Hibbaan/DIVYADRISHTI huggingface dataset:
DARA LAKSHMI NARAYANA & OTHERSversusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ANOTHER
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5199/2024
Decision Date: 10-12-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC953

B.V. NAGARATHNA*, N KOTISWAR SINGH Issue for Consideration In the facts and circumstances of the case and after examining the FIR, whether the High Court was correct in refusing to quash the ongoing criminal proceedings against the appellants under Section 498A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Penal Code, 1860 – s.498A – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – ss.3, 4 – Refusal to quash criminal proceedings, when not justified – FIR lodged by respondent No.2-wife against appellants under Section 498A, IPC and Sections 3 and 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.DARA LAKSHMI NARAYANA & OTHERSversusSTATE OF TELANGANA & ANOTHER-[2024] 12 S.C.R. 5592024 INSC 953Coram : B.V. NAGARATHNA*, N KOTISWAR SINGHIssue for Consideration In the facts and circumstances of the case and after examining the FIR, whether the High Court was correct in refusing to quash the ongoing criminal proceedings against the appellants under Section 498A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Penal Code, 1860 – s.498A – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – ss.3, 4 – Refusal to quash criminal proceedings, when not justified – FIR lodged by respondent No.2-wife against appellants under Section 498A, IPC and Sections 3 and
CHANDANversusTHE STATE (DELHI ADMN.)
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 788/2012
Decision Date: 05-04-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC271

SUDHANSHU DHULIA*, PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALE Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to effect of lack or absence of motive, when there is testimony of a reliable eye-witness. Headnotes Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 – Murder – Prosecution case that accused stabbed the victim multiple times with the knife he was carrying, – Victim’s sister-in-law witnessed the incident from a short distance – Conviction and sentence u/s. 302 by the courts below – Interference with: Held: Not called for – Blood of the deceased clearly matched with the blood found on the knife recovered from the accused, 

Summary: Englishहिन्दी - Hindiनेपाली - Nepaliਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.CHANDANversusTHE STATE (DELHI ADMN.)-[2024] 4 S.C.R. 942024 INSC 271Coram : SUDHANSHU DHULIA*, PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALEIssue for Consideration Matter pertains to effect of lack or absence of motive, when there is testimony of a reliable eye-witness. Headnotes Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 – Murder – Prosecution case that accused stabbed the victim multiple times with the knife he was carrying, – Victim’s sister-in-law witnessed the incident from a short distance – Conviction and sentence u/s. 302 by the courts below – Interference with: Held: Not called for – Blood of the deceased clearly matched with the blood found on the knife recovered from the accused,
NAEEM BANO ALIAS GAINDOversusMOHAMMAD RAHEES & ANR.
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 13050/2024
Decision Date: 22-11-2024
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC1000

NAEEM BANO ALIAS GAINDO versus MOHAMMAD RAHEES & ANR. - [2024] 11 S.C.R. 14922024 INSC 1000 B.V. NAGARATHNA, N KOTISWAR SINGH Issue for Consideration Inconsistency between the U.P. State amendment and the subsequent Parliamentary amendment to Section 106, Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Whether in view of the Parliament amending a provision subsequent to a State legislature’s amendment of a provision of law List, the Parliamentary amendment would apply. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Article 254; Entry 6, List III, Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.106 – Legislature of State of U.P. amended Section 106 by amendment 

Summary: NAEEM BANO ALIAS GAINDOversusMOHAMMAD RAHEES & ANR.-[2024] 11 S.C.R. 14922024 INSC 1000Coram : B.V. NAGARATHNA, N KOTISWAR SINGHIssue for Consideration Inconsistency between the U.P. State amendment and the subsequent Parliamentary amendment to Section 106, Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Whether in view of the Parliament amending a provision subsequent to a State legislature’s amendment of a provision of law List, the Parliamentary amendment would apply. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Article 254; Entry 6, List III, Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.106 – Legislature of State of U.P. amended Section 106 by amendment
SHRI GURUDATTA SUGARS MARKETING PVT. LTD.versusPRITHVIRAJ SAYAJIRAO DESHMUKH & ORS.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3070/2024
Decision Date: 24-07-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC551

VIKRAM NATH*, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Issue for Consideration Whether the signatory of the cheque, authorized by the “Company”, is the “drawer” and whether such signatory could be directed to pay interim compensation in terms of section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 leaving The High Court answered the question in the negative. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – ss.138, 141, 143-A – Appellant company entered into several agreements with C Ltd. and made advance payments for supply of sugar – C failed to supply – In order to 

Summary: Englishमराठी - Marathiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.SHRI GURUDATTA SUGARS MARKETING PVT. LTD.versusPRITHVIRAJ SAYAJIRAO DESHMUKH & ORS.-[2024] 7 S.C.R. 12112024 INSC 551Coram : VIKRAM NATH*, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRAIssue for Consideration Whether the signatory of the cheque, authorized by the “Company”, is the “drawer” and whether such signatory could be directed to pay interim compensation in terms of section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 leaving The High Court answered the question in the negative. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – ss.138, 141, 143-A – Appellant company entered into several agreements with C Ltd. and made advance payments for supply of sugar – C failed to supply – In order to
SHYAM NARAYAN RAMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. ETC.
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4287/2024
Decision Date: 21-10-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC800

VIKRAM NATH*, PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALE Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court fell in error in remanding the matter to Trial Court and giving liberty to the accused to cross-examine a prosecution witness and allowing the prosecution to lead further evidence in the form of formal witnesses. Headnotes† Code of s.294 – The High Court while allowing the appeal filed by accused persons and remanding the matter back to Trial Court recorded – Accused did not get a fair trial as their counsel had admitted the genuineness of documents filed by the prosecution and had dispensed with its formal Flip viewPDF

Summary: SHYAM NARAYAN RAMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. ETC.-[2024] 10 S.C.R. 17262024 INSC 800Coram : VIKRAM NATH*, PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALEIssue for Consideration Whether the High Court fell in error in remanding the matter to Trial Court and giving liberty to the accused to cross-examine a prosecution witness and allowing the prosecution to lead further evidence in the form of formal witnesses. Headnotes† Code of s.294 – The High Court while allowing the appeal filed by accused persons and remanding the matter back to Trial Court recorded – Accused did not get a fair trial as their counsel had admitted the genuineness of documents filed by the prosecution and had dispensed with its formalFlip viewPDF
BABA NATARAJAN PRASADversusM. REVATHI
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2912/2024
Decision Date: 15-07-2024
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC523

C.T. RAVIKUMAR*, SANJAY KUMAR Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court had shown undeserving leniency and sympathy to accused Nos.1 and 2 by sentencing them to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- each, even after finding that they committed the serious offence of bigamy of sentence is called for. Headnotes† Sentence/Sentencing – Enhancement of – High Court after restoring conviction for the offence of bigamy punishable u/s. 494 IPC, sentenced accused Nos.1 and 2 to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.BABA NATARAJAN PRASADversusM. REVATHI-[2024] 7 S.C.R. 7812024 INSC 523Coram : C.T. RAVIKUMAR*, SANJAY KUMARIssue for Consideration Whether the High Court had shown undeserving leniency and sympathy to accused Nos.1 and 2 by sentencing them to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- each, even after finding that they committed the serious offence of bigamy of sentence is called for. Headnotes† Sentence/Sentencing – Enhancement of – High Court after restoring conviction for the offence of bigamy punishable u/s. 494 IPC, sentenced accused Nos.1 and 2 to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusM/S. B.T. PATIL AND SONS BELGAUM (CONSTRUCTION) PVT. LTD
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 7238/2009
Decision Date: 05-02-2024
Disposal: Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC83

ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYAN Issue for Consideration Entitlement of the respondent to refund of duty drawback and interest for delayed payment thereof. Headnotes Customs Act, 1962 – ss.75A, 27A – Central Excise Act, 1944 – Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 – Rules, 1993 – Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 – Exim Policy of 1992-1997 – Duty Exemption Scheme – Duty Drawback Scheme – Supplies in civil construction work, eligibility for ‘deemed export’ benefit under the Exim 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusM/S. B.T. PATIL AND SONS BELGAUM (CONSTRUCTION) PVT. LTD-[2024] 2 S.C.R. 912024 INSC 83Coram : ABHAY S. OKA*, UJJAL BHUYANIssue for Consideration Entitlement of the respondent to refund of duty drawback and interest for delayed payment thereof. Headnotes Customs Act, 1962 – ss.75A, 27A – Central Excise Act, 1944 – Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 – Rules, 1993 – Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 – Exim Policy of 1992-1997 – Duty Exemption Scheme – Duty Drawback Scheme – Supplies in civil construction work, eligibility for ‘deemed export’ benefit under the Exim
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusBHUPENDRA SINGH
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 8546/2024
Decision Date: 08-08-2024
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC592

HIMA KOHLI*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH Issue for Consideration Order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court quashing the removal order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and issuing directions to reconsider the employee’s case for promotion, which was upheld by the Division Bench, if justified. Headnotes† Service – Disciplinary authority accepting enquiry officer’s findings and imposing punishment – Requirement of reasons – On facts, employee placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental enquiry for having committed various irregularities – Departmental 

Summary: Englishहिन्दी - Hindiਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusBHUPENDRA SINGH-[2024] 8 S.C.R. 1542024 INSC 592Coram : HIMA KOHLI*, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAHIssue for Consideration Order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court quashing the removal order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and issuing directions to reconsider the employee’s case for promotion, which was upheld by the Division Bench, if justified. Headnotes† Service – Disciplinary authority accepting enquiry officer’s findings and imposing punishment – Requirement of reasons – On facts, employee placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental enquiry for having committed various irregularities – Departmental