Indian Evidence Act, 1872
123 Supreme Court judgments considering this law. Search within these.
-
Neeraj Kumar @ Neeraj Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Issue arose whether the courts below, in the attending facts and circumstances, justified in dismissing the application for summoning additional accused.
-
Raj Kumar @ Bheema v. State of NCT of Delhi
Appellant-accused was convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC. The High Court further affirmed the order on sentence dated 20.02.2021, whereby the accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
-
Govind v. State of Haryana
Whether the judgment of Trial Court, as affirmed by the High Court, convicting the appellant for the charges u/s.302, IPC and s.25, Arms Act and the sentence as directed, is based on cogent material and evidence sufficient to…
-
R. Rajendran v. Kamar Nisha and Others
The High Court directed the appellant to appear before a Hospital for collection of blood samples for DNA profiling. Whether the High Court was justified in directing the appellant to undergo DNA testing.
-
Samiullah v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Issue arose as regard the sub-rules (xvii) and (xviii) to r.19 of the Bihar Registration Rules, 2008 empowering registering authorities to refuse registration of documents, if proof of mutation of the property under sale in…
-
P. Anjanappa (D) By Lrs v. A.P. Nanjundappa & Ors.
Issue arose whether the registered release deeds are valid and binding, and if so, what is their legal effect on the membership and share entitlements of plaintiff no. 2 and defendant no. 3; whether the document styled as the…
-
Rajendra Singh and Ors. v. State of Uttaranchal Etc.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court convicting the appellants u/s.302 IPC; and whether the appellants are the real persons who chased the deceased and killed him.
-
Nilesh Baburao Gitte v. State of Maharashtra
Appellant was convicted for matricide-killing of one’s own mother. By the present appeal, the appellant calls in question the correctness of the judgment of the High Court.
-
Dharmrao Sharanappa Shabadi and Others v. Syeda Arifa Parveen
Whether the impugned judgments suffer from perversity and misreading of evidence, warranting re-appreciation of evidence under Article 136 of the Constitution of India; whether the High Court is correct in reversing the finding…
-
Nazim & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand
Whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing, beyond a reasonable doubt, a complete chain of circumstances leading only to the conclusion of guilt of the Appellants, or whether the circumstances leave room for reasonable…
-
Nagamma @ Nagarathna & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka
In the instant case, whether the motive projected and the crime has been proved and whether the circumstances lead to the culpability of the accused.
-
Kailas S/o Bajirao Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in ordering a re-trial; if not, then what would be the appropriate order that may be passed in this appeal.
-
Mohammad Afzal Mohammad Sharif v. The State of Maharashtra and Others
The complaint of the appellant before the High Court was that the police officers concerned had failed in their duty by not registering a First Information Report apropos the attack and assault on him by four individuals on…
-
C.P. Francis v. C.P. Joseph and Others
Whether the High Court, while invoking the Proviso to s.100(5), CPC, was correct in referring to and applying s.67, Indian Succession Act, 1925; whether s.67, Indian Succession Act, 1925 is attracted to determine the succession…
-
Rajan v. The State of Haryana
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302/34 IPC and ss.25, 27 of the Arms Act; and delay at the instance of the High…
-
Ramesh Chand (D) Thr. Lrs. v. Suresh Chand and Anr.
I) Whether the impugned documents, i.e., Agreement to Sell, General Power of Attorney, Receipt of Consideration and the registered Will, allegedly entered into by K, father of the appellant/ defendant no.1 and respondent…
-
Manoj Tejraj Jain v. State of Gujarat
Challenge to the judgment of the High Court whereby the appeals filed by the appellants herein were dismissed against the judgment of the trial court convicting them for offences u/ss.25A and 29, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic…
-
Putai v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The accused-appellants were convicted for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction preferred by the accused-appellants.
-
Chowdamma (D) by Lr and Another v. Venkatappa (D) by Lrs and Another
Issue arose whether the respondents succeeded in establishing a valid marital relationship between their mother and the deceased primarily on the basis of the oral testimony of P.W.2; and whether the relationship between the…
-
Iqbal Ahmed (Dead) By Lrs. & Anr. v. Abdul Shukoor
Issue arose whether it is necessary for the appellate court to consider the pleadings of the parties before adjudicating the prayer made for leading additional evidence u/Ord. XLI r.27(1) CPC.
-
Syed Basheer Ahmed v. M/S Tinni Laboratories Private Limited & Anr.
A suit for specific performance was decreed by the trial court, which was dismissed by the High Court in appeal, reversing the judgment and decree. Whether the High Court erred in reversing the findings and the judgment and…
-
Intelligence v. Suresh Kumar and Co. Impex Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Whether the CESTAT erred in passing the impugned order setting aside the penalty imposed upon the respondents-assessees.
-
K. Prabhakar Hegde v. Bank of Baroda
(i) Whether denial of the report of preliminary inquiry prepared by the officer entrusted by Vijaya Bank (which merged with the respondent in the year 2019) to conduct such inquiry, who happened to be the sole management witness,…
-
Sd. Shabuddin v. The State of Telangana
Whether the judgment passed by the High Court places a reverse burden of proof upon the appellant and is thus, legally unsustainable; whether the conviction u/s.411, IPC for dishonestly receiving stolen property can be sustained…
-
Nilima Das Gupta (Deceased) Through Its Lrs. v. On the Death of Abdur Rouf His Legal Heirs & Ors.
Issue arose as regards to whether D.W.5-son could have entered the witness box and deposed on behalf of his mother-defendant No.1.
-
Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Whether every allegation or accusation levelled, a reprimand or rebuke made, an insinuation or insult voiced or even continuous acts of ill-treatment, harassment and defamation; as alleged in this case, would lead to a charge of…
-
Shanti Devi v. State of Haryana
Issue arose whether the courts below were justified in convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offences punishable u/ss.302/34 and 201/34 IPC for the alleged murder of the son of the informant.
-
Narayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court erred in passing the impugned judgment relying on the confessional FIR filed by the appellant-accused himself and the medical evidence to uphold his conviction, however, altering it from s.302, IPC to s.304…
-
Suresh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
Whether the Courts below erred in declaring the Respondent No.2 as a ‘juvenile’ under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, on the date of the incident.
-
Gurdial Singh (Dead) Through LR v. Jagir Kaur (Dead) and Anr. Etc.
Issue arose as to whether the High Court was justified in reversing the concurrent findings of the courts below and holding the Will was vitiated due to existence of suspicious circumstances, non-mention of the existence of wife…
-
Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamilnadu
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302, 376 and 397 IPC.
-
Kum. Shubha @ Shubhashankar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants by the High Court u/s.302 read with s.120-B, IPC and additionally, s.201, IPC for A-4 alone, is justified.
-
Vibhor Garg v. Neha
Issue arose whether the conversation between spouses secretly recorded by one of them could be permitted to be made admissible in evidence; whether in light of the Evidence Act and the Family Courts Act, 1984, a conversation…
-
Vaibhav v. The State of Maharashtra
In a case based on circumstantial evidence where there were missing links in the chain of circumstances, whether the finding of the High Court regarding the conviction of the appellant for offences u/ss.302, 201 r/w s.34, Penal…
-
Chetan v. The State of Karnataka
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 304 IPC, and u/ss.3, 5 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
P Krishna Mohan Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Whether the statement of an accused u/s.161, Cr.P.C implicating co-accused can be looked into qua such co-accused at the stage of anticipatory bail or regular bail; whether the High Court exercised its discretion in a judicious…
-
Renuka Prasad v. The State Represented by Assistant Superintendent of Police
Whether the High Court erred in reversing the acquittal and convicting the accused persons based on the testimony of the IOs which was founded only on s.161, CrPC statements of the witnesses; whether present was a case of two…
-
A. Raja v. D. Kumar
Whether the Appellant belongs to the Hindu Parayan caste in the State of Kerala and is covered by the 1950 Order insofar as it relates to the State of Kerala; whether the Appellant had still retained the Hindu Parayan caste, as a…
-
Shubhkaran Singh v. Abhayraj Singh & Ors.
Whether the petition filed by the petitioner herein u/Or.18 Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was rightly rejected by the High Court.
-
Raju @ Umakant v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 366, 376(2)(g) and 342, Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(v), Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is justified.