Search Judgments

(Quashing of Defamation Proceedings)

The Indian Penal Code (IPC)Sections 499, 500, and 120B - The respondent filed a private complaint alleging that the petitioner, a journalist, defamed him through publications on YouTube and Facebook. The publications accused the respondent of falsely representing himself as a 'Professor'/'Doctorate' and having criminal antecedents. The petitioner contended his actions were in public interest, aimed at exposing the respondent's fraudulent claims regarding his academic qualifications and pending complaints against him. He argued that his publications fell under the First, Eighth, and Ninth Exceptions to Section 499 IPC, which cover imputations made in good faith for public good or to authorized persons.

The Court noted that the petitioner had also lodged formal complaints with the Chief Minister's Special Cell and university authorities concerning the respondent's alleged misrepresentations. It was highlighted that a prior complaint by the respondent under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration of an FIR against the petitioner had been dismissed.

(Death Penalty Sentencing Guidelines and Legal Aid)

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Sections 235(2) and 354(3)- Principles from Manoj and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2023) 2 SCC 353, and other jurisprudence on capital punishment.

The Supreme Court, addressing an appeal against a Patna High Court judgment imposing a death sentence, highlighted critical procedural deficiencies in capital punishment cases. The Court noted the prevalent failure to timely collect comprehensive reports on mitigating and aggravating circumstances at trial and High Court stages, along with inadequate legal representation, which compromises fair and informed sentencing.

(Return of Seized Vehicle)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, Sections 281, 121(a), 106(1) - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 207(2) - This Criminal Revision Case challenged the dismissal of an application for the return of a seized tractor and trailer, involved in Crime No.24 of 2025 under BNS, 2023. The vehicle was implicated in a fatal road accident where the petitioner's tractor allegedly struck the defacto complainant's wife after a private bus had initially caused their fall. She tragically succumbed to her injuries.

The petitioner, owner of the tractor, sought its release, arguing the primary cause was the bus and that the tractor driver lost control due to sudden events.

(Criminal Appeal - POCSO Act and IPC Conviction Challenged)

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences 2012 (POCSO) Act Sections 10 and 12 and The Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 323. The appellant, the victim's father, was accused of sexually assaulting his daughter from ages 4 to 13, involving inappropriate touching, making her touch his private part, making her read pornographic material, and peeping while she changed clothes.

The prosecution's case relied on the complaint filed by the victim's mother (PW1) and the testimonies of the victim (PW2) and grandmother (PW3). The trial court had found the appellant guilty, sentencing him to five years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 10 POCSO Act, one year under Section 12 POCSO Act, and two months under Section 323 IPC. The appellant contended that the complaint was lodged with mala fide intentions, significantly delayed, and only after he had filed for divorce, attributing the allegations to matrimonial differences and property disputes. He highlighted the lack of medical examination, the 'parrot-like' nature of the witnesses' testimonies, and the absence of these serious allegations in PW1's earlier legal actions.

(Quashing of FIR Proceedings in Matrimonial Dispute)

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) Sections 494 and 498A read with Section 34, against the accused-appellants (father-in-law, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law). The complainant alleged dowry harassment and cruelty by her husband from 2007, and later, bigamy. She claimed the appellants were present during harassment, encouraged the husband's cruelty, and were aware of his second marriage.

The appellants argued there were no specific allegations against them, only vague accusations of presence or encouragement, and that they were not actively involved. They highlighted the significant delay in filing the FIR and contended that liability under Section 494 IPC does not extend to family members without proven active participation in the second marriage.

(Quashing of Criminal Proceedings in Matrimonial Dispute)

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 498A, 323, 354, and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - The appellants (sister-in-law, mother-in-law, and father-in-law) challenged the Allahabad High Court's refusal to quash criminal proceedings. The FIR, lodged by the complainant (daughter-in-law/sister-in-law), alleged dowry demands, cruelty, forcible miscarriage, inappropriate conduct by the father-in-law, assault, and expulsion from the matrimonial home.

The Supreme Court noted an unexplained delay of over six years and seven months in lodging the FIR, stating that "law protects those who are vigilant about their rights." The Court found a lack of material evidence to support the dowry demands and general harassment. Allegations against the sister-in-law regarding instigation for an illicit affair were vague and omnibus, lacking specific details.

(Application for Additional Witnesses in NI Act Case)

The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) Section 145(2) and Section 243 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) - The accused is facing a summary trial under Section 138 of the NI Act. The complainant, a fireworks manufacturer, alleged the accused owed money for goods. An agreement dated 24.04.2018 was executed, and 12 cheques were issued, three of which were dishonoured, leading to the case.

The accused contended that the agreement and cheques were obtained by coercion at a police station. Crucially, it was argued that Mr.

(Cheque Dishonour under Negotiable Instruments Act)

The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Sections 138, 118, and 139. The appellant alleged the respondent borrowed Rs. 50,000/- and issued a cheque that was dishonoured ("Payment stopped by Drawer"). A statutory notice went unclaimed, leading to the complaint, which the trial court dismissed.

The appellant argued that the respondent's admitted cheque and signature triggered statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139.

(Quashing of Criminal Proceedings under IPC)

Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 425, 435, 511 - This petition sought to quash criminal proceedings in C.C.No. 4 of 2025, where the petitioners were charged under Sections 435 and 511 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners were found at a bus stand with combustible material, intending to damage public property.

The petitioners contended that mere possession of combustible material without any overt act of ignition or causing damage did not constitute an attempt to commit mischief.