English

हिन्दी - Hindi
 नेपाली - Nepali
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

SIVAMANI AND ANR.
 versus
STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLORE TALUK POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 849
2023 INSC 1027
Coram : VIKRAM NATH
*
, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Victims sustained simple injuries. Whether Courts below were justifi ed in convicting appellants u/s. 307 IPC. Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 323, 324 and 307 – Trial Court Nos.3 and 4) u/s. 307, IPC and sentenced to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment – High Court reduced the imprisonment from 10 years to 5 years – Propriety: Held: PW1 and accused no.1 had a dispute concerning a lane between their houses – A civil case regarding the same was
 Decision Date :
 28-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3619/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

PARSHURAM
 versus
STATE OF M.P.
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 186
2023 INSC 973
Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
*
, B.V. NAGARATHNA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the courts below were justifi ed in convicting and sentencing the appellants for the off ences punishable u/s. 302/149, s.326/149, s.324/149, s.323/149, s.147 and s.148 IPC. Penal Code, 1860 – 302/149, 326/149, 324/149, 323/149, 147 and 148 – Murder – Unlawful assembly – Accused persons formed an unlawful assembly when the buff alo of the complainant party spoiled the taparia built by the accused, and thereafter grieviously assaulted the complainant and his members
 Decision Date :
 03-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 524/2021
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

ગુજરાતી - Gujarati
हिन्दी - Hindi
 नेपाली - Nepali
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

JITENDRA NATH MISHRA
 versus
STATE OF U.P. & ANR
-
[2023] 7 S.C.R. 642
2023 INSC 576
Coram : DIPANKAR DATTA, PANKAJ MITHAL
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.319 – Exercise of power under – Held: What is essential for exercise of the power u/ s.319 is that the evidence on record must show the involvement of a person in the commission of a crime and that the said arraigned as an accused, should face trial together with the accused already arraigned – However, the court holding a trial, if it intends to exercise power conferred by s.319 must not act mechanically merely on the ground that some evidence has come on record implicating the person sought
 Decision Date :
 02-06-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 978/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

BALVIR SINGH
 versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
-
[2023] 12 S.C.R. 815
2023 INSC 879
Coram : J.B. PARDIWALA
*
, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The High Court affi rmed the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court holding appellant-husband guilty of the off ence of murder punishable u/s.302 of the IPC alongwith the off ence punishable u/s. 498A of the IPC and appellant-mother-in-law the IPC r/w. 34 of the IPC, whether the High Court committed any error in passing the impugned judgment and order. Penal Code, 1860 – s.302, s.498A – Prosecution case was that victim died due to poisoning – At the time of death only her appellant-husband was present –
 Decision Date :
 06-10-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 301/2015
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

M/S. SHEKHAR RESORTS LIMITED (UNIT OF ORIENT TAJ)
 versus
UNION OF INDIA
-
[2023] 1 S.C.R. 1111
2023 INSC 15
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 : Deposit of settlement amount under the 2019 Scheme, during moratorium – When impossible in view of the bar under the IBC – Appellant-corporate debtor, if can be made to suffer for no fault of its own and rendered rememediless – On facts, of the appellant u/s. 7 – Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the appellant – Appellant subjected to moratorium – Thereafter, Resolution plan approved and the appellant applied for “Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019 – Appellant could
 Decision Date :
 05-01-2023
 | Case No :
 CIVIL APPEAL No. 8957/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

SMT. ROOPA SONI
 versus
KAMALNARAYAN SONI
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 871
2023 INSC 814
Coram : SANJIV KHANNA
*
, M.M. SUNDRESH
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the trial Court and High Court were justifi ed in adopting a hyper-technical and pedantic approach in declining the decree of divorce, when both the parties had made serious allegations against each other and were living separately for decade Act, 1955 – The appellant-wife registered a complaint u/s. 498A of IPC and ss.3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – The respondent-Husband had questioned the character of the appellant-wife – Petition for divorce – Trial Court and the High Court declined decree of
 Decision Date :
 06-09-2023
 | Case No :
 CIVIL APPEAL No. 5700/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

MARKASH JAJARA
 versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 834
2023 INSC 1015
Coram : SURYA KANT, DIPANKAR DATTA
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The appellant was held guilty of having committed the murder of his son-in-law. Whether the off ence attributed to the appellant falls within the ambit of Exception I of Section 300 IPC which defi nes “murder”. Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 and – The occurrence took place inside the house of the appellant – The informant had gone to the house of the appellant and found his brother, who had been staying with his in-laws, lying dead – Trial Court on consideration of the evidence held the appellant guilty of committing
 Decision Date :
 03-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3405/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 | Direction Issue :
 Appeal partly allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

PRIYANKA MISHRA & ORS
 versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.
-
[2023] 5 S.C.R. 1152
2023 INSC 729
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
*
, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Quashing of FIR – Complaint filed by Respondent no.2-wife against appellants (sister-in-law, mother-in-law and father-in-law) and her husband for offences punishable u/s.498-A s.4, Dowry Prohibition Act – Petition filed by appellants u/s.482 for quashing, dismissed – On appeal, held: FIR in question as far as appellants are concerned, is an abuse of the process of the Court – Respondent No.2 resided for less than three weeks in the matrimonial home
 Decision Date :
 08-05-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1545/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

WAZIR KHAN
 versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
-
[2023] 11 S.C.R. 39
2023 INSC 674
Coram : J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration : In a case hinging on circumstantial evidence, where the appellant was put to trial u/ss. 302 and 201 IPC for murdering his wife, and he did not dispute his presence at the place of incident and, further, the explanation off ered by him as regards wife was found to be false, whether the High Court was justifi ed in reversing the acquittal order passed by the trial court. Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302 and 201 – Reversal of acquittal by High Court – Propriety: Held : When attention of the appellant was drawn to the
 Decision Date :
 02-08-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1922/2017
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

M/S. D. N. SINGH
 versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, PATNA AND ANOTHER
-
[2023] 7 S.C.R. 530
2023 INSC 543
Coram : K.M. JOSEPH
*
, HRISHIKESH ROY
 Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.69A – Scope and applicability of – s.69A deals with unexplained money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles – Deeming effect of the provision – When applicable – Ambit of the word ‘owner’ in s.69A Joseph, J.) : To apply s.69A of the Act, it is indispensable that the Officer must find that the other valuable article is owned by the assessee – A bailee who is a common carrier is not the owner of the goods – A bailee who is a common carrier would necessarily be entrusted with
 Decision Date :
 16-05-2023
 | Case No :
 CIVIL APPEAL No. 3738/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
 नेपाली - Nepali
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

SARVESH MATHUR
 versus
THE REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
-
[2023] 13 S.C.R. 1117
2023 INSC 891
Coram : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Denial of access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through the hybrid mode. Directions by Supreme Court – Conduction of hearings through video conferencing/hybrid mode – Considerable variation between High Courts in of technology – Position of the tribunals under various ministries of the Union Government: Held: No High Court shall deny access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through the hybrid mode to any member of the Bar or litigant desirous of availing of such a facility – All
 Decision Date :
 06-10-2023
 | Case No :
 WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 351/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Directions issued

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

VARDAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.
 versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX CENTRAL SECTION & ORS
-
[2023] 16 S.C.R. 1118
2023 INSC 1087
Coram : HIMA KOHLI, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Consignment was intercepted in the course of inter-state movement, as there was no valid E-way bill. High Court directed that the goods be released subject to payment of the entire amount of the Goods cash and 50% of the penalty imposed also in cash while the remaining 50% by way of bank guarantee. Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 – West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017 – Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Appellant executed work contracts for GAIL in the
 Decision Date :
 31-10-2023
 | Case No :
 CIVIL APPEAL No. 8302/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

KARAN @ FATIYA
 versus
 THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
-
[2023] 2 S.C.R. 587
2023 INSC 197
Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
*
, VIKRAM NATH, SANJAY KAROL
 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 – Claim of Juvenility – Appellant convicted for various offences under IPC and POCSO Act was awarded death sentence – Death sentence affirmed by High Court – During the pendency of the present appeals, appellant Trial Court was directed to submit report after due inquiry – Report submitted, appellant’s date of birth was found to be conclusively proved as 25.07.2002 – Date of incident being 15.12.2017, the appellant was aged 15 years 04 months and 20 days on the date of the incident
 Decision Date :
 03-03-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 572/2019
 | Disposal Nature :
 Case Partly allowed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

MOHD. NAUSHAD
 versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
-
[2023] 10 S.C.R. 160
2023 INSC 605
Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
*
, VIKRAM NATH, SANJAY KAROL
 Decision Date :
 06-07-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1269/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

AMANDEEP SINGH SARAN
 versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
-
[2023] 16 S.C.R. 435
2023 INSC 1028
Coram : C.T. RAVIKUMAR
*
, SUDHANSHU DHULIA
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Conduct of the trial for off ence under Section 409, Penal Code, 1860; exercise of powers under Cr.PC, for committal of cases to the Court of competent jurisdiction. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.26, 29, 12, 323; First Schedule to CrPC – s.409 – Courts by which off ences are triable – Procedure when, after commencement of inquiry or trial, Magistrate fi nds case should be committed– Appellant charged for commission of various off ences including u/s.409, IPC punishable with imprisonment for life or
 Decision Date :
 29-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2625/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

PRATIBHA MANCHANDA & ANR
 versus
STATE OF HARYANA & ANR
-
[2023] 10 S.C.R. 411
2023 INSC 612
Coram : SURYA KANT
*
, C.T. RAVIKUMAR
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 438 – Anticipatory bail – Rejection of – Appellants’ case that they had possession over the subject land and they never sold the subject land to anyone nor have they ever executed any power of attorney (GPA) in favor of any third persons had approached the halqa patwari to sanction mutation of the aforesaid land – It was alleged that the application for mutation was based on a forged and fabricated sale deed dated 24.02.2022 – Appellant also learnt that the said sale deed was based on yet another,
 Decision Date :
 07-07-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1793/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

ANIL KUMAR
 versus
THE STATE OF KERALA
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 173
2023 INSC 965
Coram : ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether in the circumstances of the instant case, the appellant had any premeditated mind to kill the deceased or was it due to grave and sudden provocation which would not amount to murder or would at best be a case of culpable homicide not amounting to for a term which may extend up to 10 years or with fi ne or with both u/s. 304 Part-II of IPC. Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 and s. 304 Part-II – Prosecution case that the appellant, with the intention to kill his wife, lighted a matchstick and threw it upon her when she had
 Decision Date :
 01-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2697/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

PRIYA INDORIA
 versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. ETC.
-
[2023] 15 S.C.R. 525
2023 INSC 1008
Coram : B.V. NAGARATHNA
*
, UJJAL BHUYAN
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Whether the power of the High Court or the Court of Session to grant anticipatory bail u/s 438 CrPC could be exercised with respect to an FIR registered outside the territorial jurisdiction of the said Court; and whether the transit anticipatory bail or interim protection to enable an applicant seeking anticipatory bail to make an application u/s 438 CrPC before a Court of competent jurisdiction is consistent with the administration of criminal justice. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 438 –
 Decision Date :
 20-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 003549/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
മലയാളം - Malayalam
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

KAILASH VIJAYVARGIYA
 versus
RAJLAKSHMI CHAUDHURI AND OTHERS
-
[2023] 6 S.C.R. 135
2023 INSC 494
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, SANJIV KHANNA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : s. 156(3) – Police officer’s power to investigate cognizable case – Application u/s. 156(3) by the victim-complainant alleging rape by the appellants; and sought direction to police to investigate the matter treating the complaint as an FIR filed several complaints before the police authorities, who conducted an enquiry and found that there was delay of two years in filing the complaint and refused to register the same – Dismissal of the application u/s. 156(3) by the Magistrate – Revision application thereagainst,
 Decision Date :
 04-05-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1581/2021
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

DINESH KUMAR
 versus
THE STATE OF HARYANA
-
[2023] 4 S.C.R. 220
2023 INSC 493
Coram : SUDHANSHU DHULIA
*
, SANJAY KUMAR
 Penal Code,1860 – ss.302,364,392,394,201 and 34 – Evidence Act, 1872 – ss.27,101,106 and 165 – The case of prosecution was based on circumstantial evidence i.e. the evidence of ‘last seen’ and the ‘discoveries’ made from the information given by the co-accused convicted by Trial Court for the murder of the deceased – Two separate appeals were filed before the High Court – During the pendency of the appeal, the co-accused passed away, thus, his appeal stood abated – The appeal of the present appellant was dismissed, thus
 Decision Date :
 04-05-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 530/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

MARIAPPAN
 versus
STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
-
[2023] 15 S.C.R. 1074
2023 INSC 1034
Coram : VIKRAM NATH
*
, RAJESH BINDAL
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: On the day of incident, heated arguments took place between the two parties. During the quarrel, accused nos.1 and 2 stabbed victim multiple times with sooriknives, while accused no.3, though armed with a spade handle, did not infl ict injuries attack. The appellant-accused was convicted u/s. 302 IPC. Whether the acts of the accused would come under Exception 4 to s.300 IPC or would be an act of culpable homicide amounting to murder punishable u/s. 302. Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 and s.304 Part-I – Trial Court after examining
 Decision Date :
 24-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3598/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 | Direction Issue :
 Appeal partly allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

PAWAN KUMAR
 versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
-
[2023] 15 S.C.R. 261
2023 INSC 1012
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
*
, SUDHANSHU DHULIA
 261 : 2023 INSC 1012 261 CASE DETAILS PAWAN KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 3548 of 2023) NOVEMBER 21, 2023 [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL AND SUDHANSHU DHULIA,JJ] HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The question which arise for determination is whether the appellant was a of age – When exact assessment of the age cannot be done: Held: Age of a juvenile has to be determined on the basis of the date of the alleged commission of the crime – In a case of juvenility where two views are possible, a liberal approach should be undertaken –
 Decision Date :
 21-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3548/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

PRASAD PRADHAN & ANR.
 versus
THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
-
[2023] 1 S.C.R. 241
2023 INSC 79
Coram : KRISHNA MURARI
*
, S. RAVINDRA BHAT
 Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 r/w s.34 – Murder – Prosecution case that appellant/accused and the victim were cousins – On the afternoon of 28.02.2012, when the victim was getting his land levelled through a JCB machine, the appellants (A-1 and A-2) reached the place and armed with an axe and he attacked the victim on the head – Against A-2, the allegation was that he was armed with an axe and had assaulted the victim on the legs – Regarding A-3, the grandson of A-1 and son of A-2, the allegation was that he went to the spot and caught hold of the
 Decision Date :
 24-01-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2025/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

MUNNA LAL
 versus
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
-
[2023] 3 S.C.R. 224
2023 INSC 78
Coram : S. RAVINDRA BHAT
*
, DIPANKAR DATTA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : s. 374(2) –Appeal from convictions – Murder of the complainant’s father – Previous enmity between the parties – On the fateful day, the appellants armed with weapons inflicted gun shot injuries and blows to the – FIR against the appellants – Surviving appellants convicted u/s. 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment – Upheld by the High Court – On appeal, held : PW-2 being inimical to the appellants, his testimony to be taken carefully – PW-3 was at the best, a chance
 Decision Date :
 24-01-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 490/2017
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

TARUN KUMAR
 versus
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 813
2023 INSC 1006
Coram : ANIRUDDHA BOSE
*
, BELA M. TRIVEDI
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: Appellant was arrested on the fourth supplementary complaint fi led u/ss.44, 45, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, in continuation of three complaints in the Complaint Case, for the commission of the off ence of whether justifi ed in dismissing the bail application of the appellant seeking bail in connection with the said Complaint Case bearing ECIR No. arising out of the FIR registered for off ence u/s.13(2) r/w 13(1)(d), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and u/s.120B r/w ss.420, 465, 467, 468, 471,
 Decision Date :
 20-11-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3593/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

ATULBHAI VITHALBHAI BHANDERI
 versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
-
[2023] 4 S.C.R. 239
2023 INSC 496
Coram : AJAY RASTOGI
*
, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
 Bail : Grant of – Appellant involved in intimidating and threatening the victim in connivance with the main accused no.1 running an organised crime syndicate for extorting money and land- grabbing by threatening people – 59 cases registered against the accused no.1 – FIR for offence punishable under the 2015 Act and the Penal Code – Bail application by the appellant during pendency of the trial – Dismissed by the High Court – On appeal, held: Discretion must be exercised judiciously – Keeping in view the appellant’s alleged role,
 Decision Date :
 04-05-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1390/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

TALAT SANVI
 versus
STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.
-
[2023] 1 S.C.R. 289
2023 INSC 80
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
*
, ABHAY S. OKA
 Victim compensation: Interim victim compensation in proceedings for anticipatory bail cannot be imposed as a condition for the same – Question of interim victim compensation cannot form part of the bail jurisprudence – Bail – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 357. 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for order to pay compensation when a court imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence (includinga sentence of death) of which fine forms a part in the circumstances enumerated therein. Sub-section (2) imposes a limitation that when fine is imposed in a
 Decision Date :
 24-01-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 205/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ಕನ್ನಡ - Kannada
മലയാളം - Malayalam
मराठी - Marathi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

RAVASAHEB @ RAVASAHEBGOUDA ETC.
 versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA
-
[2023] 2 S.C.R. 965
2023 INSC 238
Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
*
, VIKRAM NATH, SANJAY KAROL
 Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 – Victim was murdered – The trial court and the High Court, despite most of the prosecution witnesses turning hostile, found the prosecution case to be established beyond reasonable doubt through the unrefuted testimony of PW-1 and convicted the accused consideration on appeal was, whether eight men can be convicted based on the testimony of a solitary witness, who was the only eyewitness to the crime – Held: Presence of the accused on the spot is not disputed by anyone – Witness, despite being cross-examined extensively, is
 Decision Date :
 16-03-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1109/2010
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
 versus
SHYAM BIHARI & OTHERS
-
[2023] 10 S.C.R. 464
2023 INSC 623
Coram : B.V. NAGARATHNA
*
, MANOJ MISRA
 COURT REPORTS [2023] 10 S.C.R. 464 CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v. SHYAM BIHARI & OTHERS (Criminal Appeal No. 413 of 2013) JULY 17, 2023 [B. V. NAGARATHNA AND MANOJ MISRA, JJ. ] Penal Code,1860 – ss. 302 and 34 – Murder case – Acquittal of three policeman – with weapons – Policemen fired at them, hitting the victim who succumbed to the injuries and the prosecution witnesses managed to escape – Policemen charged of murder while patrolling u/s. 302/34 – However, acquittal by the trial court – Appeal thereagainst, u/s. 378(3)
 Decision Date :
 17-07-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 413/2013
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

H. D. SUNDARA & ORS.
 versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA
-
[2023] 14 S.C.R. 47
2023 INSC 858
Coram : ABHAY S. OKA
*
, SANJAY KAROL
 HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: The question which arose for consideration was whether the High Court was justifi ed in setting aside the order of acquittal passed by the trial court. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 378 – Appeal against acquittal – Matter pertaining to accused and the family of complainant – Accused assaulted the complainant and his family – Acquittal of all the accused by the trial court, however conviction for the off ences punishable u/s. 304 Part I and s. 324/149 IPC by the High Court – Correctness: Held: No fi ndings
 Decision Date :
 26-09-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 247/2011
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

TEESTA ATUL SETALVAD
 versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
-
[2023] 10 S.C.R. 1147
2023 INSC 637
Coram : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
*
, A.S. BOPANNA, DIPANKAR DATTA
 Bail– Appellant was on interim bail on account of order dtd. 02.09.2022 passed by Supreme Court – By the impugned order, High Court rejected the bail application filed by the appellant and directed the appellant to surrender immediately – Legality of – Held: There was no immediately when she was enjoying the interim protection under the orders of Supreme Court – The considerations which were available when the order dtd.02.09.2022 was passed are still available even at this stage – Most of the evidence in the present case are documentary evidence
 Decision Date :
 19-07-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2022/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

ROYDEN HAROLD BUTHELLO & ANR.
 versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.
-
[2023] 3 S.C.R. 150
2023 INSC 180
Coram : A.S. BOPANNA
*
, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
 Criminal Law – Investigation by CBI – When cannot be directed – Appellant no.1 accused of indulging in sale of psychotropic NDPS substance – It is the case of the appellant no.1 that while he was travelling with regard to illegally abducted, detained and a case under NDPS was foisted on him – Appellant no.1 and his father-appellant no.2 filed writ petition before High Court inter alia seeking direction to transfer the investigation to the CBI, which was declined – Revision petition filed by the
 Decision Date :
 28-02-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 634/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

ગુજરાતી - Gujarati
हिन्दी - Hindi
कोंकणी - Konkani
मराठी - Marathi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
తెలుగు - Telugu

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

MS. X
 versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
-
[2023] 2 S.C.R. 1112
2023 INSC 252
Coram : A.S. BOPANNA, HIMA KOHLI
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 437,438 and 439 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 354,354-B, 376 and 506 – Anticipatory bail – Cancellation of – A complaint filed by the appellant- prosecutrix, against the respondent No.2-accused, who lured her under the garb of assignments, raped her in a hotel room where she was staying – Initially, the FIR was registered u/ss. 354, 354-B and 506 of the IPC, and later, on the supplementary statement of the appellant being recorded, the offence u/s.376 was added to the FIR – The High Court granted
 Decision Date :
 17-03-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 822/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

ગુજરાતી - Gujarati
हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
 versus
ADITYA TRIPATHI
-
[2023] 5 S.C.R. 410
2023 INSC 531
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, C.T. RAVIKUMAR
 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002: s. 45 – Enlargement on bail – Sustainability of – Allegations of tempering of bids – Accused chargesheeted u/ss. 120-B, 420, 468, 471 IPC and s. 7 rw s. 13(2) of the PC Act, the scheduled offences – Offences 2002 added later – Enforcement Directorate initiated money laundering investigation – Respondent no. 1 arrested – Thereafter, the High Court enlarged the respondent No.1 on bail – Sustainability of – Held: Not sustainable – High Court did not consider the
 Decision Date :
 12-05-2023
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1401/2023
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi

 Disclaimer

								Due care and caution has been taken by the Editorial Section, Supreme Court of India to provide complete and accurate information in the English version.
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools.
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.

						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India.

						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text.
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.

						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.

NARAYAN CHETANRAM CHAUDHARY
 versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
-
[2023] 6 S.C.R. 1055
2023 INSC 298
Coram : K.M. JOSEPH
*
, ANIRUDDHA BOSE, HRISHIKESH ROY
 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – ss. 9, 94 – Juvenility – Determination of – The applicant, along with two other accomplices had committed and two children – They were tried for commission of offences u/ss. 302, 342, 397, 449 r/w 120B and 34 of IPC – Trial Court sentenced the appellant to death – Both the judgment of conviction and order of sentence were confirmed by the High Court – The Supreme Court
 Decision Date :
 27-03-2023
 | Case No :
 Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 157334/2018
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Split view
HTML view
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.