IPC + crpc Rafiq Ahmedbhai S. 482 - Penal Code, 1860 - Ss.

143, 147, 148, 323, 392,

Paliwala v. State of395 & 397 - Quashing of FIR - The High Court instead of
Gujarat, 2019 quashing the FIR at such a preliminary stage should have
directed the IO to make proper investigation on the basis
of the FIR and then file proper charge sheet on the basis
of the material collected in the investigation accordingly.
It was, however, not done. It was more so because, the
FIR did disclose prima facie allegations of commission of
concerned offences.
[Social Action Forum SC Modifies The Earlier Directions Issued To Prevent
For Manav Misuse Of 498A IPC, Says No To ‘Welfare Committees’
Adhikar V. Union of Supreme Court of India has modified its directions issued
India 2018 in Rajesh Sharma case for preventing misuse of Section
498A of Indian Penal Code. A three judges’ bench led by
CJI has withdrawn the earlier direction issued by a two
judges bench that complaints under Section 498A IPC
should be scrutinised by Family Welfare Committees
before further legal action by police.
Murder & Ankush Maruti False Implication - Compensation - It is to be noted that
Rape –IPC Shinde v. State of all the accused persons are nomadic tribes coming from
Maharashtra,2019 the lower strata of the society and are very poor
labourers. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the
case, false implication cannot be ruled out since it is
common occurrence that in serious offences sometime
innocent persons are roped.
Penal Code, Khushwinder Singh v. Section 302 - Murder - the accused has killed six innocent
1860 - State of Punjab, JT persons in a pre-planned manner - the case would fall in
2019 the category of the “rarest of rare case” warranting death
sentence / capital punishment.
Penal Code, Dauwalal @ Ganesh Ss. 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 342 & 450 - Unlawful
1860 - Devangan v. State of Assembly - In a crime committed by an unlawful assembly
Madhya Pradesh by principle of vicarious liability, every member of the
(Now State of unlawful assembly would be guilty of the offence, even if
Chhattisgarh), 2019 he himself had not done the actual act. But the facts
must indicate with clarity that such person was in fact a
member of the unlawful assembly.
Penal Code, Jahangir Hussain v. - Ss. 170, 412 & 395 - Incident had occurred nearly 19
1860 State of West years ago - there was no previous antecedents - ready to
Bengal, 2019 pay the enhanced fine, although his monetary condition is
 poor in the peculiar facts and surrounding circumstances
of the case, Court reduced the sentence from seven years
R.I. to five years R.I. and enhance the fine to Rs.20,000/
each.
Penal Code, Amrika Bai v. State of - Ss. 302 r/w. 149 & 147 - Mere presence in an unlawful
1860 Chhattisgarh-2019 assembly cannot render a person liable unless there was a
common object.
Penal Code, Nandlal v. State of - Ss. 302 r/w. 34 - Murder - Life Imprisonment - Scope of
1860 Maharashtra, JT Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC - In order to bring the case
2019 within Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, the following
conditions enumerated therein must be satisfied:- (i) The
act must be committed without premeditation in a
sudden fight in the heat of passion; (ii) upon a sudden
quarrel; (iii) without the offender’s having taken undue
advantage; and (iv) the accused had not acted in a cruel or
unusual manner. Even if the fight is unpremeditated and
sudden, if the weapon or manner of retaliation is
disproportionate to the offence and if the accused had
taken the undue advantage of the deceased, the accused
cannot be protected under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.
Ipc State of Madhya Injury On Vital Part Not An Essential Ingredient Of Section
Pradesh V. Harjeet 307 IPC (Attempt To Murder) There is no requirement for
Singh the injury to be on a "vital part" of the body, merely
causing 'hurt' is sufficient to attract S. 307 I.P.C, the
Supreme Court held., if the assailant acts with the
intention or knowledge that such action might cause
death, and hurt is caused, then the provisions of Section
307 I.P.C. would be applicable.
Penal Code, . Harveer Singh v. - Ss. 323, 324, 452, 504 & 506 - Revision - The least that
1860 State of U.P., 2019 was expected of was that the High Court will apply its
judicial mind to the factual and legal aspects arising in the
case and then pass appropriate orders either for
upholding the conviction or acquitting the appellants, as
the case may be - the High Court failed to do this and
hence interference is called for.
IPC Satishchandra Mere Inability To Repay Loan Does Not Constitute
Ratanlal Shah vs. 'Cheating' The Supreme Court observed that inability of a
State of Gujarat person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a
criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or
diishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the
 transaction.
Penal Code, Asif Khan v. State of - Ss. 302, 323, 504 & 506 r/w. 34 - Acts done by several
1860 Maharashtra, JT persons in furtherance of common intention - Test for
2019 applicability of Section 34 in a fact situation of an offence -
Discussed.
Penal Code, Pavan Vasudeo Ss. 302, 392 r/w. 34 - Police Act, 1951 (Bombay) - Ss. 37(1)
1860 - Sharma v. State of r/w. 135 - Arms Act, 1959 - S. 3 (25) - Circumstantial
Maharashtra Evidence - There are too many missing links - benefit of
through Secretary, - doubt - Acquitted.
2019

IPC State of Uttar SC observed that if the provocation was voluntary on the
Pradesh V. Faquirey part of the accused, it would not attract exception 1 to
Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code (Exception to the
offence of murder).set aside a High Court judgment that
had converted the conviction of the accused from under
Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part I, IPC.
Penal Code, . Ganga Prasad - S. 376 - the prosecutrix was in habit of implicating all the
1860 Mahto v. State of persons by making wild allegations of such nature against
Bihar, JT 2019 those with whom she or/and her husband were having
any kind of disputes.
ipc Punishment Sachin While commuting death sentence awarded to a man
Kumar Singhraha V. convicted for rape and murder of a five year old girl, the
State of Madhya Supreme Court observed that death sentence must be
Pradesh imposed only when life imprisonment appears to be an
altogether inappropriate punishment. sentenced Sachin
Kumar Singhraha to undergo a sentence of 25 years'
imprisonment (without remission).
Ipc SH Narendra Kumar The Supreme Court reiterated that a private complaint
Srivastava V. State of alleging an offence u/s 193 IPC [False Evidence in Judicial
Bihar Proceedings] is not maintainable.
ipc The State of Madhya Sc observed that proof of grievous or life-threatening
Pradesh V. Kanha @ hurt is not a sine qua non for the offence under Section
Omprakash 307 [Attempt to Murder]. set aside the Madhya Pradesh
High Court judgment that had acquitted the accused from
attempt to murder charges on the ground that there was
no evidence to prove that the injuries caused to the
deceased were grievous in nature or life-threatening.
IPC Mala Singh V. State Sc --that, while convicting accused by altering charge
of Haryana from Section 149 IPC to Section 34 IPC, their 'common
 intention' should be proved. Eleven accused were
convicted by the Trial Court for committing murder of one
lady. In the appeal filed by the accused, the High Court
acquitted eight persons from all the charges whereas
dismissed the appeal in respect of three accused persons,
and upheld their conviction by taking recourse to Section
34 IPC.
CRIMINAL [State of Drunkenness While On Duty A Serious Misconduct: sc
Uttarakhand v. Prem upheld dismissal of a police constable for drunkenness
Ram] and misbehavior with the public. "Having regard to the
seriousness of the charge of misconduct and the fact that
the respondent was a member of the police service, we
find no justification for the High Court to interfere with
the order of dismissal" the court held.