Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 1119-1120
of 2016, Judgment Date: Nov 30, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 2526
of 2014, Judgment Date: Nov 22, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 2539
of 2014, Judgment Date: Nov 21, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 1141
of 2007, Judgment Date: Nov 09, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 1015
of 2010, Judgment Date: Nov 08, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 988-989
of 2016, Judgment Date: Oct 28, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 2135
of 2009, Judgment Date: Sep 09, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)
Writ Petition (Crl.), 46
of 2008, Judgment Date: Aug 30, 2016
The principle of ex debito justitiae is founded on a recognition of
a debt that the justice delivery system owes to a litigant to correct an
error in a judicial dispensation. Its application, by the very nature of
things, cannot be made to depend on varying perceptions of legal omissions
and commissions but such recognition of the debt which have the potential
of opening new vistas of Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 991
of 2010, Judgment Date: Aug 17, 2016
Every accused is presumed to be innocent unless his guilt is proved.
The presumption of innocence is a human right. Subject to the statutory
exceptions, the said principle forms the basis of criminal jurisprudence in
India. The nature of the offence, its seriousness and gravity has to be
taken into consideration. The appellate court should bear in mind the
presumption of innocence Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 1791
of 2010, Judgment Date: Aug 12, 2016
The prosecution has not been able to complete
the chain of circumstances so as to fasten the guilt and to prove the
commission of offence by the appellant beyond periphery of doubt.
The appellant is acquitted
giving her the benefit of doubt. Full Judgment
Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)
CRIMINAL APPEAL, 3032
of 2016, Judgment Date: Jun 21, 2016
Full Judgment
Delhi High Court (Single Judge)
CRL.A., 723,724
of 2014, Judgment Date: Jun 01, 2016
Full Judgment
Delhi High Court (Single Judge)
CRL.A., 1026
of 2013, Judgment Date: Jun 01, 2016
Full Judgment
Delhi High Court (Single Judge)
CRL.A., 850
of 2015, Judgment Date: Jun 01, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 365
of 2013, Judgment Date: Apr 19, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Civil), 2118-2119
of 2009, Judgment Date: Apr 13, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 1664
of 2005, Judgment Date: Apr 13, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 185
of 2016, Judgment Date: Mar 02, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 92
of 2016, Judgment Date: Feb 02, 2016
Full Judgment
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 1526
of 2008, Judgment Date: Nov 20, 2015
Full Judgment
