Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still governs offences and proceedings from before that date.
654 Supreme Court judgments considering this law. Search within these.
-
M/S Rajco Steel Enterprises v. Kavita Saraff and Another
Issue arose as to whether the cheques were issued in discharge of a debt and if so, whether the respondent no.1 was able to rebut the presumption in terms of s. 118/139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.
-
Khengarbhai Lakhabhai Dambhala v. The State of Gujarat
Appellant’s vehicle was seized under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 as the driver of the vehicle was found carrying liquor beyond permissible limit. Appellant approached the High Court by filing Special Criminal Application…
-
Vipin Sahni and Another v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Whether it is open for High Court to convert or treat a petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., as one filed under section 397 Cr.P.C.
-
Yash Tuteja & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors
The issue for consideration was a challenge to the Complaint filed by the Directorate of Enforcement under Section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, mainly on the ground that apart from s. 120B of the…
-
Shoma Kanti Sen v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
The appellant was detained on 06.06.2018. The appellant assails the order of a Division Bench of the High Court passed on 17.01.2023, disposing her application for bail with liberty to approach the Trial Court for filing a fresh…
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shilpa Jain & Ors.
Whether the High Court is correct in exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR filed against Respondents.
-
Shivani Tyagi v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Matter pertains to suspension of sentence of life imprisonment of the convicted persons, and their consequential enlargement on bail, in an acid attack case.
-
Ballu @ Balram @ Balmukund and Another v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
High Court whether justified in reversing the acquittal of the appellant Nos.1 and 2 and convicting them u/ss.302 and 201/34 and ss.302/34 and 201, Penal Code, 1860 respectively and sentencing accordingly; whether the prosecution…
-
State of Haryana v. Dr. Ritu Singh and Another
FIR against the accused-employee by the complainant, for defrauding the State-employer, if can be quashed on basis of a “compromise” between the complainant and the accused.
-
A.M. Mohan v. The State Represented by SHO and Another
FIR registered against accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 (appellant) for offences punishable u/s.420 r/w s.34, Penal Code, 1860. High Court whether justified in rejecting the petition filed by the appellant u/s.482, Code of Criminal…
-
Apoorva Arora & Anr. Etc. v. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Whether the use of expletives and profane language in the titles and content of the episodes of the web-series ‘College Romance’ constitutes an offence of publication and transmission of obscene and sexually explicit content…
-
Ms. X v. Mr. A and Others
Whether the High Court erred in quashing the criminal proceedings by exercising the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C in a complaint alleging offences under Sections 354D, 376(2)(n), 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Penal Code,…
-
Periyasamy v. The State Represented by the Inspector of Police
Whether the High Court justified in affirming the judgment of trial court convicting and sentencing the accused appellant, (A-1), for the offence punishable under sections 302 & 307 of Penal Code, 1860 and accused appellant (A-2)…
-
Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala
Appellant-accused was held guilty for the offences punishable u/ ss.302, 449, 309, IPC and sentenced accordingly. For the offence punishable u/s.302, IPC, he was sentenced to death. High Court confirmed the conviction, however…
-
Susela Padmavathy Amma v. M/S Bharti Airtel Limited
The High Court rejected the prayer for quashing of criminal complaints qua the appellant in connection with the offence punishable u/s. 138 r/w. s.142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
-
Rakesh Ranjan Shrivastava v. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.
Whether the provision of sub-section (1) of s.143A, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which provides for the grant of interim compensation, is directory or mandatory. If it is held to be a directory provision, what are factors to…
-
Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Anr.
Whether there could be any bar on the Trial Court for proceeding u/s. 82 Cr.P.C., merely because an anticipatory application for bail has been filed or because such an application was adjourned without passing any interim order.
-
Naresh Kumar & Anr. v. State of Karnataka
Refusal by High Court to quash criminal proceedings against Appellants/Accused arising out of a civil transaction between Appellants and Respondent No.2, if justified.
-
Dablu Kujur v. The State of Jharkhand
The issue for consideration was the compliance of the requirements of a Police Report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
-
Dr Sonia Verma & Anr. v. The State of Haryana & Anr.
The issue for consideration was a challenge to a decision of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, refusing to quash the F.I.R. registered u/s. 506, 420, 34, 120-B and 467 of the Penal Code, 1860, against the Appellants/Accused, on…
-
XXXX v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another
High Court, if justified in dismissing the petition filed by the appellant u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR registered against him u/ss. 376 (2)(n) and 506 IPC.
-
Prabhat Kumar Mishra @ Prabhat Mishra v. The State of U.P. & Anr.
High Court, if justified in rejecting the application filed by the accused appellant u/s. 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceeding of the criminal case registered against him u/s. 306 IPC and s. 3(2)(v) of the Schedule Castes and…
-
Anil Mishra v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Whether High Court was justified in setting aside the entire proceedings of the case against the accused on the basis of a Settlement Agreement where the complainant in the FIR was not made a party.
-
Shailesh Kumar v. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand)
What is the goal of investigation and what is the role of investigating officer; Are s.172 CrPC and ss. 145 & 161 of the Evidence Act to be read in consonance with each other; Can a General Diary entry precede the registration of…
-
Thakore Umedsing Nathusing v. State of Gujarat
Scope of interference by High Court in an appeal challenging acquittal of the accused by the trial Court; standard of proof required to bring home charges in a case based purely on circumstantial evidence.
-
Vikas Chandra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Respondent No.2 was summoned to face the trial for the offence under Section 306 of the Penal Code, 1860. High Court whether justified in quashing the summons.
-
Naresh Kumar v. State of Haryana
Conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable u/s.306, Penal Code, 1860, if justified.
-
Ram Nath v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Interplay between the provisions of Chapter IX of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) and ss.272 and 273 of the Penal Code, 1860; whether the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s. Pepsico India…
-
Mohd Abaad Ali & Anr. v. Directorate of Revenue
Whether benefit of s.5 r/w. ss. 2 and 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be availed in an appeal against acquittal.
-
Kuldeep Kumar v. U.T. Chandigarh and Others
Result of the election to the post of Mayor at the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation declared by the Presiding Officer in favour of the eighth respondent, if was contrary to law in view of the alleged electoral malpractices by him…
-
Deepak Kumar Shrivas & Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
Parties levelled counter-allegations against each other of having extracted money for securing job for their relatives. High Court whether justified in dismissing the writ petition of the appellant for quashing the criminal…
-
N. Manogar & Anr. v. The Inspector of Police & Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the order passed by the trial court whereunder, the trial court rejected the application filed by the complainant u/s. 216/319 CrPC seeking the summoning of, and the…
-
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.
The Amicus submitted report dated 10.02.2024 indicating the directions that have been complied with by the parties in terms of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil**. On basis of the said report,…
-
Directorate of Enforcement v. Niraj Tyagi & Ors.
Interim orders passed by the High Court staying the investigations of the FIRs and the Enforcement Directorate, if justified.
-
State by the Inspector of Police v. B. Ramu
In a case involving recovery of huge quantity of narcotic substance (232.5 kg of ganja), wherein the Respondent-accused was indicted as being the conspirator for procurement/supply of the ganja so recovered, High Court whether…
-
Mallappa & Ors. v. State of Karnataka
The trial Court acquitted appellants-accused nos.3, 4 and 5 for the commission of murder of one ‘M’. However, the High Court reversed the order of acquittal and held the appellants guilty of the commission of murder. Whether the…
-
Gurwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Another
Whether the High Court was justified in upholding the order passed by the Special Judge, rejecting the application filed u/s. 439 CrPC by the appellant seeking regular bail in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities…
-
Mamidi Anil Kumar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
The High Court, if justified in refusing to quash the docket order which re-initiated criminal proceedings against the appellants for offences u/s. 420, 498A, 506 IPC and u/s. 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
-
Bhaggi @ Bhagirath @ Naran v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The capital punishment awarded to the petitioner-convict for the conviction u/s. 376 AB, IPC was not confirmed and it was commuted to imprisonment for life, which, going by the provisions thereunder, means imprisonment for the…
-
Dattatraya v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting the appellant u/ss. 302 and 316 IPC and sentencing to undergo life imprisonment and 10 years of R.I. respectively along with fine, for causing death of his wife as also the…