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.

DAYALU KASHYAP
 versus
THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 1020
2022 INSC 95
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, M.M. SUNDRESH
 Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 – s.50 – Effect of – Search conducted by Sub-Inspector and not by a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, recovery of ganja from a polythene bag on a Kanwad carried by appellant – Appellant – Relying on State of Rajasthan v. Parmanand & Anr. [2014] 3 SCR 522 and seeking to expand the scope of the observations made, the appellant contended that the option given to him to get himself searched from the Officer concerned not being part of the statute, the same could not have
 Decision Date :
 25-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 130/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

BHAGWANI
 versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
-
[2022] 8 S.C.R. 1
2022 INSC 52
Coram : L. NAGESWARA RAO
*
, BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Penal Code, 1860 – ss.363, 366A, 364, 346, 376D, 376A, 302 and 201 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.5(g)(m) r/w s.6 – Kidnapping, rape and murder of 11 year old girl – Circumstantial evidence – PW-2 (father of victim) along with his one ‘AM’ in the evening – His 11 years old daughter went missing and was found dead next morning – Appellant alongwith co-accused- ’S’ (since deceased) was convicted and sentenced to death – On appeal, held: Medical evidence shows that the deceased was
 Decision Date :
 18-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 101/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Case Partly allowed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
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.

SIDDHARTH MUKESH BHANDARI
 versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.
-
[2022] 6 S.C.R. 853
2022 INSC 788
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Stay of investigation and/or interim relief while exercising powers u/s.482 CrPC – Private respondents-accused filed Special Criminal Applications u/Art.226 of the Constitution r/w s.482 CrPC for quashing criminal proceedings instituted further investigation, the High Court passed ad-interim order dated 10-10-2019 directing that coercive steps be not taken against private respondents-accused – SLPs against the interim order dated 10-10-2019 – Interim order 10-10-2019 stayed by Supreme Court – SLPs converted into
 Decision Date :
 02-08-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1044/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

VIJAYA
 versus
STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
-
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 367
2022 INSC 964
Coram : SURYA KANT
*
, HRISHIKESH ROY
 Evidence Act, 1872 – ss. 32, 157 – Code of Criminal Procedure – s. 164 – Dying declaration – Victim survived – Statement u/s.164 Cr.P.C. – Prosecution case that appellant consumed a poisonous substance, which she also administered to her 10 months old was recorded – Appellant survived but her baby died – Appellant’s husband reported matter to the police, which led to regsitration of FIR u/ss. 302 and 309 IPC – Appellant’s husband (PW1) and her father-in-law (PW5), both turned hostile during the trial
 Decision Date :
 15-09-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1573/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

 MS. P  XXX
 versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR
-
[2022] 15 S.C.R. 324
2022 INSC 648
Coram : DINESH MAHESHWARI
*
, VIKRAM NATH
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.177-180, 184, 218, 220 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.376, 504, 506 – Allegations against respondent No.2-accused consisting of offences of distinct nature, one set of allegations is of the offence of rape at Delhi set of allegations is of hurling abuses and extending threat on phone calls received by the appellant at her village in District Chamoli (ss.504, 506 IPC), if could be said to be ‘one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction’ for the purpose of trial
 Decision Date :
 16-06-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 903/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

বাংলা - Bengali
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.

CHANDI PULIYA
 versus
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
-
[2022] 14 S.C.R. 566
2022 INSC 1276
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, C.T. RAVIKUMAR
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: ss.227, 300, 228 – Discharge application – Appellant was acquitted by the Sessions Court for the offences under ss. 148, 149, 448, 364 and 506 IPC – Second FIR filed against appellant alleging inter alia that he and other co-accused of the father of the first informant, the same person that they had alleged to have kidnapped and were granted acquittal – Appellant approached the High Court for quashing the criminal proceedings arising out of the second FIR – Dismissing the petition, High Court granted appellant
 Decision Date :
 12-12-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2249/2022

 | Direction Issue :
 Matter remitted to trial court

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

MANNO LAL JAISWAL
 versus
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 990
2022 INSC 97
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, SANJIV KHANNA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 439 and 161 – Bail – Grant of – Appellant lodged FIR against the respondents-accused for murder of his son – Respondents-accused applied for bail – Sessions Courts rejected the said bail applications bail to respondents – Appellant approached this court and submitted that – (i) High Court erroneously noted that the accused persons were not named in the FIR and that the statement of witnesses u/s. 161 Cr.PC were recoded after inordinate delay; (ii) High Court have not
 Decision Date :
 25-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 97/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

STATE OF U.P.
 versus
JAI DUTT AND ANR.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 215
2022 INSC 71
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302 and 326 – Murder – Conviction by trial court u/s.302 accepting the prosecution case that the accused persons armed with deadly weapons went to the agricultural field were the victim (complainant’s father) was working and beat him, resulting in his to that u/s.326, primarily on grounds that the victim died six days after the incident and no fracture was found on his head – Justification – Held: Not justified – Merely because the victim died six days after the incident not a ground to set aside the conviction u/s.302
 Decision Date :
 19-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 37/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

NEERAJ DUTTA
 versus
STATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI)
-
[2022] 5 S.C.R. 104
2022 INSC 1280
Coram : S. ABDUL NAZEER
*
, BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI, A.S. BOPANNA, V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Prevention of Corruption Act 1988: ss.7 and 13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2) – In the absence of evidence of the complainant (direct/ primary, oral/documentary evidence) it is permissible to draw an inferential deduction servant u/ss.7 and 13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2) of the Act based on other evidence adduced by the prosecution. Reference Matter – Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 – Whether B. Jayaraj v State of A.P & P. Satyanarayana Murthy v D. Insp. Of Police, State of A.P. in conflict with M.
 Decision Date :
 15-12-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1669/2009
 | Disposal Nature :
 Reference answered

 |  Bench :
 5 Judges
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.

NAVIKA KUMAR
 versus
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
-
[2022] 16 S.C.R. 182
2022 INSC 1017
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, KRISHNA MURARI
 Constitution of India: Art 32 – Writ of Certiorari – Petitioner was the anchor of Newshour Debate (debate) telecasted on Times Now – Various FIRs/criminal complaints filed against the petitioner in relation to the debate telecasted on 26.05.2022 – Petitioner prayed described in the instant writ petition or any other FIR/criminal complaint that may be instituted in future arising out of the same incident – Petitioner also prayed that the various FIR/Complaints be clubbed together – Held: Taking into consideration the order passed by
 Decision Date :
 23-09-2022
 | Case No :
 WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 286/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

XYZ
 versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS
-
[2022] 18 S.C.R. 163
2022 INSC 799
Coram : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
*
, J.B. PARDIWALA
 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – s.156(3) – “may” – Commission of cognizable offence alleged, need for police investigation – Exercise of jurisdiction u/s.156(3) – Sexual harassment alleged by appellant against second respondent (Vice- Chancellor of the Police on her complaint, the appellant eventually, moved the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) u/s.156(3) – JMFC though concluded that, prima facie, “occurrence of the offence by the accused persons” was “shown”, however, held that the case could be decided
 Decision Date :
 05-08-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1184/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

YERUVA SAYIREDDY
 versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 882
2022 INSC 1297
Coram : VINEET SARAN, ANIRUDDHA BOSE
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s. 394 – Abatement of appeals – Appeal against conviction and sentence of death or of imprisonment – Death of appellant/convict during the pendency of the appeal – Amicus curiae, if a near relative of deceased of appeal – Held: Counsel appearing as an Amicus Curiae, cannot be treated as a near relative of the deceased appellant/convict – On facts, application for continuance of the appeal having not been made within 30 days or even thereafter by any near relative, as per the provision
 Decision Date :
 07-03-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 233/2016
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

TARLOCHAN SINGH @ RANA
 versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
-
[2022] 2 S.C.R. 961
2022 INSC 356
Coram : N.V. RAMANA
*
, KRISHNA MURARI, HIMA KOHLI
 961 961 TARLOCHAN SINGH @ RANA v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 293 of 2018) March 29, 2022 [N. V. RAMANA, CJI, KRISHNA MURARI AND HIMA KOHLI, JJ] Arms Act, 1959: ss. 29 and 30 –Punishment for knowingly purchasing arms, etc., from unlicensed person or for delivering arms, etc., to double barrel 12 bore rifle, used in the murder of the deceased and was part in the conspiracy hatched by the other co-accused – Conviction of the appellant u/ss. 29 and 30, and u/s. 120-B IPC and sentenced accordingly –High Court acquitted the appellant u/s. 120-B IPC, however, upheld
 Decision Date :
 29-03-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 293/2018
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
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.

MOHAMMAD IRFAN
 versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA
-
[2022] 10 S.C.R. 827
2022 INSC 664
Coram : UDAY UMESH LALIT
*
, HEMANT GUPTA, S. RAVINDRA BHAT
 Penal Code, 1860: ss.121 and 121 A – Conspiracy to commit offences punishable by s.121 – Prosecution case that the Investigating Officer, while investigating incident of shoot-out occurred at Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, came to know about a larger (LeT), banned militant organization in India – Registration of FIR that accused persons A-1 to A-6, active members of LeT entered into a criminal conspiracy to cause large scale destruction of public property, multi- national companies, places of worships, by causing bomb explosions,
 Decision Date :
 11-07-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 201/2018
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
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.

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
 versus
NANDU @ NANDUA
-
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 487
2022 INSC 901
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, KRISHNA MURARI
 MADHYA PRADESH v. NANDU @ NANDUA (Criminal Appeal No. 1356 of 2022) SEPTEMBER 02, 2022 [M. R. SHAH, JJ. AND KRISHNA MURARI] Sentence/Sentencing – ss.147,148,323 and 302/34 of IPC – Reduction of sentence by the High Court – Proper or not – The respondent-accused along with under aforesaid sections but reduced the sentence to approximately seven years and ten months, the period of sentence undergone by the respondent – State approached the Supreme Court and submitted that the reduction in sentence is contrary to s.302 IPC – On appeal, held: Though
 Decision Date :
 02-09-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1356/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
 versus
THE STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, CHENNAI & ANOTHER
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 715
2022 INSC 228
Coram : M.R. SHAH, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Land Grabbing: Transfer of 864 cases pending in civil courts to the jurisdictional courts – Original complainant in case pending on the file of the Special Court for Land Grabbing the High Court, seeking transfer of the said case from the Special Court to the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate – Allowed/disposed of, by the High Court – Thereafter, on ‘mentioning’ made by the Additional Public Prosecutor in the said disposed of petition, the Single
 Decision Date :
 23-02-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 272/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

P. PONNUSAMY
 versus
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU
-
[2022] 15 S.C.R. 265
2022 INSC 1177
Coram : UDAY UMESH LALIT
*
, S. RAVINDRA BHAT
*
, BELA M. TRIVEDI
 Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 120B, 109, 341, 302 & 34 – Draft Rules of Criminal Practice, 2020 – Right of accused to demand documents – Appellant along with other eight accused were convicted and sentenced by Sessions Court for the offences punishable u/s 120B, with 34 of IPC – Some of them were sentenced to death penalty and some with life imprisonment – The Sessions Court had referred its judgment to the High Court for confirmation of the death penalty – Adjournments were sought several times by the parties – During the course
 Decision Date :
 07-11-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1926/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
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.

RAVI SHARMA
 versus
STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR.
-
[2022] 12 S.C.R. 257
2022 INSC 699
Coram : ABHAY S. OKA
*
, M.M. SUNDRESH
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.378 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – s.27 – FIR was recorded on finding a dead body – PW-2 (brother of deceased) identified the dead body – Statements of both PW-1, father of deceased and PW-2 were recorded – Both pointed extending the benefit of doubt in favour of appellant passed the order of acquittal – High Court ordered conviction of the appellant – On appeal, held: High Court have not acted within the legal parameters set down for s.378 Cr.PC. by the various judgments of Supreme Court –
 Decision Date :
 11-07-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 410/2015
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

JASDEEP SINGH @ JASSU
 versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
-
[2022] 2 S.C.R. 647
2022 INSC 23
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
*
, M.M. SUNDRESH
 Penal Code, 1860 – s. 304 part I and s.34 – Allegation that victim-deceased was shot dead by the accused persons (A1 to A4) during the night time – A3 and A4 (appellants) were present at the scene of occurrence and made a statement saying “what are you seeing now”, his pocket and shot the deceased – In complaint, father of the deceased (Complainant/ PW6) did not make any statement that A3 and A4 exhorted A1 to shoot – However, in his additional statement u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. he improved his statement stating that A3 and A4 instigated A1 to fire
 Decision Date :
 07-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1584/2021
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE
 versus
RAHUL MODI & ORS.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 597
2022 INSC 158
Coram : L. NAGESWARA RAO
*
, BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.167(2) – Filing of a charge-sheet is sufficient compliance with the provisions of s.167and that an accused cannot demand release on default bail under s.167(2) on the ground that cognizance has not been taken before the expiry of 60 days right of an accused to seek statutory bail under Section 167(2) arises only if the charge- sheet has not been filed before the expiry of the statutory period. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1 It is clear from the judgment of this Court in Bhikamchand Jain that filing of a charge-sheet
 Decision Date :
 07-02-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 185/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

ABDUL VAHAB
 versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
-
[2022] 3 S.C.R. 311
2022 INSC 263
Coram : K.M. JOSEPH
*
, HRISHIKESH ROY
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.482 – Jurisdiction of High Court under s.482 for quashing of confiscation proceedings under s.11(5) of the M.P Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 2004 and Rule 5 of the M.P Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Rules, 2012 – In the instant case, appellant’s was intercepted and the driver along with other accused was arrested – Case was registered under M.P Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 2004 and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 – Vehicle was seized – Trial court held that no offence was made out under these Acts
 Decision Date :
 04-03-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 340/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

JOSEPH STEPHEN AND OTHERS
 versus
SANTHANASAMY AND OTHERS
-
[2022] 8 S.C.R. 182
2022 INSC 96
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, SANJIV KHANNA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.401 – Whether in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under s.401, High Court can convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction and what is the procedure to be followed by the High Court – Held: the High Court to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction – Though the High Court has revisional power to examine whether there is manifest error of law or procedure etc., however, after giving its own findings, on the findings recorded by the court acquitting the
 Decision Date :
 25-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 90/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

CHHERTURAM @ CHAINU
 versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
-
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 210
2022 INSC 951
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
*
, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
 Penal Code, 1860 – Murder – Exception 4 of s.300, s.82 – Exception 4 of s.300, when not applicable – Father and appellant- son were drinking alocohol together, got into a fight – Appellant convicted for murder of his father – On appeal, held : being father and son – There was no prior dispute and liquor got the better of the appellant, however that is no defence in view of s.86 – There were eleven injuries – It is not only the number of injuries but where and in what manner they were inflicted, even if it is by a
 Decision Date :
 13-09-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1317/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

বাংলা - Bengali
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.

MUSSTT REHANA BEGUM
 versus
STATE OF ASSAM & ANR.
-
[2022] 3 S.C.R. 962
2022 INSC 80
Coram : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
*
, BELA M. TRIVEDI
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.494, 495 – Appellant-wife filed application u/s.482 for quashing the complaint filed by second respondent-husband u/ ss.494 and 495, IPC – Dismissed by Single Judge – the appellant and the second respondent the issue as to whether she had a subsisting marriage on the date on which she entered into a marriage with him is the subject matter of a conclusive finding of the Principal Judge of the Family Court which has attained finality – Appellant and the
 Decision Date :
 21-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 118/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
தமிழ் - Tamil

 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.

DEVADASSAN
 versus
THE SECOND CLASS EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM & ORS.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 868
2022 INSC 286
Coram : INDIRA BANERJEE
*
, J.K. MAHESHWARI
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: ss. 122(1)(b), 111, 117 and 110 – Security for keeping the peace and for good behaviour – Imprisonment in default of security –Correctness of –On facts, bond executed by the appellant by him on account of his involvement in a criminal case, registered subsequently – Executive Magistrate and the High Court found the appellant guilty for breach of the conditions of bond and punished him in exercise of power u/s 122(1)(b) and sent him to custody –Interference
 Decision Date :
 09-03-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 388/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
 versus
LT. GEN. (RETD.) S.K. SAHNI
-
[2022] 16 S.C.R. 946
2022 INSC 332
Coram : L. NAGESWARA RAO
*
, BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI
 Army Rules, 1954 – rr.180, 22 and 40(2) – Army Act, 1950 – s.123 –Respondent, commissioned in the Indian Army in 1967, was thereafter appointed as Director General, Supplies and Transport (DGST) in 2005 – A Court of Inquiry (CoI) was ordered to investigate against him – CoI only recommended for award of recordable censure against the respondent, but the Army Commander and GOC-in-C directed disciplinary action under the Army Act, 1950 and Army Rules, 1954 – After his retirement in 2006, respondent filed a writ petition before High
 Decision Date :
 23-03-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2169/2014
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 | Direction Issue :
 Appeal dismissed and  Transferred Case allowed.

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

CHANDRAPAL
 versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH (EARLIER M.P.)
-
[2022] 3 S.C.R. 366
2022 INSC 629
Coram : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
*
, BELA M. TRIVEDI
 Penal Code, 1860: ss. 302 and 201/34 – Murder – Prosecution case that a girl and a boy having a love affair went missing and ten days later their dead bodies found hanging on the tree in decomposed state – Allegations of accused and other co-accused – Conviction u/ss. 302/34 and 201/ 34 and sentenced accordingly – In appeal, the High Court upheld the order of conviction and sentence as regards the appellant, however, set aside the conviction of co-accused u/s. 302/34, but upheld for the offence
 Decision Date :
 27-05-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 378/2015
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

ZAKIA AHSAN JAFRI
 versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
-
[2022] 6 S.C.R. 1
2022 INSC 653
Coram : A.M. KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI, C.T. RAVIKUMAR
 Gujarat Riots – Godhra incident of 27.2.2002, in which large number of Kar-sevaks, returning from Ayodhya, were burnt alive in train bogies – As aftermath of that incident, there was unrest and violence all across the State of Gujarat – A violent mob attacked the inhabitants of 69 persons including the husband of appellant – Complaint dated 8.6.2006 of appellant to Director General of Police, Gujarat and other high officials inter alia containing allegations of “larger conspiracy at the highest level” which resulted into causing mass violence across
 Decision Date :
 24-06-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 912/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Dismissed

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
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.

JAFARUDHEEN & ORS.
 versus
STATE OF KERALA
-
[2022] 5 S.C.R. 721
2022 INSC 464
Coram : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
*
, M.M. SUNDRESH
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.378: Appeal against acquittal – Scope of – Appellate Court has to consider whether trial court’s view can be termed as a possible one, particularly when evidence on record has been analyzed – An order of acquittal adds up to the of the accused – Double presumption that enures in favour of the accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters – Thus, appellate court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of trial court rendering acquittal. Criminal Law: FIR: Delay
 Decision Date :
 22-04-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 430/2015
 | Disposal Nature :
 Disposed off

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ - Punjabi
தமிழ் - Tamil

 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.

OMKAR SINGH
 versus
JAIPRAKASH NARAIN SINGH & ANR.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 550
2022 INSC 166
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, SANJIV KHANNA
 Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 r/w s.34 – Murder – Common intention –Two accused, A-2 (respondent no.1) and his son (A-1) – Three PWs – Sessions Court convicted A-1 u/s.302 and A-2 u/s. 302 r/w 34 – High Court affirmed conviction of A-1, but, by first informant/ son of deceased, held: High Court erred in acquitting A-2 – All three PWs were consistent and fully supported the case of prosecution – Even as per the High Court the motive was established and proved – High Court also observed that due to land dispute
 Decision Date :
 09-02-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 84/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

SATISH KUMAR JATAV
 versus
THE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.
-
[2022] 3 S.C.R. 270
2022 INSC 577
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Legality of – Magistrate summoned the private respondents-accused for offences punishable u/ss.307, 504, 506 of IPC and s.3(10)(15) of the Scheduled Castes of Atrocities) Act – High Court allowed application u/s.482 CrPC preferred by the private respondents–accused and quashed the criminal proceedings as well as summoning order of the Magistrate – Challenge to – Held: The order passed by the High Court was a cryptic,
 Decision Date :
 17-05-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 770/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

GEETA DEVI
 versus
STATE OF U.P. & ORS.
-
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 428
2022 INSC 54
Coram : M.R. SHAH
*
, B.V. NAGARATHNA
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.378 – Appellate Power of High Court in case of acquittal – In the instant case, trial court convicted respondents for the offences punishable under ss.452, 323/34 and 325/34 of the IPC, however, acquitted them for the 504, 506 of the IPC, ss.3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – High Court dismissed victim’s appeal without elaborate reappreciation of the entire evidence on record – On appeal, held: High Court only
 Decision Date :
 18-01-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 78/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 | Direction Issue :
 Allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to High court, the Court

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
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.

VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS.
 versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
-
[2022] 6 S.C.R. 382
2022 INSC 757
Coram : A.M. KHANWILKAR
*
, DINESH MAHESHWARI, C.T. RAVIKUMAR
 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – s.2(1), Clause (na) – Expression “proceedings” therein – Held: The expression “proceedings” occurring in Clause (na) of s.2(1) is contextual and is required to be to include inquiry procedure followed by the Authorities of ED, the Adjudicating Authority, and the Special Court. Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – s.2(1), Clause (na) –Expression “investigation” therein – Held: The expression “investigation” in
 Decision Date :
 27-07-2022
 | Case No :
 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 4634/2014
 | Disposal Nature :
 Reference answered

 | Direction Issue :
 Issues Answered

 |  Bench :
 3 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


English

हिन्दी - Hindi
मराठी - Marathi
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.

HOTEL PRIYA, A PROPRIETORSHIP
 versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
-
[2022] 16 S.C.R. 322
2022 INSC 206
Coram : K.M. JOSEPH
*
, S. RAVINDRA BHAT
 Licensing and Performance for Public Amusement including Cabaret Performance, Melas and Tamashas Rules, 1960 – rr.108, 109, 120, 122 and 123 – Constitution of India – Article 15(1), 19(1)(g) – Impugned conditions inter alia imposed a gender cap as to or men, who can perform in orchestras and bands in licensed bars – Challenge to – Conditions upheld by High Court – On appeal, held: Impugned gender cap is the product of stereotypical view that women who perform in bars and establishments, like the appellants, belong to a
 Decision Date :
 18-02-2022
 | Case No :
 CIVIL APPEAL No. 1459/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.


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.

THE STATE OF SIKKIM
 versus
JASBIR SINGH & ANR.
-
[2022] 8 S.C.R. 242
2022 INSC 128
Coram : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
*
, SURYA KANT
 Army Act – ss. 69, 70, 125, 126 – Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1978 – ss. 3, 4 and 5 – Concurrent jurisdiction between the court-martial and the ordinary criminal court – FIR u/s. 302 of IPC the respondent-accused – Sessions Judge directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to furnish a written notice to the Commanding Officer of the unit of the respondent-accused and deliver him for trial by a Court-martial – High Court upheld the decision of the Session Judge –
 Decision Date :
 01-02-2022
 | Case No :
 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 85/2022
 | Disposal Nature :
 Appeal(s) allowed

 |  Bench :
 2 Judges
Flip view
PDF

Instruction: Analyze this Supreme Court judgment.

Output: Analysis provided.