other attending circumstances. In State of M.P. vs. Ghanshyam Singh5 , it was observed : “13. criminal law adheres in general to the principle o of proportionality in prescribing liability according to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct. It ordinarily
Date of decision : 24-04-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/714/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
294MOHAN LAL Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2015] 5 S.C.R. 435
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,S.A. BOBDE
quoting the observations of Beaumount, C.J. in an earlier Full Bench decision of that Court observed: “Even so, this expression has acquired a well-recognised o meaning in criminal law . If an act committed by an accused person constitutes an offence and if that act continues from day to day
Date of decision : 17-04-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1393/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
295MS.S Vs SUNIL KUMAR & ANR. – [2015] 5 S.C.R. 274
Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,UDAY UMESH LALIT
examination G supported her testimony – Case against the accused­ respondent was proved- Respondent was liable to conviction – Test Identification Parade. criminal law : Identification by prosecutrix for the first H time in court – Reliability of. 274 MS. S v. SUNIL KUMAR & ANR. 275 Allowing the
Date of decision : 10-04-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1581/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
296RAJA @ RAJINDER Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 947
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA
in consuming poppy husk and the father of the appellant 0 had a suspicion that the deceased was instrumental in making his son a drug addict. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an FIR No. 45 dated 20.1.2003 was lodged at the police station Rania. After the criminal law was set in
Date of decision : 10-04-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/486/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
297MEHMOOD UL REHMAN Vs KHAZIR MOHAMMAD TUNDA AND ORS. – [2015] 4 S.C.R. 841
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
exercise under Section 204 of CrPC of summoning an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and that the process of criminal law cannot be set into motion in a B mechanical manner. It was also held that the order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind
Date of decision : 31-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1347/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
298STATE OF PUNJAB Vs SAURABH BAKSHI – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 590
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
forgotten that the purpose of criminal law legislated by the competent legislatures, subject to judicial scrutiny within constitutionally established parameters, is to 0 protect the collective interest and save every individual that forms a constituent of the collective from unwarranted hazards
Date of decision : 30-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/520/2015
299SHREYA SINGHAL Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2015] 5 S.C.R. 963
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,R.F. NARIMAN
pith and substance would fall within Entry 1 List Ill which speaks of criminal law and would thus be within the competence C of the State Legislature in any case. [Paras 104 and 105] [1065-B, G-H] 10.2 Unders.118(d) ofKerala Police Act, causing annoyance in an indecent manner suffers from the
Date of decision : 24-03-2015 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/167/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
300MRS. PRIYANKASRIVASTAVAANDANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS – [2015] 4 S.C.R. 108
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
higher forum and D if, a borrower is allowed to take recourse to criminal law in the manner it has been taken it, needs no special emphasis to state, has the inherent potentiality to affect the marrows of economic health of the nation. It is clearly noticeable that the E statutory remedies have
Date of decision : 19-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/781/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
301RAMDEV FOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2015] 5 S.C.R. 283
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,R. BANUMATHI
partnership deed is an issue. The process of criminal law cannot be used when a dispute is primarily of civil nature. Simultaneously initiation of criminal proceedings may be permitted where an offence is shown to have been committed. Thus, the Magistrate was E entitled to satisfy himself as to whether
Date of decision : 16-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/600/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
302TUKARAM DNYANESHWAR PATIL Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 526
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,C. NAGAPPAN
and complainant have challenged this alteration of sentence. Sentencing is an important task in the matters of crime. One of the prime objectives of the criminal law is imposition of appropriate, F adequate, just and proportionate sentence commensurate with the nature and gravity of crime and
Date of decision : 13-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/442/2015 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
303  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PAWAN KUMAR @ MONU MITTAL Vs STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH & ANR. – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 876
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,N.V. RAMANA
criminal law into motion – Thus, the accused cannot take shelter u/s. 25. Dismissing the appeals, the Court F HELD: 1.1 The statements made by an accused before police official which amount to confession is barred under Section 25 of the Evidence Act. This prohibition is, however, lifted to
Date of decision : 11-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2194/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
304MD.ALl @ GUDDU Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 416
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA
the criminal law was set in motion, the investigating agency commenced the search of the victim. As the factual matrix would uncurtain, Abrar had along with co-villagers, G namely, Arif s/o Md. Rafi, Zulfi, Papal, Shafiq and others had gone in search of his sister, they had reached village Loni
Date of decision : 10-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2238/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
305SATISH KUMAR JAYANTI LAL DABGAR Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2015] 2 S.C.R. 751
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,A.K. SIKRI
said provision with sound rationale and there is an important objective behind such a provision. It is considered that a minor is incapable of thinking rationally E and giving any consent. For this reason, whether it is civil law or criminal law , the consent of a minor is not treated as valid
Date of decision : 10-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/230/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
306NAGARAJ Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SALEM TOWN, TAMIL NADU – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 450
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
answers of the accused u/s. 313 CrPC evasive and u_ntrustworthy, and held this to be another factor indicating his guilt. Section 313 is of seminal importance in our criminal law B jurisdiction. [Para 14] [463-D-E] 1.5 Refusal to answer any question put to the accused by the court in relation to
Date of decision : 10-03-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1311/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
307  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAMAKANT MISHRA @ LALU ETC. Vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS. – [2015] 2 S.C.R. 961
Judge Name: VIKRAMAJIT SEN,R.K. AGRAWAL
at the time of consideration of bail application – The alleged exculpating Dying Declaration was, therefore, shrouded in suspicion – Defence having failed to give credible version of their innocence, interference with B the order of conviction not called for. criminal law : Dying declaration
Date of decision : 27-02-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1279/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
308  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
GHUSABHAI RAISANGBHAI CHORASIYA & ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2015] 2 S.C.R. 594
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,DIPAK MISRA
thereafter reported at H GHUSABHAI RAISANGBHAI CHORASIYA v. 598 STATE OF GUJARAT [DIPAK MISRA, J.) the Police Station in Jamnagar. After the criminal law was set A in motion, the investigating agency proceeded with the · investigation and recorded the statements of 25 witnesses and eventually
Date of decision : 18-02-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/262/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
309KRISHNAMOORTHY Vs SIVAKUMAR & ORS. – [2015] 4 S.C.R. 987
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT
Review the Working of the Constitution (2001 ), (vi) Election Commission of India – Proposed Electoral Reforms (2004), (vii) the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2008), (viii) Justice J.S. Verma Committee Report on Amendments to criminal law (2013), and (ix) Law Commission Report
Date of decision : 05-02-2015 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1478/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
310SANJAYSINH RAMRAO CHAVAN Vs DATTATRAY GULABRAO PHALKE AND OTHERS – [2015] 1 S.C.R. 130
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
the Code. But the word (cognizance) is of indefinite import. It has no esoteric or mystic significance in criminal law . It merely means “become aware of’ and when used with reference to a court or a Judge, it connotes “to take notice of judicially”. It indicates the point when a court or a
Date of decision : 16-01-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/97/2015 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
311STATE OF PUNJAB Vs BAWA SINGH – [2015] 1 S.C.R. 709
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,KURIAN JOSEPH
instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross-cultural conflict where living law mu~t find answer to the new challenges and the courts E F are required to mould the sentencing system to meet the challenges. The contagion of lawlessness would undermine social order and lay it in
Date of decision : 15-01-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/90/2015 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
312STATE OF U.P. Vs OM PRAKASH – [2015] 1 S.C.R. 667
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,N.V. RAMANA
/149 IPC, 307/149 IPC, 506 IPC, Sectivil 7 of the criminal law Amendment Act and Section 4 C read with Section 25 of the Arms Act. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses out of whom Lalta Prasad (PW 1 ), Leelawati (PW 2), Ved Prakash (PW 3) and Hari Shankar (PW 4) are
Date of decision : 13-01-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1187/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
313SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION – [2015] 1 S.C.R. 377
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,MADAN B. LOKUR,A.K. SIKRI
Code? We have already pointed out earlier the two alternative modes in which the criminal law can be set in motion; by the filing of information with the police under Section 154 of the Code or upon receipt of a complaint or information by a Magistrate. The former would lead to investigation by
Date of decision : 09-01-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/34/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
314SHER SINGH @ PARTAPA Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2015] 1 S.C.R. 29
Judge Name: VIKRAMAJIT SEN,KURIAN JOSEPH
again to what was required to free society of this pernicious practice. G 6. As is evident from a perusal of the Statement of Objects and Reasons to the criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 [Act 46 of 1983], Parliament continued to be concerned with the increasing number of dowry deaths
Date of decision : 09-01-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1592/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
315VINOD KUMAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2015] 1 S.C.R. 328
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA
. After the H criminal law was set in motion, the Investigating Officer VINOD KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 333 [DIPAK MISRA, J.] proceeded to village lkkas, where the house of Jagbir Singh A is situate, prepared .the site plan, seized two other letters, Exhibits P1 and P2, written by Vined, vide
Date of decision : 08-01-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1401/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
316POOJA RAVINDER DEVIDASANI Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA&ANR. – [2014] 14 S.C.R. 1468
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,N.V. RAMANA
responsible for the conduct of business of the Company. .. . Code ofCiiminal Procedure, 1973 :- s. 482- Criminal proceeding – Initiated u/s. 138 rlw. s.’ 141 of Negotiable . Instruments Act- Quashing of Held: criminal law n·ot to be E set into motion as a matter of course without examining nature of
Date of decision : 17-12-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2604/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
317  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
VIJAY PAL SINGH AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF UTIARAKHAND – [2014] 12 S.C.R. 517
Judge Name: KURIAN JOSEPH,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
known to the law, and if those facts can be proved · D without much difficulty, the existing criminal law can be resorted to for bringing the offender to book. In practice, however, two main impediments arise- (i) (ii) either the facts do not fully fit into the pigeon-hole of any known
Date of decision : 16-12-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/37/2011 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
318KUNWARPAL @ SURAJPAL & ORS. Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR. – [2014] 11 S.C.R. 245
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,C. NAGAPPAN
information furnished by PW2 about the occurrence. 8 There is no requirement of law for mentioning the names of all the witnesses in the FIR, the object of which is only to set the criminal law in motion. The statements of all witnesses were recorded by the Investigation Officer in the night of
Date of decision : 09-12-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/820/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
319THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC (LAW AND ORDER-F) AND ANOTHER. Vs NABILA AND ANOTHER. – [2014] 12 S.C.R. 405
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
there be pending bail application or in case if it is moved in future is decided. The word “likely” shows it can be either way. So without taking any such risk if on the facts and circumstances of each case, the type of crime to be dealt with under the E criminal law , including contents of the
Date of decision : 09-12-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2545/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
320SURESH &ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2014] 13 S.C.R. 760
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
in the decades that followed. Interestingly the clock appears to have come full circle by the law makers and courts going back in a great measure to what was in ancient times common place. Harvard Law Review (1984) in an article on “Victim Restitution in criminal law Process: A Procedural
Date of decision : 28-11-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/420/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
321BALJINDER KAUR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2014] 13 S.C.R. 985
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,R. BANUMATHI
. Police investigation is therefore the foundation stone on which the C entire edifice of the criminal law rests. It is by the action of the investigating officer that the criminal law becomes an actual positive force. Proper investigation is necessary for obtaining a complete picture of all the
Date of decision : 19-11-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1142/2011 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
322STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs SURENDRA SINGH – [2014] 13 S.C.R. 554
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
the challenges confronting the society. Friedman in his Law E in Changing Society stated that: ‘State of criminal law continues to be-as it should be-a decisive reflection of social consciousness of society.’ Therefore, in operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective
Date of decision : 13-11-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2401/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
323UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs M/S. AGARWAL IRON INDUSTRIES – [2014] 11 S.C.R. 181
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,UDAY UMESH LALIT
is to maintain social security in its 8 broadest sense. The process is widely recognized in all civilized countries. Our own criminal law accepted its necessity and usefulness in Sections 96 to 103 and Section 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In M.P. Sharma v. Salish Chandra6 the challenge to
Date of decision : 12-11-2014 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7499/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
324BINOD KUMAR & ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. – [2014] 11 S.C.R. 85
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,R. BANUMATHI
.” 14. While no one with a legitimate cause or grievance C should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law , a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings are unwarranted and his remedy lies only in civil law
Date of decision : 30-10-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2327/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
325J.V. BAHARUNI & ANR. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 1061
Judge Name: RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,N.V. RAMANA
Section 326, Cr.P.C. observed: “12. Section 326 is part of the general provisions as to inquiries and trials contained in Chapter XXIV of the Code. It is one of the important principles of criminal law that the J.V. BAHARUNI & ANR. v. STATE OF GUJARAT 1081 [N.V. RAMANA, J.] Judge who hears
Date of decision : 16-10-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2221/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
326STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs SMT. SUVARNAMMA & ANR. – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 778
Judge Name: V. GOPALA GOWDA,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
reasonable doubt is the same as proof which affords moral certainty to the Judge. 9. Francis Wharton, a celebrated writer on criminal law in the United States has quoted from judicial pronouncements in his book Wharton’s Criminal C Evidence (at p. 31, Vol. 1 of the 12th Edn.) as follows: “It is
Date of decision : 14-10-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/785/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
327RAJIB RANJAN & ORS. Vs R. VIJAYKUMAR – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 982
Judge Name: JASTI CHELAMESWAR,A.K. SIKRI
or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.” 14. While no one with a legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law , a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings are unwarranted
Date of decision : 14-10-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/729/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
328R. N. AGARWAL Vs R. C. BANSAL & ORS. – [2014] 14 S.C.R. 1124
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE
person is convicted. (6) A special Judge, whiletrying an offence punishable under thisAct, shall exercise all the powers and functions exercisable by a District Judge under the criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 (Ord. 38of1944).” 23.Abare reading of the provision would show that the G
Date of decision : 14-10-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2199/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
329  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
MOFIL KHAN & ANR. Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 812
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,R.K. AGRAWAL,ARUN MISHRA
executes a deliberately planned crime inspite of understanding the probable consequence of his act, C the death sentence may be the most appropriate punishment. We are mindful that criminal law requires strict adherence to the rule of proportionality in providing punishment according to the
Date of decision : 09-10-2014 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1795/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
330MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,J.S. KHEHAR,JASTI CHELAMESWAR,A.K. SIKRI,R.F. NARIMAN
– It is obvious, that substantial questions of law which relate to taxation would also involve many areas of civil and criminal law – It is, therefore, not correct to say that taxation, being a specialized subject, can be dealt with by a tribunal – All substantial questions of law B have
Date of decision : 25-09-2014 | Case Number : TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL)/150/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
331STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH CBI Vs VIKRAM ANANTRAI DOSHI AND OTHERS – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 506
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
Counsel for CBI the manner in which the letters of credits were issued and the funds were siphoned has a foundation in criminal law . Learned counsel would submit that it does not depict a case which has overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour. The intrinsic character is different
Date of decision : 19-09-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2048/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
332SUKHJIT SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 608
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,A.K. SIKRI
life spark. 3. After the criminal law was set in motion the concerned investigating officer recorded the statement of witnesses. It is apt to note here that on the basis of an order passed in a writ petition the investigation was entrusted to the crime branch, G Punjab Police and the said
Date of decision : 11-09-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/263/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
333STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Vs SANJAY – [2014] 9 S.C.R. 1063
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE
municipality and was prosecuted for offences among others under s. 409 of the Indian Penal Code and s. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for c misappropriat+on of sums entrusted to him as such tax­ collector. By virtue of the provision contained in s. 7 of the criminal law Amendment Act, XLVI of
Date of decision : 04-09-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/499/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
334DENY BORA Vs STATE OF ASSAM – [2014] 7 S.C.R. 1111
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
Sonitpur district and on the basis of the said FIR Station Case No. 20/91 u/s 302/34 IPC read with Sections 3/4 of TADA was registered which set the criminal law in motion. B 3. During investigation, certain incriminating documents belonging to Assam United Reservation Movement were recovered
Date of decision : 27-08-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/679/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
335MANOJ NARULA Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2014] 9 S.C.R. 965
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,DIPAK MISRA,MADAN B. LOKUR,KURIAN JOSEPH,S.A. BOBDE
J.S. Verma Committee Report on Amendments to criminal law (2013), and (ix) Law Commission Report (2014). 10. Vohra Committee Report and other Reports have been C taken note of on various occasions by this Court. Justice J.S. Verma Committee Report on Amendments to criminal law has proposed
Date of decision : 27-08-2014 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/289/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
336STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs BABLU – [2014] 9 S.C.R. 467
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE
one of the prime objectives of criminal law is the imposition of adequate, just, proportionate punishment which is commensurate with the gravity and nature of the crime E and manner in which the offence is committed. One should keep in mind the social interest and consciousness of the
Date of decision : 26-08-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1845/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
337SHAILESHBHAI @ PAPPU BALUBHAI CHUNARA & ANR. Vs STATE OF GUJRAT – [2014] 8 S.C.R. 1075
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,V. GOPALA GOWDA
, Shailesbhai @ Pappu Balubhai Chunara, aided and abetted the offence. On the basis of the statement made by the deceased on 13.12.2001, the criminal law was set in motion and accused persons were arrested. The dying declarations of Champaben H 1078 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 8 S.C.R. A were
Date of decision : 07-08-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1974/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
338MANZOOR ALI KHAN Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2014] 7 S.C.R. 569
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
criminal law into motion except where the statute enacting or creating E an offence indicates to the contrary. The s~heme of the F Code of Criminal Procedure envisages two parallel and independent agencies for ‘taking crimif}al offences to court. Even for the most serious offence of murder, it was
Date of decision : 06-08-2014 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/305/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
339DASHRATH RUPSINGH RATHOD Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2014] 11 S.C.R. 921
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,VIKRAMAJIT SEN,C. NAGAPPAN
) 4 SCC 711 and South East Asia Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Nav Bharat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (1996) 3 SCC 443. F 11. We are alive to the possible incongruities that are H 940 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2014] 11 S.C.R. A · fraught in extrapolating decisions relating to civil·law onto criminal law , which
Date of decision : 01-08-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2287/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
340RAMESH Vs STATE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2014] 7 S.C.R. 956
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,V. GOPALA GOWDA
omission in the FIR. 18. The court has also to consider the fact that the main purpose of the FIR is to satisfy the police officer as to the commission of a cognizable offence for him to conduct further investigation in accordance with law. The primary object is to set the criminal law into motion
Date of decision : 01-08-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/592/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
341  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ATUL TRIPATHI Vs STATE OF UP. & ANR. – [2014] 14 S.C.R. 1188
Judge Name: M.Y. EQBAL,KURIAN JOSEPH
the private respondents have been convicted by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh under ·Sections 147, 148, 149 read with Sections 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) (hereinafter referred to as E ‘!PC’) and Section 7 of criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013 and they
Date of decision : 22-07-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1516/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
342RISHIPAL SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. & ANR. – [2014] 6 S.C.R. 1012
Judge Name: RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,N.V. RAMANA
complaints to F otherwise settle their scores by setting the criminal law into motion, which is a pure abuse of process of law and it has to be interdicted at the threshold – A clear reading of the complaint did not make out any offence against the appellant! Branch Manager, much less the offences
Date of decision : 02-07-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1300/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
343UMAKANT & ANR. Vs STATE OF CHHATISGARH – [2014] 8 S.C.R. 69
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA
the light of surrounding circumstances. criminal law – Burden of proof – Held: Prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt – If two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the C case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the Qtber towards his
Date of decision : 01-07-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1424/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
344UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CBI Vs NIRALA YADAV @ RAJA RAM YADAV @ DEEPAK YADAV – [2014] 6 S.C.R. 148
Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA
the village and when he declined to comply with the illegal demand of the naxalites for payment of rup~es five lakhs for his release, E F he was taken inside the forest vyhere he was shot dead. After the criminal law was set in motion on the basis of an FIR, the G investigation commenced
Date of decision : 30-06-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/786/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
345CHANDRA PRAKASH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2014] 6 S.C.R. 819
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
– There should not be vagueness – Accused must know the scope and particulars in detail – In the case at hand, the charges were B framed – That apart, neither any prejudice was caused nor there was any failure of justice .. criminal law : Criminal conspiracy – While dealing with the fact of
Date of decision : 09-05-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1155/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
346DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Vs DIRECTOR, CENTERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – [2014] 6 S.C.R. 873
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,A.K. PATNAIK,S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,DIPAK MISRA,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
independent, unhampered, unbiased and efficient investigation. The contention is that Vineet Narain decision frames a structure by which honest officers could fearlessly enforce the criminal law and detect corruption uninfluenced by extraneous political, bureaucratic or other influences E and the result
Date of decision : 06-05-2014 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/38/1997 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
347SUMER SINGH Vs SURAJBHAN SINGH AND OTHERS – [2014] 5 S.C.R. 882
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,DIPAK MISRA
sentence E – Held: In such an appeal, accused can plead for his acquittal on establishing that there is no material on record to sustain ·his conviction. F criminal law : Right of private defence – Hand of victim chpped off over a land dispute – Held: Exercise of right of private defence
Date of decision : 05-05-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/942/2014 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
348RAJAT PRASAD Vs C.B.I – [2014] 8 S.C.R. 636
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI,N.V. RAMANA
materials available for fuller probe into the precise role of appellants in · B the alleged conspiracy – Order of the High Court refusing to interfere with the charges framed against the accused- . appellants therefore fully justified. criminal law – Crime detection – Proof of criminal acts
Date of decision : 24-04-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/747/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
349OM PRAKASH Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2014] 7 S.C.R. 305
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
nearby police station about his death. The Investigating Officer, Ronaski Ram, PW-8, recorded the statement of Satbir Singh, PW-3, and on that base registered an FIR No. 100/93 at 7.45 p.m. and the criminal law was set in motion. D 3. In course of investigation, the investigating agency prepared
Date of decision : 16-04-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1102/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
350PRAKASH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2014] 5 S.C.R. 242
Judge Name: RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,MADAN B. LOKUR
choose, the prosecution seems to dispose once and for all the question whether the defendant in th·e dock is in fact the man seen and referred to by the witness.”5 A similar view was expressed by the Canadian Supreme Court in Mezzo v. The Queen.6 G 4. 1963 criminal law Review pp. 479, 480. 5
Date of decision : 15-04-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1682/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
351MAHINDER DUTT SHARMA Vs U.0.1. & ORS. – [2014] 5 S.C.R. 95
Judge Name: J.S. KHEHAR,M.Y. EQBAL
general. In criminal law , the phrase is used generally to describe. a conduct which is contrary to community standards of justice, honesty and good morals. Any debauched, degenerate or evil behaviour would fall in this classification. (ii) Was the act of the D delinquent, which resulted in the
Date of decision : 11-04-2014 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2111/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
352DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY & ORS. Vs RAJU THR. MEMBER JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD & ANR. – [2014] 9 S.C.R. 283
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
Bench. The second is with regard to t_he G recommendations of the Justice J.S. Verma Committee following whictl recommendations, the criminal law Amendment Act, 2013 has been enacted by the legislature fundamentally altering the jurisprudential norms so far as H 300 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
Date of decision : 28-03-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/695/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
353P.C. MISHRA Vs STATE (C.B.I.) & ANR. – [2014] 4 S.C.R. 183
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
the circumstantial evidence which are not otherwise available to the investigating agency. The offence mentioned in the FIR is triable c exclusively by the Court of a Special Judge appointed under the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 (46 of 1952).” 5. The above mentioned order was not
Date of decision : 27-03-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1310/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
354NARINDER SINGH & ORS. Vs STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. – [2014] 4 S.C.R. 1012
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,A.K. SIKRI
more important. Cases of murder, rape, or other sexual offences etc. would clearly fall in this category. After all, justice requires long term vision. On the other hand, there may be, offences falling in the category where “correctional” objective of criminal law would have to be given more
Date of decision : 27-03-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/686/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
355SUNDEEP KUMAR BAFNA Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2014] 4 S.C.R. 486
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
custody of court within G contemplation of s. 439 – Impugned order is, accordingly, set aside – Single Judge shall consider appellant’s plea for surrendering to court and grant of bail – Constitution of India, 1950 – Art. 21. H 486 SUNDEEP KUMAR BAFNA v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA CRIMINAL
Date of decision : 27-03-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/689/2014 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
356SUSHIL ANSAL Vs STATE THROUGH CBI – [2014] 9 S.C.R. 571
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
difference of opinion as to quantum of sentence, matter referred to larger Bench – Cinematograph Act, 1952 – s. 14. G criminal law : ‘Rash’ or ‘negligent’ – Meaning of – Explained. 571 H A B c D E F 572 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R. ‘Negligence’ in regard to use of buildings
Date of decision : 05-03-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/597/2010 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
357ASHOK DEBBARMA @ ACHAK DEBBARMA Vs STATE OF TRIPURA – [2014] 4 S.C.R. 287
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
made by the witness before the Court does not find a place in the statement recorded uls.161 CrPC. s.313 – Object of- Discussed. criminal law : Reasonable doubt – Held: An accused has a profound right not to be convicted of an offence which is not established by the evidential standard of
Date of decision : 04-03-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/47/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
358MAHESH DHANAJI SHINDE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2014] 3 S.C.R. 406
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
law in India was noted in Jagmohan Singh (supra) in the following terms: “The impossibility of laying down standards is at the very core of the criminal law as administered in India which invests the judge with a very wide discretion in the manner of fixing the degree of punishment. … The
Date of decision : 27-02-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1210/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
359DINUBHAI BOGHABHAI SOLANKI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – [2014] 3 S.C.R. 932
Judge Name: S.S. NIJJAR,A.K. SIKRI
Court had declined to give any directions. G 1. c2008) 3 sec 542. 2. (2009) 10 sec 488. 3. 2012 criminal law Journal 1001. 4. c2012i 8 sec 106. 5. (1993) Supp4 sec 260. H 954 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 3 S.C.R. A 23. He also pointed out that the appellant has been elected as Member
Date of decision : 25-02-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/92/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
360ANIL @ ANTHONY ARIKSWAMY JOSEPH Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2014] 3 S.C.R. 34
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed, etc. Thus, it is evident that criminal law requires strict adherence to the rule of proportionality in providing punishment according to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct keeping in mind the effect of not awarding
Date of decision : 20-02-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1419/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
361BIRJU Vs STATE OF M.P. – [2014] 1 S.C.R. 1047
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,VIKRAMAJIT SEN
is a fit case where 20 years of rigorous imprisonment, without remission, to the appellant, over the period which he has B already undergone, would be an adequate sentence and will render substantial justice – criminal law – Motive. EVIDENCE: Evidence of hostile witness – Held: Cannot be
Date of decision : 14-02-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1352/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
362VIJAYANDER KUMAR & ORS. Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. – [2014] 1 S.C.R. 1012
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
-8-C] E Ravindra Kumar Madhanla/ Goenka and Another vs. Rugmini Ram Raghav Spinners Private Limited 2009 (6) SCR 27 = 2009 (11) sec 529 – relied on. Vijayander Kumar and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and F Another 1999 criminal law Journal 1849 – referred to. 1.2 When the informant and
Date of decision : 11-02-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1297/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
363  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE THROUGH CBI NEW DELHI Vs JITENDER KUMAR SINGH – [2014] 2 S.C.R. 621
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,A.K. SIKRI
SINGH [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] and functions exercisable by a District Judge under the A criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 (Ord. 38 of 1944).” 22. Section 3(1) of the PC Act confers power on the Central Government or the State Government to appoint as 8 many Special Judges as may be
Date of decision : 05-02-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/943/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
364VISHAL AGRAWAL & ANR. Vs CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ANR. – [2014] 1 S.C.R. 857
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,A.K. SIKRI
prospectively i.e. the date VISHAL AGRAWAL v. CHHATIISGARH STATE 869 ELECTRICITY BOARD [A.K. SIKRI, J.] on which the amendment was notified and could not have A retrospective operation, more particularly when the provisions are in the realm of criminal law . He also referred to certain
Date of decision : 29-01-2014 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/275/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
365  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BISWANATH BHATTACHARYA Vs UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS – [2014] 1 S.C.R. 885
Judge Name: H.L. GOKHALE,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
can make laws whose operation is dependent upon facts A or events anterior to the making of the law – However, criminal law is excepted from such general Rule, under another equally well settled principle of constitutional law, i.e. no ex post facto legislation is permissible with respect to
Date of decision : 21-01-2014 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/772/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
366SHATRUGHAN CHAUHAN & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2014] 1 S.C.R. 609
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
case to commute any sentence imposed by a court into a lesser sentence and as said by Chief Justice Taft in James Shewan and Sons v. U.S., the “executive 0 clemency exists to afford relief from undue harshness or evident mistake in the operation or enforcement of the criminal law ” and that the
Date of decision : 21-01-2014 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/55/2013 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
367MANOHAR LAL SHARMA Vs THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ORS. – [2013] 17 S.C.R. 1099
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,MADAN B. LOKUR
nature of procedure established by law for the purposes of Article 21 and where consequences follow in criminal law for an accused, the Court is not at liberty to negate the same even in exercise of powers under Article 32 or Article 142. According to him, requirement B of sanction under
Date of decision : 17-12-2013 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/120/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
368  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs SHAMBHU KEWAT AND ANOTHER – [2013] 12 S.C.R. 973
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,A.K. SIKRI
assault was a crime ‘against an individual’, rather than ‘against the society at large. Hence the present appeal. 973 H 974 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013) 12 S.C.R. A Allowing the appeal and remitting I.he matter to High Court, the Court HELD: 1.1. criminal law is designed as a mechanism
Date of decision : 28-11-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2018/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
369MRS. SARAH MATHEW Vs THE INSTITUTE OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES BY ITS DIRECTOR – DR. K.M. CHERIAN & ORS. – [2013] 12 S.C.R. 674
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,RANJAN GOGOI,S.A. BOBDE
the criminal law is to punish G perpetrators of crime. This is in tune with the well known legal maxim ‘nullum tempus aut locus occurrit regi’, which means that a crime never dies. At the same time, it is also the policy of law to assist the vigilant and not the sleepy. This is expressed in the
Date of decision : 26-11-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/829/2005 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
370C.B.I. Vs ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 983
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,S.A. BOBDE
[2013] 14 S.C.R. 983 C.8.1. v. ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL (Criminal Appeal No.1838 of 2013) NOVEMBER 22, 2013 [DR. S.S. CHAUHAN AND S.A. BOBDE, JJ.] criminal law – Sanction for prosecution – Validity of – Legal propositions in regard to grant of sanction – Discussed – Prevention of
Date of decision : 22-11-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1838/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
371  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
LALITA KUMARI Vs GOVT. OF U.P. AND ORS. – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 713
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,RANJAN GOGOI,S.A. BOBDE
orders and hence cannot supersede Cr.P.C. – Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. c Penal Code, 1860- s.166A (as inserted by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013) – Punishment for non-registration of FIR for the offences specified in the provision – Implication of – Held: The provision
Date of decision : 12-11-2013 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/68/2008 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
372DR. BALRAM PRASAD Vs DR. KUNAL SAHA & ORS. – [2013] 12 S.C.R. 30
Judge Name: C.K. PRASAD,V. GOPALA GOWDA
effect. In the instant case, negligent action has been noticed with respect to more than one respondent. A cumulative incidence, therefore, has led to the death of the patient. B 187. It is to be noted that doctrine of cumulative effect is not available in criminal law . The complexities
Date of decision : 24-10-2013 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2867/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
373JOGINDER SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2013] 11 S.C.R. 446
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
statement was recorded by the Inspector of Police, .Prem Chand, PW-16, and an FIR was registered at 8:30 pm. 3. After the criminal law was set in motion, the investigating H agency commenced the investigation and in course of JOGINDER SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA 455 [DIPAK MISRA, J
Date of decision : 24-10-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1148/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
374SUNIL DUTT SHARMA Vs STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) – [2013] 9 S.C.R. 1000
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,RANJAN GOGOI
laid down by this Court in Jagmohan case. These propositions may be summed up as under: “(i) The general legislative policy that underlines the G structure of our criminal law , principally contained in the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code, is to define an offence with
Date of decision : 08-10-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1333/2013 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
375BHARATI TAMANG Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 525
Judge Name: S.S. NIJJAR,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
remain unturned to book the culprits and bring them for trial for being dealt with 0 under the provisions of the criminal law of prosecution. Any slackness displayed in that process will not be in the interest of public at large and therefore it is responsibility of the Court to ensure that the
Date of decision : 08-10-2013 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/159/2012 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Passing the order and keeping the petition pending for passing necessary orders if and when required
376TOFAN SINGH Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2013] 9 S.C.R. 962
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,A.K. SIKRI
) 12 SCC 298; State of Punjab v. Barkat Ram (1962) D 3 SCR 338; Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India 1990 (2) SCR 63 =1990 (2) SCC 409; Shahid Khan vs. Director of Revenue Intelligence 2001 ( criminal law Journal 3183 – referred to. Queen Empress v. Babula/ I.LR (1884). 6 All. 509 – referred to. E
Date of decision : 08-10-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/152/2013 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
377STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs JAMIL KHAN – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 361
Judge Name: C.K. PRASAD,KURIAN JOSEPH
people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross-cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and the courts are required to mould the sentencing system to meet the challenges
Date of decision : 27-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/659/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
378KAMLESH KUMAR AND ORS. Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS. – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 263
Judge Name: H.L. GOKHALE,MADAN B. LOKUR
sentence under c Section 56. It does not state that the Magistrate alone is empowered to pass the necessary sentence, in which case the proceeding cannot be transferred from his Court. This provision is not like the one in the case of A.R. Antu lay where under Section 7(1) of criminal law 0
Date of decision : 26-09-2013 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/6219/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
379A.C. NARAYANAN Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2013] 11 S.C.R. 80
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,RANJAN GOGOI
has opined: E F “This Court has, as far back as, in the case of Vishwa Mitter v. O.P. Poddar (1983 4 SCC 701) held that it is clear that anyone can set the criminal law in motion by filing a complaint of facts constituting an offence before a Magistrate entitled to take cognizance~ It has been
Date of decision : 13-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/73/2007 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
380DR. P.B. DESAI Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2013] 11 S.C.R. 863
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,A.K. SIKRI
omission – Medical E profession is included in it. Liability – Omission liability – ‘Omission to act’ whether amounts to ‘act’ – Held: Liability for an omission, requires a legal duty to act arising from either civil or criminal law – A moral duty to act is not sufficient for invoking omission
Date of decision : 13-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1432/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
381A.S.V. NARAYANAN RAO Vs RATNAMALA & ANOTHER – [2013] 10 S.C.R. 117
Judge Name: H.L. GOKHALE,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
Jacob Mathew (supra) considered exhaustively the various aspects of negligence on the part of a doctor and laid down inter alia; D “48 ….. (5) The jurisprudential concept of negligence differs in civil and criminal law . What may be negligence in civil law may not necessarily be negligence in
Date of decision : 13-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1433/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
382SUNIL DAMODAR GAIKWAD Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2013] 9 S.C.R. 295
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,KURIAN JOSEPH
considered it desirable to take up the subject separately from the revision of the general criminal law of the country. This was so, because of the importance of the subject, the voluminous nature of materials that were to be considered, and the large C number of questions of detail that were
Date of decision : 10-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/165/2011 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
383PINAKIN MAHIPATRAY RAWAL Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2013] 10 S.C.R. 306
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE
case that the wife committed suicide within seven years of the date of the marriage. Hence, a presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act could be drawn. 24. Section 113A which was inserted by the criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983, w.e.f. 26.12.1983; is given below for easy
Date of decision : 09-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/811/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
384UMESH KUMAR Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 213
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,S.A. BOBDE
the Samithi and forged the signature of Shri M.A. G Khan, M.P., the matter being of grave nature requires investigation and, in view of above, we cannot find fault with the action initiated against Umesh Kumar, appellant. Once criminal law is put in motion and after investigation the charge
Date of decision : 06-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1305/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
385GURDIP SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 277
Judge Name: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,KURIAN JOSEPH
can be proved without much difficulty, the existing criminal law can be E resorted to for bringing the offender to book. In practice, however, two main impediments arise- (i) either the facts do not fully fit into the pigeon-hole of any known offence: or (ii) the peculiarities of the
Date of decision : 03-09-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1308/2013 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
386SHIMBHU AND ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2013] 14 S.C.R. 136
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,RANJAN GOGOI
parties in rape cases to be a ground for the Court to exercise the discretionary G power under the proviso of Section 376(2) of IPC. [Para 22] [153-C-F] 7. The legislature through the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013 has deleted this proviso in the H 140 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013) 14 S.C.R
Date of decision : 27-08-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1278/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
387KAMLESH PRABHUDAS TANNA & ANOTHER Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2013] 9 S.C.R. 257
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
death was due to suicide. After the criminal law was set in motion on the base of the FIR lodged by the brother, the investigating officer examined number of witnesses and after completing all the formalities laid the charge sheet under Sections 3048, 306 and 498A read with Section 34 IPC and
Date of decision : 26-08-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1517/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
388DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY AND ORS. Vs RAJU, THROUGH MEMBER, JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD AND ANR. – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 520
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI,RANJAN GOGOI
the criminal law system. In this regard learned counsels have placed reliance on several decisions of D this Court, which will be noticed hereinafter, wherein the aforesaid legal principle has been stated and reiterated. 6. To counter the arguments advanced on the plea of maintainability
Date of decision : 22-08-2013 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/1953/2013 | Direction Issue : Notice issued
389VIKAS Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 208
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,M.Y. EQBAL
extraordinary power and should be used by the court very sparingly thereby ensuring that principles of rule of law and basic tenets of criminal law jurisprudence are not vitiated – Issuance of non-bailable warrant in the first instance without using the other tools of summons and F bailable
Date of decision : 16-08-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1190/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
390STATE OF M.P. Vs BABULAL & ORS. – [2013] 10 S.C.R. 21
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,S.A. BOBDE
sentence in view of the fact that criminal proceedings had protracted for about 7 years. The Revisional Court reduced the sentence from 3 years to 3 months. Hence the present appeal by the S~~- G AHowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. One of the prime objectives of criminal law 21 H 22
Date of decision : 12-08-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1156/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
391ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYYUM ANSARI Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – [2013] 7 S.C.R. 1061
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
invoking Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the said orders. It was his grievance that time and again the authorities C abused the process of criminal law by failing to file the orders passed by Portugal courts and by wilfully and deliberately violating the solemn sovereign assurance. It was
Date of decision : 05-08-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/415/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
392SALIL BALI Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2013] 13 S.C.R. 1020
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,S.S. NIJJAR,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
appointed to review the amendments to the criminal law , headed by former CJI, J.S. Verma, in its report submitted on 23rd January, 2013, did not recommend the reduction in the age of juveniles in conflict G with law and has maintained it at 18 years. The learned ASG pointed out that the issue
Date of decision : 17-07-2013 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/10/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
393DILIP SUDHAKAR PENDSE & ANR. Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION – [2013] 7 S.C.R. 646
Judge Name: H.L. GOKHALE,MADAN B. LOKUR
triable by Magistrate’s Court, and cognizance is taken by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and not by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate – Further, it was also not an offence triable by Special Judge under criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 – It was, thus, a case E falling in the category of
Date of decision : 16-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/966/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
394SUBHASH POPATLAL DAVE Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2013] 17 S.C.R. 596
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,GYAN SUDHA MISRA,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
of statutory provisions. [Paras 45, 46, 47 and 48] [639-E-H; 640-A-C] 5. There is difference between preventive detention and the ordinary criminal law providing for detention C and arrest. While the Constitution, which is the cornucopia of all laws, accepts the necessity of providing for
Date of decision : 16-07-2013 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/137/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
395JITENDRA SINGH @ BABBOO SINGH & ANR. Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2013] 13 S.C.R. 764
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,MADAN B. LOKUR
under the normal criminal law and de hors the Act and the Rules, and second, a resultant situation, where the “trial” of the juvenile is required to be set aside and quashed as having been conducted by a court not having jurisdiction to do so or a juvenile, on being found guilty, B going
Date of decision : 10-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/763/2003 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
396S.D. BANDI Vs DIVISIONAL TRAFFIC OFFICER, KSRTC & ORS. – [2013] 17 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI
upon such property, whether before or after the coming into force of the criminal law (U. P. Amendment) Act, 1961, with the intention of taking unauthorized use of such property fails towithdrawfrom such property or its possession or use, when called upon to do so by that another person by notice
Date of decision : 05-07-2013 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4064/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
397VIKRAM SINGH@ VICKY & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 1090
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA
citizens and the security and safety of the vulnerable sections of the society especially children who are prone to kidnapping for ransom and being brutally done to death if their parents are unable to pay the ransom amount. Mr. Luthra referred to 42nd Law Commission Report, The criminal law (Amendment
Date of decision : 02-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/824/2013 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
398MRS. APARNA A. SHAH Vs M/S. SHETH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANR. – [2013] 7 S.C.R. 69
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,J.S. KHEHAR
8 F 2008 (2) SCR 1088 refened to para 10 1989 (3) SCR 886 relied on para 11 2010 (5) SCR 927 held inapplicable para 14 G AIR 1960 SC 1292 held inapplicable para 14 2010 (15) SCR 538 held inapplicable para 14 2007 (4) SCR 885 relied on para 15 2008 criminal law approved para 17 H
Date of decision : 01-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/813/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
399HARIVADAN BABUBHAI PATEL Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2013] 10 S.C.R. 889
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
know about the situation, Kantibhai made enquiry and searched · about the deceased for two days and when the deceased did not return, he lodged a complaint at Pardi Police Station on 25.1.2006 which was registered as C.R. No. 1-12/2006. After F the criminal law was set in motion, the
Date of decision : 01-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1044/2010 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
400BIRENDRA DAS & ANR. Vs STATE OF ASSAM – [2013] 7 S.C.R. 179
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
– In the circumstances establishing of any motive is inconsequential – criminal law – Motive. Out of the nine accused named in the FIR, three were declared absconders, three being juveniles, were referred E to juvenile court and the remaining three were prosecuted for committing the murder of
Date of decision : 01-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1130/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
401STATE OF M.P. Vs NAJAB KHAN AND ORS. – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 301
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,M.Y. EQBAL
demands. Security of persons and property of F the people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross-cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and the courts are required to mould
Date of decision : 01-07-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/809/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
402ROHTASH KUMAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 884
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
official as a witness, motive and explanation of accused u/s 313 CrPC, discussed – criminal law – Motive – Evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Last seen theory – Evidence of E hostile witness – Evidence of police witness – Discrepancies in depositions. The appellant was prosecuted for committing
Date of decision : 29-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/896/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
403RUMI BORA DUTIA Vs STATE OF ASSAM – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 801
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
– criminal law – Motive – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.27 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.313. The appellants – the aunt and the nephew – were prosecuted for causing the death of the bread winner of E the family. The prosecution case was that on the day of occurrence, the police learnt about
Date of decision : 24-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/737/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
404DEEPAK GULATI Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2013] 6 S.C.R. 544
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
G contracts a consent obtained by coercion or fraud is only voidable by the party affected by it, the effect of Section 90 IPC is that such consent cannot, under the criminal law , be availed of to justify what would otherwise be an offence.” H 558 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 6 S. C.R
Date of decision : 20-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2322/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
405  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHYAM NARAIN Vs THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 951
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
station and informed what was told by his daughter and, accordingly, an FIR was registered. After the 0 criminal law was set in motion, the investigating agency arrested the accused and, eventually, the accused-appellant was sent up for trial. The accused pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried
Date of decision : 15-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1860/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
406GURNAIB SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 563
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
, accordingly, lodged an FIR at Joga Police Station. After the criminal law was set in motion, the Investigating Officer carried out the investigation and got the autopsy conducted on the dead body by a board of doctors G consisting of three members. The doctors who conducted the post mortem on
Date of decision : 10-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/744/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
407ANKUSH SHIVAJI GAIKWAD Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2013] 8 S.C.R. 863
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
distinction A between civil and criminal law in which civil law provides for remedies to award compensation for private wrongs and the criminal law takes care of punishing the wrong doer, the legal position that emerged till recent times was that criminal law need not concern itself with 8
Date of decision : 03-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/689/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
408MANGA @ MAN SINGH Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 175
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
– Investigation – Non-recovery of bullets/ pellets – criminal law – Motive-, • s.141 read with ss.40, 144 and 149 -“Other offence” occurring in Clause ‘Third’ of s.141 — Connotation of – F Held: A conspectus reading of s.40 makes it clear that for all offences punishable tJnder /PC, the main clause of
Date of decision : 03-05-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1156/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
409SHANKAR KISANRAO KHADE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2013] 6 S.C.R. 949
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,MADAN B. LOKUR
India on 3rd February, 2013 promulgated an ordinance titled “The criminal law F (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013, further to amend the CPC, 1973, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860. By the ordinance, ss. 375, 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C and 376-D IPC have been substituted by new
Date of decision : 25-04-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/362/2010 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off | Direction Issue : death sentence converted to life imprisonment
410RATTIRAM & ORS. ETC. Vs STATE OF M.P. THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2013] 2 S.C.R. 1003
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
injuries. On an FIR being lodged, the criminal law was set in motion and after investigation the F appellants were charge-sheeted under Section 3(1)(x) of the­ Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “the Act”), but, eventually, charges were
Date of decision : 18-04-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/223/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
411HAZARA SINGH Vs RAJ KUMAR AND ORS. – [2013] 5 S.C.R. 979
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,M.Y. EQBAL,A.K. SIKRI
the eyes of law. This Court; observed thus: “7. The law regulates social interests, arbitrates conflicting claims and demands. Security of persons and property of the people is an essential function of the State. It could be E achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly
Date of decision : 18-04-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/603/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
412SAHIB HUSSAIN @ SAHIB JAN Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2013] 2 S.C.R. 1019
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,M.Y. EQBAL
: F “14 …. In the context of our criminal law which punishes G murder, one cannot ignore the fact that life imprisonment works out in most cases to a dozen years of imprisonment and it may be seriously questioned whether that sole alternative will be an adequate substitute for the death
Date of decision : 18-04-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2083/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
413DEVENDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR Vs STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI – [2013] 6 S.C.R. 676
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA
the time being in force”. The obvious reference is to Sections 401 and 402 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Then again Entries 1 and 2 in List Ill of the Seventh Schedule refer to criminal law and Criminal Procedure. In Entry No. 1 the entry criminal law is extended by specifically including
Date of decision : 12-04-2013 | Case Number : WRIT TO PETITION (CRIMINAL)…/16039/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
414AARUSHI DHASMANA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – [2013] 5 S.C.R. 371
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
REPORTS [2013] 5 S.C.R A medical law, family law, criminal law and human rights law. B Should we go for the best interest of Saba and Farah, or either of them? Can a Court override the wishes of the parents when we apply the best interest standard for saving the life of at least one
Date of decision : 10-04-2013 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/232/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
415KHACHAR DIPU @ DILIPBHAI NAKUBHAI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2013] 5 S.C.R. 341
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
cycle, the accused No. 1 tied him behind the motor vehicle and dragged him about 10 kilometers and threw the dead body on the Gadhada Road and destroyed the evidence. The other two accused persons abetted with the common intention to assist accused No. 1. On an FIR being E lodged, the criminal
Date of decision : 04-04-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/532/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
416  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SOOGURU SUBRAHMANYAM Vs STATE OF A.P. – [2013] 2 S.C.R. 514
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
that the accused is guilty of the crime and it is totally inconsistent with his innocence – Conviction and sentence as awarded by trial court and affirmed by High Court, upheld – Evidence – E Circumstantial evidence – criminal law – Motive. The appellant was prosecuted for the murder of his
Date of decision : 04-04-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/164/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
417M/S. GHCL EMPLOYEES STOCK OPTION TRUST Vs M/S INDIA INFOLINE LIMITED – [2013] 5 S.C.R. 276
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,M.Y. EQBAL
H serious matter. Hence, criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. The order of Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable GHCL EMPLOYEES STOCK OPTION TRUST v. INDIA 279 INFOLINE LIMITED
Date of decision : 22-03-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/488/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
418UMESH SINGH Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2013] 4 S.C.R. 797
Judge Name: C.K. PRASAD,V. GOPALA GOWDA
criminal law in motion and marks the commencement of the investigation which ends up with the formation of B opinion under Section 169 or 170 CrPC, as the case may be, and forwarding of a police report under Section 173 CrPC. It is quite possible and it happens not infrequently that more
Date of decision : 22-03-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/43/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
419SURENDER KAUSHIK AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS – [2013] 1 S.C.R. 1053
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
law prohibits lodgment of the second FIR in respect of the same cognizable offence and it is propounded by him that when there is a legal impediment for setting the criminal law in motion, the decision in State of Haryana and Others v. Bhajan Lal and Others3 gets attracted. D To bolster the
Date of decision : 14-02-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/305/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
420GOPAL SINGH Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – [2013] 4 S.C.R. 104
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,DIPAK MISRA
lodged with the Patwari, Bilekh. After the criminal law was set in motion, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses c under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prepared the site plan, Ext.-7, recovered the pellets, seized the blood-stained clothes of the injured
Date of decision : 08-02-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/291/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
421R. SHAJI Vs STATE OF KERALA. – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 1172
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,V. GOPALA GOWDA
purpose of contradiction – Statements u/s. 164, however, can be used for both corroboration and contradiction – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.157. H 1172 R. SHAJI v. STATE OF KERALA 1173 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.164 – Object of- A Discussed. criminal law – Criminal conspiracy – Proof
Date of decision : 04-02-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1774/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
422RAVINDER SINGH Vs SUKHBIR SINGH & ORS. – [2013] 1 S.C.R. 243
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,V. GOPALA GOWDA
is quashed – Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes F (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989 – s.3(1)(viii) – Code of Criminal Procoedure, 1898 – s. 403(2). criminal law : G Issued estoppel – Explained – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 – s.403(2). Scheduled Cast~s and Scheduled Tribes
Date of decision : 11-01-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/67/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
423ARUN BHANDARI Vs STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 961
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
F further contend that the appellant has taken contradictory stands inasmuch as in one way he had demanded the forfeited amount and the other way lodged an FIR to set the criminal law in motion which is impermissible. To bolster the said contentions reliance has been placed on the judgments
Date of decision : 10-01-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/78/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
424A. SRIMANNARAYANA Vs DASARI SANTAKUMARI & ANR. – [2013] 1 S.C.R. 230
Judge Name: S.S. NIJJAR,ANIL R. DAVE
) The jurisprudential concept of negligence differs in civil C and criminal law . What may be negligence in civil law may not necessarily be negligence in criminal law . For negligence to amount to an offence, the element of mens rea must be shown to exist. For an act to amount to criminal
Date of decision : 09-01-2013 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/368/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
425ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2013] 1 S.C.R. 236
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
defence under the criminal law , since a person is presumed to know the law. lndisputedly ignorance of law often in reality exists, though as F a general proposition, it is true, that knowledge of law must be imputed to every person. But it must be too much to impute knowledge in certain situations
Date of decision : 09-01-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/817/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
426UDAI SHANKAR AWASTHI Vs STATE OF U.P. ANR. – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 935
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,J.S. KHEHAR
E proceedings – May not by itself be a ground for dismissing the complaint at the threshold. criminal law – ‘Continuing offence’ and ‘Instantaneous offence’ – Difference between. F Maxim – ‘nulfum tempus out locus occurrit regi’ – Applicability. The works contract, awarded by IFFCO to the
Date of decision : 09-01-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/61/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
427PARBIN ALI AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF ASSAM – [2013] 1 S.C.R. 154
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
11.00 p.m. While he was on the road, his father-in-law went to the police station wherein an “ezahar” was recorded. After the G injured died, an FIR was lodged on 18.7.1994. Afterthe criminal law was set in motion, the accused were arrested, the dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem
Date of decision : 07-01-2013 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1037/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
428LAHU KAMLAKAR PATIL AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2012] 9 S.C.R. 1173
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
stitched clothes of the deceased which were in the rickshaw E to the police. On the basis of the F.l.R., a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 452 of the l.P.C. was registered and the criminal law was set in motion. In the course of investigation, the investigating agency got the autopsy
Date of decision : 14-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/114/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
429ANJU CHAUDHARY Vs STATE OF U.P. & ANR. – [2012] 13 S.C.R. 901
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,MADAN B. LOKUR
U.P. Gangsters and Activists Prevention Act and E Section 7 of the criminal law Amendment Act. 7. The complaint application under Section 156 IPC was filed by Parvaz on 16th November, 2007, nearly 10 months after the date of occurrence. This application, which was heard by F the learned Chief
Date of decision : 13-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2039/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
430YANAB SHEIKH@ GAGU Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2012] 13 S.C.R. 1150
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,MADAN B. LOKUR
complaint has been disposed of on full consideration of the case of the complainant on merit.” F 23. The First Information Report is a very important document, besides that it sets the m-~chinery of criminal law in motion. It is a very material document on which the entire case of the prosecution is
Date of decision : 13-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/905/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
431SUKHDEV SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2012] 11 S.C.R. 964
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,MADAN B. LOKUR
effect unless legislative intent and expression is clear beyond ambiguity. The amendments to criminal law would not intend that there should be undue delay in disposal of criminal trials or there should be retrial just because the law has changed. Such an G approach would be contrary to the
Date of decision : 13-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2118/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
432KASHMIR KAUR & ANR. Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2012] 11 S.C.R. 802
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
fiction is H A B c D E F G H 806 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 11 S.C.R. hardly applicable to criminal jurisprudence but in contradistinction to this aspect of criminal law , the legislature applied the concept of deeming fiction to the provisions of Section 3048. (I) Such
Date of decision : 12-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/915/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
433AKIL@ JAVED Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – [2012] 13 S.C.R. 659
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
bound to create legal complications as witnesses whose examination-in-chief F recorded earlier may insist on refreshing their memory and therefore such an occasion should not be allowed to arise particularly when it is the demand of the criminal law that trial once commence must take place on
Date of decision : 06-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1735/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
434JEETU @ JITENDERA & ORS. Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2012] 13 S.C.R. 161
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
sentence – Such plea bargaining is impermif;sible in law and defeats the D fundamental purpose of the justice delivery system – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Chapter XX/A – ss. 265A and 265L (as inserted by the criminal law Amendment Act, 2005) – Plea Bargaining – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 147
Date of decision : 04-12-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1986/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed | Direction Issue : Matter remitted to High Court
435KUNJUMON @ UNNI Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2012] 9 S.C.R. 1032
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,MADAN B. LOKUR
of victims – Therefore, absence of the TIP makes no difference to the case of the prosecution or the identification of the accused – criminal law . B EVIDENCE: Testimony of a child witness – Held: The evidence of the witness, who was of 11 years at the time of incident, was recorded after a
Date of decision : 21-11-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/38/2009 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
436SANGEET & ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2012] 13 S.C.R. 85
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,MADAN B. LOKUR
our criminal law , principally contained in the G Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code, is to define an offence with sufficient clarity and to prescribe only the maximum punishment therefor, and to allow a very wide discretion to the Judge in the matter of fixing the degree of
Date of decision : 20-11-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/490/2011 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
437  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
C.K. JAFFER SHARIEF Vs STATE (THROUGH CBI) – [2012] 10 S.C.R. 1079
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI
to the liability of an accused which may have application to the present case. is to be found in the work ” criminal law ” C by K.D. Gaur. The relevant passage from the above work may be extracted below: “Criminal guilt would attach to a man for violations of criminal law . However, the rule is
Date of decision : 09-11-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1804/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
438NAZMA Vs JAVED @ ANJUM – [2012] 9 S.C.R. 826
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
this Court in Hari Singh Mann F (supra). Reference to the following paragraph of that judgment is apposite: “8. We have noted with disgust that the impugned orders were passed completely ignoring the basic G principles of criminal law . No review of an order is contemplated under the Code of
Date of decision : 19-10-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1693/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
439PRATAPBHAI HAMIRBHAI SOLANKI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER – [2012] 9 S.C.R. 561
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
from their country made revolver on the left part of his back and caused injuries to which he succumbed and they immediately disappeared from the scene of occurrence. After the criminal law was set in motion, the investigating agency commenced investigation and after H 566 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
Date of decision : 12-10-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1649/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
440GULZAR AHMED AZMI & ANR. Vs UNI.ON OF INDIA & ORS. – [2012] 9 S.C.R. 287
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
and under the criminal law jurisprudence, to protect the interest of any such person – When the time tested G Criminal Procedure Code and other statutory provisions are working in the field providing for such we/I laid down procedure to be followed in the matter of regulating such criminal 287
Date of decision : 11-10-2012 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/19/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
441M/S NEW HORIZON SUGAR MILLS LTD. Vs GOVT. OF PONDICHERRY TH. ADDL. SEC. & ANR. – [2012] 8 S.C.R. 874
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
I List 111 viz. ” criminal law ”. It is for that purpose that Entry I List Ill provides for an exclusion from “offences against laws with respect to any of the matters specified in List I and List II”. F 30. It was further pointed out that Entries 93 in List I and 64 in List II are similarly
Date of decision : 27-09-2012 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6673/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
442AVINASH SADASHIV BHOSALE (D) THR. LRS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2012] 9 S.C.R. 86
Judge Name: S.S. NIJJAR,H.L. GOKHALE
of evidence in the two proceedings is also not similar. In criminal law , burden of proof is on the prosecution and unless the prosecution is 14. (2005) 7 sec 764. H 116 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 9 S.C.R. A able to prove the guilt of the accused “beyond reasonable doubt”, he cannot be
Date of decision : 25-09-2012 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7005/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
443ASH MOHAMMAD Vs SHIV RAJ SINGH @ LALLA BABU AND ANR. – [2012] 7 S.C.R. 584
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
and lodged the FIR as a E consequence of which crime No. 770 of 2011 was registered for offences punishable under Section 364 and 506 of the IPC. On the basis of the FIR the criminal law was set in motion and the accused was arrested and taken into custody. 4. The accused Shiv Raj Singh @ Lalla
Date of decision : 20-09-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1456/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
444PUSHPANJALI SAHU Vs STATE OF ORISSA & ANR. – [2012] 8 S.C.R. 727
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,C.K. PRASAD
conflicting claims and demands. Security of persons and property of the people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross-cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and the
Date of decision : 18-09-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1439/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
445  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
DR. SUNIL CLIFFORD DANIEL Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2012] 7 S.C.R. 1100
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
by the provision uls 162(2) – Merely because the recovery memo was not signed by the accused, will not c vitiate the recovery itself, as every case has to be decided on its own facts – In the instant case, it cannot be said that the recoveries are vitiated. criminal law : D Motive – Held: In
Date of decision : 14-09-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2001/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
446RAKHAL DEBNATH Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2012] 7 S.C.R. 513
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
Ramesh Kumar (supra) can be usefully applied. In paragraph 12 of the said decision this Court, while explaining the application of Sections 107, 113A in regard to an offence falling under Section 306 IPC has held as under: c “12. This provision was introduced by the criminal law (Second
Date of decision : 04-09-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/201/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
447M.C. GUPTA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DEHRADUN – [2012] 7 S.C.R. 455
Judge Name: AFTAB ALAM,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI
criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 (46 of 1952) are hereby repealed. (2) Notwithstanding such repeal, but without prejudice F to the application of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897), anything done or any action taken or purported to have been done or taken under or in
Date of decision : 31-08-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1332/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
448MOHAMMED AJMAL MOHAMMAD AMIR KASAB @ ABU MUJAHID Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2012] 8 S.C.R. 295
Judge Name: AFTAB ALAM,C.K. PRASAD
significant to note that the law of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) is a major departure from the common criminal law process in this country. One can almost call the POT A and a few other C Acts of its ilk as exceptions to the general rule. In the severe framework of the POTA, certain
Date of decision : 29-08-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1899/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
449GURU BASAVARAJ @ BEENE SETTAPPA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2012] 8 S.C.R. 189
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 357(3) – Sentence/Sentencing. criminal law – Conviction and sentence – Distinction between. 189 H 190 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 8 S.C.R. A The appellant-accused was charged for the offences punishable u/ss. 279, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC r/w. s. 187 of Motor
Date of decision : 29-08-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1325/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
450NARAYAN MANIKRAO SALGAR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2012] 8 S.C.R. 170
Judge Name: S.S. NIJJAR,H.L. GOKHALE
assembly. This is duly proved by the fact that all the accused came together armed D with various weapons which were used to assault Khushal. He further submits that Section 149 which fastened the criminal law on the accused does not require the prosecution to prove any overt act against any
Date of decision : 28-08-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/159/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
451SUBHASH POPATLAL DAVE Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. – [2012] 7 S.C.R. 61
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,GYAN SUDHA MISRA,JASTI CHELAMESWAR
not be defended. 13. On the same lines, Mr. Adsure referred to the decision F in Rekha’s case (supra), wherein this Court had held that when the ordinary criminal law of the land is able to deal with a situation, then recourse to preventive detention law will be illegal. Mr. Adsure urged that
Date of decision : 10-07-2012 | Case Number : WRIT TO PETITION (CIVIL)…/137/2011 | Disposal Nature : Hearing Adjourned
452DROPTI DEVI & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2012] 6 S.C.R. 307
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,H.L. GOKHALE
detained upto 7 days. In Australia preventive detention orders and prohibited conduct orders are two c mechanisms available under criminal law for addressing terrorism concerns and dangerous sex offenders. The preventive detention order permits detention of a person for a short period of time
Date of decision : 02-07-2012 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/65/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
453JUGENDRA SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2012] 6 S.C.R. 193
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
had already breathed her last. . Leaving the accused in the custody of the villagers, Pitambar went to the police station and lodged an FIR. c 3. After the criminal law was set in motion, the accused was arrested and the investigating officer, Balvir Singh, PW 7, reached the spot and carried out
Date of decision : 29-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/82/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
454THOTI MANOHAR Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 1129
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,DIPAK MISRA
, PW-1, lodged an FIR at Police Station, Gangadhara, Nellore and Crime No. 70 of 2002 was registered under Sections 452, 302 and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC against the accused persons. G After the criminal law was set in motion, on 29.9.2002, the Circle Inspector of Police, P.W. 20
Date of decision : 15-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1739/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
455ALAGUPANDI @ ALAGUPANDIAN Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2012] 4 S.C.R. 342
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,SWATANTER KUMAR
concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below based on proper appreciation of evidence clearly prove the guilt of the accused – In the circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the finding of guilt as well as the order of sentence – F Circumstantial evidence. Criminal
Date of decision : 08-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1315/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
456NAGESH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 872
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,SWATANTER KUMAR
conduct of the appellant is such that absolves him of any liability under the criminal law because he had throughout participated in taking the deceased to the hospital, attended her funeral and never ran away. If the appellant had committed the offence, the first thing he would have done was to
Date of decision : 08-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/671/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
457JITENDER KUMAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2012] 4 S.C.R. 408
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,SWATANTER KUMAR
recovered, would be the portion admissible in evidence. H 408 JITENDER KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 409 criminal law : A Accused not named in FIR – Conviction of – Held: An accused who has not been named in the FIR, but to whom a definite role is attributed in the commission of the crime and
Date of decision : 08-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1763/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
458RASHMI REKHA THATOI & ANR. Vs STATE OF ORISSA & ORS. – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 674
Judge Name: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA
. 10. The facts that had formed the bedrock in setting the criminal law in motion need not be stated, for the nature of orders passed by High Court in both the cases have their own peculiarity. If we allow ourselves to say they have the enormous potentiality to create colossal puzzlement as
Date of decision : 04-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/750/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
459GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING Vs CBI AND ANR – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 599
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,SWATANTER KUMAR
Act which are extremely stringent and far removed from the provisions of the general criminal law . If, as submitted on bE!half of some of the respondents, it is accepted that a private complaint under Section 9(1) is not subject to the rigours of Section 23, then the very purpose of
Date of decision : 01-05-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/257/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
460  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ANEETA HADA Vs M/S. GODFATHER TRAVELS & TOURS PVT. LTD. – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 503
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA,DIPAK MISRA
liability of the principal offender. If both are treated separately, it would amount to ANEETA HADA v. GODFATHER TRAVELS & TOURS 521 PVT. LTD. [DIPAK MISRA, J.) causing violence to the language employed in the A provision. (c) It is a fundamental principle of criminal law that a penal
Date of decision : 27-04-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/838/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
461STATE OF HARYANA Vs SHAKUNTLA AND ORS. – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 276
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,SWATANTER KUMAR
Police Station, an FIR vide Exh. PH/1, was registered in the Police Station, B Dharuhera. The process of criminal law was set into motion against the accused persons on the basis of the statement, Ext. PH. 4. It has come on record that the deceased Manohar Lal had, after retirement, been working
Date of decision : 19-04-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/658/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
462HEINZ INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR. Vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS. – [2012] 3 S.C.R. 898
Judge Name: T.S. THAKUR,DIPAK MISRA
England and also part of the criminal law of this country. Having said so, the Court further . declared that if an exception is taken by an accused person · he is not required to justify his plea beyond a reasonable doubt B and that the degree and character of proof which he is expected to
Date of decision : 23-03-2012 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1476/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
463STATE OF ORISSA & ORS. Vs UJJAL KUMAR BURDHAN – [2012] 2 S.C.R. 512
Judge Name: D.K. JAIN,ANIL R. DAVE
investigation was totally unwarranted – The investigation initiated against the B respondent restored and the Vigilance Cell directed to proceed with and complete the investigation expeditiously, in accordance with law. s.482 – Scope of – Discussed. criminal law : Existence of an arbitration
Date of decision : 19-03-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/546/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
464GOVINDARAJU@ GOVINDA Vs STATE BY SRIRAMAPURAM P.S. & ANR. – [2012] 5 S.C.R. 67
Judge Name: A.K. PATNAIK,SWATANTER KUMAR
trial court is perverse on facts or law. Upon examination of the evidence before it, the appellate court should be fully convinced that the findings returned by the trial court are really erroneous and contrary to the settled principles of 0 criminal law . [Para 6) [90-A-H; 91-A] E State
Date of decision : 15-03-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/984/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
465LALITA KUMARI Vs GOVERNMENT OF U.P. & OTHERS – [2012] 1 S.C.R. 1066
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,T.S. THAKUR,DIPAK MISRA
criminal law . This Court has also said that the expression “law” contained in Article 21 necessarily postulates law which is reasonable and not merely H a statutory provision irrespective of its reasonableness or LALITA KUMAR! v. GOVERNMENT OF U.P. 1099 [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.] otherwise. In the
Date of decision : 27-02-2012 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/68/2008 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
466RATTIRAM & ORS. Vs STATE OF M. P. THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2012] 3 S.C.R. 496
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,T.S. THAKUR,DIPAK MISRA
-C-E; 526-B] 4. Section 209 of 1973 Code deals with the C commitment of case to Court of Session when an offence is triable exclusively by it. Prior to coming into force of 1973 Code, Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 dealt with committal proceedings. By the criminal law Amendment
Date of decision : 17-02-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/223/2008 | Direction Issue : Appeals placed before appropriate bench
467LOKESH SHIVAKUMAR Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2012] 1 S.C.R. 896
Judge Name: AFTAB ALAM,ANIL R. DAVE
and according to post-mortem report that blow itself caused his death – Appellant rightly convicted u/s.302 rlw s.34. criminal law : Motive – Relevance of – Held: If the prosecution case is fully established by reliable ocular evidence coupled with medical evidence, the issue of motive G loses
Date of decision : 10-02-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1326/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
468JIK INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ORS. Vs AMARLAL V. JUMANI AND ANOTHER – [2012] 3 S.C.R. 114
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,J.S. KHEHAR
; Vinay Devanna Nayak vs. Ryot Sewa Sahakari Bank Limited (2008) 2 SCC 305: 2007 (12) SCR 1134; R. Rajeshwari vs. H H. N. Jagadish 2008) 4 SCC 82: 2008 (3) SCR 1065- referred to. JIK INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ORS. v. AMARLAL V. 123 JUMANI AND ANR. Kenny’s ‘Outlines of criminal law ‘ (Nineteenth
Date of decision : 01-02-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/263/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
469LEE KUN HEE & ORS. Vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS. – [2012] 4 S.C.R. 287
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,J.S. KHEHAR
Court of International Justice, Series A, Nos.10, 23) is very instructive : C “It is certain; that the courts of many countries, even of countries which have given their criminal legislation a strictly territorial character, interpret criminal law in the sense that offences, the authors of
Date of decision : 01-02-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/304/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
470STATE OF PUNJAB Vs DALBIR SINGH – [2012] 4 S.C.R. 608
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,J.S. KHEHAR
statement of the obvious ……. ” As observed by Palekar, J., who spoke for a Constitution Bench in Jagmohan Singh v. State of UP.: [SCC para 26, p. 35: sec (Cri) p. 1 a41 E “The impossibility of laying down standards is at the very core of the criminal law as administered in India which invests
Date of decision : 01-02-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/117/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
471DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Vs DR. MANMOHAN SINGH AND ANOTHER – [2012] 3 S.C.R. 52
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,A.K. GANGULY
order to set the criminal law in motion against a corrupt public official. This right of F access, a Constitutional right should not be burdened with unreasonable fetters. When a private citizen approaches a court of law against a corrupt public servant who is highly placed, what is at stake is
Date of decision : 31-01-2012 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1193/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
472STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS Vs ESSAR OIL LIMITED AND ANOTHER – [2012] 2 S.C.R. 1127
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,J.S. KHEHAR
noticing the provisions of section 6 and 7 of the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 and C also the binding nature of the Larger Bench decision in The State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar & another (Al R 1952 SC 75). 73. It was made clear in the Antulay Case [(1988) 2 SCC D 602) that when
Date of decision : 17-01-2012 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/599/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
473ALISTER ANTHONY PAREIRA Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2012] 1 S.C.R. 145
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,J.S. KHEHAR
the appellant of the offence punishable u/s 337 IPC as well. [para 68] [186- EJ 4.1. One of the prime objectives of the criminal law G is imposition of appropriate, adequate, just and proportionate sentence commensurate with the nature and gravity of crime and the manner in which .the crime is
Date of decision : 12-01-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1318/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
474MOHD. HUSSAIN @ JULFIKAR ALI Vs THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI – [2012] 1 S.C.R. 64
Judge Name: H.L. DATTU,C.K. PRASAD
to be shown that the accused has suffered some disability F or detriment in the protections available to him under the Indian criminal jurisprudence. It is also a settled canon of criminal . law that this has occasioned the accused wit!\ failure of justice. One of the other cardinal principles
Date of decision : 11-01-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1091/2006 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
475DR. MRS. NUPUR TALWAR Vs C.B.I., DELHI & ANR. – [2012] 1 S.C.R. 31
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,J.S. KHEHAR
significance in criminal law . It G merely means “become aware of and when used with reference to a court or a Judge, it connotes” to take notice of judicially”. It indicates the point when a court or a Magistrate takes judicial notice of an offence with a view H A B c D E F 42 SUPREME
Date of decision : 06-01-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/68/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
476RUSHIKESH TANAJI BHOITE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. – [2012] 2 S.C.R. 640
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,H.L. GOKHALE
maintenance of public order and he was dangerous person within the meaning of Section 2 (b-1) of the 1981 Act. The last criminal case referred to in the grounds is against the detenu for the offences under Sections 143, F 147, 323, 504, 506, 353, 427 of IPC read with Section 7,cJf criminal law Amendment
Date of decision : 04-01-2012 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/24/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
477STATE OF PUNJAB Vs DAVINDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR & ORS. ETC – [2011] 15 S.C.R. 540
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,A.K. PATNAIK
been invested with an express power· to review any judgment in criminal law . Jurisdiction: Of the Bench – Held: A Judge or a Bench of Judges can assume jurisdiction in a case pending in the B High Court only if the case is allotted to him or them by the Chief Justice – Strict adherence of this
Date of decision : 07-12-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/753/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
478SWATANTER KUMAR AND RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.] Vs SHERA RAM @ VISHNU DUTTA – [2011] 15 S.C.R. 485
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI
] [507-G; 511-D-F] B c D E F G H State of Rajasthan v. Kalu (1998) SCC (Cri.) 898 – relied on. Ram Jattan and Others v. State of UP. (1995) SCC (Cri) 169 – referred to. Ha/sbury’s Laws of India 5(2) criminal law -II – referred to. Case Law Reference: (2011) 8 sec 65 relied on
Date of decision : 01-12-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1502/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
479BANGARU LAXMAN Vs STATE (THROUGH CBI) & ANOTHER – [2011] 13 S.C.R. 268
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
Judge before whom such a prayer is made, as in the instant case, by the prosecution – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 306 (2) (a) – Interpretation of Statutes. F criminal law : Grant of pardon to one of the several accused involved in an offence – Purpose of – Explained. INTERPRETATION
Date of decision : 22-11-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2164/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
480THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC Vs M.G. VITTAL RAO – [2011] 14 S.C.R. 1089
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,T.S. THAKUR
proceedings is also · not similar. In criminal law , burden of proof is on the prosecution and unless the prosecution is able to prove H 1104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A the guilt of the accused “beyond reasonable doubt”, he cannot be convicted by a Court of law. In a
Date of decision : 18-11-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/9933/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
481D. ETHIRAJ Vs SECRETARY TO GOVT. & ORS. – [2011] 15 S.C.R. 1048
Judge Name: A.K. GANGULY,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
and also in the cases of persons convicted for offences under Sections 3 to 10 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, Sections 2 and 3 of the criminal law Amendment Act 1961, Sections 121 to 130 of the Indian Penal Code, Foreigners and Passport Acts and persons convicted by Courts of criminal
Date of decision : 11-10-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1949/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
482DAYARAM Vs SUDHIR BATHAM & ORS. – [2011] 15 S.C.R. 1092
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,P. SATHASIVAM,A.K. PATNAIK
to the High Court of Bombay. A bench of seven judges while overruling the earlier decision held that section 7(1) of the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 created a E condition that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law, the offences under section
Date of decision : 11-10-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3467/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
483  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
OM PRAKASH & ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2011] 14 S.C.R. 240
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,CYRIAC JOSEPH,S.S. NIJJAR
purpose of remand. The learned ASG submitted that F only on the filing of a complaint, can the criminal law be set in motion. 20. Mr. Prasaran also urged that the power to arrest must necessarily be vested in the Officer concerned under the 1944 G Act for the efficient discharge of his functions
Date of decision : 30-09-2011 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/66/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
484M/S THERMAX LTD. & ORS. Vs K.M. JOHNY & ORS. – [2011] 14 S.C.R. 154
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
respondent No.1. There was E also no specific allegation with regard to their role. Apart from the fact that the complaint lacked necessary ingredients of Sections 405, 406, 420 read with Section 34 IPC, it is to be noted that the concept of ‘vicarious liability’ is unknown to criminal law . There
Date of decision : 27-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1868/2011
485D.M. NAGARAJA Vs THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA & ORS. – [2011] 11 S.C.R. 458
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
will indulge in further activities which will be prejudicial to the maintenance of public health and order and recourse to normal criminal law would not have the desired effect of effectively preventing him from indulging in such activities, on B the materials placed and after fully satisfying the
Date of decision : 19-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1814/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
486SANTOSH KUMARI Vs STATE OF J & K & OTHERS – [2011] 13 S.C.R. 1054
Judge Name: J.M. PANCHAL,H.L. GOKHALE
is a fundamental principle of criminal law that the accused should be informed with certainty and accuracy the exact nature of the charge brought against him. The object of the statement of particulars to be mentioned in the charge is c to enable the accused person to know the substantive
Date of decision : 13-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1660/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
487MRINAL DAS & ORS. Vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA – [2011] 14 S.C.R. 411
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,H.L. GOKHALE
triable exclusively by that court or if the Magistrate taking cognizance is the Chief Judicial Magistrate; (ii) To a court of Special Judge appointed under the criminal law Amendment Act 1952 (46 of 1952), if the offence is triable exclusively by that court; (b) In any other case, make over the
Date of decision : 05-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1994/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
488STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs ARJUN SINGH & ORS. ETC – [2011] 10 S.C.R. 823
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,H.L. GOKHALE
due to septiceemia – HELD: The injuries were sufficient to cause death – Case falls within the ambit of s. 302. criminal law : E F Motive – Held: Reliable evidence in the case indicates that there was previous enmity between one of the accused and the complainant because of a litigation
Date of decision : 02-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/552/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
489NITINBHAI SAEVATILAL SHAH & ANOTHER Vs MANUBHAI MANJIBHAI PANCHAL & ANOTHER – [2011] 10 S.C.R. 804
Judge Name: J.M. PANCHAL,H.L. GOKHALE
the important principles of criminal law that the Judge H 814 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 10 S.C.R. A who hears and records the entire evidence must give judgment. Section 326 is an exception to the rule that only a person who has heard the evidence in the case is competent to decide
Date of decision : 01-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1703/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
490STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Vs RAJASTHAN CHIEF MINISTERS RELIEF FUND RULES, 1999 – [2011] 10 S.C.R. 662
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,A.K. PATNAIK
provisions relating· to C punishment for offences under criminal law have no bearing upon grant of ex-gratia monetary benefit to some of the victims. Secondly, the assumption that all cases of rape involving victims under twelve years are liable to be · punished identically under IPC is not correct
Date of decision : 25-08-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7333/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
491AMITAVA BANERJEE @ AMIT @ BAPPA BANERJEE Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2011] 12 S.C.R. 160
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,T.S. THAKUR
AMITAVA BANERJEE @AMIT @ BAPPA BANERJEE 161 v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL criminal law · Motive – Significance of, and effect of A ·its absence – Discussed. The prosecution case was that the appellant strangulated the victim-deceased to death and buried his dead body in jungle. The trial court
Date of decision : 17-08-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1939/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
492MALOTH SOMARAJU Vs STATE OF AP. – [2011] 10 S.C.R. 349
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,T.S. THAKUR
suspicious circumstance – Quality of the evidence of G PW-1 is very high and her evidence alone is sufficient_for the conviction of the accused – Thus, order passed by the High Court is upheld. criminal law – Judgment of acquittal – Sustainability of 349 H 350 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 10
Date of decision : 17-08-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1849/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
493SARIN & ANR. Vs KUMAUN AND UTTARAKHAND ZAMINDARI ABOLITION AND LAND REFORMS ACT, 1960 – [2011] 9 S.C.R. 1012
Judge Name: S.H. KAPADIA,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,SWATANTER KUMAR,ANIL R. DAVE
Article 254 of the .. Constitution of India . B 48. In the Australian cases, the concept of Repugnancy has really been applied in the context of criminal law where for the same offence, there are two inconsistent and different punishments, which are provided and so the two laws cannot c co-exist
Date of decision : 09-08-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4772/1998
494RAFIQ AHMED @ RAFI Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2011] 11 S.C.R. 907
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,SWATANTER KUMAR
Indian criminal jurisprudence. It Is also a settled canon of criminal law that this has occasioned the accused with failure of justice. One of the other cardinal principles of B criminal justice administration is that the courts should make a close examination to ascertain whether there was really
Date of decision : 04-08-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/656/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
495VIJAY KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. – [2011] 11 S.C.R. 893
Judge Name: J.M. PANCHAL,H.L. GOKHALE
should be exercised consistently with the provisions of the Code and the principles E of criminal law – The discretionary power conferred uls. 311 has to be exercised judicially for reasons stated by the Court and not arbitrarily or capriciously. ‘R’, the daughter of appellant, owned a piece of
Date of decision : 03-08-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1345/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
496GOSU JAIRAMI REDDY & ANR. Vs STATE OF A.P. – [2011] 9 S.C.R. 503
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,T.S. THAKUR
circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the view taken by the courts below. criminal law : C Motive – Relevance of – HELD: In a case based on eye witness account of the incident, proof or absence of the motive is not of any significant consequence – If the motive is proved it may support
Date of decision : 26-07-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1321/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
497A. SUBASH BABU Vs STATE OF A.P.& ANR. – [2011] 9 S.C.R. 453
Judge Name: J.M. PANCHAL,H.L. GOKHALE
woman is void, for breach of s.5 (i) of the said Act, it brings/attaches several legal disabilities to the o woman with whom the second marriage Js performed. [para 10) [472-H; 473-A-E-G] S.Radhika Sameena Vs. Station House Officer, 1997 criminal law Journal 1655 – referred to. 1.2 Section 494
Date of decision : 21-07-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1428/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
498ANIL SACHAR & ANR. Vs M/S SHREE NATH SPINNERS P. LTD. & ORS. ETC. – [2011] 9 S.C.R. 328
Judge Name: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,ANIL R. DAVE
(11) SCR 951 =2008(2) sec 321 – relied on 1.2 The trial court materially erred while coming to a conclusion that in criminal law no presumption can be raised with regard to consideration as no goods had been supplied by the complainants to M/s. ‘ATO’ Ltd. The trial court ought to have
Date of decision : 19-07-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1413/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
499  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SUNIL RAI @ PAUA & ORS. Vs UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH – [2011] 7 S.C.R. 41
Judge Name: AFTAB ALAM,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
insufficient evidence and, as F such, is set aside – Evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Extra-judicial confession – Recovery of blood stained articles – Proving of – criminal law – Motive. · The appellants were prosecuted for commission of G an offence punishable u/s 302 IPC. The prosecution case was
Date of decision : 04-07-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1254/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
500  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NOORUL HUDA MAQBOOL AHMED Vs RAM DEO TYAGI & ORS. – [2011] 7 S.C.R. 782
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,T.S. THAKUR
782 NOORUL HUDA MAQBOOL AHMED v. RAM DEO 783 TYAGI & ORS. there is no reason to take a different view than the one which A has been taken by the High Court – Bombay Police Act – s.161. criminal law : Criminal trespass – Common intention – Common object B – Mumbai riots -Suleman Bakery
Date of decision : 04-07-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1256/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
501  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ABHAY SINGH CHAUTALA Vs C.B.I – [2011] 10 S.C.R. 949
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,T.S. THAKUR
cognizance, the public servant is holding a different post with 0 a different removing authority from the one in which the offence is alleged to have been committed”. It is argued that such an addition would be clearly impermissible as it would negate the very foundation of criminal law which
Date of decision : 04-07-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1257/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
502WAMAN & ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2011] 6 S.C.R. 1072
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,A.K. PATNAIK
were aware of the B likelihood of a particular offence being committed in prosecution of a common object, they would be liable for the same u/s. 149 – criminal law – Common object. Witnesses – Related witnesses – Credibility of – Held: Relationship is not a factor to affect the credibility of a
Date of decision : 29-06-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/364/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
503  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
URVIBEN CHIRAGHBAI SHETH Vs VIJAYBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI JORANPUTRA .& ORS. – [2011] 5 S.C.R. 897
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,A.K. GANGULY
Cox’s criminal law 8 c Cases 454 – referred to. A History of English Law by W S. Holdsworth, Vol 5, p. 158 – referred to. 1.5 Having regard to the materials on record, the matter should not be remanded, keeping in mind the period which has elapsed in between since the accident took place
Date of decision : 26-04-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3618/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
504  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
KULVINDER SINGH & ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2011] 4 S.C.R. 817
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
courts below – criminal law – E Motive – Evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Prosecution case close to the circumstances of the accused and the deceased being last seen together- Extra-judicial confession. The appellants (A-1 and A-2) were prosecuted for F causing the death of one ‘AD’, the son
Date of decision : 11-04-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/916/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
505  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
CHAIRMAN-CUM-M.D., COAL INDIA LTD., & ORS. Vs ANANTA SAHA & ORS. – [2011] 5 S.C.R. 44
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
made by the delinquent. .D 41. Even in criminal law a complaint cannot be “thrown over· board on some unsubstantiated plea of malafides”. That “a · criminal prosecution, if otherwise, justifiable and based upon adequate evidence does not become vitiated on account of malafides or political
Date of decision : 06-04-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2958/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
506REKHA Vs STATE OF T NADU TR.SEC.TO GOVT. & ANR. – [2011] 4 S.C.R. 740
Judge Name: MARKANDEY KATJU,S.S. NIJJAR,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
prejudicial to the maintenance of public health and order. Further the recourse to normal criminal law would not have the desired effect of effectively preventing him from indulging in such activities, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of • REKHA v. STATE OF T NADU TR.SEC.TO GOVT. & 751
Date of decision : 05-04-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/755/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
507CHANDRAN @ MANICHAN @ MANIYAN Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2011] 8 S.C.R. 273
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,CYRIAC JOSEPH
presumption of fact or of law provided for in the criminal law with indifference. It requires States to confine them within H reasonable limits which take into account the importance of that Ct-IANDRAN@ MANICHAN@ MANIYAN v. STATE 313 OF KERALA is at stake and maintain the rights of the
Date of decision : 04-04-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1528/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
508  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
K. P. THIMMAPPA GOWDA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2011] 4 S.C.R. 200
Judge Name: MARKANDEY KATJU,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
, benefit of doubt goes to accused – In the instant matter, prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt – Accused deserves benefit of doubt – Judgment of High Court set aside – criminal law – Benefit of doubt. E The appellant was prosecuted on the basis of an FIR
Date of decision : 04-04-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1499/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
509HARICHARAN & ANR. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS, – [2011] 3 S.C.R. 769
Judge Name: B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,S.S. NIJJAR
G of justice – Appellate court should also not interfere with an order of acquittal if two reasonable conclusions are possible. ” criminal law : Suspicion, no matter how strong cannot be 769 _ ,>,, H 770 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 3 S.C.R. A the basis of conviction – Even in cases of
Date of decision : 09-03-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/581/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
510K.K. BASKARAN Vs STATE REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TAMIL NADU & ORS. – [2011] 3 S.C.R. 527
Judge Name: MARKANDEY KATJU,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
Parliament being the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Companies Act, 1956 and the criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944; and that the Tamil Nadu Act was arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article … 14, 0 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. Dismissing the
Date of decision : 04-03-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2341/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
511M. MOHAN Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE – [2011] 3 S.C.R. 437
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,S.S. NIJJAR
convicted under Section 306 IPC. c 31. The appellants submitted that the summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support allegations in the
Date of decision : 01-03-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/611/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
512ASHOK TSHERING BHUTIA Vs STATE OF SIKKIM – [2011] 3 S.C.R. 242
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
violation of statutory requirements. The question of putting the criminal law into motion could not arise. Executive action has not only been taken irresponsibly, it tantamounts to abuse of power. The courts below not only ought to have disapproved of it but should have refused to act D upon it
Date of decision : 25-02-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/945/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
513NARAYAN DUTT AND ORS. Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. – [2011] 4 S.C.R. 983
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,A.K. GANGULY
Grossman, (1924) 267 US 87), wherein the learned Chief Justice opined: c D “Executive clemency exists to afford relief from undue harshness or evident mistake in the operation or the enforcement of the criminal law . The administration of justice by the Courts is not necessarily always wise or
Date of decision : 24-02-2011 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2058/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
514MD. SUKUR ALI Vs STATE OF ASSAM – [2011] 3 S.C.R. 209
Judge Name: MARKANDEY KATJU,GYAN SUDHA MISRA
opinion of the US Supreme Court G observed;- “The pressures on state executive and judicial officers charged with the administration of the criminal law are great. But it is precisely the predictability of those H .. 216 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 3 S.C.R. A pressures that makes
Date of decision : 24-02-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/546/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
515  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAMESH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2011] 4 S.C.R. 585
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,T.S. THAKUR
observed as under: B c D E “37.The quality of a nation’s civilization, it is said, can be largely measured by the methods it uses in the enforcement of the criminal law ‘ and going by the manner in which the investigating agency acted in this case causes concern to us. In every civilized
Date of decision : 22-02-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1236/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
516STATE THROUGH C.B.I. Vs MAHENDER SINGH DAHIYA – [2011] 1 S.C.R. 1104
Judge Name: B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,S.S. NIJJAR
in hiding till he was arrested – Prosecution a/so did not produce any evidence with regard to the recovery of any weapon of offence E – Order of acquittal was justified. criminal law : Motive – Held: In cases based on circumstantial evidence, motive for committing the crime assumes great
Date of decision : 28-01-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1360/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
517MANJIT SINGH @ MANGE Vs CBI, THROUGH ITS S.P. – [2011] 1 S.C.R. 997
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,H.L. DATTU
wants to record any commission of an offence under the. Act,· the reason appears to be that the Superintendent of Police of the District is fully aware of necessity to initiate the proceedings under the stringent criminal law like the TADA Act. In the instant case, the State Government, in G
Date of decision : 25-01-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1778/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
518  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NARWINDER SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2011] 1 S.C.R. 110
Judge Name: B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,S.S. NIJJAR
on account of demands for dowry but due to harassment caused by her husband and it had compounded the acute depression from which E deceased was suffering after the murder cf her father – High Court was fully justified in convicting the husband u/s 306 – criminal law – Framing of charges. ss
Date of decision : 05-01-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/590/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
519S. GANESAN Vs RAMA RAGHURAMAN & .ORS – [2011] 1 S.C.R. 27
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
-:- They are accordingly convicted uls 304(Part 1/)134 G !PC with. a sentence of 5 years RI – Sentence/Sentencing – Mitigating circumstances – Evidence – Circumstantial evidence – criminal law – Motive – Right of self defence ‘:'” ·I’ I .. :~. 27 H .-:.·· 28 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 1
Date of decision : 03-01-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/989/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
520ABRAR Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2010] 13 S.C.R. 1217
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,P. SATHASIVAM,C.K. PRASAD
recor<jed the dying declarations after E the doctor certified that victim was fit to make statement – Thus, dying declarations were reliable – Motive established between the parties – FIR was lodged promptly – FIR – Evidence – Dying declaration – criminal law – Motive – Code of Criminal Procedure
Date of decision : 16-12-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1668/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
521THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA Vs VIMAL KUMAR SURANA AND ANOTHER – [2010] 14 S.C.R. 248
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,A.K. GANGULY
Code, 1860 – ss. 419, 420, 468 and 473. ss. 24A(2), 26 and 25(2) – Expression ‘without prejudice 8 to any other proceedings which may be taken against him’ in ss. 24A(2), 26 and s. 25(2) – Meaning of criminal law : Double jeopardy – Simultaneous prosecution of offender C for contravention of ss
Date of decision : 01-12-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2263/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
522REFERENCE UNDER ARTICLE 317 (1) NO.2 OF 2008 IN RE: MEHAR SINGH SAINI, CHAIRMAN, HPSC AND ORS. Vs — – [2010] 14 S.C.R. 647
Judge Name: S.H. KAPADIA,K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,SWATANTER KUMAR
Court for inquiry c into allegations of misbehaviour against Chairman/Members .of a Public· Service Commission – Nature of the proceedings :… Standard of proof- HELD: The proceedings are neither akin to those under service law nor to those under criminal law – The nature of such proceedings
Date of decision : 12-11-2010 | Case Number : REF. U/A 317(1)/2/2008 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
523S.D. JOSHI & ORS. Vs HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY & ORS. – [2010] 15 S.C.R. 396
Judge Name: SWATANTER KUMAR,C.K. PRASAD
applicable to ensure that these orders are given effect to in the same manner as a decree and/or order of the Court of E competent jurisdiction under the civil and criminal law . Further, the process of appeal is specifically provided under the Act. Every judgment and order, not being an
Date of decision : 11-11-2010 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/598/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
524RANJIT SINGH AND ORS. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2010] 14 S.C.R. 133
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
– Falsus in U,no, Falsus in Omnibus – Inapplicability of, in India, F criminal law – Acr,cused not named in the FIR – Effect of – Held: In case the informant fails to name a particular accused in the FIR, and the said accused is named at the earliest opportunity, when the statements of witnesses
Date of decision : 27-10-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1072/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
525IRIDIUM INDIA TELECOM LTD. Vs MOTOROLA INCORPORATED & ORS. – [2010] 14 S.C.R. 591
Judge Name: B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,S.S. NIJJAR
, 1950 – Arlicle 227. criminal law – Mens rea – Prosecution of corporations – Held: A corporation will be liable for crimes of intent. Penal Code, 1860 – s. 415, Explanation – Ingredients of G 591 H 592 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010) 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A cheating – Held: Misleading statements
Date of decision : 20-10-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/688/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
526ASOKE BASAK Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. – [2010] 12 S.C.R. 736
Judge Name: D.K. JAIN,H.L. DATTU
availability of a civil remedy does not preclude a criminal law remedy and this alone cannot be a ground for quashing the complaint and it was not incumbent on the complainant to plead the role of each and every accused as due to the principle of vicarious liability under F Section 34 of the
Date of decision : 08-10-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1980/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
527SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH Vs STATE THR. CBI – [2010] 13 S.C.R. 901
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,C.K. PRASAD
the interest of justice, sentence commuted to life imprisonment – Sentence/ c Sentencing – criminal law – Evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.313. D E F Evidence: Circumstantial evidence – False plea taken by an accused in a case of circumstantial
Date of decision : 06-10-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/87/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
528STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs ABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYAM ANSARI AND ORS. – [2010] 12 S.C.R. 204
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
exclusively by the Court of Session or by the Court of a Special Judge appointed under the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 (46 of 1952). (b) any offence punishable with imprisonment, which may extend to seven years or with a more severe sentence. (3) Every Magistrate who tenders a pardon under
Date of decision : 05-10-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1925/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
529ABU SALEM ABDUL QAYOOM ANSARI Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. – [2010] 13 S.C.R. 8
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,A.K. GANGULY
the appellant passed by the Government of Portugal, the judgment of the Court of Appeals as well as the Supreme Court of Portugal. 8. It is also his grievance that time and again the authorities abused the process of criminal law by failing to file F the orders passed by Portugal Courts and
Date of decision : 10-09-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/990/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
530C. MUNIAPPAN & ORS. Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 262
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,B.S. CHAUHAN
clubbed together and one charge-sheet could not be filed – Practice G and Procedure. H criminal law : Crime and society – Crimes occurring in presence of public and police – Social sensitivity – Duty of police and C. MUNIAPPAN & ORS. v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU 265 protectors of law – A
Date of decision : 30-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/127/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
531PRATHAP & ANR. Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 241
Judge Name: B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,S.S. NIJJAR
Court does not call for interference – Evidence – criminal law – Common object – Principle ·of parity – Constitution of India 1950 – Article. 136. According to the prosecution case, ‘K’-deceased and ‘M’-CW 11 attacked the appellants. To seek revenge, the G appellants and the other accused
Date of decision : 27-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1198/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
532BABUBHAI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ETC. – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 651
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
State inter-alia F contended that the FIRs could not be clubbed as there were two separate incidents at two different places and for distinct offences. Disposing of the appeals, the Court G HELD: 1.1 An FIR u/s. 154 Cr.P.C. is a very important document. It sets the machinery of criminal law in
Date of decision : 26-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1599/2010 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
533RAJESHWAR TIWARI AND ORS. Vs NANDA KISHORE ROY – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 444
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
Section 482 of the Code. Jurisdiction under this section has to be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.” 14. While no one with a legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law , a
Date of decision : 19-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/779/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
534MEGHMALA & ORS. Vs G. NARASIMHA REDDY & ORS. – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 47
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
any other F criminal case where accused is presumed to be innocent unless the· guilt is proved – criminal law – Burden of proof . Review: Review application – Maintainability of – Held: In case a review application is filed before filing the special G /eave· petition and the review application
Date of decision : 16-08-2010 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6656/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
535M.A.A. ANNAMALAI Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANOTHER – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 1124
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,A.K. PATNAIK
from the very inception.” 33. This Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. & Anr. v. Special E Judicial Magistrate & Ors. (1998) 5 SCC 749 observed as under: F G H “28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It
Date of decision : 12-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1504/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
536S.S. CHHEENA Vs VIJAY KUMAR MAHAJAN & ANOTHER – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 1111
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN
not an offence under either English F or Indian criminal law , though at one time it was a felony in England. In England, the former law was of the nature of being a deterrent to people as it provided penalties of two types: 1 Degradation of corpse of the deceased by G burying it on the highway
Date of decision : 12-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1503/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
537SAQUIB ABDUL HAMEED NACHAN Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 833
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
made to a police officer can be proved against an accused. “Confessions” which is a terminology used in criminal law is a species of “admissions” as defined in Section 17 of the Evidence Act. An admission is a statement, oral or documentary which enables the court to draw an inference as to any
Date of decision : 11-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/419/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
538ATBIR Vs GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 993
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
inflicted the injuries, death sentence is just as D his act was barbaric and inhuman – It is a gravest case of extreme culpability and rarest of rare case – Sentence I . Sentencing – Death sentence – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.32 – Dying Declaration – criminal law – Motive. F The two appellants
Date of decision : 09-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/870/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
539STATE OF U.P. Vs KRISHNA MASTER & ORS. – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 563
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,J.M. PANCHAL
rigorous imprisonment for life· – Evidence – criminal law – F Motive – Sentence/sentencing. Evidence: Oral evidence – Criteria for appreciation – Explained. Rustic witness – Appreciation of evidence – Relevant factors – Held: Evidence of such witness who is not educated and comes from a poor
Date of decision : 03-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1180/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
540RAVINDRA TUKARAM HIWALE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 454
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,C.K. PRASAD
– The incident happened in February, 1990 and the accused has undergone about four years of the sentence – The sentence awarded by High Court is quashed and the judgment of trial court confirmed – criminal law – Interference with H 454 RAVINDRA TUKARAM HIWALE v. STATE OF 455 MAHARASHTRA
Date of decision : 02-08-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1419/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
541RAM NIWAS Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 112
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,C.K. PRASAD
benefit of doubt to two of the accused – No interference with the conviction and the sentence is thus called for – criminal law – Motive. E Evidence – A part of evidence of witness disbelieved – Effect of. The appellant along with his brother and three uncles was prosecuted for attempt to
Date of decision : 28-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/115/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
542PRITHI Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 33
Judge Name: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,A.K. PATNAIK
commission of crime – Both the D eye-witnesses are reliable witnesses. criminal law – ‘Corpus delicti’ – Establishment of- Held: It i.<> r:ot essential to establish corpus delicti – The fact of death of deceased can be established like any other fact The E evidence of corpus delicti and the guilt of
Date of decision : 27-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1835/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
543BIPIN KUMAR MONDAL Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2010] 8 S.C.R. 1036
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
credible – Absence of motive would not dislodge the prosecution case as there was direct evidence of a trustworthy witness regarding the commission of crime – Evidence Act, 1872 – s. 134 – Witness – Sole witness. criminal law : Motive – Held: Becomes totally irrelevant F when there is direct
Date of decision : 26-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1247/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
544NATIONAL COMMISSION OF WOMEN Vs STATE OF DELHI & ANR. – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 905
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,C.K. PRASAD
under Article 136 even though the justice of lis may well justify it. While “the criminal law should not be used as a weapon in personal vendettas between private individuals”, as Lord Shawcross once wrote, in the absence of an independent prosecution authority easily accessible to every
Date of decision : 23-07-2010 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/2506/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
545MANNU SAO Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2010] 8 S.C.R. 811
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,SWATANTER KUMAR
suicide without any provocation or incident F immediately preceding the occurrence – Circumstances proved by prosecution are of a conclusive nature – Evidence – criminal law – Motive. Code of Criminal Procedure, 197″3:s.313 – Essential features of -Explained. G According to the prosecution case
Date of decision : 22-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1165/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
546SIKANDAR SINGH & ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2010] 8 S.C.R. 373
Judge Name: D.K. JAIN,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
not claim right of self-defence. criminal law : Non-explanation of injuries on accused – HELD: Having B regard to the nature of the injuries, i.e. simple and superficial, suffered by one of the accused, prosecution case cannot be overthrown for non-explanation of the said injuries – Penal
Date of decision : 09-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/227/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
547DHARNIDHAR Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2010] 8 S.C.R. 173
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,SWATANTER KUMAR
convicted and sentenced all the five accused u/s 3021149. ss. 34 and 149 – Ingredients and applicability of – Explained. criminal law : Motive – Relevance of – Explained. Evidence: Interested witness – Connotation of – Explained – HELD: E F The family members of the two deceased being
Date of decision : 08-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/239/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
548CHUNNI LAL Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2010] 7 S.C.R. 410
Judge Name: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,H.L. DATTU
both in lodging the FIR and starting the investigation – Accused has been rightly convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life u/s 302 – criminal law – Motive – Evidence – Testimony of related witnesses – Delay in lodging FIR and starting investigation. H 410 CHUNN! LAL v. STATE OF U.P
Date of decision : 05-07-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/669/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
549H.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Vs MUKESH THAKUR & ANR. – [2010] 7 S.C.R. 189
Judge Name: B.S. CHAUHAN,SWATANTER KUMAR
three papers, namely, Civil Law – I, Civil Law – II and criminal law and each paper to carry 200 marks. Besides, paper-IV consisted of English Composition (200 marks), Language (100 marks) followed by Viva-Voce (100 marks). Regulation 6 (i) made it mandatory for the candidate to secure at least
Date of decision : 25-05-2010 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/907/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
550MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2010] 6 S.C.R. 957
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,R.V. RAVEENDRAN,D.K. JAIN,P. SATHASIVAM,J.M. PANCHAL
appreciation of evidence and consequential findings of facts are crucial. The trial would require experience and expertise in criminal law , which means that the Judge or the G adjudicator to be legally trained. Tribunals which follow their own summary procedure, are not bound by the strict rules of
Date of decision : 11-05-2010 | Case Number : TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL)/150/2006 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Transferred cases delinked and to be listed separately for hearing
551S. KHUSHBOO Vs KANNIAMMAL AND ANR. – [2010] 5 S.C.R. 322
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,DEEPAK VERMA,B.S. CHAUHAN
that portray women in an indecent manner – Not applicable to the appellant as she can neither be described as an “advertiser’ nor ‘publisher’ by any means – Penal Code, 1860 – s.499. B Administration of criminal justice.: When the criminal law machinery is set in motion, the superior courts
Date of decision : 28-04-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/913/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
552ZAMEER AHMED LATIFUR REHMAN SHEIKH Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. – [2010] 4 S.C.R. 1042
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
to the criminal law , cannot be accepted. [Para 20) [1062-C-E] State of Maharashtra v. Bharat Shanti Lal Shah and Ors. E (2008) 13 SCC 5, referred to. Repugnance with Central Statute: 3. The analysis relating to the essential elements of offence of ‘promoting insurgency’ u/s. 2 (1)(e) of the
Date of decision : 23-04-2010 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/940/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
553SIDHARTHA VASHISHT @ MANU SHARMA Vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) – [2010] 4 S.C.R. 103
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,SWATANTER KUMAR
responsibility of the investigating agency but as well that of the Courts to E ensure that investigation is fair and does not in any way hamper the freedom of an individual except in accordance with law. Equally enforceable canon of criminal law is that the high responsibility lies upon the
Date of decision : 19-04-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/179/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed After
554PATAI @ KRISHNA KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2010] 3 S.C.R. 1135
Judge Name: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,A.K. PATNAIK
the object F of setting the police or criminal law into motion – An FIR must at least contain some information about the crime committed as also some information about the manner in which the cognizable offence was committed – Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 r.w. s.34. G Prosecution case was that on
Date of decision : 30-03-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1718/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
555V. KISHAN RAO Vs NIKHIL SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL & ANOTHER. – [2010] 5 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: G.S. SINGHVI,A.K. GANGULY
unanimous three- ‘ Judge Bench in Mathew (supra), made a clear distinction H 20 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 5 S.C.R. A between degree of negligence in criminal law and civil. law where normally liability for damages is fastened. His Lordship held that to constitute negligence in criminal law the
Date of decision : 08-03-2010 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2641/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
556NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORP. LTD. Vs HARMEET SINGH PAINTAL AND ANR. – [2010] 2 S.C.R. 805
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,H.L. DATTU
under Section 141 of the Act is sought A to be fastened vicariously on a person connected with a company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A clear case should be spelled out in the complaint against the
Date of decision : 15-02-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/320/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
557KUSUM SHARMA & OTHERS Vs BATRA HOSPITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE & OTHERS – [2010] 2 S.C.R. 685
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,H.S. BEDI
doctor chooses one course of action in preference to the other, he would not be liable if the course of action chosen by him was acceptable to the medical profession – Tort – Negligence – Difference between ‘negligence and ‘criminal negligence’. E criminal law : Criminal negligence -Medical
Date of decision : 10-02-2010 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1385/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
558DARSHAN SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. – [2010] 1 S.C.R. 642
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,A.K. GANGULY
social purpose and deserves to be fostered within the prescribed limits. [Paras 24 and 38] D (664-F-H; 668-F-G] E Mahandi v. Emperor (1930) 31 criminal law Journal 654 (Lahore); Alingal Kunhinayan and Anr. v. Emperor Indian Law Reports 28 Madras 454; Ranganadham Perayya (1957) 1 Andhra Weekly
Date of decision : 15-01-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1057/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
559RUBABBUDDIN SHEIKH Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – [2010] 1 S.C.R. 991
Judge Name: TARUN CHATTERJEE,AFTAB ALAM
filed which is to deal with all matters relating to the trial of the accused including matters falling within the scope of Section 173(8). We respectfully agree with the above view expressed by this Court. In our view, monitoring of pending trial is subversion of criminal law as it stands to mean
Date of decision : 12-01-2010 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/6/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
560  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
GANGULA MOHAN REDDY Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2010] 1 S.C.R. 7
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,A.K. PATNAIK
by himself, irrespective of the means employed by him in achieving his C object of killing himself. 8. Suicide by itself is not an offence under either English or Indian criminal law , though at one time it was a felony in England. In England, the former law was of the nature of being D a
Date of decision : 05-01-2010 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1301/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
561  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
DILIP PREMNARAYAN TIWARI AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2009] 16 S.C.R. 322
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,DEEPAK VERMA
. We are surprised that the Public j.. Prosecutor opposed the application. Fairness of the trial is the .> basic requirement in the criminal law . We think that the Public E Prosecutor ought not to have opposed the production of the document. We, therefore, allowed the production of the
Date of decision : 10-12-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1026/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
562KAILASH NATH Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2010] 3 S.C.R. 599
Judge Name: H.S. BEDI,J.M. PANCHAL
could not be said to be fatal to the prosecution story – Appeal dismissed – criminal law – Motive. [Para 5,8,9 and 11] CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 1416 of 2008. C From the Judgment & Order dated 24.82007 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Lucknow Bench
Date of decision : 10-12-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1416/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
563STATE OF U.P. Vs RAM SAJIVAN & ORS. – [2009] 16 S.C.R. 154
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,A.K. PATNAIK
criminal law Review • F 584.]” {emphasis supplied} 42. In Tota Singh & Another v. State of Punjab (1987) 2 SCC 529, the Court reiterated the same principle in the following G words: “This Court has repeatedly pointed out that the mere fact that the appellate court is inclined on a re
Date of decision : 04-12-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/686/2002 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
564GIMIKPIOTR Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. – [2009] 15 S.C.R. 889
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,H.L. DATTU
when out on bail. Para 6 of the detention order goes on to state:- “6. The State Government are also satisfied that on the facts E and material mentioned above, if you are released on bail, you will indulge in such activities again and that further recourse to normal criminal law would not
Date of decision : 13-11-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2121/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
565JAYABALAN Vs U.T. OF PONDICHERRY – [2009] 15 S.C.R. 736
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
criminal law – Presumption of innocence – Held: such A ,. presumption, which starts at trial stage, continues upto appellate stage. Appellant was prosecuted u/s. 302 IPC for killing his ( wife. According to prosecution, relations between the ………_ couple were strained. Accused did not
Date of decision : 06-11-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1246/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
566PANDURANG CHANDRAKANT MHATRE & ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2009] 15 S.C.R. 58
Judge Name: D.K. JAIN,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
be used with regard. to the testimony of other witnesses who depose H 60 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A in respect of incident. The earliest information in regard ” to commission of a cognizable offence is to be treated as First Information Report. It sets the criminal
Date of decision : 08-10-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/986/2007 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
567D. VENKATASUBRAMANIAM AND ORS. Vs M.K. MOHAN KRISHNAMACHARI AND ANR. – [2009] 14 S.C.R. 441
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
case on c hand is a case where the criminal law is directed to be set in motion on the basis of the allegations made in anonymous petition filed in the High Court. No judicial order can ever be passed by any court without providing ‘~ a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the person 1 D i
Date of decision : 14-09-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1766/2009
568  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs PARMESHWARAN SUBRAMANI AND ANR. – [2009] 14 S.C.R. 385
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
Section 8 ( 1) of the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952. On behalf of the appellant an application was made in that court questioning jurisdiction of E that court inter alia on the ground that it could not take cognizance of any of the offences enumerated in Section 6 ( 1) ~ (a) and (b) of the said
Date of decision : 11-09-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1758/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
569CHIKKARANGAIAH & ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2009] 13 S.C.R. 1182
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
by the High Court for the offence under Section 302 IPC. 30. With regard to the conviction of accused persons under Section 326 read with Section 149 IPC is concerned, before .E dwelling into the evidences, we would like to reiterate the well established legal position. In our criminal law jurisprudence
Date of decision : 02-09-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/634/2002 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
570DHANAPAL Vs STATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS – [2009] 13 S.C.R. 1116
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,H.S. BEDI
of any of us about almost anything at some time or other, it does not mean a doubt begotten by sympathy out c of reluctance to convict;. it means a real doubt; a doubt . founded upon reasons. [Salmond J. in his charge to the. jury in R. v. Fantle reported in 1959 criminal law Review …., 584
Date of decision : 01-09-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/987/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
571SUCHITA SRIVASTAVA & ANR. Vs MEDICAL TERM/NATION OF PREGNANCY ACT, 1971 – [2009] 13 S.C.R. 989
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,P. SATHASIVAM,B.S. CHAUHAN
implementing anti-discrimination measures. The High Court has also taken note of provisions E in the IPC which lay down strong criminal law remedies that can be sought in cases involving the sexual assault of ‘mentally ill’ and ‘mentally retarded’ persons. The High Court points to th
Date of decision : 28-08-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5845/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
572M.N. OJHA & ORS. Vs ALOK KUMAR SRIVASTAV & ANR. – [2009] 13 S.C.R. 444
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
particularly in cases where the complainant sets the criminal law in motion with a view to exert pressure and harass the persons arrayed as accused in the complaint. [Para 15] [454-C-G] G I- .+– State of Kamataka v. L. Muniswamy (1977) 2 SCC 699 and Kurukshetra University v. State of Haryana (1977) 4
Date of decision : 21-08-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1582/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
573MALAY KUMAR GANGULY Vs DR. SUKUMAR MUKHERJEE AND OTHERS – [2009] 13 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,DEEPAK VERMA
negligence – Patient treated by various doctors/Hospitals – Death – Allegation of negligence – Negligence must be of a gross or a very high degree to amount to criminal negligence A B c – To prosecute a medical professional for negligence under 0 criminal law it must be shown that the
Date of decision : 07-08-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1191/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
574R. VENKATAKRISHNAN Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION – [2009] 12 S.C.R. 762
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
public money is involved, criminal law can be set in motion by anybody- In the instant case, prosecution D was rightly initiated on the basis of the information received by CBI. ss:23, 24 and 43- ‘Wrongful gain’ – ‘Dishonestly’ -‘Illegal’ – Connotation of. E PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988
Date of decision : 07-08-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/76/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
575S. PALANI VELAYUTHAM & ORS. Vs DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUNVELVELI, TAMIL NADU & ORS. – [2009] 12 S.C.R. 1215
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,P. SATHASIVAM
against the Government/Court. F criminal law : Criminal Proceedings cannot be set into motion against a litigant, as a matter of course – Court’s order directing prosecution of litigants in a casual manner without any investigation or enquiry either by itself or by any G independent
Date of decision : 07-08-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5743/2009 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
576STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs S. SWARNALATHA & ORS. – [2009] 12 S.C.R. 289
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
– Supreme Court would not interfere with a judgment of acquittal in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 161 and 164 – Evidence – Extra-judicial confession – Test identification parade – F criminal law – Absence of motive for
Date of decision : 04-08-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/315/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
577STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs DNYANESHWAR LAXMAN RAO WANKHEDE – [2009] 11 S.C.R. 513
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
place too much reliance on the minor inconsistencies in the D statements of prosecution witnesses. criminal law – Appeal against acquittal – Interference with – Held: When two views are possible, one in favour of prosecution and other in favour of accused, the court shall not E interfere
Date of decision : 29-07-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1350/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
578RAMESH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2009] 11 S.C.R. 367
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
Ors. v. The State Al R ( 1961) All 153; Ravindru Laxman Mahadik v. State of Maharashtra (1997) criminal law Journal 3833, referred to. <;;ase law reference: G :·~ .. (2003) 5 sec 146 referred to Para 18 (2001) 1 o sec 11s held inapplicable Para 19 367 H I A B 368 SUPREME COURT
Date of decision : 27-07-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/629/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
579BHASKAR LAL SHARMA & ANR. Vs MONICA – [2009] 11 S.C.R. 408
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
498-A. Substantive Section 498-A IPC and presumptive Section 113-8 of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by the criminal law C (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. It is to be noted that Sections 304-8 and 498-A IPC cannot be held to be mutually inclusive. These provisions
Date of decision : 27-07-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1325/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
580  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
JEEWAN KUMAR RAUT & ANR. Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, – [2009] 10 S.C.R. 272
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,A.K. GANGULY
exceptions provided for in TOHO, thus, is only authorized to investigate cases of breach of any of the provisions c thereof, whether penal or otherwise. [Paras 12 and 13] [290-G-H; 291-A-B] 1.2. Ordinarily, any person can set the criminal law in motion. The Parliament and the State
Date of decision : 07-07-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1133/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
581MALLAPPA SIDDAPPA ALAKANUR & ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2009] 10 S.C.R. 196
Judge Name: V.S. SIRPURKAR,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
. criminal law – Doubt on veracity of evidence of witnesses – By criminal court- Held: the doubt should be reasonable, real and tangible. F Appeal – Appeal against acquittal – Interference with – – scope of. Appellants along with four accused (in all six accused) were prosecuted u/ss. 148, 302, 504 r
Date of decision : 07-07-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1055/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
582  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHAKSON BELTHISSOR Vs STATE OF KERALA & ANR. – [2009] 9 S.C.R. 1187
Judge Name: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,B.S. CHAUHAN
. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case .is a serious matter. criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to E bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have the criminal law set into motion. The order of the
Date of decision : 06-07-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/249/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
583BHAIRON SINGH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2009] 9 S.C.R. 875
Judge Name: D.K. JAIN,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
admissible under Section 32. c (3) The second part of clause (1) of Section 32 is yet another exception to the rule that in criminal law the evidence of a person who was not being subjected to or given an opportunity of being cross-examined by the D accused, would be valueless because the place of
Date of decision : 29-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1124/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
584P.G. INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH CHANDIGARH Vs JASPAL SINGH & ORS. – [2009] 9 S.C.R. 889
Judge Name: D.K. JAIN,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
HELD: 1.1. In civil law, the term negligence is used for the purpose of fastening the defendant with liability G ‘ of the amount of damages. To fasten liability in criminal law , the degree of negligence has to be higher than that of negligence enough to fasten liability for damages in civil
Date of decision : 29-05-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7950/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
585KEKI HORMUSJI GHARDA AND ORS. Vs MEHERVAN RUSTOM IRANI AND ANR. – [2009] 9 S.C.R. 183
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
. criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have the criminal law set into motion. The i- order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must F reflect that he has
Date of decision : 13-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1015/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
586SANTOSH KUMAR SATISHBHUSHAN BARIYAR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2009] 9 S.C.R. 90
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
Opinion (1996, criminal law Review), referred to. G 8.1. This court laid down rarest of rare dictum in H Bachan Singh and thereby endorsed a broad sentencing threshold. It has been interpreted by courts in various ways. It is important to note here that principled application of rarest of rare
Date of decision : 13-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1478/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
587JAYENDRA VISHNU THAKUR Vs STATE OF MAHARAHSTRA AND ANOTHER – [2009] 8 S.C.R. 591
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
effect is the decision of the Madras High Court in Mysore v. Sanjeeva, [AIR 1956 Mys. 1 ] wherein it was held:- “(14) The question also arises as to what constitutes E absconding. The word ‘absconder’ is not defined in the Code of Criminal procedure. It occurs in other provisions of criminal law e.g
Date of decision : 11-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/981/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
588ABUTHAGIR AND ORS. Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MADURAI – [2009] 8 S.C.R. 432
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM
not be factor to discard .. D their evidence. criminal law – Delay in examining prosecution witnesses during the course of investigation – Effect on prosecution case E – Held: Not fatal – On facts, since no question was specifically put to investigating officer as to why there was delay in
Date of decision : 08-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/26/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
589JAMIRUDDIN ANSARI Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 759
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,CYRIAC JOSEPH
provisions of Section 23 are the safeguards provided against the .. invocation of the provisions of the Act which are extremely stringent and far removed from the provisions of the F general criminal law . If, as submitted on behalf of some of the respond~nts, it is accepted that a private complaint
Date of decision : 06-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/958/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
590  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
U. SUVETHA Vs STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 902
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA
aforementioned provision was inserted in the Indian Penal Code by reason of The criminal law (Second … Amendment) Act, 1983 (Act No.45of1983). The statement of objects and reasons thereof reads as under :- F “The increasing number of Dowry Deaths is a matter of serious concern. The extent of the
Date of decision : 06-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/938/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
591PERLA SOMASEKHARA REDDY AND ORS. Vs STATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – [2009] 8 S.C.R. 145
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
Proof //”: Glanville Williams criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340, referred to. F 4.Doubts would be called reasonable if they are free from a zest for abstract speculation. Law cannot afford any favourite other than truth. To constitute reasonable doubt, it must be free
Date of decision : 06-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1218/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
592VISHNU DUTT SHARMA Vs DAYA SAPRA – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 977
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Williams, Textbook of criminal law (2nd Edn.) page 56, it is stated: Harking back to Woolmington, it will be remembere.d that Viscount Sankey said that “it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner’s guilt, subject to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory
Date of decision : 05-05-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3238/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
593DHARMESHBHAI VASUDEVBHAI & ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 475
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
Code of Criminal Procedure. 7. Mr.R.S. Suri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, supported the impugned F judgment. 8. It is well settled that any person may set the criminal law in motion subject of course to the statutory interdicts. When an offence
Date of decision : 05-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/914/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
594HARI RAM Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 623
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,CYRIAC JOSEPH
Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, 1985. E criminal law – Claim of juvenility – If two views possible – Court to lean in favour of holding the offender to be a juvenile ~~ in borderline cases. Appellant-accused was arrested for commission of F offences ulss. 148, 302, 149
Date of decision : 05-05-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/907/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
595STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs Y. MOIDEEN KUNHI (DEAD) BY LRS. – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 392
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
competent authority after grant of opportunity to the concerned B person(s). If any, action under criminal law (s) is to be taken, same shall be taken. K.K.T. Special leave petition adjourned. –
Date of decision : 04-05-2009 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)/11398/2009 | Disposal Nature : Hearing Adjourned
596NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 236
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM,AFTAB ALAM
substantive criminal law .” F 35. This Court has often emphasised that in a criminal case the fate of the proceedings cannot always be left entirely in the hands of the parties, crime being public wrong in breach and violation of public rights and duties, which affects the whole community as a
Date of decision : 01-05-2009 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/109/2003 | Disposal Nature : Hearing Adjourned
597DR. C.P. SREEKUMAR, M.S. (ORTHO) Vs S. RAMANUJAM – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 272
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,H.S. BEDI
of the criminal law against the medical _…. profession should be done cautiously and on the basis of reasonably sure grounds. In criminal prosecutions or claims in tort, the burden always rests with the prosecution E or the claimant. No doubt, in a given case, a doctor may be obliged to
Date of decision : 01-05-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6168/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
598ANKUSH MARUTI SHINDE & ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2009] 7 S.C.R. 182
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
offence and B the manner in which it was executed or committed etc. [Para 15] [196-E-F] 2.3 The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability accor­ ding to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct. It C ordinarily allows some significant
Date of decision : 30-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1008/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
599RAMESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI RATHOD Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 1055
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
. Security of persons and property of the people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved ~~ through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a c cross cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and the courts are required to mould
Date of decision : 27-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/575/2007 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
600STATE OF M.P. Vs BASODI – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 1166
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
it was executed or committed etc. [Para 8] [1173-G-H; 117 4-A] H 1168 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 6 S.C.R. A 2.3. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability according to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct. It ordinarily
Date of decision : 27-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1002/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
601NEPAL SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 982
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
degree of probability amounts to “proof’ is an exercise particular to each cas«;!. [Para 36] [1008-E-F] “The Mathematics of Proof II”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340, D – » referred to. -I 3.1. Doubts would be called reasonable if they are’ free
Date of decision : 24-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/383/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
602STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs MOHAN LAL – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 406
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
standard. What degree of probability amounts to “proof; is an exercise particular to each case. Referring to the interdependence of evidence and the confirmation of one piece of evidence by another, a learned author says [see “The E Mathematics of Proof II”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review
Date of decision : 16-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/85/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
603IN RE: DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC & PRIVATE PROPERTIES Vs STATE OF A.P. AND ORS. – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 439
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,P. SATHASIVAM
presume that he is not guilty of the offence. This F is in tune with Section 437 of the Code of Criminal G Procedure, 1973 and certain other modern criminal law statutes. So we recommend that Section 5 may be amended for carrying out the above restriction. Thus we are of the view that
Date of decision : 16-04-2009 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/77/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
604RAMRAJSINGH Vs STATE OF M.P. & ANR. – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 1130
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,P. SATHASIVAM
be contained in a complaint before a person can be subjected to criminal process. A liability under Section 141 of the Act is sought to be fastened vicariously on a person connected with a company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against
Date of decision : 15-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1103/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
605SUHELKHAN KHUDYARKHAN & ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 1142
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,P. SATHASIVAM
E three remedies under the criminal law . The first relates to – the prosecution under Chapter XIV of IPC. The second provides for summary proceedings under Sections 133 to 144 of the Code, and the third relates to remedies under special or local laws. Sub-section (2) of Section 133 F
Date of decision : 15-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1039/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
606STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs SHEIKH SHAHID – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 1038
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,P. SATHASIVAM
filed by the State Government, F the Court HELD:1.1. Sections 375 and 376 IPC have been substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983, and several new sections have been introduced by G the new Act, i.e. ss.376-A, 376- B, 376-C and 376-D. The fact that sweeping changes were
Date of decision : 15-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/660/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
607RAVINDRA KUMAR MADHANLAL GOENKA & ANR. Vs M/S. RUGMINI RAM RAGHAV SPINNERS P. LTD. – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 27
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
large number of cases where criminal law A and civil law can run side by side. The two remedies are not mutually exclusive but clearly coextensive and essentially differ in their content and consequence. The object of the criminal law is to punish an offender who commits an offence against a
Date of decision : 13-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/706/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
608STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs RAMESHWAR & ORS. – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 510
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,CYRIAC JOSEPH
, held inapplicable. 2. There is no bar under the M.P. Co-operative E Societies Act, 1960, to take resort to the provisions of the general criminal law , particularly when charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, are involved. (Para 38] I [525-F] F Stree Atyachar Virodhi
Date of decision : 06-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/647/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
609SATISH KUMAR BATRA & ORS. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 451
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
which “cruelty” by itself amounts to an offence. [Para 11) [459-E-H; 460-A] 1.2. The object for which Section 498-A IPC was D introduced is amply reflected in the Statement of Objects and Reasons while enacting the criminal law (Second Amendment) Act 46 of 1983. The increase in the number
Date of decision : 01-04-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/976/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
610  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BHASKAR RAMAPPA MADAR AND ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 256
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
was not r correct. criminal law – Investigation – Conducted by complainant – Effect of- Held: Merely because the complainant conducted the investigation, that would not be sufficient to cast doubt on G the prosecution version – The matter has to be decided on case to case basis without any
Date of decision : 31-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/415/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
611KRISHNA GHOSH Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2009] 5 S.C.R. 333
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
REPORTS (2009] 5 S.C.R. A sustained bleeding injuries on her ear, nose, left eye, back and leg. Yogmaya died due to assault and torture of her in-laws by < chain. Upon such complaint, the instant case germinated against B the accused persons and the criminal law was set in motion after
Date of decision : 31-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/597/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
612CHUNDURU SIVA RAM KRISHNA AND ANR. Vs PEDDI RAVINDRA BABU AND ANR. – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 1129
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
private and personal grudge.” 15. The above decision was followed by this Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate [1998 (5) SCC 749]. In paragraph 28 of the said judgment this Court held thus: “28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. criminal law cannot
Date of decision : 25-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/549/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
613MS. INS. MALHOTRA Vs DR. A. KRIPLANI & ORS. – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 1062
Judge Name: LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
Court has dealt with the issues of medical negligence and laid down principles on which the liability of a medical professional is determined generally and in the field of criminal law in particular. Reference may c be had to Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab (2005) 6 SCC D 1. The Court has
Date of decision : 24-03-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1386/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
614HARI Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 1012
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,A.K. GANGULY
guilt against the appellant – criminal law . Prosecution case was that appellant and accused 2 .. ” came to the house of complainant and assaulted his father and brother with a knife. Due to knife blow, H 1012 HARi V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 1013 I complainant’s father died on the spot. The
Date of decision : 23-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/669/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
615ABDULWAHAB ABDULMAJID BALOCH Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 956
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Act, 1872 – s.114. F criminal law – Non-framing of proper charge – Death due to fire-arm injury – Recovery of weapon – Held: On facts, it was a matter of serious concern that despite recovery of weapon, the accused was not charged for commission of offence punishable under ss. 25 and 27 of
Date of decision : 23-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1507/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
616AJOY KUMAR GHOSE Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 515
Judge Name: TARUN CHATTERJEE,V.S. SIRPURKAR
would, therefore, have to be set A aside. [Para 27] [539-G-H; 540-A-B] Verendra Vs. Aashraya Makers 1999 criminal law Journal 4206 – overruled. Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr V Meenakshi Marwah & Anr B 2005 (4) SCC 370; Cricket Association of Bengal & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. 1971 (3
Date of decision : 18-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/485/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
617  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs MURALIDHAR – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 400
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
Prosecutions (1937) AC 576 at p.583 = 2 All E.R. 552) observed as under: “Simple lack of care such as will constitute civil liability is C not enough. For purposes of the criminal law there are degrees of negligence; and a very high degree of negligence is required to be proved before the
Date of decision : 16-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/428/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
618V. LAXMINARASAMMA Vs A. YADAIAH (DEAD) & ORS. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 1040
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,A.K. GANGULY
remedy in case an application is found to be vexatious or frivolous although it exercises a very wide jurisdiction both under Civil as also criminal law . The Tribunal is a high powered one. It can execute its own decrees. ‘ The provisions of the Act, as noticed herein before, contain non- ” F
Date of decision : 03-03-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1849/2002 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
619STATE OF M.P. Vs OHARA SINGH & ANR. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 935
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
to Gujiars. Subsequently, deceased had purchased a portion of land from Gujiars. The accused persons were under impression that the deceased got their brothers killed. The First Information Report (In short the ‘FIR’) was lodged F by PW-2 Ramhet and in this manner the criminal law was set in
Date of decision : 03-03-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1390/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
620SAHDEV Vs JAIBAR @ JAI DEV & ORS. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 722
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
(2009] 3 S.C.R. 722 A SAHDEV ” ~- V. JAIBAR@ JAi DEV & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 403 of 2009) B FEBRUARY 27, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.] criminal law : c Sentencing – HELD: It is duty of court to award proper sentence having regard to nature of offence
Date of decision : 27-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/403/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
621STATE OF U.P. Vs SATT AN @ SA TYE NORA & ORS. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 643
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
sentence – Murder of six members of a family t including helpless women and children in a brutal manner – D Held: Case falls under rarest of rare category – High Court effed in altering death sentence to life sentence – criminal law – Doctrine of proportionality – Administration of criminal
Date of decision : 27-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/314/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
622MANI @ UDATTU MAN & ORS. Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2009] 2 S.C.R. 1210
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
. F criminal law – Duty of court – To separate grain from chaff – Administration of justice. Evidence – Normal discrepancies and material discrepancies – Distinction between. Prosecution case was that accused persons were implicated in the murder case of B-son of PW1 and were acquitted
Date of decision : 25-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/382/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
623MANI@ UDATTU MAN & ORS. Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 338
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
– Stated. criminal law – Duty of court- To separate grain from chaff – Administration of justice. -r Evidence – Normal discrepancies and material discrepancies – Distinction between. F Prosecution case was that accused persons were implicated in the murder case of B-son of PW1 and were
Date of decision : 25-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/382/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
624MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2009] 2 S.C.R. 1033
Judge Name: LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
evidence and ). ballistic expert’s report in regard to weapon of offence – High D Court disregarded rule of prudence in converting order of acquittal to conviction – Hence, order of High Court set aside and that of trial court restored. criminal law – Administration of Criminal Justice
Date of decision : 24-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/34/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
625SHEKARA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2009] 2 S.C.R. 744
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
, there is a c separate heading for ‘Sexual offence’, which encompasses Sections 375, 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C, and 376-0. ‘Rape’ is defined in Section 375. Sections 375 and 376 have been substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 198~. ~ and several new sections were introduced by
Date of decision : 18-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/479/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
626CHHOTANNEY & ORS. Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. – [2009] 2 S.C.R. 756
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
medical evidence – Thus, conviction of main accused uls. 302 rlw s. 201 and ~ s. 148 and co-accused uls. 302 rlw s. 149 and s. 147 /PC by … courts below justified. criminal law – Evidence – Standard of proof – Degree E of proof and probability – Measurement of – Explained. i t
Date of decision : 18-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/441/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
627SNEH GUPTA Vs DEVI SARUP & ORS. – [2009] 2 S.C.R. 553
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
criminal law Amendment Act. t (iii) The right of first appeal to the High Court under the same section. c (iv) The right to move the Supreme Court under Article 136 thereafter by way of a second appeal, if necessary.”‘ We are concerned herein with a question of limitation. The compromise
Date of decision : 17-02-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1085/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
628AJMER SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2010] 2 S.C.R. 785
Judge Name: P. SATHASIVAM,H.L. DATTU
witness – In a case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act – Authenticity of – Held: Normally in a charge under the Act, corroboration from E independent witness is expected, but it is not inviolable rule – The obligation to take public witness is not absolute. criminal law – Principle
Date of decision : 15-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/436/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
629GOPAL Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2009] 2 S.C.R. 423
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
application of Section 498A IPC. Cruelty has been defined in the .,+.., j– ~ Explanation for the purpose of Section 498A. Substantive Section 498A IPC and presumptive Section 1138 of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by B criminal law (Second Amendment) Act
Date of decision : 13-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/57/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
630THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA Vs THE COUNCIL OF PRINCIPALS OF COLLEGE IN KERALA & ORS. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 99
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
institution and the hostel if any and give opportunity to him to have his say. Immediately, the police shall be informed and criminal law set into motion. If it comes to the notice of the university or controlling body that any educational institution is c trying to shield the errant students, they
Date of decision : 11-02-2009 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/887/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
631STATE OF PUNJAB Vs PRITAM CHAND AND ORS. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 173
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
criminal case may arise even when breach of contract is also there and there is no bar for prosecution under the criminal law . Having said so, the High Court came to an abrupt conclusion that because two views are C possible as to whether the allegation made was of a civil dispute or of a criminal
Date of decision : 11-02-2009 | Case Number : Contempt Appeal/1069/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
632  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ARJUN SINGH Vs STATE OF H.P. – [2009] 1 S.C.R. 983
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,A.K. GANGULY
. ‘Rape’ is defined in Section 375. Sections 375 and 376 have been substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983, B and several new sections were introduced by the new Act, i.e. 376-A, 376-B, 376-C and 376-D. The fact that sweeping changes were introduced reflects the legislative
Date of decision : 06-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/224/2009 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
633JITENDRA PANCHAL Vs INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, NCB & ANR. – [2009] 1 S.C.R. 842
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,MARKANDEY KATJU
latter part, being offences under the NDPS Act was G triable and punishable in India – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – ss.29, 20, 23, 27A, 24 rlw s.8(c), 12- Penal Code, 1860- ss.3 and 4 – criminal law – Double jeopardy. A consignment of Hashish seized in USA, was H
Date of decision : 03-02-2009 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1660/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
634  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF M.P. Vs BABLU NATT – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 1096
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
as has been highlighted in the above two cases, we may notice that in latter doctrine of proportionality has been invoked, stating: G “24. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability according to the … ‘· culpability of each kind of
Date of decision : 18-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2060/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
635VINOD SOLANKI Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 1070
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
because admissibility, reliability and the, evidentiary value of the • “;- statement of the inculpatory statement depend on the I ; \ bench mark of the provisions of the Evidence Act and the general criminal law .” ‘ ,- G Holding in categorical terms that Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act
Date of decision : 18-12-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7407/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
636RAGHU RAJ SINGH ROUSHA Vs M/S. SHIVAM SUNDRARAM PROMOTERS (P) L & ANR. – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 833
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
. Strong reliance in this behalf has been placed on Chandra Deo Singh v. Prakash Chandra Bose alias Chabi Bose and another[AIR 1963 SC 1430] and Mohd. Yousufv. Afaq Jahan D (Smt) and Another [(2006) 1 SCC 627]. 9. A person intending to set the criminal law in motion inter alia may file an
Date of decision : 17-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2054/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
637V.Y. JOSE & ANR. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 588
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
ingredients of. s.420 – Offence of cheating vis-a-vis breach of contract- Distinction between. E criminal law : Criminal proceedings – If barred only on the ground that civil law could be taken recourse to. Respondent no.2-complainant firm placed an order n- to manufacture a machine on the firm in
Date of decision : 16-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2048/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
638TARSEM SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 379
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
presumptive Section 113-B of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by the criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. It is to be noted that Sections 304- B and 498-A IPC cannot be held to be mutually inclusive. 0 These provisions deal with two distinct offences. It is true
Date of decision : 12-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/476/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
639RANGAIAH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 396
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
– Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302 and 324 – criminal law – Administration of justice. I According to the prosecution case, a quarrel took place between two groups of people of the same village. M had gone out of his house to take a cup of tea. During E the quarrel, the appellant stabbed M with
Date of decision : 12-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/992/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
640ARUN Vs STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 279
Judge Name: LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
-arm – He cannot be made E constructively liable for the act of A-4 – Hence, acquitted under s.302134 – Conviction u/s 457(1) confirmed. ~ criminal law – Appeal against acquittal – Appreciation of – Held: While appreciating appeal against acquittal, courts F … to keep in mind that there is
Date of decision : 11-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1657/2007 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
641STATE OF GOA Vs PANDURANG MOHITE – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 176
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
. Krishna Gopal 1988 (4) SCC 302 and Krishnan and Anr. v. State represented by Inspector of Police .. 2003 (7) sec 56, referred to . H e 180 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 17 S.C.R. • A· “The Mathematics of Proof //”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p
Date of decision : 08-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/598/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
642KASHIBEN CHHAGANBHAI KOLi Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2008] 16 S.C.R. 1179
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
– Penal p Code, 1860 – s.427 . .. Words and Phrases – Mischief – Meaning of – Penal Code, 1860 – s. 425. criminal law – Conviction under Atrocities Act and under E /PC – However, accused stated to be suffering from paralysis – Hence, direction issued that he need not surrender for 3 months
Date of decision : 04-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1967/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
643GOBIND SINGH Vs KRISHNA SINGH AND ORS. – [2008] 16 S.C.R. 1103
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
criminal law amendment Acl, 0 1998 and sentenced. to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Respondent Suresh. was further convicte._d under SeCtion 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (in short ‘Arms Act’) and was awarded 3 years pf rigorous imprisonment. Respondent No.1- Krishna Singh was convicted
Date of decision : 03-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/30/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
644  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAJENDRAN & ANR. Vs STATE ASSTT. COMMNR. OF POLICE LAW & ORDER – [2008] 16 S.C.R. 1005
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
: order to bring home the application ofs.498A IPC. Cruelty has ·been defined in the Explanation for the purpose of C s.498A. Substantive s.498A IPC and presumptive s.1138 of the Evidence Act, 1872 have been ins.erted in the respective statutes by criminal law (Seccm.d Amendment) Act, 1983. 5.3048
Date of decision : 02-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/53/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
645  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BATCU VENKATEHSWARLU AND ORS. Vs PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF AP. – [2008] 16 S.C.R. 851
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,V.S. SIRPURKAR,G.S. SINGHVI
. Referring to the F interdependence of evidence and the confirmation of one piece _,I, – of evidence by another, a learned author says [see “The Mathematics of Proof II”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340 (342)]: “The simple multiplication rule does not
Date of decision : 01-12-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1159/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
646TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs M/S RASIPURAM TEXTILE (P) LTD. & ORS. – [2008] 17 S.C.R. 11
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH
petition rightly held that the Directors could not -”f· have been convicted – Order of acquittal not interfered with – criminal law – Burden of proof. S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla & Anr. (2005) 8 SCC 89; K. Srikanth Singh Vs. North East G Securities Ltd. and Anr. (2007) 12
Date of decision : 25-11-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1962/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
647STATE OF PUNJAB Vs SUKHCHAIN SINGH & ANR. – [2008] 15 S.C.R. 923
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
Williams, criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340 (342), referred to. G )If 2.1. Considering in the light of the principles enunciated by this Court, the reasonings recorded by the Courts below, there is no scope for interference with the order of acquittal passed by the trial
Date of decision : 07-11-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/254/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
648R. KALYANI Vs JANAK C. MEHTA AND ORS. – [2008] 14 S.C.R. 1249
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,AFTAB ALAM
must be strictly construed in the first place. Secondly, there is no vicarious liability in criminal law unless the statute takes that also within its fold. Section 1 O does not provide for such liability. It does not make all the partners liable for the offence whether they do business or not
Date of decision : 24-10-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1694/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
649STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs AHMED SHAIKH BABAJAN & ORS. – [2008] 14 S.C.R. 1184
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,D.K. JAIN
occurrence needs to be recorded in the First Information Report. Nevertheless, having re- c gard to the fact that ‘it is one of the modes by which a person aggrieved sets the criminal law in motion, it must disclose the commission of an offence. Though it is trite that the First Information Report
Date of decision : 24-10-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/25/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
650VIJI & ANR. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2008] 14 S.C.R. 761
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
offence punishable under s.326 read with s.34, IPC. Partly allowing the appeals and modifying the con- v- viction recorded by the High Court, the Court I – G HELD: 1. criminal law undoubtedly admits to the proposition that commonality of intent may develop on the spot, but on the other hand
Date of decision : 20-10-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/296/2006 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
651SIDDHAPAL KAMALA YADAV Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2008] 14 S.C.R. 320
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
faculties of the mind that can form a ground of exemp- -~ tion from criminal responsibility. [Para 11] [330-F-G] ‘History of the criminal law of England, by Stephen Vo. E II, page 166 – referred to. 2.4 The law recognizes nothing but incapacity to realise the nature of the act and presumes
Date of decision : 13-10-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1602/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
652  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BABLOO PASI Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. – [2008] 14 S.C.R. 161
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,D.K. JAIN
. However, if he is -y not found to be a juvenile, he would face trial under the ordinary criminal law . (Paras-23, 24 & 25) [177,H; 178,A-G] CASE LAW REFERENCE (1997) 8 SCC 720 Referred to Para – 13 C (2006) 9 SCC 428 Referred to (2001) s sec 714 Relied on (2000) s sec 488 Relied on 1988
Date of decision : 03-10-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1572/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
653MURUGAN AND ANR. Vs STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS, TAMIL NADU ANR. – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 1160
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
dard. What degree of probability amounts to “proof” is an exer- D cise particular to each case. Referring to the interdependence of evidence and the confirmation of one piece of evidence by another, a learned author says [see “The Mathematics of Proof II”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review
Date of decision : 30-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1278/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
654UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Vs M/S DHARAMENDRA TEXTILE PROCESSORS AND ORS. – [2008] 14 S.C.R. 13
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM,AFTAB ALAM
, hold that ‘ -r mens rea (as is understood in criminal law ) is not an essential ingredient for holding a delinquent liable to pay penalty under Section 23(1 )(a) of FERA, 1947 for contravention of the provisions of Section 10 of FERA, 1947 and that penalty is attracted under Section 23(1 )(a) c
Date of decision : 29-09-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/10289/2003 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
655BALWANT SINGH AND ORS. Vs STATE OF H.P. – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 1111
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
statutes by criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. It is to be noted that s.3048 and s.498A, IPC F cannot be held to be mutually inclusive. These provisions … deal with two distinct offences. It is true that cruelty is a common essential to both the Sections and that has to be proved. The
Date of decision : 29-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/831/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
656PREMIYA @ PREM PRAKASH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 769
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
, 1a, 9 Edw. 4, 26 a, Hale PC 628; E ” criminal law ” by Stephen 9th Ed. p.262; ‘Encyclopoedia of Crime and Justice’ Volume 4, p 1356; Halsbury’s Statutes of England and Wales Fourth Edition Volume 12 – referred to. 2. Section 228-A IPC makes disclosure of identity of F victim of certain offences
Date of decision : 22-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1504/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
657STATE OF U.P. Vs AWDHESH – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 269
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM,AFTAB ALAM
II”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340 (342) – referred to. G 1.5 The concepts of probability, and the degrees of it, cannot obviously be expressed in terms of units to be mathematically enumerated as to how many of such units constitute proof beyond
Date of decision : 09-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/803/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
658SHIVAJI @ DADYA SHANKAR ALHAT Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 81
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
The law regulates social interests, arbitrates conflicting claims and demands. Security of persons and property of the people is an essential function of the State. ,_ It could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross cultural conflict where c living law
Date of decision : 05-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1409/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
659FAKHRUDDIN AHMAD Vs STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANR. – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 66
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,D.K. JAIN
import. As observed by this Court in Ajit Kumar Pa/it Vs. State of West Benga/2 , the word G ‘cognizance’ has no esoteric or mvstic significance in criminal law or procedure. It merely means-·become aware of and when .I.· used with reference to a Court o,r Judge, to take notice of judicially
Date of decision : 05-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1408/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
660STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs SHYAMADAS BANERJEE & ANOTHER – [2008] 12 S.C.R. 1210
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,MARKANDEY KATJU
·ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The short point for decision in this appeal is whether a Special Judge exercising jurisdiction under the provisions of E· the West Bengal criminal law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 1949, (hereinafter referred to as “the Special Courts Act, 1949”), can take
Date of decision : 03-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1395/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
661STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs BHARAT SHANTI LAL SHAH & ORS. – [2008] 12 S.C.R. 1083
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,R.V. RAVEENDRAN,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
expressly or by necessary intendment- Sub-sectionsf3)and (5) are to be read in the manner as mentioned in the judgment – criminal law – Mens rea. F s. 4 – Words “at any time” – Connotation of – HELD: ~ High Court has rightly held that 1hese words should be read to mean at any time after coming
Date of decision : 01-09-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1376/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
662STATE OF PUNJAB Vs RAKESH KUMAR – [2008] 12 S.C.R. 929
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Chapter XVI of IPC. It is an offence affecting the human body. In that Chapter, there is a separate heading for ‘Sexual offen~e’, D which encompasses ss. 375, 376, 376-A, 376-8, 376-C, and 376-D. ‘Rape’ is defined in s.375. ss. 375 and 3’76 have been substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment
Date of decision : 29-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1365/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
663HARI SINGH GOND Vs STATE OF M.P. – [2008] 12 S.C.R. 949
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
derived merely from ~he character of the crime. [para 9] [956,H; 957,A-C] Shera// Walli Mohammed v. State of Maharashtra 1972 Cr.LJ 1523 (SC) – referred to. s ‘History of the criminal law of England’ by Stephen, c Vo. II, page 166 – referred to. 2. The trial Court and the High Court have
Date of decision : 29-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/321/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
664K.K. SARAVANA BABU Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR. – [2008] 12 S.C.R. 468
Judge Name: DALVEER BHANDARI,H.S. BEDI
the allegation in both the cases relied on by the detaining authority are correct, then also no case of disturbance of public order is made out. The detenu can be dealt with B :.1 under the ordinary criminal law if. it becomes imperative. [Paras 30, 31 and 32] [482-G 483-0, 482-E, 483-C] Brij
Date of decision : 22-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1332/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
665STATE OF U.P. Vs KISHANPAL & ORS – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 1048
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,P. SATHASIVAM
– Sentencing – Relative/ interested witnesses – Testimony of. criminal law : B ~· )- Liability of members of an unlawful assembly – Dis- cussed. Motive – Scope of, in proving guilt of the accused. ‘ Evidence: c Evidence of related witness – Reliance on. Interested witness & natural
Date of decision : 08-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/936/2003 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
666TAMILSELVAN Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 888
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,MARKANDEY KATJU
uphold the conviction of the appellant on these facts, and the appellant has to be given c the benefit of doubt which is an established principle in criminal law . Furthermore, there is no evidence .to indi- cate that of the six persons who are alleged to have fired, it was the shot fired by the
Date of decision : 05-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1071/2006 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
667STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs PAPPU @ AJAY – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 793
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
the people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal -· law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross cultural conflict where .living law must find answer to the ·new challenges and the courts are required to mould the sentencing system to meet the
Date of decision : 04-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1213/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
668STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs GAJENDRA SINGH – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 816
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
, does not war­ rant reducing of the sentence – criminal law adheres to the principle of proportionality in sentencing -It is duty of the court to award proper sentence in view of the nature and manner of commission of offence -Undue sympathy to impose inad­ equate sentence would do more harm to
Date of decision : 04-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1217/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
669SATYA NARAIN YADAV Vs GAJANAND AND ANR. – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 607
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
of probability amounts to “proof” is an exercise particular to each case. E (Para – 49) [640-A-B] criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340 – referred to. 3.2 Doubts would be called reasonable if they are free F from a zest for abstract speculation. Law cannot afford any
Date of decision : 01-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/305/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
670  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
VALSON AND ANR. Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 642
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Inspector of Police 2003 (7) ~i H sec 56 – relied on. \ “” { ‘ VALSON AND ANR. v. STATE OF KERALA 645 “Tha Mathematics of Proof 11”: Glanville Williams A criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, pp.340- 342 – referred to. 2.1 The trial court’s judgment appears to be bundle of
Date of decision : 01-08-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/572/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
671GHUREY LAL Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 499
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,DALVEER BHANDARI
some time or other, it does not mean a doubt begotten by ~ sympathy out of reluctance to convict; it means a real doubt, a doubt founded upon reasons. [Salmond J. in his charge to the jury in R. V Fantle reported in 1959 criminal law c Review 584.}” [emphasis supplied] 62. In Tota Singh
Date of decision : 30-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/155/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
672SURAJ SINGH Vs ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.] – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 286
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
evidence by another, a learned author says [see “The Mathematics of Proof II”: Glanville Williams, criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweet and Maxwell, p.340 (342)]: H 312 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R. ~ A “The simple multiplication rule does not apply if the separate pieces of
Date of decision : 24-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1072/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
673RAJBABU & ANR. Vs STATE OF M.P. – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 270
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2001) 9 G SCC 618 wherein this Court observed: “12. This provision was introduced by the criminal law (Second) Amendment Act, 1983 with effect from 26-12- 1983 to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married
Date of decision : 24-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/895/2003 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
674BANTU Vs THE STATE OF U.P. – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 184
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Kumar Srivastava, (1992 Crl.LJ 1104); Hanumant Govind Nargundkar and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (AIR 1952 SC 343) and Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (AIR 1984 SC 1622) – relied on. G Circumstantial Evidence by Alfred Wills, Chapter VI- referred to 2.1. The criminal law adheres
Date of decision : 23-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/117/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
675  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SWAMY SHRADDANANDA @ MURALI MANOHAR MISHRA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2008] 11 S.C.R. 93
Judge Name: B.N. AGRAWAL,G.S. SINGHVI,AFTAB ALAM
– ;…. ment) as follows: G ”In India this onerous duty is cast upon Judges and for more than a century the J_udges are carrying out this duty under the Indian Penal’ Code. ·The impossibility of laying …. down standards is at the very core of the criminal law as administered in India
Date of decision : 22-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/454/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
676KULDEEP SINGH Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – [2008] 10 S.C.R. 1063
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,H.S. BEDI
(1937) (2) All ER 552; R. v. Briggs (1977) 1 All ER 475 and R. v. F Caldwell (1981) 1 All ER 961; R v. Lawrence (1981) 1 All ER 97 4- referred to. Halsbury’s Laws of England (4th Edition) Volume 34; Kenny’s Outlines of criminal law , 19th Edition (1966), p.38; Restatement of the law of Torts
Date of decision : 16-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1106/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
677NOOR AGA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. – [2008] 10 S.C.R. 379
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,V.S. SIRPURKAR
. State of Kamataka 2008 (7) SCALE 716 – referred to. ·-~ Regina v. Lambert 2001 UKHL 37 : 2001 (3) All ER 577; D State v. Coetzee 1997 (2) LRC 593; R. v. Hansen 2007 NZSC 7; Home vs. Dorset Yacht Company 1970 (2) ALL E.R. 294- referred to. The Presumption of Innocence in English criminal law , E
Date of decision : 09-07-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1034/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
678M/S SHANKAR FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. – [2008] 10 S.C.R. 905
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,P. SATHASIVAM
Mitter v. 0.P Poddar – (1983) 4 SCC 701, held that it is clear that anyone can set the criminal law in motion by filing a complaint of facts constituting an offence before a i ‘t ,, ‘ r ‘ ‘ … l ~ MIS SHANKAR FINANCE & INVESTMENTS v. STATE OF 909 ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. [R. V
Date of decision : 26-06-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1449/2003 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
679MOHAN ANNA CHAVAN Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2008] 8 S.C.R. 1072
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Sections 375 and 376 of the Penal Code, 1860 were substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983, and several new sections were introduced, i.e. 376-A, 376-B, 376-C and 376-D. The fact that sweeping changes were introduced reflects the legislative intent to E curb with iron hand, the
Date of decision : 16-05-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/680/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
680  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SIRIYA@ SHRI LAL Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2008] 8 S.C.R. 422
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM
could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law . Undoubtedly, there is a cross cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and. the courts are required to mould the sentencing system C to meet the challenges. The contagion of lawlessness would undermine
Date of decision : 13-05-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/870/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
681STATE OF PUNJAB Vs PREM SAGAR & ORS. – [2008] 8 S.C.R. 574
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,V.S. SIRPURKAR
[2008] 8 S.C.R. 574 -i ,,, A STATE OF PUNJAB v. PREM SAGAR & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 872 of 2008) B MAY 13, 208 [S.B. SINHA AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.] criminal law : _., ~ c Sentencing – HELD: Courts while imposing sentence must take into consideration the principles
Date of decision : 13-05-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/872/2008 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
682ANEETA HADA Vs M/S. GODFATHER TRAVELS & TOURS PVT. LTD. – [2008] 7 S.C.R. 1054
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,V.S. SIRPURKAR
corporations. The corporate vehicle now occupies such a large portion of the industrial, commercial and sociological sectors that amenability of the corporation to a criminal law is essential to have a peaceful society with stable economy” -, (Emphasis supplied) F An earlier decision of this
Date of decision : 08-05-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/838/2008 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
683UNION OF INDIA Vs PRABHAKARAN VIJAYA KUMAR & ORS. – [2008] 7 S.C.R. 673
Judge Name: H.K. SEMA,MARKANDEY KATJU
tort overlap with criminal law , but also and more regrettably, implies that a wrongdoer should only be answerable to the extent of his fault. This is unjust when a wholly innocent victim sustains catastrophic harm through some trivial fault, and is left virtually without compensation”. E 28
Date of decision : 05-05-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6898/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
684HARENDRA SARKAR Vs STATE OF ASSAM – [2008] 7 S.C.R. 589
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,H.S. BEDI
based upon an error of judgment. As pointed out by Lord Atkin in Andrews v. Director of Public Prosecutions919 , “simple lack of care such as will constitute civil liability, is not enough”; for liability under the criminal law “a very high degree of negligence B is required to be proved
Date of decision : 02-05-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/907/2006 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
685ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs ZAHARULNISHA & ORS. – [2008] 7 S.C.R. 58
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
violation of the law by the assured. In some cases, violation of criminal law , particularly violation of the provisions of the MV Act, may result in absolving the insurers F …,., but, the same may not necessarily hold good in the case of a third party. In any event, the exception applies only to
Date of decision : 29-04-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3055/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
686KESAR SINGH & ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2008] 6 S.C.R. 1196
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,V.S. SIRPURKAR
Administration)(1991) 2 SCC 32; and Bhagwan Bahadure v. State of Maharashtra 2007 (11) SCALE 519 – relied on. “Outlines of criminal law ” 17th Edn. P.31 by Kenny – E referred to 3. In the instant case, the appellants are guilty of commission of the offence under Section 304 (Part-I) and not Section 304
Date of decision : 29-04-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/754/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
687NOORJAHAN Vs STATE REP. BY D.S.P. – [2008] 6 S.C.R. 903
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM
. Allowing the appeal, the Court 903 H 904 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R. A HELD: 1.1 Substantive Section 498A IPC and presumptive Section 1138 of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. Section 498-A and Section 113-8
Date of decision : 23-04-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/706/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
688STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. Vs M/S SRI CHAMUNDESWARI SUGAR LTD. – [2008] 6 S.C.R. 16
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM,AFTAB ALAM
Constitution, the provisions of the H 34 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R. A Indian Penal Code, Prevention of Corruption Act and t criminal law Amendment Act stood repealed. After review of all the earlier authorities the Court laid down the following tests: (SCC pp.448-49, para 35
Date of decision : 08-04-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4934/2006 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
689STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. Vs SRI R. VIVEKANANDA SWAMY – [2008] 5 S.C.R. 905
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,V.S. SIRPURKAR
criminal law . Centuries ago thinkers of this Great Land conceived of such right and recognised it. Attention can usefully be drawn to verses 17, 18, 20 and C 22 in Chapter 16 of the Garuda Purana (A Dialogue suggested between the Divine and Garuda, the bird) in the words of the Divine : 17. Vinaa
Date of decision : 01-04-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2336/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
690UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs NAMAN SINGH SEKHAWAT – [2008] 5 S.C.R. 137
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,H.S. BEDI
. Corporation B Ltd. and others vs. K. Meerabai : (2006) 2 SCC 255 wherein this court opined :- “30. The scope of disciplinary proceedings and the scope ~– of criminal proceedings in a Court of criminal law are quite distinct, exclusive and independent of each other. c The prosecution proceedings
Date of decision : 14-03-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/140/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
691  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
CHAND PATEL Vs BISMILLAH BEGUM AND ANR. – [2008] 5 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,J.M. PANCHAL
been drawn between void marriages and irregular marriages. [Paras 19, 21] [10-G, H; 11-A, B, C, G, H] c Nanak Chand v. Chandra Kishore Aggarwal and Ors. AIR (1970) SC 446; Re-Hussain Saheb (1985) criminal law Journal 1505 (A.P.); Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga v. Rameshwari Rameshchandra Daga
Date of decision : 14-03-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/488/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
692HIMANSHU SINGH SABHARWAL Vs STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. – [2008] 4 S.C.R. 783
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM
the rules and practices which the common law requires to be observed “” in the administration of the substantive criminal law “. F >( … 8. This Court has often emphasised that in a criminal case the fate of the proceedings cannot always be left entirely in the hands of the parties, crimes
Date of decision : 12-03-2008 | Case Number : TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL)/175/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
693DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE Vs STATE OF KERALA & ORS. – [2008] 4 S.C.R. 701
Judge Name: S.H. KAPADIA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
cognizable offence. Setting criminal law in motion is fraught with serious consequences, 0 which cannot lightly be undertaken by the High Court even in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of lnclia. The High Court in exercise of its whatsoever jurisdiction cannot direct
Date of decision : 11-03-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/472/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
694VINAY D. NAGAR Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2008] 3 S.C.R. 735
Judge Name: P.P. NAOLEKAR,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
short time of the marriage or the distance of time is not spread over more than 3-4 months the statement may be admissible under S. 32. (3) The second part of Cl. (1) of S. 32 is yet another exception to the rule that in criminal law the evidence of a D person who was not being subjected to or
Date of decision : 03-03-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/210/2007 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
695KASHI RAM & OTHERS Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2008] 2 S.C.R. 101
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,DALVEER BHANDARI
Sing 1864 (1) WR (Cr) 34; Browne 1973 NI 96 – Jieferred to. criminal law by J.C. Smith & Brian Hogan; Crimes by Russel 11th Edn. p.491; Blackstone Commentaries Book 4; P. 185; Halsbury’s Laws of England Fourth Edn, Vol.11 E pp. 630-631 – referred to. CRIMINALAPPEALLTE JURISDICTION : Criminal
Date of decision : 28-01-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/732/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
696S.K. SINHA, CHIEF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER Vs MIS. VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. & ORS. – [2008] 2 S.C.R. 36
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,P.P. NAOLEKAR
criminal law . It merely ~ means-‘become aware of’ and when used with reference to a Court or a Judge, it connotes ‘to take notice of-judicially’. It ‘f indicates the point when a Court or a Magistrate takes judicial H notice of an offence with a view to initiating proceedings in
Date of decision : 25-01-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/175/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
697BENJAMIN Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2008] 1 S.C.R. 656
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,H.S. BEDI
accused by High Court is correct – In view of number and nature of injuries and the medical evidence intention of the accused is proved. criminal law – ‘Mens rea’ – Determination of – Held: It should be determined in the facts of each case. E Appellant-accused No. 1, alongwith accused Nos. 2
Date of decision : 11-01-2008 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/76/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
698STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Vs DINESH KUMAR – [2008] 1 S.C.R. 281
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,ALTAMAS KABIR
very grain of Sections 46 and 439 of the Code. [para 25] [295-E, F, G] Roshan Beevi and Anr. Vs. Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Ors. 1984 criminal law Journal 134 – C distinguished. 1.4 The definition of ‘arrest’ as given in Halsbury’s Law of England is similar in spirit to
Date of decision : 08-01-2008 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/84/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
699STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs BABULAL – [2007] 12 S.C.R. 795
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,ALTAMAS KABIR
-Trial Court was wholly right and fully justified in awarding D punishment for 7 years as envisaged bys. 376 (1)- criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983-Sentencing. Sentence/Sentencing-Sexual offence against woman- Considerations for sentencing-held: In such cases, the accused should E be treated
Date of decision : 03-12-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1658/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
700NARESH GIRI Vs STATE OF M.P. – [2007] 11 S.C.R. 987
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P. SATHASIVAM
961; and R v. Lawrence, (1981) 1 All ER 974, referred to. Hals bury ‘s Laws of England (4th Edition) Volume 34 paragraph F 1; Kenny’s Outlines of criminal law 19th Edition (1966) p38; Restatement of the law of Torts American Law Institute (1934) Vol. I; and Law ofTorts by Fleming p 124
Date of decision : 12-11-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1530/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
701  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAMESH BABURAO DEVASKAR AND ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2007] 11 S.C.R. 197
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,H.S. BEDI
evidently was a chance witness. His name was not disclosed in the First Information Report. (Para 10] (207-B-D] 2. Lodging of a First Information Report is necessary for setting the criminal law in motion. It can be lodged by anybody. It, however, should not be too sketchy so as to make
Date of decision : 12-10-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/844/2005
702SHANTI LAL Vs STATE OF M.P. – [2007] 10 S.C.R. 727
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,ALTAMAS KABIR
-Administration of Criminal Justice. G criminal law : Imprisonment in default of payment of fine-Nature of-HELD: 727 H 728 SUPREME COURT REPORTS -~ [2007] 10 S.C.R. – A the term of imprisonment in default of payment of fine is not a sentence-It is a penalty which a person incurs on account of non­
Date of decision : 08-10-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1375/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
703MAKSUD SAIYED Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. – [2007] 9 S.C.R. 1113
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,H.S. BEDI
.” .. MAKSUDSAIYEDv. STATE[SINHA,J.] 1123 The approach of the High Court, with respect, is entirely correct. A 15. This Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd and Anr. v. Special Judicial Magistrate and Ors., [1998] 5 SCC 749, held as under: “28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal
Date of decision : 18-09-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1248/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
704STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs RAJU – [2007] 9 S.C.R. 970
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,P.P. NAOLEKAR
” stated that, “State of criminal law continues to be – as it should be – a decisive reflection of social consciousness of society”. Therefore, in operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix. By deft G modulation sentencing
Date of decision : 14-09-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/782/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
705  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
M. SRINIVASULU Vs STATE OF A.P. – [2007] 9 S.C.R. 842
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN
Explanation for the purpose of Section 498A. Substantive Section 498A IPC and presumptive Section 1138 of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. G It is to be noted that Sections 3048 and 498A, IPC cannot be held to be mutually
Date of decision : 10-09-2007 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/11/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
706STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs TULSHIRAM BHANUDAS KAMBLE AND ORS. – [2007] 9 S.C.R. 185
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
other party. Maxim-‘Fa/sus in uno falsus in omnibus’-Applicabi/ity of criminal law -Common object-Appreciation of-Held: Once formation F of common object amongst the accused is proved, it is not necessary for the ·court to consider the specific overt act played by each of them. Appeal-Appeal
Date of decision : 21-08-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/85/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
707  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PRADEEP KUMAR@ PRADEEP KUMAR VERMA Vs STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. – [2007] 9 S.C.R. 58
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN
. In considering a similar statute, it was G held in England in R. v. Hopkins (1842) Car & M 254) that a consent obtained by fraud would not be sufficient to justify the taking of a minor. See also Halsbury’s Laws of England, Vol. 9, p. 623. In Stephen’s Digest of the criminal law of England
Date of decision : 17-08-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1086/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
708RAJENDRA SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANR. – [2007] 8 S.C.R. 834
Judge Name: G.P. MATHUR,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
chargesheeted was rightly called to face the D trial-The statement u/s 161 being wholly inadmissible in evidence could not have been taken into consideration by High Court-A finding on a plea of alibi cannot be recorded for the first time in a petition uls 482- criminal law -Alibi. E s. 319
Date of decision : 06-08-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1019/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
709  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
JAPANI SAHOO Vs CHANDRA SEKHAR MOHANTY – [2007] 8 S.C.R. 582
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,TARUN CHATTERJEE
punishment is not inflicted before the offence has been wiped off the memory of persons concerned. (4) The sense of social retribution which is one of the purposes of .. C criminal law loses its edge after the expiry of long period. D E F G (5) The period of limitation would put
Date of decision : 27-07-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/942/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
710  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ARVIND KUMAR AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2007] 8 S.C.R. 474
Judge Name: R.V. RAVEENDRAN,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
provisions of Section l l 3A of the Indian Evidence Act as D inserted by Act No. 43/1983 [ criminal law Second Amendment, I.983] is not retrospective in operation. He further submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges agarnst the accused by leading satisfactory, believable
Date of decision : 24-07-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/452/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off | Direction Issue : Appeal of Appellant No. 1 dismissed and Appellant No. 2 allowed.
711PRABHAKARAN Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2007] 7 S.C.R. 1141
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN
Prosecutions, (1937) AC 576 at p.583 = 2 All E.R. 552) observed as under: “Simple lack of care such as will constitute civil liability is not enough. For purposes of the criminal law there are degrees of negligence; and a very high degree of negligence is required to be proved before the felony is
Date of decision : 21-06-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/775/2005 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
712  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHIV ANAND MALLAPPA KOTI Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2007] 7 S.C.R. 930
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN
person related to her to meet such demand.” 8. Section 498-A does not specifically speak of a dowry demand. It speaks of unlawful demand for property and valuable articles. H 934 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 7 S.C.R. A 9. Section 498-A IPC was enacted by the criminal law (Second Amendment
Date of decision : 05-06-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/145/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
713  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BAPU@ GAJRAJ SINGH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2007] 7 S.C.R. 917
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN
fundamental maxim of criminal law , i.e., F actus non reumfacit nisi mens sit rea” (an act does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty intention). In order to constitute an offence, the intent and act must concur; but in the case of insane persons, no culpability is fastened on them as they
Date of decision : 04-06-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1313/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
714C.C. ALAVI HAJI Vs PALAPETTY MUHAMMED AND ANR – [2007] 7 S.C.R. 326
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,R.V. RAVEENDRAN,D.K. JAIN
borne in mind that the requirement of giving of notice is a clear departure from the rule of criminal law , where there is no stipulation of giving of a notice before filing a complaint. Any drawer who claims that H 338 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2007] 7 S.C.R. A he did not receive the notice
Date of decision : 18-05-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/767/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
715ANANDA MOHAN SEN AND ANR. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2007] 6 S.C.R. 1088
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
her husband on the belief that the things will improve. 27. Indian Penal Code was amended by criminal law Amendment Act 1983 with a view to deal with menace of dowry deaths. Explanation appended to Section 498A defines cruelty in three parts. Clause (a) of the said explanation D itself is in
Date of decision : 16-05-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/743/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
716SMT. SELVI & ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2010] 5 S.C.R. 381
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,ALTAMAS KABIR,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
: ‘3 Should it be admissible?’ 36 American criminal law Review 87-116 (Winter 1999) p. 91; Henry T. Greely and Judy /lies: ‘Neuroscience based lie-detection: The urgent need for regulation’, 33 American Journal of Law and Medicine, 377-421 (2007); ‘The Polygraph and Lie-Detection: 1-1
Date of decision : 05-05-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1267/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
717JODHRAJ SINGH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2007] 5 S.C.R. 850
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
based even on testimony of single witness-In the fact situation of a case, it is permissible D for a court to rely on one part of the deposition of hostile witness-Evidence­ Hostile witness-Evidentiary value- criminal law -Common intention. Appellant-accused was tried for having caused death of one
Date of decision : 27-04-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/634/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
718GOMTI Vs THAKURDAS AND ORS. – [2007] 5 S.C.R. 90
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,D.K. JAIN
court was not passed kfeping the correct principles. D criminal law -Bail and Suspension of execution of sentence- Distinction between. “( Respondent Nos. I to S were convicted u/s 302 r/w s. 149 IPC, u/ss. 148 and 201 IPC and u/s 3(2) and S of Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes E
Date of decision : 13-04-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/555/2007 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
719  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
MANZAR SAYEED KHAN Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. – [2007] 4 S.C.R. 907
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,D.K. JAIN
the paragraph complained of would attract the penal consequences envisaged in Section 153A of IPC. Section 153A of IPC was amended by the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1969 (Act 35 of 1969). It consists of three clauses of which clauses (a) and (b) alone are material for the case on hand, which
Date of decision : 05-04-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/491/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
720MADHUMILAN SYNTEX LTD. AND ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2007] 4 S.C.R. 378
Judge Name: C.K. THAKKER,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
financial irregularities are done by various corporations. The corporate vehicle now occupies such a large portion of the industrial, commercial and sociological sectors that amenability of the corporation to a criminal law is essential to have a peaceful);ociety with stable economy.” 26. In
Date of decision : 23-03-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1377/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
721N.K. WAHI Vs SHEKHAR SINGH AND ORS. – [2007] 3 S.C.R. 883
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
person connected with a company, the principal accused being the company B itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A clear case should be spelled out in the complaint against the person sought to be made liable. Section 14Jofthe Act contains the
Date of decision : 09-03-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/83/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
722S.M.S. PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. Vs NEETA BHALLA AND ANR. – [2007] 2 S.C.R. 862
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
person connected with a company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A clear case should be spelled out in the complaint against ., the person sought to be made liable. Section 141 of the Act contains
Date of decision : 20-02-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/664/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
723HARBANS SINGH Vs STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) – [2007] 2 S.C.R. 689
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
/appellants, Harbans Singh and Mohd. Ayub Mir. Section I 06 of the Evidence Act casts upon them a responsibility of advancing an explanation for the same. The applicability of Section 106 of the Evidence Act in the criminal law has been recognized by the Supreme Court in several judgments. Two
Date of decision : 15-02-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/212/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
724  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SHIVU AND ANR. Vs R.G. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. – [2007] 2 S.C.R. 555
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
punishment without guilt. 25. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality E in prescribing liability according to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct. It ordinarily allows some significant discretion to the Judge in arriving at ~ sentence in each case
Date of decision : 13-02-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/202/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
725SAROJ KUMAR PODDAR Vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. – [2007] 1 S.C.R. 907
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
. A liability under Section 141 of the Act is sought to be fastened vicariously on a person connected with a Company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against A ‘ f- SAROJKUMARPODDARv. STATE(NCTOFDELHI) [SINHA,J.] 915
Date of decision : 16-01-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/70/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
726NOIDA ENTREPRENEURS ASSN. Vs NOIDAAND ORS. – [2007] 1 S.C.R. 892
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
criminal law . When trial for criminal offence is conducted it should be in accordance with proof of the offence as per the evidence defined under the provisions of the Indian F Evidence Act, 1872. Converse is the case of departmental enquiry. The enquiry in a departmental proceeding relates to
Date of decision : 15-01-2007 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/150/1997 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
727  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs BACCHUDAS@ BALARAM AND ORS. – [2007] 1 S.C.R. 671
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
re-appreciation of evidence of witnesses, order of acquittal passed by High Court suffers from no infirmity to warrant interference-Penal Code, I 860-Section, 304 rlw 34. criminal law -Two views-Possibility-Effect of-Held: If two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one
Date of decision : 10-01-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/39/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
728  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
AMITSINGH BHIKAMSING THAKUR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2007] 1 S.C.R. 191
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
therefore, criminal law was set into motion by the complaint lodged by said C Abhijit at Topkhana Police Station, Ahmed Nagar, on the same day at about 9 p.m. Complainant Abhijit was working with the victim Santoshkumar Kirjichand Bakliwal (hereinafter described as ‘deceased’) in his shop of gold
Date of decision : 05-01-2007 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/13/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
729BABLU @ MUBARIK HUSSAIN Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2006] SUPP. 10 S.C.R. 835
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
, which is a corollary of just desert, is dictated by the same principle that does not allow punishment of the innocent, for any punishment in excess of what is deserved for the criminal conduct is punishment without guilt. D The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality
Date of decision : 12-12-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1302/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
730SASI THOMAS Vs STATE AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 450
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
legal system provided for the possibility of a civil action for damages against the perpetrators, the court notes that this assertion has not been substantiated. In any event, as stated above, effective protection against rape and sexual abuse requires measures of a criminal law nature (see
Date of decision : 24-11-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1211/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
731VIKRAMJlT SINGH@ VICKY Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2006] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 375
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
Criminal Procedure, 1973- Section 313. criminal law : Two views-Possibility, effect-Held: If.two views appear to be probable, one contended by accused should be accepted-On facts, ‘courts below weighed the probability of two views and opined that accused not been able D to prove its case
Date of decision : 24-11-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1459/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
732JASBIR SINGH Vs PUNJAB & SIND BANK AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. 62
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
Rani v. Suraj Kumar, AIR (1985) SC 628: [1985] 2 SCC 370 where a statement of law was made that criminal law and civil law can be allowed to operate side by side. There is no quarrel with the said proposition. The High Court, however, failed to take note of the decision of the civil H court
Date of decision : 31-10-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/8046/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
733MAJOR SINGH AND ANR. Vs STTE OF PUNJAB – [2006] SUPP. 7 S.C.R. 486
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,MARKANDEY KATJU
of ‘Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’- E Applicability-Held: It is not an acceptable principle. Criminal Trial-Minor discrepancies in prosecution case-Effect a/­ Held: Such discrepancies not a good ground for rejecting the entire prosecution case. criminal law -Motive-Evidentiary value of-Held
Date of decision : 19-10-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1231/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
734  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
EPURU SUDHAKAR AND ANR. Vs GOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 7 S.C.R. 81
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
execution of the sentence. It may also be used to the end that justice be done by correcting injustice, as where after-discovered facts convince the official or board invested with the power that there was no guilt or that other mistakes were made in the operation or enforcement of the criminal law . Executive
Date of decision : 11-10-2006 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/284-285/2005 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
735MOTI LAL SARAF Vs STATE OF JAMMU & KASMIR AND ANR. – [2006] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 903
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,DALVEER BHANDARI
dismissing the appellant’s petition the High Court had in fact reviewed Its own order. There was no provision B in the criminal law which enabled the Court to review its own order. The appellant further submitted that repeated filing of challans by the respondents without any sanction had caused
Date of decision : 29-09-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/774/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
736TARAKESHWAR SAHU Vs STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND) – [2006] SUPP. 7 S.C.R. 10
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,DALVEER BHANDARI
(Punjab & Haryana); Rameshwar v. State of Haryana, (1984) CrLJ 786 (Punjab & Haryana) and Shokut v. State of C Rajasthan, (2002) CrLJ 364 (Rajasthan), referred to. Outlines of criminal law by Kenny (19th Edn.), referred to. 2.3. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances of the case, the
Date of decision : 29-09-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1036/2005 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
737SIDDARAMA AND ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2006] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 276
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
of criminal law continues to be as it should be a decisive reflection of social consciousness of society”. Therefore, . D in operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix. By deft modulation sentencing process be stem where
Date of decision : 15-09-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/959/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
738A.GEETHA Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. – [2006] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 724
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
activities to be prejudiclal to maintenance of public order and being of the view that recourse to normal criminal law would not have desired effect in preventing him from indulging in such activities which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, the detaining authority passed the H , A
Date of decision : 04-09-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/911/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
739RAJIV RANJAN SINGH ‘LALAN’ AND ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 742
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,AR. LAKSHMANAN,S.H. KAPADIA
to the Court. Therefore, respondent Nos. 4 and S cannot be held G responsible for the delay. Besides, it cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail when it is not proved that any of the bail conditions has been violated. [770-B; E-G) S. Monitoring of pending trial is subversion of criminal
Date of decision : 21-08-2006 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/197/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
740ARUN NIVALAJI MORE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2006] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 301
Judge Name: G.P. MATHUR,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
assured or being acquainted with. (312-C-D[ Black’s law Dictionary, Blackstone’s Criminal Practice, The law B Commission of United Kingdom: 11th Report and Glanville Williams: Text Book of criminal law . p. 125, referred to. 3.2. Therefore, having regard to the meaning assigned in criminal law the
Date of decision : 08-08-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1078/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
741S. SUDERSHAN REDDY & ORS. Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 743
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
‘· . . -~ S. SUDERSHAN REDDY & ORS. A v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH JULY 20, 2006 [ARIJITPASAYAT ANDR.V. RAVEENDRAN,JJ.] B criminal law : Evidence-Testimony of related witness-Held, relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witness-Judgment of High Court affirming C
Date of decision : 20-07-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/639/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
742M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION Vs M/S NEPC INDIA LTD. AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 704
Judge Name: H.K. SEMA,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
subsequent recourse to remedies under criminal law -Permissibility of-Held: When civil remedies are available in law and the party had taken recourse to such remedies, remedy under criminal law is not barred nor the party estopped from seeking such remedy-Criminal proceedings should not be D
Date of decision : 20-07-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/834/2002 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
743STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs SANTOSH KUMAR – [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 548
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
A B c STA TE OF MAD HY A PRADESH v. SANTOSH KUMAR JULY 14, 2006 [ARJJJTPASAYAT AND LOKESHWARSINGH PANTA,JJ.] Penal Code, 1860; Ss. 342, 375 and 376 with criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983: Rape of a minor-Trial Court found accused guilty of offences under Sections 342, 376(2
Date of decision : 14-07-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/762/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
744HEERALAL YADAV Vs STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 147
Judge Name: H.K. SEMA,A.K. MATHUR
HEERALAL Y ADA V A v. STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. JULY 4, 2006 [H.K. SEMA AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ.] B criminal law : Evidence-Dying declaration-Recorded by doctor-Veracity of-High Court setting aside conviction of accused uls 302134 !PC solely on the ground C that dying declaration did not
Date of decision : 04-07-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/546/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
745CHAIRMAN S.E.B.I. Vs SHRIRAM MUTUAL FUND AND ANR. – [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 833
Judge Name: AR. LAKSHMANAN,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
in agreement with the aforesaid view and in our opinion what applies to “tax delinquency” equally holds good for the ‘blameworthy’ conduct for contravention of the provisions of FERA, 1947. We, therefore, hold that mens area (as is understood in criminal law ) is not an essential ingredient for
Date of decision : 23-05-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/9523/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
746G.M. TANK Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. – [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 253
Judge Name: AR. LAKSHMANAN,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
also not similar. In criminal law , burden of proof is on the prosecution and unless the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, he cannot be convicted by a court of law. In departmental enquiry, on the other hand, penalty can be imposed on the delinquent
Date of decision : 10-05-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2582/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
747INDERPREET SINGH KAHLON AND ORS. Vs STA TE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. – [2006] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 772
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,DALVEER BHANDARI
. STATE OF PUNJAB [S.B SINHA,J.] 811 (a) English (Pages I to 16) A (b) Punjabi (Pages I to 26) (c) Civil Law I (Pages I to 37) (d) Civil Law II (Pages I to 27) (e) criminal law (Pages I to 29) Envelop No. 4 – Answer Sheets of Amo! Gill PCS (J) B (a) English (Pages I to I 0) (b
Date of decision : 03-05-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3411/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
748T. ARUNTPERUNJOTHI Vs STATE THROUGH S.H.O., PONDICHERRY – [2006] 3 S.C.R. 799
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,P.P. NAOLEKAR
. Cruelty has been defined in the Explanation for the purpose of Section 498-A. Substantive Section 498-A !PC and presumptive Section 113-A of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by the criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. It is to E be noted that Sections 304-B and 498
Date of decision : 05-04-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/779/2005
749ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH AND ANR . Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. – [2006] 2 S.C.R. 1081
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,H.K. SEMA
ultimate rationale and touchstone of the rules and practices which the common la’!V requires to be observed in the administration of th1e substantive criminal law .” This Court has often emphasised that in a criminal case the fate of the D proceedings cannot always be left entirely in the hands of the
Date of decision : 08-03-2006 | Case Number : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition/6658/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
750DINESH @ BUDDHA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2006] 2 S.C.R. 793
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
. “Rape” is defined in Section 375 I.P.C. Sections 375 and B 376 I.P.C. have been substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983, and several new sections were introduced by the new Act, i.e . .,.. 376A, 376B, 376C and 3760. The fast sweeping changes introduced reflect the legislative
Date of decision : 28-02-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/263/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
751P. MANI Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2006] 2 S.C.R. 486
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,P.P. NAOLEKAR
entire truth-Accused entitled to ben1~fit of doubt–Conviction set E aside-Penal Code, 1860-Section 302. Section 1l3A-Presumption under–Husband charged under Section 302 /PC. hence presumption in terms of Section l /3A is not available. criminal law : F Commission of offence-Burden of proof
Date of decision : 24-02-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1081/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
752STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ORS. Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ORS. – [2006] 2 S.C.R. 709
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,C.K. THAKKER,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
Pradesh High Court in Anil Kumar Aganval v. K.C. Basu (2003) criminal law Journal 2197 which also take the same view as the one taken by the Full Bench in the judgment under challenge. The court has also derived support G for its view from the decisions of this Court in Assistant Collector of
Date of decision : 24-02-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1748/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
753  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SUBE SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. – [2006] 2 S.C.R. 67
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,B.N. SRIKRISHNA,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
traditional remedies available under civil/ criminal law -Further held, the degree of proof required in criminal prosecution relating to such matters is not strict. B Custodial Violence-Reasons and causes of custodial violence enumerated-Emphasis laid on preventive measures to tackle custodial
Date of decision : 03-02-2006 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/237/1998 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
754CHAIRMAN-CUM-M.D., T.N.C.S. CORPN. LTD. AND ORS. Vs K. MEERABAI – [2006] 1 S.C.R. 540
Judge Name: H.K. SEMA,AR. LAKSHMANAN
misappropriation indulged in by the respondent in collusion with the other members of the staff causing thereby huge loss to the Corporation. F (555-Ff 6. The scope of disciplinary proceedings and the scope of criminal proceedings in a Court of criminal law are quite distinct, exclusive and
Date of decision : 23-01-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/623/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
755SHAILESH JASVANTBHAI AND ANR . Vs STTE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. – [2006] 1 S.C.R. 477
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
– Though criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in D .\. prescribing liability in proportion to the culpability of the type of criminal \ conduct yet in practice sentences determined largely by other considerations- Besides, disproportionate punishment has some very
Date of decision : 19-01-2006 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/118/2006 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
756UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Vs DEVENDRA NATH RAI – [2006] 1 S.C.R. 295
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,TARUN CHATTERJEE
-.I, I .1 – UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. A v. DEVENDRA NA TH RAI JANUARY 10, 2006 [ARIJIT PASAYAT AND TARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.] B criminal law : Sentencing-Court Martial awarding death penalty to accused for having caused homicidal death of two army personnel and attempting to murder two
Date of decision : 10-01-2006 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/206/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
757S.K. SHUKLA AND ORS. Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ORS – [2005] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 172
Judge Name: B.N. AGRAWAL,A.K. MATHUR
A S.K. SHUKLA AND ORS. v. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS .. NOVEMBER I 0, 2005 B [B.N. AGRAWAL AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ.] criminal law Prevention of Terrorism Act,’ 2002-Section 3, 4(a)-Genera/ Clauses C Act-Arms Act, 1959-Sch./ category (1), 3(a)-Possession of arms and ammunition in a notified
Date of decision : 10-11-2005 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/132/2003 | Direction Issue : WRIT PETITION, APPEALS AND TRANSFER PETITION ALLOWED
758GURPREET SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2005] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 90
Judge Name: B.N. AGRAWAL,A.K. MATHUR
attained finality. This Court, however, convicted the accused under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous injury by him to the deceased. I .ikewise, in the case of Roopa Ram v. State of Rajas than 1999 criminal law Journal 290 I three accused persons were charged under Section 302 and out of
Date of decision : 09-11-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/711/1995 | Direction Issue : CRIMINAL APPEAL 711 of 1995 DISMISSED, CRIMINAL APPEAL 710 of 1995 ADJOURNED
759BISHNA@ BHISWADEB MAHATO AND ORS. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2005] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 892
Judge Name: S.B. SINHA,R.V. RAVEENDRAN
considered to be contradictions. criminal law -First Information Report-It need not be encyclopedia of events-It is not necessary that all relevant and irrelevant facts should be stated therein in detail. Appellants-accused bought one part of a piece ofland. The other part of that land from
Date of decision : 28-10-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1430/2003 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
760S.M.S. PHARMACEUTICALS LTD Vs NEETA BHALLA AND ANR. – [2005] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 371
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,ARUN KUMAR,B.N. SRIKRISHNA
criminal process. A liability under Section D 141 of the Act is sought to be fastened vicariously on a person connected with a Company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A clear case should be spelled out in
Date of decision : 20-09-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/664/2002 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
761AJIT KUMAR NAG Vs GENERAL MANAGER, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. – [2005] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 314
Judge Name: S.N. VARIAVA,C.K. THAKKER,TARUN CHATTERJEE
proceedings. The degree of proof which is necessary to order a conviction is different from the degree of proof necessary to record the commission of delinquency. The rule relating to E appreciation of evidence in the two proceedings is also not similar. Jn criminal law , burden of proof is on the
Date of decision : 19-09-2005 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/4544/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed | Direction Issue : APPEAL AND WRIT PETITION DISMISSED
762STATE OF PUNJAB Vs SHIV RAM AND ORS. – [2005] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 991
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,C.K. THAKKER,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
needs to be clarified and settled. Very recently, this Court has dealt with the issues of medical negligence and laid down principles on which the liability of a medical professional is determined generally and in the field of criminal law in particular. Reference may be had to Jacob Mathew v
Date of decision : 25-08-2005 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5128/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
763CREF FINANCE LTD. Vs SHREE SHANTHI HOMES PVT. LTD. AND ANR. – [2005] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 873
Judge Name: B.P. SINGH,S.H. KAPADIA
mystic significance in criminal law or procedure. It merely means-become aware of and when used with reference to a Court or Judge, to take notice of judicially. It was stated in Gopal Marwari v. Emperor, AIR (1943) Pat. 245 by the learned Judges of the Patna High Court in a passage quoted with
Date of decision : 23-08-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1063/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
764JACOB MATHEW Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. – [2005] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 307
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,G.P. MATHUR,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
. disregard/or the possible consequences, constitutes the mens rea in criminal negligence. Section 304-A-Negligence-As a tort and criminal negligence-Nature of Negligence required-Held, to fasten liability in criminal law , degree of negligence has to be higher than negligence enough to fasten
Date of decision : 05-08-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/144/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
765STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) Vs NAVJOT SANDHU@AFSAN GURU – [2005] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 79
Judge Name: P. VENKATARAMA REDDI,P.P. NAOLEKAR
Crammer v. USA, 325 US 1-77 and United States v. Villata, 1797 CC Pennsylvania 419, referred to. E – English Salute of High Treason of 1351 i.e. Statute 25, Edward III, c.2; Sir James F. Stephen, – “A History of the criminal law of England”, (1883) publication; ‘Law of Crimes’ by Ratanlal and
Date of decision : 04-08-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/373/2004 | Direction Issue : CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 381, 373-375 AND 376-378 of 2004 DISMISSED. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 379-380 of 2004 PARTLY ALLOWED
766  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SURESH CHANDRA Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 759
Judge Name: P. VENKATARAMA REDDI,D.M. DHARMADHIKARI
intention sprang up at the spot-However, prima facie, facts ahd circumstances of the case justify remission a/sentence to some extent-Such ·application, if filed, it is hoped, would be duly considered- criminal law -Common intention- E Remission of sentence. Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana, (2002) 3
Date of decision : 21-07-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/746/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
767SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 730
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,H.K. SEMA
inserted in the E respective statutes by criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, l 983. F Section 498A IPC and Section 113-B of the Evidence Act include in their amplitude past events of cruelty. Period of operation of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act is seven years, presumption arises when a
Date of decision : 19-07-2005 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/141/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
768STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs BABBU BARKARE @ DALAP SINGH – [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 381
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed etc. (387-G-H; 388-F] Sevaka Perumal etc. v. State ofTamil Nadu, AIR (1991) SC 1463, relied on. H STATEOFM.P. v. BABBUBARKARE@DALAPSINGH 383 2.3-. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of A
Date of decision : 13-05-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/738/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
769STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ORS. ETC. Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ORS. ETC. – [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 49
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,D.M. DHARMADHIKARI,ARUN KUMAR,B.N. SRIKRISHNA
of the citizens. Large scale financial irregularities are done by various corporations. The corporate vehicle now occupies such a large portion of the industrial, commercial and sociological sectors that ·amenability of the corporation to a criminal law is essential to have a peaceful society
Date of decision : 05-05-2005 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1748/1999 | Direction Issue : ALL ABOVE APPEALS AND WRIT PETITIONS BE NOW PLACED FOR FURTHER HEARING BEFORE THE RESPECTIVE BENCHES. LISTED FOR DISPOSAL
770IN RE: ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 Vs – – [2005] 3 S.C.R. 1020
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,G.P. MATHUR,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
criminal law (Second Amendment) Act bringing in stringent cr(minal provisions to combat the menace and to some amendments in the Dowry Prohibition Act itself giving it more teeth. The objects and reasons for C the amendment by Act 63 of 1984, were set down as follows :- D E F “The evil of dowry
Date of decision : 02-05-2005 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/499/1997
771STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs PAWAN KUMAR – [2005] 3 S.C.R. 417
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,G.P. MATHUR,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
free. [427-A-D] F 5.1. Moreover, criminal law should be absolutely certain and clear and there should be no ambiguity or confusion in its application. The same principle should apply in the case of search or seizure, which come in the domain of detection of crime. The position of such bags
Date of decision : 08-04-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/222/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
772RANJITSING BRAHMAJEETSING SHARMA Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. – [2005] 3 S.C.R. 345
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,B.P. SINGH,S.B. SINHA
TADA Act with an oblique motive of depriving the accused persons from getting bail and in some occasions when the courts are inclined to grant bail in cases registered under ordinary criminal law , the investigating officers in order to circumvent the authority of the courts B invoke the
Date of decision : 07-04-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/523/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
773RAVI KUMAR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2005] 2 S.C.R. 548
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
Information Report is a report giving information of the comntission of a cognizable crime which may be made by the complainant or by any other person knowing about the commission of such an offence. It is intended to set the criminal law in motion. The object of insisting upon lodging of the FIR
Date of decision : 04-03-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/377/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
774STATE OF U.P. Vs SATISH – [2005] 1 S.C.R. 1132
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
were last seen together-High Court drew an adverse inference without indicating D any reason and hence not sustainable. Principle of Just desert-Proportion between crime and punishment­ The criminal law adheres to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability according to the
Date of decision : 08-02-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/256/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
775  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PRATAP SINGH Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR. – [2005] 1 S.C.R. 1019
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,S.N. VARIAVA,B.P. SINGH,H.K. SEMA,S.B. SINHA
which only mollifies the rigour of a criminal law does not fall within the said prohibition. If a particular law makes a provision C to that effect, though retrospective in operation, it will be valid. The question whether such a law is retrospective and if so, to what extent depends upon the
Date of decision : 02-02-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/210/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
776KAMESH PANJIYAR @ KAMLESH PANJIYAR Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2005] 1 S.C.R. 903
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
the respective statutes by criminal law (Second Amendment) E Act, 1983. It is to be noted that Sections 3048 and 498A, IPC cannot be held to be mutually inclusive. These provisions deal with two distinct offences. It is true that cruelty is a common essential to both the Sections and that has to
Date of decision : 01-02-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/205/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
777STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs MUNNA CHOUBEY AND ANR. – [2005] 1 S.C.R. 781
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
Chapter, there is a separate heading for ‘Sexual offence’, which encompasses Sections 375, 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376- C, and 376-D. ‘Rape’ is defined in Section 375. Sections 375 and 376 have G been substantially changed by criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983, and several new sections were introduced by
Date of decision : 24-01-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/167/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
778PRAKASH KUMAR @ PRAKASH BHUTTO Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2005] 1 S.C.R. 408
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,B.N. AGRAWAL,H.K. SEMA,G.P. MATHUR,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
of the D TADA Act with an oblique motive of depriving the accused persons from getting bail and in some occasions when the courts are inclined to grant bail in cases registered under ordinary criminal law , the investigating officers in order to circumvent the authority of the courts invoke the
Date of decision : 12-01-2005 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/526/2001 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
779  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
K. PRABHAKARAN Vs P. JAYARAJAN – [2005] 1 S.C.R. 296
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,SHIVARAJ V. PATIL,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,B.N. SRIKRISHNA,G.P. MATHUR
. Contesting an election is a E statutory right and qualifications and disqualifications for holding the office can be statutorily prescribed. A provision for disqualification cannot be termed a penal provision and certainly cannot be equated with a penal provision contained in a criminal law . [326-B-C
Date of decision : 11-01-2005 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/8213/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
780HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. Vs SARVESH BERRY – [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 834
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
private rights punishable under criminal law . When trial for a criminal offence is conducted it should be in accordance with proof of the offence as per B c D E F G the evidence defined under the provisions of the India Evidence Act, 1872. Converse is the case of departmental
Date of decision : 09-12-2004 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7980/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
781STATE OF U.P. Vs PAPPU @ YUNUS AND ANR. – [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 585
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
-Practice and Procedure. criminal law : – Offence of rape-Testimony of prosecutrix-Appreciation of Prosecution case was that when the prosecutrix was alone at her home, the two accused-appellants entered her house through the roof, and raped her at gunpoint. When her mother returned from market and
Date of decision : 01-12-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1382/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
782STATE OF U.P. Vs KISHAN – [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 530
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.H. KAPADIA
ground of lapse of time-Held, as the High Court disposed of the matter by an unreasoned order, matter remitted back to it for decision afresh on the question of sentence. D E criminal law : Sentencing-A liberal attitude by imposing meager sentence merely for lapse of time would be
Date of decision : 30-11-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1381/2004 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
783DEELIP SINGH @ DILIP KUMAR Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 909
Judge Name: P. VENKATARAMA REDDI,P.P. NAOLEKAR
taking of a minor. See also Halsbury’s Laws of England, Volume 9, page 623. In Stephen’s Digest Of the criminal law of England (sixth edition, page 217), the learned author says with reference to the law relating F to “abduction of girls under sixteen” “thus …… If the consent of the G pefson
Date of decision : 03-11-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/44/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
784STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs DHARKOLE @ GOVIND SINGH AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 780
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
U.P. v. Krishna Gopal and Anr., AIR (1988) SC 2154, relied on. Mathematics of Proof II: Glanville Williams: criminal law Review, 1979 by Sweet and Maxwell p340, referred to. 3. There is nothing unusual in the conduct of the eye witnesses. The B High Court has put unwarranted stress on certain
Date of decision : 29-10-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/238/2004 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
785D. GOPALAKRISHNAN Vs SADANAND NAIK AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 520
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,AR. LAKSHMANAN
A D. GOPALAKRISHNAN v. SADANAND NAIK AND ORS. OCTOBER 15, 2004 B [K.G. BALAKRISHNAN AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.] criminal law : Identification of accused-During investigation police showing C photographs of the accused with names written underneath, to witnesses and recording their
Date of decision : 15-10-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1197/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
786ADU RAM Vs MUKNA AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 314
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was D executed or committed etc. (320-A-B) E Sevaka Peruma/ etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR (1991) SC 1463, relied on. 2.3. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability according to the
Date of decision : 08-10-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/646/1999 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
787SACHCHEY LAL TIWARI Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 107
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
premeditation, it must be shown that offender has not taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner-On facts, the exception has no application to the case. criminal law : Appeal against acquittal-Held, principle to be followed in such cases is to interfere only when there are
Date of decision : 06-10-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/270/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
788UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs M/S. HARCHAND RAI CHANDAN LAL – [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 662
Judge Name: S.N. VARIAVA,A.K. MATHUR
definitions given in other enactments like criminal law -Hence, compensation awarded set aside-However, no order passed for recovery of compensation already given-But suggestions made for suitably amending the terms of the policy so that the word “burglary” is given a meaning which F is closer to
Date of decision : 24-09-2004 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6277/2004 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
789KACHRULAL BHAGBIRATH AGRAWAL AND ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 597
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
not prove that they have sustained any special damage. The second remedy is a suit by a private individual for a special damage suffered by him. There are three remedies under the criminal law . The first relates to the prosecution under Chapter XIV of IPC. The second provides for summary
Date of decision : 22-09-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1350/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
790THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Vs BABU CHAKRABORTY – [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 17
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,AR. LAKSHMANAN
– ‘ THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. A v. BABU CHAKRABORTY SEPTEMBER 2, 2004 [K.G. BALAKRISHNAN AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.] B criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Sec. 21, Sec. 8(c), 41(2), 42 (I), (2)-Non-compliance of mandatory requirements under
Date of decision : 02-09-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/426/1998 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
791STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs R.B. SHARMA – [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 417
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
guished from mere private rights punishable under criminal law . When trial B for criminal offence is conducted it should be in accordance with proof of the offen,ce as per the evidence defined under the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 (in short the ‘Evidence Act’). Converse is the
Date of decision : 10-08-2004 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5121/2004 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
792SURJIT SINGH Vs NAHARA RAM AND ANR. – [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 356
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER
A B SURJIT SINGH v. NAHARA RAM AND ANR. AUGUST 5, 2004 [ARIJIT PASAYAT AND C.K. THAKKER, JJ.] criminal law -Appropriate sentence-Award of-General princi­ ples-Held: There should be adherence to the principle of proportionality according to the culpability of each kind of criminal
Date of decision : 05-08-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/799/2004 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
793SAKSHI Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 723
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,G.P. MATHUR
should not be F subsumed under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code and the same should not be limited to penile vaginal penetration only. (c) That in view of the widespread prevalence of child sexual abuse and bearing in mind the provisions of the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983 which
Date of decision : 26-05-2004 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/33/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
794  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH AND ANR. ETC. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. ETC. – [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 571
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
order of the Special Judge constituted under the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 rejecting the objections F taken to the jurisdiction of the Special Judge to take cognizance of the complaint filed as a private complaint. It is in this context only Article 142 was not of assistance to that case
Date of decision : 07-05-2004 | Case Number : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition/4827/2004 | Direction Issue : APPLICATIONS DISMISSED
795STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs SADAN K. BORMAL AND ANR. – [2004] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 870
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,B.P. SINGH
. criminal law Amendment Act, (Special Courts) Act, 1949 deemed to be a Special Judge under the 1988 Act-Effect of-Accused committed offences while P.C. Act, 1947 was in force-But no Special Judge appointed in the State under the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 to try offences under the I947 Act
Date of decision : 29-04-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/877/1998 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
796DAYAL SINGH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2004] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 103
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,B.P. SINGH
; that the report of the Public Analyst was defective inasmuch as it did not mention the percentage of mineral oil found in the sample and that any law mollifying the rigour of criminal law must be held to be retrospective in the sense that it must be 103 H 104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004
Date of decision : 13-04-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1042/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
797ZAHIRA HABIBULLA H SHEIKH AND ANR. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. – [2004] 3 S.C.R. 1050
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
principles and provides the ultimate rationale and touchstone of the rules and practices which the common law requires to be observed in the administration of the substantive criminal law “. This Court has often emphasised that in a criminal case the fate of the proceedings cannot always be
Date of decision : 12-04-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/446/2004 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
798ESHER SINGH Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 1180
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
] – ( – ESHER SINGH i·. ST A TE OF A.P. 1185 Regina v. Murphy, 11837] 173 ER 502, referred to. Russell on Crime, 12th Ed. Vol. I. p 202; criminal law by Glanville Williams, Second Ed. p.382, referred to. A 4.1. In a case where the agreement is for accomplishment of an act which by
Date of decision : 15-03-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1363/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
799DR. B. SINGH Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 1061
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
basis of the said decision. This tendency is being slowly permitted to percolate for setting in motion criminal law jurisdiction, F often unjustifiably just for gaining publicity and giving adverse publicity to their opponents. The other interesting aspect is that in the PILs, official documents
Date of decision : 11-03-2004 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/122/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
800HANS RAJ Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 676
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,B.P. SINGH
danger to life, limb or health of the woman. The law has been succinctly stated in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, [2001] 9 SCC 618 wherein this Court observed : “This provision was introduced by the criminal law (Second) Amendment Act, 1983 with effect from 26-12-1983 to meet a social F
Date of decision : 26-02-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/609/1997 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
801AMAN KUMAR AND ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 237
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
Punjab and D Haryana thr. Registrar, 119791 I SCC 212, relied on. Joseph lines JC & K 893, Stephens criminal law 9th Ed. P.262, Encycolpedia of Crime and· Justice Volume 4, p.1356 and Halsbury’s Statutes of England and Wales (Fourth Edition) Vol. 12, referred to. 3.1. A culprit first intends to
Date of decision : 10-02-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1016/1997 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
802BASHEER@ N.P. BASHEER Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 224
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,B.N. SRIKRISHNA
correctness of these High Court decisions is open to question. In Raton Lal v. State of Punjab, AIR ( 1965) SC 444, it was unequivocally declared by this Court that an ex postfacto criminal law , which only mollifies H the rigour of l~w is not hit by Article 20( I) of the Constitution and th~t if a
Date of decision : 09-02-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1334/2002 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
803STATE OF U.P. Vs VIRENDRA PRASAD – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 39
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
by the Trial Court, it is not necessary to deal with the question whether the sentence awarded by the High Court was without application of mind. It is. however, necessary to note ‘ that sentence should commensurate with the gravity of offence. E The criminal law adheres in general to the
Date of decision : 03-02-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/998/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
804SIMON AND ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2004] 1 S.C.R. 1164
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,B.N. AGRAWAL
upon a decision of House of Lords in Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland v. lynch, (1975) Appeal Cases 653 stating at page 695 “So contemporarily aware a written on the criminal law as Professor Glanville Williams, criminal law , 2nd ed. (1961) p.751 quotes the phrase “coactus
Date of decision : 29-01-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/149/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
805SHRI GOPAL AND ANR . Vs SUBHASH AND ORS. – [2004] 1 S.C.R. 1085
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,S.B. SINHA
,~ ..I- SHRJ GOPAL A.ND ANR . A v. SUBHASH AND ORS. JANUARY 23, 2004 [DORAi SW AMY RAJU AND S.B. SINHA, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860-Sections 34; 141; 148; 149 and 302-5 persons convicted by trial court/or offences under Section 3021149-Discrepancies in c the prosecution
Date of decision : 23-01-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/961/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
806KARNATAKA RARE EARTH AND ANR. Vs THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY AND ANR. – [2004] 1 S.C.R. 965
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,ASHOK BHAN,B.P. SINGH
of situations. Sub-Sections (I), (2), (4), (4A) and (6) are in the realm of criminal law . Sub-Section (3) empowers the State Government or any authority authorized in this behalf to summarily evict a trespasser. Sub-Section (5) empowers the State Government to recover rent, royalty or tax from
Date of decision : 23-01-2004 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3618/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
807B. SHASHIKALA Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [2004] 1 S.C.R. 940
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,S.B. SINHA
A B. SHASHIKALA v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH JANUARY 22, 2004 B [DORAISWAMY RAJU AND S.S. SINHA, JJ.] criminal law : Evidence Act, 1872-Section 32(/)-Dying Declaration-Recording of C in translated form-Statement being recorded by Muns if Magistrate in the presence of a doctor who
Date of decision : 22-01-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/985/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
808VIDHYA DEVI AND ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2004] 1 S.C.R. 846
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,S.B. SINHA
· Words and Phrases: ‘Dowry ‘-Definition and meaning of in the context of Penal Code, 1860 and criminal law (Second amendment) Act, 1983. E The appellants alongwith other accused were prosecuted under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 302 r/w Section 34 IPC for having tortured the victim for not
Date of decision : 20-01-2004 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/846/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
809  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs SWARAN SINGH AND ORS. – [2004] 1 S.C.R. 180
Judge Name: V.N. KHARE,D.M. DHARMADHIKARI,S.B. SINHA
criminal law , particularly, violation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act may result in absolving the insurers C but, the same may not necessarily hold good in the case of a third party. In any event, the exception applies only to acts done intentionally or so recklessly as to denote that
Date of decision : 05-01-2004 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)/9027/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
810JAMES MARTIN Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 910
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
Appellant. Ramesh Babu for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by D E ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.: Self-preservation is the prime instinct of every human being. The right of private defence is a recognized right in F the criminal law . Therefore, Section 96 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
Date of decision : 16-12-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/887/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
811  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PEOPLE’S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES AND ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 860
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,G.P. MATHUR
order and criminal law procedure; the mere fact that there is an indirect impact on armed forces in s. 3 of the Ordinance will not make it in pith and substance a law covered by item (1) under the head ‘Defence’ in the Schedule.” Th~refore, Rehman Shagoo is distinguishable and cannot be used as
Date of decision : 16-12-2003 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/389/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
812GORLE S. NAIDU Vs STTE OF A.P. AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 816
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
significant-Held, such factors throwing considerable light on the vulnerability of the prosecution version-Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 164. Practice and Procedure-Order of’ acquittal-Inte1ference by Appel- B late Court-Principles governing, discussed. criminal law : Acquittal of co
Date of decision : 15-12-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/232/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
813ARUN PASWAN, S.I. Vs STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 724
Judge Name: S.N. VARIAVA,H.K. SEMA
Penal Code and as subordinate Courts can sufficiently vindicate their dignity under the provisions of criminal law in such cases the legislature deemed it proper to exclude them from the jurisdiction of the High Court under S.2(3), Contempt of Courts Act, but it would not be correct to say
Date of decision : 12-12-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/473/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
814SUSHIL MURMU Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 702
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
criminal conduct is punishment without guilt. (712-F-H] 1.2. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of B proportionality in prescribing liability according to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct. It ordinarily allows some significant discretion to the Judge in
Date of decision : 12-12-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/947/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
815N.C. DHOUNDIAL Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 674
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,P. VENKATARAMA REDDI,H.K. SEMA
offence’ in the field of criminal law . It cannot be said that the alleged wrongful act of detention repeats itself everyday even after the complainant was produced before the Mag- D istrate and remand was obtained in accordance with law. Detention of the complainant beyond 3.4.1994 was not a breach
Date of decision : 11-12-2003 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/42/2001 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
816UNION OF INDIA Vs KULDEEP SINGH – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 526
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
from C accused-Sentence reduced by the High Court taking into account age of father of accused and accused not being habitiial offender-Held, the grounds for reduction of sentence untenable- criminal law -Sentence. criminal law –Sentence:……..Reduction of-Discretion with the appel­ D late
Date of decision : 08-12-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1468/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
817STATE (UNION OF INDIA) Vs RAM SARAN – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 476
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
· many of such specially created offences for the purposes of this Act cannot constitute or amount to be offences under the ordinary p criminal law of the land. To that extent they are new class of offences created with punishments therefor, which are unknown. to ordinary criminal law in force. [481
Date of decision : 04-12-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/410/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
818STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs PUTTARAJA – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 274
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
Councle MCGDautha v. State of California, 402 US 183: 28 L.D. 2d 711, referred to. Law in Changing Society by Friedman, referred to. E 2.1. criminal law adheres in general to the principle of F proportionality in prescribing liability according to the culpability of each kind of criminal conduct
Date of decision : 27-11-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/506/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
819R. SAI BHARATHI Vs J. JAYALALITHA AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 85
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,P. VENKATARAMA REDDI
purchase or bid, purchases or bids for the property. Finally, it is contended that it would be violating the basic principle of criminal law to convict a person for an act which may furnish grounds for civil action but which, otherwise, is not .. H prohibited by law. In any case, it is submitted
Date of decision : 24-11-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/115/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
820  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
BHUPINDER SHARMA Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – [2003] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 792
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
cases of molestation and rape are steadily growing. Decency and morality in public and social life can be protected only if courts deal strictly with those who violate the social norms. [798-H, 799-A, 800-F) D Stephen’s ” criminal law ” (9th Edition P.262); Encyclopaedia of Crime and Justice
Date of decision : 17-10-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1265/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
821RAMAKANT RAI Vs MADAN RAI AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 17
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
criminal justice. 131-G-H, 32-A-BI The Mathematics ()f Proof II by Glanville Williams criminal law Review, 1979 by Sweet and Maxwell, pp. 340-342, referred to. 3.2. Doubts would be called reasonable if they are free from a zest ,. for abstract speculation. Law cannot afford any favourite other
Date of decision : 25-09-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2032/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
822  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
VIVEK GUPTA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR . – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 1087
Judge Name: N. SANTOSH HEGDE,B.P. SINGH
. – VIVEK GUPTA A v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR . SEPTEMBER 25, 2003 [N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND B.P. SINGH, JJ.] B criminal law : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Sections 220 and 223-Joint trial of accused persons-Appellant entering into a conspiracy with two C officers of
Date of decision : 25-09-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1249/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
823STATE OF U.P. Vs BABU AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 1079
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
STATE OF U.P. A V. BABU ANJJ ORS. SEPTEMBER 24, 2003 [DORAISWAMY RAJU AND ARIJIT PASAYAT, JJ.] B criminal law : Evidence-Appreciation of-Dacoity and murder-Accused identified at the spot itself with the help of torchlight and gaslight-Location of the C gaslight not indicated in the
Date of decision : 24-09-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1638/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
824THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ASSESSMENT-II, BANGALORE AND ORS. Vs M/s. VELLIAPPA TEXTILES LTD. AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 763
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,B.N. SRIKRISHNA,G.P. MATHUR
manager will be the personal fault of the company. That is made clear in Lord Haldane’s speech in Lennard’s Carrying Co. Ltd. v. Asiatic Petroleum Co. Ltd., 4 (1915) A.C. 705 at pp. 713, 714. So also in the criminal law , in cases where the law requires a guilty mind as a condition of a criminal
Date of decision : 16-09-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/142/1994 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
825STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs GHANSHYAM SINGH – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 618
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
, referred to. 1.2. Law regulates social interests, arbitrates conflicting claims and demands. Security of persons and property of the people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved through F instrumentality of criminal law . The contagion of lawlessness would undermine social
Date of decision : 11-09-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1646/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
826SOU. VIJAYA @ BABY Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 340
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
A SOU. VIJAYA@ BABY v. ST ATE OF MAHARASHTRA SEPTEMBER 3, 2003 B [DORAISWAMY RAJU AND ARIJIT PASAYAT, JJ.] criminal law : Penal Code, 1860-Section 20 /-Ingredients of-Conviction under- C Maintainability of-Appellant’s brother burning his wife to death while appellant was sleeping in
Date of decision : 03-09-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/901/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
827BALRAM KUMAWAT Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 24
Judge Name: V.N. KHARE,S.B. SINHA,ARUN KUMAR
deals with crimes of aggravated nature vis-a-vis the nature of the activities of the accused which can be checked under the ordinary criminal law stating : “In Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Madras v. YMA, Madras, Shah, J. observed : “In a criminal trial or a quasi-criminal proceeding, the court is
Date of decision : 27-08-2003 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/7536/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
828KALIYAPERUMAL AND ANR. Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
to be established in order to bring home the application of Section 498A !PC. Cruelty h:ls been defined in the Explanation for the purpose of Section 498A. Substantive Section 498A !PC and presumptive Section l 13B of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by Criminal
Date of decision : 27-08-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1358/2002 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
829STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs KHERAJ RAM – [2003] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 861
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
guilt of any other person, inference of guilt justified-Further, such circumstances are to be proved beyond reasonable doubt-Penal Code, I 860-Evidence Act, I 872-Section 3. criminal law : D Sentencing-Death sentence-Award of-Principles-Discussed . Determinatioq, of sentence-Principle of
Date of decision : 22-08-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/830/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
830NAZIR KHAN AND ORS. Vs STATE OF DELHI – [2003] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 884
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
. Vol.I, P.202); ” criminal law ” by Glanville Williams (Second Ed.P.382), referred to. 1.3. The essential ingredient of the offence of cri~inal conspiracy is the agreement to commit an offence. In a case where the agreement is for accomplishment of an act which by itself constitutes an offence
Date of decision : 22-08-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/734/2003 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Appeals and Death Reference disposed of
831KRISHNAN AND ANR. Vs STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [2003] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 771
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
reasonable doubt Though this standard is a higher standard, there is, however, no absolute standard, what degree of probability amounts to ‘proor is an exercise particular to each case. [779-H; 780-A) “The Mathematics of Proof If” by Glanville Williams and criminal law Review, 1979, by Sweei and
Date of decision : 28-07-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1149/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
832HIRA LAL AND ORS. Vs STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI. – [2003] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 734
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
by criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. It is to be noted that Sections 304-B and 498-A, IPC cannot be held to be mutually inclusive. These provisions deal with two distinct offences. It is true that cruelty is a .common essential to both the Sections and that has to be proved. The
Date of decision : 25-07-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/825/2002 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
833SHIVRAJ BAPURAY JADHAV AND ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2003] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 539
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
judgment of the High Court-Penal Code, F 1860-ss. 302134 and 324. criminal law : Motive-Jn a case which turns on direct evidence, the motive element G does not play such an important role as to cast any doubt on the credibility of prosecution witnesses even if there be any doubts raised in this
Date of decision : 15-07-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/805/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
834BIPIN CHANDRA PARSHOTTAMDAS PATEL (VAKIL) Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. – [2003] 3 S.C.R. 533
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,S.B. SINHA,AR. LAKSHMANAN
interpretation of Section 40 of the Act. A detention is a detention whether an accused remains in the custody of the police or in judicial custody. f549-D-F-G; 550-Bf criminal law by Ferdico-referred to. D 1.3. A statute is to be construed according to the intention of the legislature. The
Date of decision : 14-04-2003 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)/689/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
835PEOPLE’S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES (PUCL) AND ANR. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. – [2003] 2 S.C.R. 1136
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,P. VENKATARAMA REDDI,D.M. DHARMADHIKARI
legislature by an Act and the Governor by an Ordinance to amend the West Bengal criminal law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, I 949, it was incompetent for either of them to validate an order of transfer which had already been quashed by the issue of a writ of certiorari by the High court and the
Date of decision : 13-03-2003 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/490/2002 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
836R. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2003] 2 S.C.R. 436
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,BRIJESH KUMAR
negligence or careless act may constitute an offence or there may be cases of presumptions and putting the accused to proof to the contrary. 1469-H; 470-A-CJ Blackstone’s Criminal Practice by Peter Murphy, 1992 p.18; criminal law , J.C. Smith, Brian Hogan, 6th Edition, p.31; criminal law by K.D. Gaur
Date of decision : 28-02-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/372/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
837  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAM NARAIN POPLI Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION – [2003] 1 S.C.R. 119
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,B.N. AGRAWAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT
) 173 ER S02, referred to. R.N. POPLI v. C.B.I. 129 Russell on Crime (12th Ed. Vol. /, P.202) and ” criminal law ” by A Glanville Williams (Second Ed P. 382), referred jo. 3.4. Where the conspiracy alleged is with regard to commission of a serious crime of the nature as contemplated in Section
Date of decision : 14-01-2003 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1097/1999 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
838STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs HAT SINGH AND ORS. – [2003] 1 S.C.R. 38
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,BRIJESH KUMAR
distinct. [44-F] E 4. The rule against double jeopardy is stated in the maxim nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa. it is a significant basic rule of criminal law that no man shall be put in jeopardy twice for one and the same offence. The rule provides foundation for the pleas of
Date of decision : 08-01-2003 | Case Number : Contempt Appeal/671/1987 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
839SUDHANSU SEKHAR SAHOO Vs STATE OF ORISSA – [2002] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 536
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN
important that there must be fairness to all sides. In a criminal case, court has to consider the triangulation of interests. It involves taking into account the position of the accused, the victim and his or her family and the public. The purpose of criminal law is to permit everyone C to
Date of decision : 18-12-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/646/1994 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
840N. NATARAJAN Vs B.K. SUBBA RAO – [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 428
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,ARUN KUMAR
been deprived. [434-D-E) A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, 11988) 2 SCC 602, distinguished. 2. It is well settled that in criminal law that a complaint can be lodged by any one who has become aware of a crime having been committed and thereby set the law into motion. In respect of offences adverted
Date of decision : 03-12-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/556/1995 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
841RAGHUNATH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. – [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 130
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,H.K. SEMA
failed to establish case beyond reasonable doubt conviction and sentence of the accused set aside. Criminal Trial-Failure to explain injuries on accused by prosecution­ Ejfect of-Discussed. D criminal law -If two views are possible one in favour of accused and other adversely against it, the
Date of decision : 13-11-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/73/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
842VASANT ARJUNRAO BHANDAK Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 57
Judge Name: U.C. BANERJEE,B.N. AGRAWAL
– VASA NT ARJUNRAO BHAN PAK A v. STATE OF KARNATAKA NOVEMBER 12, 2002 [UMESH C. BANERJEE AND B.N. AGARWAL, JJ.] B Prevention of Corruption Act, I 988-Sections 3, 26, 30(2)— criminal law Amendment Act, 1952-Section 6-Appointment of ‘Special Judge’­ Applicabi/ity of Section 6 to 1988 Act
Date of decision : 12-11-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1138/2002 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
843GANGADHAR BEHERA AND ORS. Vs STATE OF ORISSA – [2002] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 183
Judge Name: ARIJIT PASAYAT,S.B. SINHA
Mathematics of • GANGADHAR BEHERA v. STATE OF ORIS SA [ARIJIT PASA Y AT, J.] 197 Proof II” : Glanville Williams: criminal law Review, 1979 by Sweet A and Maxwell, p. 340 (342). “The simple multiplication rule does not apply if the separate pieces of evidence are dependent. Two events are
Date of decision : 10-10-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1282/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
844RAULI RAM AND ANR. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 426
Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,ARIJIT PASAYAT
of the innocent, for any punishment in excess of what is deserved for the H 438 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2002) SUPP. 2 S.C.R. A criminal conduct is punishment without guilt. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability according to the
Date of decision : 17-09-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/887/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
845ASHISH BATHAM Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 146
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,SHIVARAJ V. PATIL
. The High Court also, though chosen to refer to the very same, had modulated and multiplied it by adverting to the various facets of the same. Realities or Truth apart, the fundamental and basic presumption in the administration of criminal law and justice delivery system is the innocence t
Date of decision : 09-09-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/148/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
846MOHD. KHALID Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL – [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 31
Judge Name: B.N. KIRPAL,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,ARIJIT PASAYAT
. MOHD. KHALIDv STATE OF WEST BENGAL 35 Russel on Crime (12th Ed Vol.I, p. 202; ” criminal law ” by Glanville A Williams (Second Ed P. 382 and Regina v. Murphy, (1937) 173 ER 502 at, · 508, referred to. J..2. Where trustworthy evidence establishing all links of J circumstantial evidence is
Date of decision : 03-09-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1114/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
847LAKSHMI AND ORS. Vs STATE OF U.P. – [2002] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 733
Judge Name: Y.K. SABHARWAL,H.K. SEMA
there was every risk of causing injury to Roshan and Dharamvir as well. In that position the accused would not open fire on their own companions. In this connection . 1961 criminal law Journal page 396 was cited on behalf of the defence. But in the instant case there was a reason for this clapping
Date of decision : 29-08-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/619/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
848STATE THROUGH CBI Vs DR. NARAYAN WARMAN NERUKAR AND ANR. – [2002] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 676
Judge Name: DORAISWAMY RAJU,ARIJIT PASAYAT
allowed Article 21 to stretch its arms as wide as it legitimately can. The mental agony, expense and strain which a person proceeded against in criminal law has to undergo and which, coupled with delay, may result in impairing the capability or ability of the accused to defend himself have
Date of decision : 26-08-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/858/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
849STATE OF PUNJAB Vs GURMEJ SINGH – [2002] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 427
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,BRIJESH KUMAR
not fall in the category of rarest of rare cases to award extreme penalty of death– Hence order of High Court does not call for interference. D criminal law -Pre-mature release of prisoner-It is considered on material facts and circumstances prevailing at the time of release and also on report of
Date of decision : 02-08-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/318/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
850RAVINDRA SHANTARAM SAWANT Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2002] 3 S.C.R. 881
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,B.P. SINGH
Courts have to be cautious to c draw a line between the crime punishable under the ordinary criminal law and the ones which are punishable under Section 3(1) of TADA. 1907-D-FJ – Hitendra Vishnu Thakur v. State ofMharashtra and Ors., 1199414 SCC 602 and Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi, Advocate v
Date of decision : 08-05-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/230/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
851MALHU YADAV AND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2002] 3 S.C.R. 676
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,DORAISWAMY RAJU
A MALHU YADAV AND ORS. v. STATE OF BIHAR MAY I, 2002 B [R.P. SETHI AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.] criminal law : Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302 read with 149, 379, 225, 109, 324, C 323, 147 and 148-Convictio~Onfacts, scujjle between parties over uprooting of crops on victims land by one of
Date of decision : 01-05-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1289/1999 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
852GIRDHAR SHANKAR TAWADE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2002] 3 S.C.R. 376
Judge Name: U.C. BANERJEE,Y.K. SABHARWAL
a separate Chapter in terms of the provisions of criminal law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983). The above amendment stands .).. incorporated by reason of present trend in the society and to meet the t- requirement of the society, the legislature thought it fit to incorporate a new
Date of decision : 24-04-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/463/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
853BIJOY SINGH AND ANR. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2002] 3 S.C.R. 179
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,D.M. DHARMADHIKARI
of the person making the FIR who generally is the victim F himself, if not dead, or the relation or associates of the deceased victim apparently under the shock of the occurrence reported bas always to be kept in mind. (185-G; 186-D) VNK Meharaj Singh v. State o/U.P., [1995) criminal law Journal
Date of decision : 17-04-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1339/1999 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
854P. RAMA CHANDRA RAO Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2002] 3 S.C.R. 60
Judge Name: S.P. BHARUCHA,S.S.M. QUADRI,R.C. LAHOTI,N. SANTOSH HEGDE,DORAISWAMY RAJU,RUMA PAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT
Directive Principles , of State Policy and alive to their constitutional obligation, the Courts have allowed Article 21 to stretch its arms as wide as it legitimately -can. The mental agony, expense and strain which a person proceeded against in criminal ~ law has to undergo and which, coupled with
Date of decision : 16-04-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/535/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
855CHANDRA BIHARI GAUTAM AND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2002] 2 S.C.R. 1164
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,DORAISWAMY RAJU
prosecution allegedly failed to establish the existence of a common object amongst the accused persons. Section 149 is an exception to the criminal law B whereunder a person can be convicted and sentenced for his vicarious liability only on proof of his being a member of the unlawful assembly
Date of decision : 15-04-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1161/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
856KRISHNA MOCHI AND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2002] 3 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,B.N. AGRAWAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT
KRISHNA MOCH! AND ORS. v. STATE OF BIHAR ETC. APRIL IS, 2002 A [M.B. SHAH, B.N. AGRA WAL AND ARIJIT PASA YAT, JJ.) B criminal law : Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987/Penal Code, 1860-Section 3/Section 302 read with Section 149-Death sentence- C Justification
Date of decision : 15-04-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/761/2001 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
857DEVENDER PAL SINGH Vs STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ANR. – [2002] 2 S.C.R. 767
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,B.N. AGRAWAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT
. Saunders, 3rd Edn., Vol. 4 p. 401, “voluntary” is defined as: ” …. The classic statement of the principle is that Lord Summer in Ibrahim v. Regem (1914) AC 599 at p. 609 where he said, “It has H long been established as a positive rule of English criminal law that • _ …. D.P. SINGH v
Date of decision : 22-03-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/993/2001 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
858  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
DIRECTOR OF SETTLEMENTS A.P. AND ORS. Vs M.R. APPARAO AND ANR. – [2002] 2 S.C.R. 661
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,S.N. PHUKAN,S.N. VARIAVA
v. Hemani Kumar Bhattacharjee and Ors., [1963] Supp 2 SCR 542, where-under the question for consideration was whether the earlier decision of the High Court regarding the unconstitutionality of Section 4(1) of the West Bengal criminal law Amendment Act, would be D binding between the parties
Date of decision : 20-03-2002 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/2517/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
859GURMAIL SINGH Vs STTE OF PUNJAB – [2002] 2 S.C.R. 518
Judge Name: U.C. BANERJEE,P. VENKATARAMA REDDI
A GURMAIL SINGH v. ST A TE OF PUNJAB MARCH 18, 2002 B [UMESH C. BANERJEE AND P. VENKATARAMA REDDI, JJ.] criminal law : Terrorist & Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987-Section 5- C Ingredients of offence punishable thereunder-Allegation that accused found carrying a bag
Date of decision : 18-03-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/686/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
860STaTE OF PUNJAB Vs HARNEK SINGH – [2002] 1 S.C.R. 1060
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,B.P. SINGH
provisions made in the Indian Penal Code were not adequate to meet the exigencies of the time, an imperative need was felt_ to make a law to eradicate the evil of bribery and corruption for which the 194 7 Act was enacted. The said Act was amended twice by criminal law E Amendment Act of 1952 and
Date of decision : 15-02-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/801/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
861  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
GANANATH PATTANAIK Vs STATE OF ORISSA – [2002] 1 S.C.R. 845
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,B.P. SINGH
GANANATII PAITANAIK A – v. ST A TE OF ORISSA FEBRUARY 6, 2002 [R.P. SETHI AND BISHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH, JJ.) B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860/Evidence Act, 1872-Sections 3048 & 498A/Section 32-Dowry death-Cruelty-Suicide by wife-Conviction of husband by trial C court and High Court for
Date of decision : 06-02-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1/1995 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
862M/S KUNSTOCOM ELECTRONICS (I) PVT. LTD. Vs GILT PACK LTD. AND ANR. – [2002] 1 S.C.R. 435
Judge Name: D.P. MOHAPATRA,P. VENKATARAMA REDDI
MIS KUNSTOCOM ELECTRONICS (I) PVT. LTD. A v. GILT PACK LTD. AND ANR. JANUARY 24, 2002 [D.P. MOHAPATRA AND P. VENKATARAMA REDDY, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code, J860-Section 420-Failure to supply raw material to respondent as per contract-Case of cheating filed against appellant
Date of decision : 24-01-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/114/2002 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
863LEHNA Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [2002] 1 S.C.R. 377
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,B.N. AGRAWAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT
allow punishment of the innocent, for any punishment in excess of what is deserved F for the criminal conduct is punishment without guilt. The criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in prescribing liability _according to the culpability of each kind of criminal
Date of decision : 22-01-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/733/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
864PANDURANG KALU PATIL AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2002] 1 S.C.R. 338
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. PHUKAN
A PANDURANG KALU PATIL AND ANR. v. ST ATE OF MAHARASHTRA JANUARY 17, 2002 B [K.T. THOMAS AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] criminal law : Penal Code, 1860/Evidence Act, 1872-Sections 34, 149, 302, 307 & c 326/Section 27-Accused Al, A2 and A3 armed with guns and A4 and A6 with knives-Deceased was
Date of decision : 17-01-2002 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/194/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
865LIMBAJI AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 672
Judge Name: R.C. LAHOTI,P. VENKATARAMA REDDI
becomes a valuable tool in the hands of the Court to reach the truth without unduly diluting the presumption in favour of the innocence of the accused which is the foundation of our criminal law . It is an inference of fact drawn from another proved fact taking due note of common experience and
Date of decision : 14-12-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1120/2000 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
866STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. Vs MD. KHALIQUE AND ANR. – [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 355
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. PHUKAN
‘ STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR. A v. MD. KHALIQUE AND ANR. NOVEMBER 28, 2001 [K.T. THOMAS AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] B criminal law : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Sections 482, 156 and 157-lnves­ tigation by police-Interference by High Court-Held, when prima fade case C is made out against
Date of decision : 28-11-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1217/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
867SUKHAN RAUT AND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 359
Judge Name: R.P. SETHI,Y.K. SABHARWAL
.. SUKHAN RAUT AND ORS. A v. STATE OF BIHAR NOVEMBER 28, 2001 [R.P. SETHI AND Y.K. SABHARWAL, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860-Sections 149, 34, 302, 147 and 148-Commission of of.fence by unlawful assembly in prosecution ~f common object-Liability of- C Murder committed
Date of decision : 28-11-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/135/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
868PRITISH Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. – [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 302
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. PHUKAN,Y.K. SABHARWAL
. SpeCial Police Establishment, 1985 criminal law B c D E F G H Journal420(Mad),approved. Nimmakayala Audi Narrayanamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR · (1970) A.P. 119, disapproved. 2. Section 341 of the Code confers a power on the party on whose application the Court has
Date of decision : 21-11-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1188/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
869M/S. M.M.T.C. LTD. AND ANR. Vs MIS. MEDCHL CHEMICALS AND PHARMA (P) LTD. AND ANR. – [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 265
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. VARIAVA
of Vishwa Miller v. 0. P. Poddarreported in [1983] 4 SCC 701, held that it is clear that anyone can set the criminal law in motion by filing a complaint of facts constituting an offence before a Magistrate entitled to take cognizance. It has been held that no court can decline to take
Date of decision : 19-11-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1173/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
870  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
RAMESH KUMAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2001] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 247
Judge Name: A.S. ANAND,R.C. LAHOTI,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN
. “cruetly” shall have the same meaning as in section 498-A .of the Indian Penal Code. This provision was introduced by criminal law (Second) Amendment Act, 1983 with effect from 26.12.1983 to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married women were eliminated by
Date of decision : 17-10-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/617/2000 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
871M. KRISHNAN Vs VIJAY SINGH AND ANR. – [2001] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 45
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,R.P. SETHI
M. KRISHNAN V. VIJAY SINGH AND ANR. OCTOBER II, 2001 [M.B. SHAH AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] criminal law : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 482-Criminal Proceedings-Quashing of-When civil disputes pending between the parties-:­ Held justified. Respondents withdrew huge amounts from
Date of decision : 11-10-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1028/2001 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
872PRAVIN C. SHAH Vs K.A. MOHD. ALI AND ANR. – [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 675
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. VARIAVA
particular Advocate is under the spell of the interdict contained in Rule 11 until he purges himself of the contempt. [688-D-E] C.N. Presannan v: K. A. Mohammed Ali, [1991] criminal law Journal 2194 and 1991 criminal law Journal 2205, referred to. CrYIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No
Date of decision : 09-10-2001 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3050/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
873UMASHANKAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 646
Judge Name: S.S.M. QUADRI,S.N. PHUKAN
fake or counterfeit was put to accused in his examination u!s. 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure­ Charges framed ulss. 489 8 ~nd 489C are not proved-Conviction and sentence set aside-Evidence Act, 1872-S.4-Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- F G S.313- criminal law -Mens rea. CRIMINAL APPELLATE
Date of decision : 05-10-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1024/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
874  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SATYA NARAYAN SHARMA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 268
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. VARIAVA
provisions in the criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944, to enable attachment of ill-gotton wealth obtained through corrupt means, including from transferees of such wealth. The Act seeks to incorporate all these provisions with modifications so as to.make the provisions more effective in
Date of decision : 25-09-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/981/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
875RAM GULAM CHAUDHURY AND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 279
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. VARIAVA
Nath Mehra v. The A State of Ajmer, reported in [1956) SCR 199. In that case it has been held that Section 106 of the Evidence Act does not abrogate the well-established rule of criminal law that the burden lies on the prosecution to prove its case and that such burden never shifts. It has been
Date of decision : 25-09-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1056/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
876STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs KAJAD – [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 617
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,R.P. SETHI
CrPC-Negation of bail is the rule and its grant an exception-Successive bail applications permissible under changed circumstances only else consideration of subsequent bail application amounts to reviewing earlier order-Not permissible under criminal law . Respondent was apprehended under S.50 of
Date of decision : 06-09-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/907/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
877HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND ORS. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 577
Judge Name: S.P. BHARUCHA,Y.K. SABHARWAL,BRIJESH KUMAR
enactments like criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1952 (since repealed) and the Special Courts Act, 1979; C that section 307 CrPC is not applicable since no commitment of the case is made to the Special Court; that at pre-cognizance stage_, no power of any nature has been conferred to the Special
Date of decision : 06-09-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/319/1996 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
878RAVINDER KUMAR AND ANR. Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 463
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.N. VARIAVA
-Based on memory-Evidentiary value of-Held: E A special event creates an impact on the human mind lasting for long­ Though routine events may not be remembered yet odd or bizarre happenings stick in the mind indelibly-Such events easily get refreshed subsequently. criminal law : Motive
Date of decision : 31-08-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/881/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
879M/S. BHASKAR INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs M/S. BHIWANI DENIM AND APPARELS LTD. AND ORS. – [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 219
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN
·• • MIS. BHASKAR INDUSTRIES LTD. A v. MIS. BHIWANI DENIM AND APPARELS LTD. AND ORS. AUGUST 27, 2001 [K.T. THOMAS AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] B criminal law : Interlocutory order-Order passed by Magistrate on application for dispensing with personal appearance of accused-Question
Date of decision : 27-08-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/858/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
880STATE OF MAD HYPRADESH Vs BHOORAJI AND ORS. – [2001] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 128
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN
should have dealt with the appeal on merits and on the basis of the evidence already on record. [139-D, E] Gangula Ashok v. State of A.P., (2000) 2 SCC 504; Meerabhai v. Bhujbal Singh, (1995) criminal law Journal 2376 (MP) and *Anand Swaroop v. Ram H · IJ~ SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2001] SUPP
Date of decision : 24-08-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/851/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
881ANIL RAI Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2001] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 298
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
immaterial if prosecution gives cogent and reasonable explanation for such delay. E F Evidence Act 1872 : Witnesses-Testimony of-Name of PWs not mentioned in the FIR­ Reliability of-Held, the purpose of FIR is to set the criminal law into motion and does not require the details or names
Date of decision : 06-08-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/389/1998 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
882T.T. ANTONY Vs STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. – [2001] 3 S.C.R. 942
Judge Name: S.S.M. QUADRI,S.N. PHUKAN
.) which sets the criminal law into motion and marks the commencement of the investigation jr, which ends up with the formation of opinion under Section 169 or 170 of the Code and forwarding of a police report under Section 173 of the Code. It is quite possible and it happens not infrequently
Date of decision : 12-07-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/4066/2001 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
883STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. Vs NAJAKAT ALIA MUBARAK ALI – [2001] 3 S.C.R. 600
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI,S.N. PHUKAN
that if there is no balance period left after such deduction the convict will be entitled to be set free from jail, unless he is required in any other case. 1609-Df H 602 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2001J 3 S.C.R. A K.C. Das v. The State, (1979) criminal law Journal 362; Lalrinfela v. State of
Date of decision : 09-05-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/617/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
884SUCHA SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [2001] 2 S.C.R. 644
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
situation like this. Shri U.R. Lalit pleaded for reconsid- eration of the said legal position. According to him, the ratio laid down in that decision is not in tune with the well accepted principle of criminal law ~ that the accused is entitled to keep his tongue inside his mouth as the burden is
Date of decision : 22-03-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/24/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
885DHANANJAYA REDDY ETC. Vs STATE OF KARN AT AKA – [2001] 2 S.C.R. 399
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
to see the admissibility of said confessional statement not as a judicial confession but as extra judicial confession made to PWSO. We found it difficult to treat Exhibit P-77 as extra-judicial confession of A4 made to PWSO. Confessions in criminal law have been categorised to be either judicial
Date of decision : 14-03-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1000/1999
886COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI Vs BHUPEN CHAMPAK LAL DALAL AND ANR. ETC. – [2001] 2 S.C.R. 178
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,S.N. PHUKAN
filed by the petitioner. High court also dismissed the writ petition and granted interim order staying the proceedings in the criminal cases E before the Metropolitan Magistrate. Hence these Special Leave Petitions. Dismissing the petitions, the Court HELD : 1.1. The prosecution in criminal
Date of decision : 27-02-2001 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/2430/2000
887M/S J.K. INTERNATIONAL Vs STATE, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. – [2001] 2 S.C.R. 90
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI,B.N. AGRAWAL
terms of Section435 (old Cr.P.C.) .l are very wide and he can even take up the matter suo motu. The criminal law is not, however, to be used as an instrument of wrecking private vengeance by an aggrieved party against the person who, according to that party, has caused injnry to it. Barring
Date of decision : 23-02-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/222/2001 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
888THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. Vs BASKAR – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 1139
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,S.N. VARIAVA
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. A v. BA SKAR FEBRUARY 20, 2001 [S.N. VARIAVA AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] B criminal law Preventive Detention-Constitution of India-Articles 21 & 226-Writ of Habeas Corpus-High Court quashing order of detention on ground of C vagueness-Held, on facts, detention
Date of decision : 20-02-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/207/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
889THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. Vs BALASUBRAMANIAM – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 1142
Judge Name: M.B. SHAH,S.N. VARIAVA
A THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. II. BALASUBRAMANIAM FEBRUARY 20, 2001 B [S.N. VARIAVA AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law Constillllion of India-Articles 226 & 21 Preventive Detention-High C Court quashing detention of Respondent-On ground of non-supply of documents relating to four
Date of decision : 20-02-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/206/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
890ALPIC FINANCE LTD. Vs P. SADASIVAN AND ANR. – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 1059
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN
appellant Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD : I.I. When somebody suffers injury to his person, property or reputation, he may have remedies both under civil and criminal law . The injury alleged may form the basis of civil claim and may also constitute the C ingredients of some crime
Date of decision : 16-02-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/194/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
891  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
JA TINDER SINGH Vs RANJIT KAUR – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 707
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
–~ JA TINDER SINGH A v. RANJIT KAUR JANUARY 30, 2001 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] B criminal law : Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973-Sections 202, 203 and 300- Marriage with appellant who was already married-Complaint ll’ith Judicial C Magistrate-Dismissal of Complaint for
Date of decision : 30-01-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/121/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
892BABUA@ TAZMUL HOSSAIN Vs THE STATE OF ORISSA – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 678
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN
A BABUA@ TAZMUL HOSSAIN v. THE STATE OF ORISSA JANUARY 30, 200 I B [S. RAJENDRA BABU AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and P;rchotropic Substances Act, 1985–Sections 20(b). C 21, 29, 3 7 (I )(b)-Petitioner arrested on ground that he worked for some one who was
Date of decision : 30-01-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2866/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
893  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH S.P. JAIPUR Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 472
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
officer to his subordinate officer in the police department. Tiie said decision is reported in State of Kera/av. Moosa Haji, (1993) 2 K.L.T. 609 and also in 1994 criminal law … Journal 1288}. A two Judge Bench of this Court (G.N. Ray and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ) has affirmed the said decision of the
Date of decision : 19-01-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1162/1998 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
894  English           தமிழ் – Tamil Disclaimer
PANKAJBHAl NAGJIBHAI PATEL Vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 337
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
from the appellant. 1344-C( K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Ba/an & Anr., (19991 7 SCC 510, relied on. E A. Y. Prabhakar v. Naresh Kumar N. Shah, (19941 Madras Law Journal (Crl.) 91 = (19951 Company Cases (Vol. 83) 191 and K.P. Sahdevan v. TK. Sreedharan, ( 19961 2 criminal law Journal
Date of decision : 12-01-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/66/2001 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
895  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SURESH CHAND JAIN Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR. – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 257
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
SURE~H CHAND JAIN ,. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR. JANUARY 10, 2001 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal l’rucedure Code, 1973-Chapters XII and XV-Sections 156 and 202-l’oll’er of Judicial Magistrate tu direct investigation hy Police on receiving complaim
Date of decision : 10-01-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/43/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
896SURYANARAYANA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [2001] 1 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
·t SURYANARAYANA. A \( STATE OF KARNATAKA JANUARY 3, 2001 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] B criminal law : Evidence Act, 1872 : c Section 118-Witness–Oiild iritness-Competence to testifj~Evidentia1)’ mlue of-Conviction based sole(v upon that evidence-Validity-Held: the
Date of decision : 03-01-2001 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/522/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
897GURA SINGH Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2000] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 408
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
leave has been left completely to the discretion of the court, the exercise of which is not fettered by or dependent upon the ‘hostility’ or ‘adverseness’ of the witness. In this respect, the Indian Evidence Act is in advance of the English Law. The criminal law Revision Committee D of England in
Date of decision : 06-12-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1184/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
898STATE, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI Vs SUN IL AND ANOTHER – [2000] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 144
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
A STATE, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI V. SUN IL AND ANOTHER NOVEMBER 29, 2000 B [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.) criminal law Penal Code 1860-Sections 364, 376, 377 and 302 read with Section C 34-Respondents charged for kidnapping, rape and murder of four year old-Sessions Court convicting
Date of decision : 29-11-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1119/1998 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
899MADHUKAR BHASKARRAO JOSHI Vs STTE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 475
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
MADHUKARBHASKARRAOJOSHI A v. ST A TE OF MAHARASHTRA NOVEMBER 9, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] B criminal law : Prevention of Corruption Act. 1947-Section 4(/)-Gratification­ Payment to or acceptance by public servant-Held, once the premise of C payment or acceptance of
Date of decision : 09-11-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/960/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
900STATE OF U.P. Vs HARi MOHAN AND ORS. – [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 440
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
A B c STATE OF U.P. v. HARi MOHAN AND ORS. NOVEMBER 7, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] criminal law : Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections. 302, 34 and 201-Murder­ Applicability of circumstantial evidence in conviction of accused when there is no direct evidence-Held, the
Date of decision : 07-11-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/484/1991 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
901HARI SINGH MANN Vs HARBHAJAN SINGH BAJWA AND ORS. – [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 313
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
illegal, against the well established principles of law and being a review of the earlier G order which was not permissible under the criminal law . The High Court dismissed the petition. Hence this appeal. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD : 1. The impugned orders were passed completely
Date of decision : 01-11-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/908/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
902RAM LAL Vs sTATE OF RAJASTHAN – [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 321
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
– RAM LAL v. ·sTATE OF RAJASTHAN NOVEMBER 1, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] criminal law : Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954: Section 2(v)-Food-Camel ‘s milk-Human consumption-Fitness for­ Held: Camel’s milk is rich and nutritious-It contains fatty acid and its
Date of decision : 01-11-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1271/1999 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
903SHAMSHER KHAN Vs STTE (NCT OF DELHI) – [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 287
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
SHAMSHER KHAN A v. ST A TE (NCT OF DELHI) OCTOBER 19, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] B criminal law : Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 299, 304 and 308-Manufacture and stocking of bombs in a house clandestinely-Explosion of bombs during C manufacture-Conviction for culpable
Date of decision : 19-10-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/502/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
904DADU @ TULSIDAS Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2000] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 703
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI,S.N. VARIAVA
Dictionary, 5th Edn., P. 1006; Jowitt’s Dictionary of English Law, 2nd Edn., Vol. 2, p. 1320; Kenny’s Outlines of criminal law ; 17th Edn., pp. 574- 76; the English Sentencing System by Sir Rupert Cross at pp. 31-34; 87 et seq; American Jurisprudence, 2nd Edn., Vol. 59, pp. 53- 61; Corpus Juris
Date of decision : 12-10-2000 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/169/1999 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
905BASAVARAJ R. PATIL AND ORS. Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. – [2000] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 658
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI,S.N. VARIAVA
A BASAVARAJ R. PATIL AND ORS. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. OCTOBER 11, 2000 B [K.T. THOMAS, R.P. SETHI AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.] criminal law -Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 313(2)­ Questioning of the accused in a warrant case-After closing of evidence by C prosecution-Held (per
Date of decision : 11-10-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/869/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
906NARAYAN CHETANRAM CHAUDHARY AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2000] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 104
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
NARAYANCHETANRAMCHAUDHARYv. STATEOFMAHARASHTRA[:sETHl,J.J· 119 every other person concerned, whether as principal or abettor, in the A commission thereof. (2) This section applies to: (a) any offence triable exclusively by the court of session or by the court of a special judge appointed under the Criminal
Date of decision : 05-09-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/25/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
907STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs THE REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA – [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 384
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.P. SETHI
remarks against present criminal law administration and particu- C larly against police department of State and directing Home Secretary and Home Minister of the State to report to it the reaction of Government to the observations made in the judgment-Held, judgments and orders should confine to
Date of decision : 10-08-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/652/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
908A. SOWKATH ALI Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 48
Judge Name: AJAY PRAKASH MISRA,N. SANTOSH HEGDE
A B c D E A. SOWKATH ALI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. AUGUST I, 2000 [A.P. MISRA AND N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] criminal law : Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activi­ t~ Act, 1974 : Sections 3(i) and (ii)-Preventive Detention-Subjective satisfaction
Date of decision : 01-08-2000 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/45/2000 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
909STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. Vs SANTOSH SHANKAR ACHARYA – [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 67
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,U.C. BANERJEE
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. v. SANTOSH SHANKAR ACHARYA AUGUST 1, 2000 [G.B. PATTANAIK AND U.C. BANERJEE, JJ.] criminal law : Maharashtra Prevention ()f Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Boot­ leggers, Drugs Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 : Sections 3(2) and 8( 1
Date of decision : 01-08-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/596/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
910SUDHAKAR AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2000] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 507
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,R.P. SETHI,SHIVARAJ V. PATIL
SUDHAKAR AND ANR. v. ST A TE OF MAHARASHTRA JULY 17, 2000 [G.B. PATTANAIK, R.P. SETHI AND SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.] criminal law : Evidence Act, 1872: Section 32(/). Dying declaration-“Circumstances of the transaction “-Statement by deceased-Effect of-Deceased gave a statement to the
Date of decision : 17-07-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/226/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
911K.K. PATEL AND ANR. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. – [2000] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 312
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
A B c K.K. PATEL AND ANR. v. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. MAY 12, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 399-Sessions Court-Revision before Additional point Raising of issue of process-Challenge of-A point regarding non
Date of decision : 12-05-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/485/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
912ARNIT DAS Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [2000] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 69
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,R.C. LAHOTI
ARNIT DAS v. STATE OF BIHAR MAY 9, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.C. LAHOTI, JJ.] criminal law : Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 : Section 2(h) and 32-Juvenile-Age-Determination of~rucial date­ Held : . The data on which the accused is brought before the competent authority is date with
Date of decision : 09-05-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/469/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
913T.K. GOPAL @ GOPI Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA MAYS, 2000 – [2000] 3 S.C.R. 1040
Judge Name: S. SAGHIR AHMAD,DORAISWAMY RAJU
award even life imprisonment, that discretion should have been exercised by the trial cou1t or the High Court in the instant case. E F G criminal law -Sexual offences-Nature of-Held, constitute an alto­ gether different kind of c1ime which is the result of a perverse mind. Appellant was
Date of decision : 05-05-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/443/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
914  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
KANS RAJ Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. – [2000] 3 S.C.R. 662
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,R.P. SETHI,SHIVARAJ V. PATIL
statement may be admissible tinder Section 32. .. KANS v. STATE [SETHI, J.] 679 (3) The second part of clause (1) of Section 32 is yet another exception to the rule that in criminal law the evidence of a person who was not being subjected to or given an opportunity of being cross
Date of decision : 26-04-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/688/1993 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
915  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
KAMAL KISHORE ETC Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – [2000] 3 S.C.R. 473
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,DORAISWAMY RAJU,S.N. VARIAVA
was committed after the enforcement of criminal law Amendment Act ‘ ‘ r j KAMAL KISHORE v. STATE [THOMAS, J.] 479 (CLAA) No.43 of 1983. So the provision prescribing more rigorous sentence must apply if the offence falls within the purview of sub-section ( 1) of Section 376, and then he
Date of decision : 25-04-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1322/1999 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
916  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
OM PRAKASH SHARMA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DELHI – [2000] 3 S.C.R. 188
Judge Name: S. SAGHIR AHMAD,DORAISWAMY RAJU
A OM PRAKASH SHARMA ~ v. ·- CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DELHI APRIL 24, 2000 B [S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.) criminal law : ~. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : c Sections 227, 22 8, 239 and 240-Framing of charge-Standard of proof- Reliable material-Pmduction of-Held
Date of decision : 24-04-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/392/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
917CAMILO VAZ Vs STATE OF GOA – [2000] 2 S.C.R. 1088
Judge Name: D.P. WADHWA,RUMA PAL
A B c D E F G CAMILO VAZ v. STATE OF GOA APRIL 10, 2000 [D.P. WADHWAAND RUMA PAL, JJ.] criminal law : Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302r!w120-B, 149, Sec. 307 r/w. 120B and 149, 143, 148 r!w 120B & 149-Appellant tried along with 17 accused for assaulting three persons-One
Date of decision : 10-04-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/319/1998 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
918  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
ASOKAN Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS – [2000] 2 S.C.R. 949
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,SHIVARAJ V. PATIL
ASOKAN A v. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS APRIL 5, 2000 [G.B. PAITANAIK AND SlllVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860: Sections 302134 and 201-Evidence-Appreciation of-Deceased died C due to manual strangulation in her in-laws’ house-A-2 called PWs 3
Date of decision : 05-04-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/597/1992 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
919  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs LALJIT RAJSHI SHAH AND ORS. – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 1239
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,N. SANTOSH HEGDE
to amend Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code, the subject of H criminal law being on the Concurrent List and yet the said not having been – STATE v. LR. SHAH [PATTANAIK, J.] 1243 done, the expression ‘public servant’ under Section 161 of the Act would A mean those officers to be ‘public
Date of decision : 28-02-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/752/1995 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
920MIS. MEDCHL CHEMICALS AND PHARMA PVT. LTD. Vs M/S. BIOLOGICAL E. LTD. AND ORS. – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 1169
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,U.C. BANERJEE
is a remedy provided for breach of contract, it does not by itself clothe the Court to come to a conclusion that civil remedy is the only remedy available. Both criminal law and civil remedy can be pursued in E diverse situations and they are not mutually exclusive but clearly co-exten- sive and
Date of decision : 25-02-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/233/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
921  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
KALLIKATT KUNHU Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 1162
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,S.S.M. QUADRI
A B KALLIKATT Kl~HU v. STATE OF KERALA FEBRUARY 24, 20CD [S. RAJENDRA BABU AND SYED SHAH vlOHAvlMED OLADRI. JJ.I criminal law : C Penal Code, Ul60 : Section !02. EvidellC<‘” AppreLiation of Murde1~ {‘umm1.11io11 of-Bv .>tabbing with a dagger-Dagger enclo.1ed i11 a >heath “‘ith
Date of decision : 24-02-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/607/1994 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
922MASUMSHA HASANASHA MUSALNAN Vs STATE OF W.AHARASHTRA – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 1155
Judge Name: S. RAJENDRA BABU,S.S.M. QUADRI
MASUMSHA HASANASHA MUSALN.AN v. STATE OF W.AHARASHTRA FEBRUARY 24, 2(!!l:J (S. RAJENDRA BABU AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.) criminal law : . Penal Code, 1860 : Section 301 Patt II. Dealh-As result of injuries inflicted with a daggzr on the left side shoulder-Deceased’s wife followed the
Date of decision : 24-02-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2048/1996 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
923KLSUM INGOTS AND ALLOYS LTD. Vs PENNAR PETERSON SECURITIES LTD. AND ORS. – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 1120
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
A KLSUM INGOTS AND ALLOYS LTD. v. PENNAR PETERSON SECURITIES LTD. AND ORS. FEBRUARY 23, 2000 B [K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] criminal law : Negotiable Instruments Act, 188I : C Section 138–lngredients of-Dishonour of cheque-Criminal proceed- ing~~Against sick company and its
Date of decision : 23-02-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/212/2000 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
924  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. Vs MOHINDER SINGH – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 698
Judge Name: S. SAGHIR AHMAD,D.P. WADHWA
; (iv) The persons sentenced under Sections 2 and 3 of criminal law Amendment Act,1961 and sections 121 to 130 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; (v) The persons sentenced under sections 3, 4, 5, 6 to 10 of the Official Secrets Act, 1930; (vi) The persons imprisoned for failing to give
Date of decision : 07-02-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/141/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
925  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
AMBIKA PRASAD AND ANR. Vs STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION, DELHI) – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 342
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M.B. SHAH
A B c AMBIKA PRASAD AND ANR. v. STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION, DELHI) JANUARY 21, 2000 (G.B. PATTANAIK A.~ M.B. SHAH, JJ.J criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Sections 156 and 15’7–Defective investigation-Effect of-Held : It is 11ot proper to acquit the accused
Date of decision : 21-01-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1152/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
926ROSY AND ANR. Vs STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. – [2000] 1 S.C.R. 107
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
ROSY AND ANR. A v. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. J&”lUARY 10, 2000 [KT. THOMAS AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] B criminal law .· Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : c Section 202(2) proviso-Holdi11g of inquiry-By Magistrat~ !11 cases exclusively triable by Sessions Court-Nature of Discretionary or man­
Date of decision : 10-01-2000 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/18/2000 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
927KISHORI Vs STATE (NCT) OF DELHI – [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 494
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
century the judges are carrying ·out this duty under the Indian Penal Code. The impossibility of laying down standards is at the very core of the criminal law as administered in India which invests the Judges G with a very wide discretion in the matter of fixing the degree of punishment. The
Date of decision : 17-12-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1376/1999
928C.K. RAVEENDRAN Vs STTE OF KERALA – [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 140
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M.B. SHAH
A B C.K. RA VEENDRAN v. ST A TE OF KERALA DECEMBER 2, 1999 [G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law -Penal Code-Sections 302, 201 !PC-Appellant’s wife missing for some days-Appellant having dissensions with wife and talk of C divorce going on-Body of wife found ir. a ravine
Date of decision : 02-12-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/809/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
929STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs RASHMOY DAS AND ORS . – [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 80
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
obtaining sanction would arise only after the expiry of the said period of six months. (85-C, DJ E Superintendent and Remembrance of Legal Affairs, West Bengal v. Mahendra Singh, (1972) criminal law Journal 544, approved. 2. The High Court cannot quash something which was n~>n-existent There is no
Date of decision : 01-12-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1287/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
930RAMAN BHAI NARAN BHAl PATEL AND ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 41
Judge Name: S.B. MAJMUDAR,U.C. BANERJEE
– RAMAN BHAI NARAN BHAl PATEL AND ORS. A v. STATE OF GUJARAT NOVEMBER 30, 1999 [S.B. MAJMUDAR AND UMESH C. BANERJEE, JJ.] B criminal law -Penal Code-Sections 302, 307, 323, 324, 326, 342 and 352 read with Sec. 149-Appellants attacking complainant party-One killed due to injuries-Three
Date of decision : 30-11-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/581/1994 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
931STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs CHANDRIKA – [1999] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 239
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
individuals than an actual trial. However, if the dispute ….. finds itself in the field of criminal law , “Law Enforcement” repudiates the idea of compromise as immoral, E or at best a necessary evil. The “State” can never compromise. It must “enforce the law”. Therefore open methods of
Date of decision : 29-10-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1131/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
932M.S. AHLAWAT Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. – [1999] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 160
Judge Name: A.S. ANAND,S. RAJENDRA BABU,R.C. LAHOTI
A B M.S. AHLAWAT v. STATE OF HARY ANA AND ANR. OCTOBER 27, 1999 [DR. A.S. ANAND, CJ., S. RAJENDRA BABU AND R.C. LAHOTI, JJ.] criminal law : C Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 142 and 129. Contempt-Punishment of-Powers of Supreme Court-Contemnor found to have filed false
Date of decision : 27-10-1999 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/353/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
933MOLAI AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [1999] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 104
Judge Name: S.P. KURDUKAR,K.T. THOMAS,N. SANTOSH HEGDE
B c MOLAi AND ANR. 11. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ‘ ‘ OCTOBER 26, 1999 [S.P. KURDUKAR, K.T. THOMAS AND N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] criminal law : t Penal Code, 1860: Sections 376(2)(g), 302134 and 201. Circumstantial evidence-Rarest. of rare case-Mitigating circumstances-Absence of
Date of decision : 26-10-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/678/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
934AHAMED NASSAR Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. – [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 657
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,AJAY PRAKASH MISRA
AHAMED NASSAR v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. OCTOBER 14, 1999 (KT. THOMAS AND A.P. MISRA, JJ.] criminal law : Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Ac­ tivities” Act, 1974: Section 3: Preventive Detention-Appropriate authority-Representation before
Date of decision : 14-10-1999 | Case Number : WRIT TO PETITION (CRIMINAL)…/166/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
935STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS. Vs SANASAM ONGBI AND ANR. – [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 641
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M. SRINIVASAN,S.N. PHUKAN
Police, Thane and Ors. Etc., [1985] criminal law Journal (Vol. 91) 1257; Gum Charan Singh v. Superintendent, Central Jail, Bareilly & Ors., (1986) Allahabad Law Journal (Vol. 84) 1172 and Jivrajbhai Vrajlal Patel v. State of Gujarat & Ors., (1988) 1 Gujarat Law Reporter 17, over­ ruled. E Nizam
Date of decision : 13-10-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/345/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
936CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ETC. Vs V.K. SEHGAL AND ANR. – [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 570
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
Act, 1947 (2 of 1947) and the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 (46 of 1952) are hereby repealed. (2) Notwithstanding such repeal, but without prejudice to the application of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897), anything done or any action taken or purported to have
Date of decision : 08-10-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1059/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
937CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. Vs SAXONS FARMS AND ORS. – [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 534
Judge Name: G.T. NANAVATI,S.N. PHUKAN
A CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. v. SAXONS FARMS AND ORS. OCTOBER 7, 1999 B [G.T. NANAVATI AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] criminal law : Negotiable lnstrnments Act, 1881 : Section 138 proviso, clause (b ). c ‘ Notice-Object of-Last line of notice stated : “Kindly arrange to make the payment
Date of decision : 07-10-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1056/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
938SATVINDER KAUR Vs STATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI) AND ANR. – [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 348
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
Bengal v. S.N. Basak, [1963] SCR 52, dealt with a similar contention wherein the High Court had held that the statutory powers of investigation given to the police under Chapter XIV were not available in respect of an offence triable under the West Bengal criminal law Amendment (Special Courts
Date of decision : 05-10-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1031/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
939RAJ DEO SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF BIHAR – [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 124
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M. SRINIVASAN,M.B. SHAH
provided by Criminal Procedure Code or by any other statutory provision. And finally, it would have an adverse effect in implementation of criminal law . In the result, in· my view, prayer (a) of holding in abeyance the operation/order dated 8th October, .1998 in Criminal Appeal No. 1045 of 1998
Date of decision : 22-09-1999 | Case Number : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition/2326/1999 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
940GURDEEP SINGH @ DEEP Vs THE STATE (DELHI ADMN.) – [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 693
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,AJAY PRAKASH MISRA
S.C.R. Ibrahim v. Regem, (1914) AC 599 at 609 where he said, “It has long been established as a positive rule of English criminal law that no statement by an accused is admissible in evidence against him unless it is shown by the prosecution to be a voluntary statement, in the sense that it
Date of decision : 17-09-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/604/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
941STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs TAPAS D. NEOGY – [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 609
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,N. SANTOSH HEGDE
, (1988) criminal law Journal (Vol. 94) 241; Mis. Purbanchal Road Service, Gauhati v. The State, (1991) criminal law journal (Vol. 97) 2798; Textile Traders Syndicate Ltd, Bulandshahr v. The State ofU.P., AIR ( 1960) Allahabad 405 (Vol.47) and Mis. Malnad Construction Co., Shimoga and Ors. v
Date of decision : 16-09-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/947/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
942PAPARAMBAKA ROSAMMA AND ORS. Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 328
Judge Name: S.P. KURDUKAR,K.T. THOMAS,N. SANTOSH HEGDE
A B c PAPARAMBAKA ROSAMMA AND ORS. v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH SEPTEMBER 13, 1999 [S.P. KURDUKAR, K.T. THOMAS AND N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] criminal law : Evidence Act, 1872: Section 32. Dying declaration-Conviction based solely on-Deceased sustained 90 per cent burn injuries
Date of decision : 13-09-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1175/1998 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
943STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs JAI LAL AND ORS. – [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 318
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
A B c D STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH v. JAi LAL AND ORS. SEPTEMBER 13, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] criminal law : Evidence Act, 187.,,: Section 45. District Horticultural Officer-Examined as expert witness-For assessing the fruit- bearing capacity of apple orchards
Date of decision : 13-09-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/530/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
944UNION OF INDIA Vs RAM SAMUJH AND ANR. – [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 76
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
A B c UNION OF INDIA v. RAM SAMUJH AND ANR. AUGUST 30, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: Section 37. Bail-Mandatory conditions-Non-compliance-Effect of-High Court granted bail to accused without
Date of decision : 30-08-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/866/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
945STATE OF ORISSA Vs ARJUN DAS AGRAWAL AND ANR. – [1999] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 442
Judge Name: G.T. NANAVATI,S.N. PHUKAN
A STATE OF ORISSA v. ARJUN DAS AGRAWAL AND ANR. AUGUST 13, 1999 B [G.T. NANAVATI ANDS.~. PHUKAN, JJ.] criminal law Penal Code, 1860-Section 34-Common intention-Accused ‘A ‘ & C ‘M’ among others convicted by trial court-Acquittal by High Court­ Participation by ‘M’ proved by eye
Date of decision : 13-08-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/5/1993 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
946T. HAMZA Vs STATE OF KERALA – [1999] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 343
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
T. HAMZA v. ST A TE OF KERALA AUGUST l l, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: Section 50(1)-Non-compliance of-Before search and seizure­ Accused found in possession of contraband article as a result of search
Date of decision : 11-08-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/798/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
947P. NALLAMMAL Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – [1999] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 135
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
P. NALLAMMAL v. ST A TE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE AUGUST 9, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law : Prevention of Corruption Act, I 988: Section I 3(/)(e)-0.lfence under-Held: Not unabettable-Hence, non­ public servant can also be tried along with a public servant
Date of decision : 09-08-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/758/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
948UMAR ABDUL SAKOOR SORA THIA Vs INTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU – [1999] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 113
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
• UMAR ABDUL SAKOOR SORA THIA v. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU AUGUST 6, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: A B c Sections 29 and 23-Police intercepted truck carrying “Mandrax
Date of decision : 06-08-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/743/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
949JOGENDRA NAHAK AND QRS. Vs STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. – [1999] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 39
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,U.C. BANERJEE
investigating agency. [45-F-G-H; 46-A-B] A . State ofOrissa v. A.P. Das, (1979) Cuttack Law Times 298; Bhima v. State, (1994) 7 Orissa Criminal Reports 413; Mohammed Sarfraz v. Crown, 1951 criminal law Journal (Lahore) 1425, In re C. W. Casse, AIR (1948) Madras 489 and Kunjukutty v. State of Kera/a
Date of decision : 04-08-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/735/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
950ARUN SHANKAR SHUKLA Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 1060
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
A ARUNSHANKARSHUKLA v. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. JULY 23, 1999 B [K.T. THOMAS AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law : ft. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Section 482 . c High Court-Inherent jurisdiction-Scope and ambit of-Trial court convicted accused and posted the case for hearing on
Date of decision : 23-07-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/680/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
951RAJATHI Vs C. GANESAN – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 1047
Judge Name: S. SAGHIR AHMAD,D.P. WADHWA
RAJA THI v. C. GANESAN JULY 22, 1999 [S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Section 125(3) Explanation to Second Proviso-Husband lived with another woman-Wife/ailed to prove his second marriage under S.494 !PC­ Held : Under such
Date of decision : 22-07-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/687/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
952THE STATE OF PUNJAB Vs BALDEV SINGH – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 977
Judge Name: A.S. ANAND,S.B. MAJMUDAR,SUJATA V. MANOHAR,K. VENKATASWAMI,V.N. KHARE
THE STATE OF PUNJAB A v. BALDEV SINGH JULY 21, 1999 [DR. A.S. ANAND, C.J., S.B. MAJMUDAR, SUJATA V. MANOHAR, B K. VENKATASWAMI AND V.N. KHARE, JJ.] criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 : c Section 50-Search-Provisions-Due compliance of-Held : It is
Date of decision : 21-07-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/396/1990 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
953PON ADITHAN Vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, MADRAS/. I – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 897
Judge Name: G.T. NANAVATI,N. SANTOSH HEGDE
PON ADITHAN A v. I DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, MADRAS/. JULY 16, 1999 [G.T. NANAVATI AND N.S. HEGDE, JJ.] B criminal law : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Section 50(1)-Contraband article-Search and seizure of-Right of accused-To be C searched in
Date of decision : 16-07-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/11/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
954AMANULLA KHAN KUDEATALLA KHAN PATHAN Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 807
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,D.P. WADHWA
AMANULLA KHAN KUDEATALLA KHAN PATHAN A v. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. JUNE 28, 1999 [G.B. PATTANAIK AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] B criminal law : Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985-Section 2(c)­ “Dangerous person”-Preventive detention of-Detenu on two incidents C demanded
Date of decision : 28-06-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/618/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
955ARUN VYAS AND ANR. Vs ANITA VYAS – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 719
Judge Name: K. VENKATASWAMI,S.S.M. QUADRI
ARUN VY AS AND ANR. A v. ANITA VYAS MAY 14, 1999 [K.VENKATASWAMY AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.] B •. criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Sections 190(1) and 473. c Offence-Discharge of accused-After taking cognizance of­ Complaint-Under Section 190(1)-For offence under S.406 JPC
Date of decision : 14-05-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/574/1999 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
956J. JAYALALITHA ETC. ETC. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 653
Judge Name: G.T. NANAVATI,S.P. KURDUKAR
Nazarali Singaporawal/a v. The State of Bombay, [1957] SCR 678 a Constitution A Bench dealing with the criminal law Amendment Act, 1952 which provided for the trial of all offences punishable under Sections 161, 165 and l 65A of the Indian Penal Code or sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the
Date of decision : 14-05-1999 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/3142/1999 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
957STATE OF HARYANA Vs BHAGIRATH AND ORS. – [1999] 3 S.C.R. 529
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,D.P. MOHAPATRA
is not consistent with probability-Court has no liability to go by D that opinion-However, due weight must be given to medical opinion. criminal law -Benefit of doubt-Principle of-Considerations for Court-Held, doctrine of benefit of doubt can be invoked when there is reasonable doubt regarding
Date of decision : 12-05-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/234/1992 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
958  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF HARYANA Vs TEK SINGH AND ORS. – [1999] 2 S.C.R. 967
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M.B. SHAH
STATE OF HARYANA A v. TEK SINGH AND ORS. MAY 3, 1999 [G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code 1860-Sections 148, 149, 302, 449-8 accused forming an unlawful assembly-Assault and murder of two persons-Eye witnesses fully C corroborated by medical evidence
Date of decision : 03-05-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/360/1993 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
959  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
T.C. MATHAI Vs THE DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,KERALA – [1999] 2 S.C.R. 305
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
appreciate why he, instead of incurring so much expenses and strain, did not advise the respondent-couple to engage B a counsel for pleading their cause before the Sessions Court. Appellant, during the course of his arguments, referred to a commentary on criminal law to support his contention
Date of decision : 31-03-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/354/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
960  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SURESH SINGH AND ORS. Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [1999] 2 S.C.R. 290
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M.B. SHAH
A SURESH SINGH AND ORS. v. STATE OF HARYANA MARCH 31, 1999 B [G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law -Right of Private Defence-Indian Penal Code Ss. 97, 99, 302, 304 P,art I-Accused chased by deceased-Deceased done to death 11 Om away from his house with sharp weapons r~sulting
Date of decision : 31-03-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/336/1993 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
961  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs JEET SINGH – [1999] 1 S.C.R. 1033
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.S.M. QUADRI
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH A v. JEET SINGH MARCH 15, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.] B criminal law : Evidence Act, 1872 : Section 45-Death-Suicidal or homicidal-Medical evidence suggested C cause of death as smothering–Chemical Examiner’s report suggested death due to
Date of decision : 15-03-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/263/1991 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
962  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SAKETH INDIA LTD. AND ORS. Vs INDIA SECURITIES LTD. – [1999] 1 S.C.R. 963
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,M.B. SHAH
, SAKETH INDIA LTD. AND ORS. A v. INDIA SECURITIES LTD. MARCH 10, 1999 (KT. THOMAS AND M.B: SHAH, JJ.] B criminal law : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 : Sections 138 proviso (c) and 142(b)-Cl1eque-Bouncing of–Complaint against-:-Filing of-Period of C limitation for-Computation of
Date of decision : 10-03-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/288/1999 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
963  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
JIWAN DASS Vs STATE OF HARYANA – [1999] 1 S.C.R. 915
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M.B. SHAH
A B c D JIWANDASS v. STATE OF HARYANA FEBRUARY 26, 1999 (G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.) criminal law : Penal Code, 1860 : Section 409. Criminal breach of trust-By public servant-<:harg~stablishing of-lngredients’to be proved-Held: Prosecution must establish (i) Accused
Date of decision : 26-02-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/990/1995 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
964UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Vs DIUEET SINGH AND ANR. – [1999] 1 S.C.R. 831
Judge Name: K.T. THOMAS,S.S.M. QUADRI
.~· …. ,. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. v. DIUEET SINGH AND ANR. FEBRUARY 23, 1999 [K.T. THOMAS AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.) criminal law : Conservation of Foreign &change and Prevention of Smuggling Ac­ tivities Act, 1974: Sections 3(2) and II. A B c Preventive Detention-State
Date of decision : 23-02-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/235/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
965SANJEEV KUMAR Vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – [1999] 1 S.C.R. 217
Judge Name: G.B. PATTANAIK,M.B. SHAH
)._ SANJEEV KUMAR v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH JANUARY 22, 1999 [G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal Tlial : Circumstantial evidence-Murder-Accused seen going to the house of deceased and was seen coming out of the house after the occu”ence with knife in his
Date of decision : 22-01-1999 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1059/1997 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
966  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SAJJAN SINGH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [1998] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 316
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,D.P. WADHWA
A B c SA.HAN SINGH v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND D.P. WADHWA, .TJ.] criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Section 392. Offence–Conviction or acquittal-Appeal against-Both the Judges of the Division Bench of the High Cowt were ill
Date of decision : 02-09-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/137/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
967  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
MOHAN SINGH Vs LATE AMAR SINGH THROUGH THE LRS. – [1998] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 252
Judge Name: A.S. ANAND,M. SRINIVASAN
appeal. He was successful in getting the Special Leave and an order staying dispossession. The Registrar of this Court is directed to file a complaint before the appropriate court and set B the criminal law in motion against the tenant. (276-H; 277-C] 3.1. There is no procedure regarding filing
Date of decision : 01-09-1998 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/14918/1996 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
968  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STTE OF RAJASTHAN Vs RAM BHAROSI AND ORS. – [1998] 3 S.C.R. 1129
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,D.P. WADHWA
ST A TE OF RAJASTHAN A v. RAM BHAROSI AND ORS. AUGUST 12, 1998 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860: Sections 97, 99, 103, 441 and 300 Exception 2. c Private defence-Right of-Extending to cause death-Availability a/­ Dispute related to ownership and
Date of decision : 12-08-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2087/1996 | Disposal Nature : Case Allowed
969KALICHARAN MAHAPATRA Vs STATE OF ORISSA – [1998] 3 S.C.R. 961
Judge Name: M.M. PUNCHHI,K.T. THOMAS
KALICHARAN MAHAPATRA v. STATE OF ORISSA AUGUST 4, 1998 [M.M. PUNCHHI, CJ., AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] criminal law : Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: Sections 19, 13(2) and 13 (1) (e). Public servant- Commission of offence by-Public servant ceased to be so at the time of trial
Date of decision : 04-08-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/770/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
970  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. Vs KEMPAIAH – [1998] 3 S.C.R. 910
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.S.M. QUADRI
A B c D E STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. v. KEMPAIAH JULY 27, 1998 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.] criminal law : Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 : Sections 2(1), 2(2) and 7. “Action”-Meaning and scope of-Amassing of wealth by public servant-Held: Not covered- Expression
Date of decision : 27-07-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/722/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
971  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
KAVITA Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [1998] 3 S.C.R. 902
Judge Name: M.M. PUNCHHI,M. SRINIVASAN
A B c D KAVITA v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU JULY 23, 1998 [M.M. PUNCHHI C.J.I. AND M. SRINIVASAN, J.) criminal law : Evidence Act, 1872 : Section 24. Extra-judicial confession-Value of-Held: Depends upon the Veracity of the witness to whom it is made-Witness need not give actual
Date of decision : 23-07-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/695/1992 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
972  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NAR BAHADUR BHANDARI AND ANR. Vs STATE OF SIKKIM AND OTHERS – [1998] 3 S.C.R. 421
Judge Name: M. SRINIVASAN,S.S.M. QUADRI
provisions of the Act of 1947, repealed by the Act of 1988- criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1952 provided for constitution of Special Courts to try the offences under the Act of 1947- Not extended to the State of Sikkim-Charge sheet filed in the Court of Special Judge constituted under the Act of 1988
Date of decision : 13-05-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/575/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
973  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
SAMBASIVAN AND ORS. Vs STATE OF KERALA – [1998] 3 S.C.R. 280
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.S.M. QUADRI
A, SAMBASIVAN AND ORS. v. STATE OF KERALA MAY 8, 1998 B [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.S. MOHAMMAD QUADRI, JJ.] criminal law : Penal Code 1860-Section 302 r!w Section 34, Section 307 rlw Section C 34-Prosecution case corroborated by medical evidence-Conviction sustained Criminal Procedure
Date of decision : 08-05-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/180/1990 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
974  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
NlRMAL KANTI ROY ETC. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL ETC. – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 1147
Judge Name: M.M. PUNCHHI,K.T. THOMAS,S. RAJENDRA BABU
beyond the prescribed period and D there are special reasons to do so-Indian Penal Code, 1860-S 409-West Bengal criminal law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1949. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Essential Commodities Act, 1955: S.468/ss. 7(/)(a)(il), I 2A 12AA(l) proviso-Offence punishable under
Date of decision : 23-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/475/1998 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
975RAM BIHARI YADAV Vs STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 1097
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.S.M. QUADRI
not elaborate but consists of only a few sentences and is in actual words of the maker it should F not be discarded merely on the ground that it is not in question-answer form. criminal law Trial-Accused a police official-Acts and omissions on the part of G investigating officers during
Date of decision : 21-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/500/1990 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
976  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF U.P. Vs HARBAN SAHAI AND ORS. – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 1056
Judge Name: M.M. PUNCHHI,K.T. THOMAS,S. RAJENDRA BABU
A B STATE OF U.P. le HARBAN SAHA! AND ORS. APRIL 20, 1998 [M.M. PUNCHHI, C.J.1., K.T. THOMAS AND S. RAJENDRA BABU, JJ.) criminal law : C Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Section 154-FIR-Contents of-Held : FIR need not contain minor particulars of events-Merely because informant
Date of decision : 20-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/692/1993 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
977  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
P.V. NARASIMHA RAO ETC. ETC. Vs STATE (CBl/SPE) ETC. ETC. – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 870
Judge Name: S.C. AGRAWAL,G.N. RAY,A.S. ANAND,S.P. BHARUCHA,S. RAJENDRA BABU
Penal Code I860, s.21- lnterprelation of Statutes. criminal law -Preventi<;m of Corruption Act I 988, s.19 rlw ss. 7, I 0, I 1, 13 and I 5 thereof-Sanction for prosecution of MP for offence of offer and G acceptance of bribes for voting in Parliament-Held, per majority-MPs cannot be prosecwed for
Date of decision : 17-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1207/1997 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
978MOHD. IQBAL M. SHAIKH AND ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 734
Judge Name: G.N. RAY,G.B. PATTANAIK
A B MOHD. IQBAL M. SHAIKH AND ORS. v. ST ATE OF MAHARASHTRA APRIL 15, 1998 [G.N. RAY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] criminal law : Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987: Section c 2(h). ‘Terrorist act ‘-Meaning of-As a sequel to the demolition of Bahri Masjid, the
Date of decision : 15-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/97/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
979  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF U.P. Vs SIKANDER ALI AND ORS. – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 658
Judge Name: M.M. PUNCHHI,K.T. THOMAS,S. RAJENDRA BABU
A B c STATE OF U.P. v. SIKANDER ALI AND ORS. APRIL 3, I 998 [M.M. PUNCCHI, CJ., K.T. THOMAS AND S. RAJENDRA BABU, JJ.] criminal law : Indian Panel Code, 1860 : Section 302-Murder-Two persons shot dead-FIR Lodged giving vivid details including names of the assailants and
Date of decision : 03-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/656/1990 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
980  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF GUJARAT Vs MOHAMMED ATIK AND ORS. – [1998] 2 S.C.R. 664
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,K.T. THOMAS
A B c ST A TE OF GUJARAT v. MOHAMMED ATIK AND ORS. APRIL 3, 1998 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] criminal law : Terrorist and Disruptive Activities [Prevention] Act, 1987. Section 15-Confessional Statement made by accused in earlier cases­ Covers, another crime involving
Date of decision : 03-04-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/400/1998 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
981MODI CEMENTS LTD. Vs SHRI KUCHIL KUMAR NANDI – [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1192
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.P. KURDUKAR,K.T. THOMAS
A MODI CEMENTS LTD. v. SHRI KUCHIL KUMAR NANDI MARCH 22, 1998 B [M.K. MUKHERJEE, S.P. KURDUKAR AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] c criminal law : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 : Sections 138 and 139-Dishonour of cheque-Complaint against­ Cognizance of-By Metropolitan Magistrate-Drawer of
Date of decision : 22-03-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/244/1998 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
982  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs NAHAR SINGH (DEAD) AND ORS. – [1998] 1 S.C.R. 948
Judge Name: G.T. NANAVATI,S.S.M. QUADRI
A STATE OF UTT AR PRADESH v. ·’— NAHAR SINGH (DEAD) AND ORS. FEBRUARY 18, 1998 B [G.T. NANAVATI AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.] f criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: c Section 154-FIR Delay in filing-Gruesome murder in a village- Assailants kept a watch on the road throughout
Date of decision : 18-02-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/273/1988 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
983CHANDRAKANT PATIL Vs STATE THROUGH CBI – [1998] 1 S.C.R. 447
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,K.T. THOMAS
CHANDRAKANT PATIL v. STATE THROUGH CBI FEBRUARY 2, 1998 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Section 377 (3). Sentence-Appeal against-By Government-Acquittal-Right of accused to plead/or-Supreme Court already confirmed conviction of
Date of decision : 02-02-1998 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/438/1997 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
984HARICHAND Vs DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION – [1998] 1 S.C.R. 143
Judge Name: S.P. BHARUCHA,V.N. KHARE
HARICHAND A r–1 v. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION JANUARY 14, 1998 [S.P. BHARUCHA AND V. N. KHARE, JJ.] B –1- criminal law : Probation of Offenders Act, 1958: c Section 12-Provided for removal of disqualification attaching to a conviction-Applicability of-Accused was convicted
Date of decision : 14-01-1998 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/1451/1987 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
985SURESH KUMAR BHIKAMCHAND JAIN Vs PANDEY AJAY BHUSHAN AND ORS. – [1997] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 524
Judge Name: G.N. RAY,G.B. PATTANAIK
Singh, (1979) criminal law Journal 1018 (Patna);Dr. Ravindra v. V.K. Panwar, (1989) criminal law Journal 191.(Madhya Pradesh) and Premji Mahananda v. Mohanpani Karva, (1996) l criminal law Journal 836 (Orissa), cited. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal Nos. 1114- l 5ofI997c From
Date of decision : 27-11-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1114/1997 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
986M/S. PEPSI FOODS LTD. AND ANR. Vs SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AND ORS. – [1997] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 12
Judge Name: SUJATA V. MANOHAR,D.P. WADHWA
to be arrayed as a party to the proceedings. criminal law -Magistrate-Summoning of an accused-Requirements to be fulfllled-laid down. Respondent No. 2 (Complainant) purchased a bottle of ‘Lehar Pepsi’. After consuming the beverage, he felt a strange taste and on observation H found that the
Date of decision : 04-11-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1019/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
987A. DEIVENDRAN Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU – [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 591
Judge Name: G.N. RAY,G.B. PATTANAIK
who had the power to take cognizance of offence under Section 8(1) of the criminal law Amendment Act 1952 would have no G jurisdiction to take cognizance and, therefore, charge sheet has to be filed before a Magistrate. This contention had been advanced because of Sub­ section (2)(8) of Section
Date of decision : 21-10-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/987/1997 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
988DUKHMOCHAN PANDEY AND ORS. Vs STATE OF BIHAR – [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 276
Judge Name: G.N. RAY,G.B. PATTANAIK
A B c DUKHMOCHAN PANDEY AND ORS. v. STATE OF BIHAR SEPTEMBER 25, 1997 [G.N. RAY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] criminal law : Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Sections 302134 and 325134-Applicability of-Common intention­ Stages at which, can be formed-Held, can be formed previously or on the
Date of decision : 25-09-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/197/1982 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
989BHAG SINGH AND ORS. ETC. Vs STATE OF PUNJAB – [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 741
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,K.T. THOMAS
BHAG SINGH AND ORS. ETC. v. STATE OF PUNJAB SEPTEMBER 3, 1997 (M.K. MUKHERJEE AND K. T. THOMAS, JJ.) criminal law -Evidence of eye witness cannot be assailed merely on the ground of exactitude/precision-Precision or vagueness in testimony depends on the individual-A broad angel taking
Date of decision : 03-09-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/638/1995 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
990MANSUKHLAL VITHALDAS CHAUHAN Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 705
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S. SAGHIR AHMAD
criminal law (Amendment) Act (2 of 1958) and was substituted, in its present form, by Anti-Corruption B Laws (Amendment) Act, 1964 (11 of 1964). The definition of “public servant”, as set out in Section 21 of the IPC, has been adopted by the Act so that there is no difference between the “public
Date of decision : 03-09-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/502/1993 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
991  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
AJIT SAVANT MAJAGAVI Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA – [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 444
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S. SAGHIR AHMAD
A AJIT SA VANT MAJAGA VI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AUGUST 14, 1997 B (M.K. MUKHERJEE ANDS. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ.] criminal law -Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Criminal Pro­ cedure Code 197rSection 378-Appeal against acquittal-Appellant ac­ quitted by trial court-Of charge of murdering wife
Date of decision : 14-08-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/368/1991 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
992  English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer
PRAHLAD SINGH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 427
Judge Name: G.N. RAY,G.B. PATTANAIK
PRAHLAD SINGH v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AUGUST 13, 1997 [G.N. RAY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] criminal law -Indian Penal Code–S. 376-Rape of a minor girl-Ac­ quittal by Sessions Court-Reversed by High Court-Held, the High Court can A B not inteifere on mere ·sunnises and conjectures
Date of decision : 13-08-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/51/1993 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
993BILAL AHMAD KALOO Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 327
Judge Name: A.S. ANAND,K.T. THOMAS
BILAL AHMAD KALOO v. STATE OF A)’IDHRA PRADESH AUGUST 6, 1997 [DR. A.S. ANAND AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] criminal law : Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Section 124(A)-Seditio11-C/1arge framed-No avennents-Hel~To­ tally bereft of the cmcial allegation-Conviction unsustainable. Sections 153A
Date of decision : 06-08-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1391/1995 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
994RAMBHAI NATH BHAI GANDHVI AND ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 356
Judge Name: A.S. ANAND,K.T. THOMAS
A B RAMBHAI NATH BHAI GANDHV~ AND ORS. v. STATE OF GUJARAT AUGUST 6, 1997 [DR. A.S. ANAND AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: C Section 197–Cognizance of offence-Duty of court-No valid sanction order for prosecution-Held, Court has no jurisdiction
Date of decision : 06-08-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1909/1996 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
995STATE OF U.P. Vs ABDUL AND ORS. – [1997] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 62
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.P. KURDUKAR
A STATE OF U.P. v. ABDUL AND ORS. MAY 5, 1997 B [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.P. KURDUKAR, JJ.] criminal law : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Section 174. C Inquest rep01t-FIR mentioned deceased was assaulted by banka but inquest report did not make say reference to banka-High Court
Date of decision : 05-05-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/174/1990 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
996SANGARABOINA SREENU Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – [1997] 3 S.C.R. 957
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.P. KURDUKAR
SANGARABOINA SREENU A v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH APRIL 23, 1997 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.P. KURDUKAR, JJ.] B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860 : Ss. 302, 306-Accused charged with murder of his wife-Trial Court C convicting him for murder-High Court setting aside the conviction u/s 302
Date of decision : 23-04-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/182/1990 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
997CHANDUBHAI MALUBHAI PARMAR AND ORS. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [1997] 3 S.C.R. 633
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,S.P. KURDUKAR
CHANDUBHAI MALUBHAI PARMAR AND ORS. v. STATE OF GUJARAT APRIL 4, 1997 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.P. KURDUKAR, JJ.) criminal law : Penal Code, 1860: Sections 302/ 149/34/ 147/148, 3251149, 323/ 149 and 436/149. Group rivalry-Riotous mob of 100/ 150 persons attacked members of a community
Date of decision : 04-04-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/95/1988 | Direction Issue : Crl.A. No 95/88 partly allowed Crl.A. No. 354/87 dismissed.
998STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs PRIYA SHARAN MAHARAJ AND ORS. – [1997] 2 S.C.R. 933
Judge Name: G.N. RAY,G.T. NANAVATI
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA A v. PRTYA SHARAN MAHARAJ AND ORS. MARCH 11, 1997 (G.N. RAY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.] B criminal law : Criminal Procedu~i Code, 1973 : Sections 227, 228 and 219. Accused-Discharge of or framing of charges against-Tests to deter- c mine-Held: Court had to sift
Date of decision : 11-03-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/263/1997 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
999AHMEDABAD WOMEN ACTION GROUP AND ORS. ETC. Vs UNION OF INDIA – [1997] 2 S.C.R. 389
Judge Name: A.M. AHMADI,SUJATA V. MANOHAR,K. VENKATASWAMI
as it subjects the Hindus alone to the specially severe provisions as to punishment and procedure. It is true that whereas under the general criminal law the offence of bigamy is cognizable only on the complaint of the wife, the impugned Act makes it cognizable so that the complaint of the wife
Date of decision : 24-02-1997 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/494/1996 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
1000SATBIR Vs SURAT SINGH AND ORS. – [1997] 2 S.C.R. 1
Judge Name: M.K. MUKHERJEE,B.N. KIRPAL
‘ – SATBIR A v. SURAT SINGH AND ORS. FEBRUARY 12, 1997 [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.) B criminal law : Penal Code, 1860 : Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149. Rioting and Murder-Accused-Convicted by Trial Court-Acquitted by c High Court-Validity of Evidence Act
Date of decision : 12-02-1997 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/779/1989 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
Criminal Law Supreme Court of India Judgments

Criminal Law Supreme Court of India Judgments

Advocate in Jabalpur – Lawyer in Jabalpur – Ajay Gautam Advocate Jabalpur

About MediumPulse Medium Pulse News

MediumPulse Medium Pulse News
This entry was posted in Delhi Advocate High Court Delhi Lawyer Supreme Court of India. Bookmark the permalink.