Supreme Court: How to ascertain whether offence under S 307 of IPC is made out or not?

 Coming back to Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court has

held that mere mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the

charge-sheet should not be the basis for adopting a hands-off

approach. It has further held that it would be open for the court

to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is

there for the sake of it or whether there is evidence to back it. It

has been held that the courts may go by the nature of injuries

sustained; as to whether the injuries are inflicted on the vital/

delicate parts of the body and the nature of weapon used. It has

also been clarified that such an exercise would be permissible

after investigation and filing of chargesheet/framing of charges

or during the trial. {Para 12}

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 660 OF 2025

(@ SLP Criminal No. 3432 of 2023)

Naushey Ali & Ors. Vs State of U.P. & Anr. 

K.V. Viswanathan, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 182.

Print Page

Important articles and Judgments on S 223 of BNSS

 

1) To what extent the Session Judge or Magistrate can permit accused to put his defence at pre-cognizance stage as per S 223 of BNSS?

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/07/to-what-extent-session-judge-or.html

2) No Need For Pre-Cognizance Summons To Accused In S.138 NI Act Case : Supreme Court Issues Directions For Speedy Trial Of Cheque Bounce Cases

E. Recently, the High Court of Karnataka in Ashok v. Fayaz Aahmad   MANU/KA/1743/2025 has taken the view that since NI Act is a special enactment, there is no need for the Magistrate to issue summons to the Accused before taking cognizance (Under Section 223 of BNSS) of complaints filed Under Section 138 of NI Act. This Court is in agreement with the view taken by the High Court of Karnataka. Consequently, this Court directs that there shall be no requirement to issue summons to the Accused in terms of Section 223 of BNSS i.e., at the pre-cognizance stage.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1755 of 2010

Decided On: 25.09.2025

 Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Manmohan and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.

Author: Manmohan, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 1158, MANU/SC/1336/2025.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/09/no-need-for-pre-cognizance-summons-to.html

Print Page

Important provisions of BNSS regarding information to police, investigation U/S 175 of BNSS, and cognizance of offence by Magistrate

 173. Information in cognizable cases.—(1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge of a police station, and if given—

(i) orally, it shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it;

(ii) by electronic communication, it shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may by rules prescribe in this behalf:

Print Page

Important articles and judgments on police investigation U/S 156 of CRPC {S 175(3 ) of BNSS }

 

1) Supreme Court: How BNSS Modernizes Section 156(3) CrPC: Key Changes and Implications

35. Further, by requiring the Magistrate to consider the submissions made by the concerned police officer before proceeding to issue directions Under Section 175(3), BNSS has affixed greater accountability on the police officer responsible for registering FIRs Under Section 173. Mandating the Magistrate to consider the submissions of the concerned police officer also ensures that the Magistrate applies his mind judicially while considering both the complaint and the submissions of the police officer thereby ensuring that the requirement of passing reasoned orders is complied with in a more effective and comprehensive manner.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 352/2020

Decided On: 16.01.2025

Om Prakash Ambadkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0134/2025, 2025 INSC 139.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/03/supreme-court-how-bnss-modernizes.html

2) Supreme Court: Magistrate's Order U/S. 156(3) CrPC For registration of FIR is Not Vitiated Merely Because Complainant Didn't Avail Remedy Under S.154(3)

Print Page