Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still governs offences and proceedings from before that date.
542 Supreme Court judgments considering this law. Search within these.
-
Chunni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the accused at the time of commission of crime was incapable of making conscious and informed decision or was suffering from certain mental incapacity or unsoundness of mind; Whether a benefit of doubt may be extended to…
-
K.P. Tamilmaran v. The State by Deputy Superintendent of Police
Whether the High Court was justified in upholding the conviction and sentence of A-15 under Sections 217, 218, Penal Code, 1860 and ss.3(2)(i), 4, SC/ST Act, 1989 and modifying the conviction and sentence of A-14, while upholding…
-
Maharana Pratap Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Whether due process was followed in dismissing the appellant from service and whether his dismissal from service is justified, on facts and in the circumstances; whether, in light of the facts, evidence, witnesses, and…
-
Panchayati Raj, Lucknow v. Ram Prakash Singh
Whether, in pursuance of a purported enquiry where there was none to present the case of the department, no witness was examined in support of the charges and no document was formally proved, any order of punishment could validly…
-
Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court by which the accused was acquitted of the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC.
-
Annaya Kocha Shetty (Dead) Through Lrs v. Laxmibai Narayan Satose Since Deceased Through Lrs & Others
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court in revision application confirming the judgment of the appellate bench whereby decree of the trial court was reversed; and whether the ‘agreement of…
-
Finance Corporation Limited) v. 63 Moons Technologies Limited & Others
Whether Resolution Plan-RP approved by Committee of Creditors-CoC and NCLT was in contravention of provisions of any law requiring NCLAT to exercise its jurisdiction u/s.61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; whether the…
-
Sita Ram & Anr. v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court holding the appellant no.1 guilty of offence punishable u/s. 304 IPC and appellant no. 2 for offences punishable u/ss. 323 and 451 IPC and sentencing…
-
Karandeep Sharma @ Razia @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant-accused for the kidnapping, rape/sexual assault and murder of a minor is sustainable.
-
C. Kamalakkannan v. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Inspector of Police C.B.C.I.D., Chennai
Whether a handwriting expert’s testimony has to be corroborated; whether in the absence of primary evidence, i.e. the original postal cover, a copy of the document is admissible.
-
Abdul Wahid & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan
Whether it is for the prosecution to connect the accused to the alleged crime by producing credible and legally admissible evidence to punish.
-
Hiralal Babulal Soni v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Issue arose as regards the sustainability of the conviction of the accused u/s.120B and 411 IPC, when the seized gold bars are not the same gold bars linked to the fraudulent transactions.
-
Md. Bani Alam Mazid @ Dhan v. State of Assam
In a case where the appellant alongwith a co-accused was alleged to have kidnapped and murdered the minor daughter of PW1, the issues for consideration were: (i) Whether the chain of circumstantial evidence based on which the…
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh
Does the Evidence Act, 1872 prescribe any particular age as a determinative factor to treat a witness to be a competent witness; Does the Evidence Act treat evidence of a child on the same footing as any other witness; Before the…
-
Vinod @ Nasmulla v. The State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 395 read with Section 397 of the Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 is justified.
-
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Mahadeo Krishna Naik
Whether the appellant-Corporation is guilty of suggestio falsi by not disclosing what it had pleaded before the MACT and suppresio veri by suppressing the award; whether the High Court was justified in exercising review…
-
Vasant @ Girish Akbarasab Sanavale & Anr. v. The State of Karnataka
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court reversing the acquittal of the appellants-husband and mother-in-law of the deceased-wife and held them both guilty of offences under the Penal Code,…
-
Ravi v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court convicting the appellant-husband for the murder of his wife.
-
Raja Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances leading to the guilt of the appellant-accused, beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Ramu Appa Mahapatar v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether on the strength of the evidence of the four witnesses, the appellant-accused can be linked with the offence; whether it can be said that the charge against the accused of committing murder of the deceased stood…
-
Karan Singh v. State of Haryana
The Trial Court convicted the appellant for the offences punishable u/ss.304-B and 498-A of IPC; By the impugned judgment, the High Court has confirmed the conviction and sentence.
-
Lalita v. Vishwanath & Ors.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court acquitting the respondents for the offence punishable u/ss.306, 498A, and 34 IPC; and incase the first informant dies before stepping into the witness box,…
-
Mahabir & Ors. v. State of Haryana
Whether the High Court committed any error in passing the impugned judgment and order of conviction in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction u/s.401 r/w. s.397 of the CrPC; Whether Proviso to s.372 of CrPC creates a right in…
-
Ivan Rathinam v. Milan Joseph
Whether the presumption of legitimacy, if not displaced, determines paternity in law; whether the Civil Court had the jurisdiction to entertain the Original Suit and whether the Family Court was entitled to reopen the Maintenance…
-
Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap v. The State of Maharashtra
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for rape and murder of the deceased and imposition of death sentence.
-
Gambhir Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the sustainability of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of conviction and death sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court.
-
Thammaraya and Another v. The State of Karnataka
Whether the conviction of the appellants-accused under Sections 201 and 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable.
-
Vijay @ Vijayakumar v. State Represented by Inspector of Police
Whether the appellant's act of causing the death of the deceased fell within the scope of "grave and sudden provocation" under Exception 1 to Section 300 of the Penal Code (IPC), thereby reducing the offence from murder to…
-
Rina Kumari @ Rina Devi @ Reena v. Dinesh Kumar Mahto @ Dinesh Kumar Mahato and Another
Will a husband, who secures a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, stand absolved of paying maintenance to his wife by virtue of Section 125(4), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if his wife refuses to abide by the said…
-
Sadashiv Dhondiram Patil v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether Village Police Patil is a Police Officer in terms of s. 25 of the Evidence Act; and whether the High Court erred in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Ram Pyarey v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Correctness of the order of conviction against the brother-in-law for the offences punishable u/ss.306, 498-A IPC and s.4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in the absence of any cogent evidence.
-
Bharat Aambale v. The State of Chhattisgarh
Appellant had been convicted by the Courts below under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The issue was whether the conviction could be said to have been vitiated because of…
-
P. Manikandan v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in directing re-investigation and retrial of the same offence on the same set of facts, after acquitting the accused by giving him the benefit of doubt; Whether, in the attending fact and…
-
Kunhimuhammed@Kunheethu v. The State of Kerala
Whether appellant had the intention to commit murder; whether the appellant’s act can be brought under section 304, IPC in light of the offence being committed in exercise of private defense and thereby exceeding the power given…
-
Basudev Dutta v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the termination order of the appellant-employee after rendering 26 years of service, based on the police verification report that he was considered ‘unsuitable’ for employment to the post.
-
Suresh Chandra Tiwari & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
(a) Whether the circumstances relied by the prosecution have been proved beyond reasonable doubt; (b) whether those circumstances are of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; (c) whether those…
-
Randeep Singh @ Rana & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Issue arose as regards conviction and sentence of the appellants u/ss.364, 302, 120-B and 201 IPC for abduction and brutal murder of the victim, if justified.
-
The State of Haryana & Anr. v. Amin Lal (Since Deceased) Through His Lrs & Ors.
Respondents/Plaintiffs had filed a suit for possession of the suit property against the Appellants/Defendants, i.e. State of Haryana and Public Works Department. The Trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the Respondents and…
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramjan Khan & Ors.
Whether the High Court was right in setting aside the conviction of the respondents-accused under Section 302, IPC read with Section 34, IPC.
-
Uma & Anr. v. The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
Whether the High Court was able to demonstrate perversity and non-appreciation of the materials on record by the Trial Court while reversing its finding of acquittal.