ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
    Free Artificial Intelligence Drafting  

    Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

   AI Submission Generator   

Latest Cases

(621) STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SHAMSHER SINGH[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 307 — Attempt to Murder — Ingredients — Nature of Injury vs. Intention/Knowledge — To attract S. 307 IPC, the crucial element is the intention or knowledge to cause death with which the act is done, irrespective of the nature or severity of the injury actually caused. S. 307 uses the word ‘hurt’, not ‘grievous hurt’ or ‘life-threatening hurt’ — Therefore, an accused cannot be acquitted merely because the injury inflicted was not grievous or dangerous to life, if the ev
India Law Library Docid # 2424793

(622) SUBHASH AGGARWAL Vs. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Criminal Law — Circumstantial Evidence — Murder (Filicide) vs. Suicide — In cases based on circumstantial evidence where the question is whether the death was homicidal (filicide) or suicidal, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances that points exclusively to the guilt of the accused and is inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence — Conviction upheld where circumstances, including (i) gunshot residue (GSR) found on the accused father’s dominant (right) hand, (ii) th
India Law Library Docid # 2424794

(623) ANKIT MISHRA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Habitual Offender/Criminal Antecedents — Consideration of Nature of Current Offence — While the criminal antecedents and alleged status of an accused as a habitual offender are extremely relevant factors that ordinarily weigh against the grant of anticipatory bail, the High Court’s discretion in granting such bail may not warrant interference if (i) the High Court has demonstrably considered the criminal history, and (ii) the spec
India Law Library Docid # 2424795

(624) AJAY RAJ SHETTY Vs. DIRECTOR AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 2(17) — ‘Principal Employer’ — Scope and Determination — The definition of ‘principal employer’ under Section 2(17) is wide and includes not only the owner or occupier of a factory (or head of department in government establishments) but also the managing agent or any person responsible for the supervision and control of the establishment — Designation is immaterial if the person functions as a managing agent or supervises/controls the establishment
India Law Library Docid # 2424796

(625) SHAHED KAMAL AND OTHERS Vs. M/S A. SURTI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Section 499, Exception 9 & Section 500 — Defamation — Imputation in Good Faith for Protection of Interests — Exception 9 to S. 499 IPC engrafts the principle of qualified privilege, stating it is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another, provided it is made in good faith for the protection of the interest of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good — Good faith requires due care and attention but, unlike Exception 1, does not
India Law Library Docid # 2424797

(626) DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE Vs. RAJ KUMAR ARORA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8(c) and 2(xxiii), Schedule & NDPS Rules, 1985 — Sch. I, Rules 53, 64, 65, 66 — Offence relating to Psychotropic Substances listed in Act Schedule but not in Rules Schedule I — Dealing in (producing, manufacturing, possessing, selling, purchasing, transporting, warehousing, using, consuming, importing, exporting, or transhipping) any psychotropic substance listed in the Schedule to the NDPS Act constitutes an offence under S. 8(c),
India Law Library Docid # 2424798

(627) SHEELA DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 — Section 4A(3)(b) — Statutory Penalty — Liability (Employer vs. Insurer) — It is settled law that the statutory penalty imposed upon an employer under Section 4A(3)(b) of the Act for default in paying compensation without justification is the sole liability of the employer and is not required to be indemnified by the Insurance Company — The Insurer's liability is limited to indemnifying the employer for the principal compensation amount and interest thereon (un
India Law Library Docid # 2424927

(628) AYYUB ALI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 304 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 228 — Framing of Charge — Prima Facie Case — Murder vs. Culpable Homicide — At the stage of framing of charge, the Trial Court cannot conclusively determine whether a case falls under Section 302 IPC or Section 304 IPC merely based on the post-mortem report or the nature of the weapon used — If the materials placed before the Court, including the nature and number of injuries and surrounding circumstances, disclose a
India Law Library Docid # 2425104

(629) AMRENDRA KUMAR YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 13(2), 13(1)(c) and (d) — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 420, 467, 471, 120B — Bail — Order of High Court rejecting bail application — Appeal against — Supreme Court inclined to grant bail considering period of custody undergone by appellant — High Court had stayed proceedings of prosecution complaint — Supreme Court clarified no opinion on merits of case — Granted bail subject to conditions like furnishing bond, executing
India Law Library Docid # 2428493

(630) BADDO SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Appeal against High Court's rejection of anticipatory bail — Supreme Court allows appeal and grants bail based on cooperation with investigation and filing of charge-sheet, without commenting on merits. (Paras 5, 6, 8)
India Law Library Docid # 2428494

(631) SUMIT RASTOGI @ GANDHI @ SUMIT KUMAR RASTOGI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 48A, 323, 504 — Anticipatory Bail — Appeal allowed after granting leave — High Court rejected application for anticipatory bail — Trial Court released appellant on bail pursuant to interim order and appellant cooperated with proceedings — State also submitted appellant is cooperating in trial — Circumstances led to acceptance of appeal and making interim bail absolute. (Para 2, 5, 6, 7)
India Law Library Docid # 2428495

(632) BIPIN KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Bail — Conditions for grant of bail — Supreme Court inclined to grant bail, subject to strict conditions, considering the period of custody undergone by the appellant — Supreme Court clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case — Conditions imposed include executing a bond, filing an undertaking, and depositing passport with the Special Court.
India Law Library Docid # 2428551

(633) AMRENDRA KUMAR YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-04-2025
Bail — Appeal against High Court order rejecting bail — Appellant in custody since Nov 2021 — Other cases bail granted — Trial stayed by High Court due to co-accused absconding — Seriousness of offence opposed by ED — Supreme Court grants bail considering period of custody and stay of proceedings, without expressing opinion on merits.
India Law Library Docid # 2428552

(634) THE CORRESPONDENCE, RBANMS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION Vs. B. GUNASHEKAR & ANOTHER[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order VII Rule 11(a) & (d) — Rejection of Plaint — Scope and Duty of Court — The power under Order VII Rule 11 CPC to reject a plaint is a mandatory duty of the court if the conditions are met — While deciding such an application, the court must consider only the averments in the plaint and the documents relied upon by the plaintiff — However, the court is not bound by clever drafting that creates an illusion of a cause of action — It must read the plaint meaningfull
India Law Library Docid # 2424734

(635) LAKHANI HOUSING CORPORATION PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASTHRA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Town Planning & Development — MHADA — Redevelopment on Private Land — DCPR 33(9) — The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) possesses the jurisdiction under Regulation 33(9) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations, 2034 (DCPR) to initiate and undertake Cluster Development Schemes (CDS) even on privately owned freehold lands, provided such development is carried out jointly with the landowners and/or Cooperative Housing Societies of the occupants.
India Law Library Docid # 2424735

(636) R. BAIJU Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Criminal Law — Criminal Conspiracy (Section 120B IPC) — Proof — Inference from Circumstances — A charge of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B IPC can be established primarily through inference drawn from the surrounding circumstances, acts, and conduct of the accused — Where evidence demonstrates a clear motive (arising from prior altercations involving the accused), the accused's presence with co-accused near the crime scene shortly before the offence, and the subsequent commission of the o
India Law Library Docid # 2424736

(637) RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SWATI SHARMA AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Negligence — Appreciation of Evidence — Contradictory Evidence of Driver and IO — In determining negligence in a motor accident claim, the testimony of the driver of the offending vehicle (RW1), being inherently self-serving (“interested testimony”), carries little weight, especially when contradicted by other evidence or contains inconsistencies (denying collision admitted by IO) — Similarly, the deposition of the Investigating Officer (RW3) suggesting contributory ne
India Law Library Docid # 2424737

(638) BALRAM DANGI Vs. VEER SINGH DANGI AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389(1) — Suspension of Sentence Pending Appeal — Recording of Reasons — Mandatory Requirement — Section 389(1) CrPC mandatorily requires the Appellate Court to record reasons in writing for ordering the suspension of execution of a sentence pending appeal Failure to assign any reasons while suspending the sentence, especially in cases involving conviction for serious offences like Section 302 IPC, constitutes a gross error and renders the order leg
India Law Library Docid # 2424860

(639) NAFEES AHMAD AND ANOTHER Vs. SOINUDDIN AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 31 — Contents of Appellate Judgment — Points for Determination — Mandatory vs. Directory — Substantial Compliance — The requirement under Order 41 Rule 31 CPC for an appellate judgment to state the points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for the decision is not mandatory to the extent that any non-compliance automatically vitiates the judgment, rendering it wholly void — Whether there has been substantial compliance depends
India Law Library Docid # 2424861

(640) SUSHILA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 16-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 4 — Quashing of Complaint and Summoning Order — Matrimonial Dispute — Allegations against Husband’s Relatives — Abuse of Process — Where a complaint under S. 498A IPC and S. 4 DPA is filed against the relatives of the husband (mother, brothers, sister-in-law, sister) years after the dissolution of marriage by an ex-parte divorce decree, and the allegations against
India Law Library Docid # 2424769