Search Judgments

(Dishonour of Cheque under Negotiable Instruments Act)

The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138, alongside Section 391 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - The appellant had paid Rs. 80 lakhs for flats. The original builder defaulted, leading to a tripartite agreement where the respondents (an Association and its office bearers) took over liabilities, agreeing to refund Rs. 1.15 Crores.

(Quashing of Criminal Proceedings in a Case of Alleged Cheating and Rape)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 417 (Cheating), 376(1) (Rape) - This Criminal Original Petition sought to quash proceedings in S.C.No.207 of 2024, where the petitioner was accused under Sections 417 and 376(1) IPC. The defacto complainant alleged that she engaged in a five-year physical relationship with the petitioner, from 2018 to 2023, based on his false promise of marriage. This relationship resulted in her pregnancy, with DNA tests confirming the petitioner's paternity. Despite his promise, the petitioner deceitfully married another woman.

(Criminal Appeal against Murder Conviction)

Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 302; Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) Sections 207, 313 - This appeal challenged the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his father-in-law. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, enraged by his wife's departure due to his harassment, assaulted the deceased by violently hitting his head against a wall, leading to his death.

The Trial Court, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar, found the appellant guilty under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

The appellant contended that most eyewitnesses turned hostile, and the partial testimony of P.W.4 and P.W.23 was inconsistent and unreliable.

(Allegations of Corruption and Illegal Logging)

The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d);  The Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 471, 477A, and 120B; and Section 27 of the Odisha Forest Act. The legal framework considered includes Sections 227 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Articles 14 and 136 of the Constitution of India - The appellant, a Forest Range Officer, was implicated in an FIR alleging a conspiracy with other officials and M/s Keshari Traders to illicitly fell live trees under the guise of salvage operations, resulting in a significant loss to the government. His discharge applications were rejected by the Special Judge (Vigilance) and subsequently by the High Court.

The appellant argued that he was falsely implicated, lacked a specific role in the alleged conspiracy, and that similarly situated co-accused, including senior IFS officers, had already been discharged.

(Partition Decree Executability)

This judgment by the Supreme Court primarily addresses the executability of a partition decree, distinguishing between preliminary and final decrees under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Specifically, it examines Section 2(2) and Order XX Rule 18 CPC concerning the definition and scope of decrees in partition suits, and Order XX Rule 12 CPC regarding mesne profits.

The case involves a partition suit for a flat. The Trial Court passed a decree on 13.04.2012, declaring the appellant's half share, entitlement to possession, and mesne profits, and directed an Advocate Commissioner to effect partition or sell the property if division by metes and bounds was not feasible.

(Bail under UAPA & NDPS Act concerning Prolonged Incarceration)

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAP Act) Sections 17, 38, 40, and 43D(5); the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) Sections 8, 21, 25, 29, and 37(1)(b); the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) Section 120B; and the Constitution of India, Article 21 - The appellant, accused of narco-terrorism and funding terrorist activities, challenged the denial of bail by the High Court, having been in custody for over 5 years and 11 months. The trial involves over 350 prosecution witnesses, indicating a remote possibility of early conclusion. Allegations against the appellant included recovery of cash and heroin based on a disclosure statement, and links with Pakistan-based LeT/HM operatives.

The Supreme Court noted that there was no direct recovery from the appellant, and statements implicating him were primarily police confessions (prima facie inadmissible under Evidence Act Section 25).

(Application of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in Fatal Road Accident)

Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 279 (Rash driving), 304-A (Causing death by negligence).
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Sections 134(b) (Duty of driver in case of accident), 187 (Punishment for offences relating to accident).
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958: Sections 3 (Power to release certain offenders after admonition), 12 (Removal of disqualification attaching to conviction) - This appeal challenged a High Court judgment sustaining the conviction of a BMTC driver under Section 304-A IPC and Sections 134(b), 187 MVA, following a fatal road accident where he failed to report the incident. The High Court had set aside the conviction under Section 279 IPC. 

Before the Supreme Court, the Appellant sought benefit under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, noting the maximum punishment for Section 304-A IPC is two years. Having deposited Rs. 5,00,000/-, the deceased's family consented to probation if the amount was released as compensation.

(Suspension of Sentence in NDPS Act Cases and Systemic Enforcement Issues)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act); Section 37; Chapter V-A - This batch of appeals concerns applications for suspension of sentence following conviction and sentencing under the NDPS Act by trial courts.

Petitioners argued procedural lapses (e.g., non-compliance with Sections 42, 50, 57 NDPS Act), lack of independent evidence, and unaddressed delays in contraband analysis. They highlighted prolonged incarceration, with many having served significant portions of their sentences, and the remote likelihood of early appeal hearings, rendering their right of appeal ineffective.

The State emphasized that most cases involved commercial quantities, invoking the stringent conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act for bail.

(Quashing of Criminal Proceedings in Job Racketeering Case)

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 423, 465, 468, 471, 473, 506(i) - This petition sought to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner (A5) in C.C.No.541 of 2023. The petitioner, father of A2, was implicated in a job racketeering scheme where A1-A4 falsely promised railway jobs, collected money, and fabricated appointment letters. The charges included IPC Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 423, 465, 468, 471, 473, and 506(i).

The prosecution alleged A5’s complicity, citing his presence at a 'panchayat' held at his garden land where an undertaking for repayment was executed, and victims were threatened.

(Bail Application in SC/ST (PoA) Act and BNS Case)

This criminal appeal challenged the order dated 27.02.2026 by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC & ST (PoA) Act, Tiruppur, which dismissed the appellant's bail petition in Crime No. 21 of 2026. The charges were registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, and Section 3 of the TN Public Property (Prevention of Damage & Loss) Act, 1992.

The prosecution alleged that due to an existing civil dispute, the appellant (A5) and his co-accused assaulted the de facto complainant and his colleague in a farmland, using caste slurs, tying their hands, damaging property, and stealing valuables, resulting in grievous injuries. The appellant contended false implication, arguing a lack of specific allegations against him, and highlighted that co-accused, including A1, had already been granted bail by the High Court.