Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: October 13, 2025 To October 19, 2025

Reports/JudgmentsPlea Of Lack Of State's Consent For CBI's Investigation Should Be Taken Soon After FIR Registration : Supreme CourtCause Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. M/S Narayan Niryat India Pvt. Ltd & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1001The Supreme Court held that objections regarding the CBI's lack of state consent under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, must be raised at the earliest stage, usually right after the FIR is registered. It clarified that once the investigation is complete, a chargesheet is filed, and a magistrate takes cognizance, such objections cannot be used belatedly to invalidate the proceedings, except where a quashing petition was already pending before cognizance was taken.A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court's Indore Bench order, which quashed the criminal case registered under Sections 420 read with 120-B of IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against respondent Nos. 1 and 3.The High Court allowed the Respondents' quashing plea even after the trial court took cognizance of the offence against the Respondents. The High Court noted that there was a lack of the State's consent under Section 6 of the DSPE Act, and no allegations had been made out, making the Respondents prima facie guilty of the offences.Magistrates Can Direct Witnesses To Give Voice Samples, Not Just Accused; Article 20(3) Not Violated : Supreme CourtCause Title: Rahul Agarwal v. State of West Bengal & Anr.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1002The Supreme Court held that a Magistrate can direct the collection of voice samples not only from accused persons but also from witnesses. It ruled that such samples, whether voice, fingerprints, handwriting, or DNA, constitute material evidence rather than testimonial evidence, and therefore do not infringe the constitutional protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3).A Bench of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran relied on the 2019 precedent Ritesh Sinha v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., which held that even in the absence of an explicit provision in the Cr.P.C., a Judicial Magistrate has the authority to direct a “person” to provide a voice sample for investigation. The Court clarified that the term “person” is not confined to the accused alone but also extends to witnesses.Supreme Court Reverses Acquittal Of Man For Daughter-in-Law's Murder In 1997Cause Title: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Janved SinghCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1003The Supreme Court set aside the acquittal of a father-in-law in a case connected to the murder of his daughter-in-law, after noting that the circumstantial evidence pointing towards his guilt, including the chain of circumstances, was complete.A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Alok Aradhe set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court's Gwalior Bench order, noting that although the appeal against the acquittal carries with it a proof of innocence, the Appellate Court can overturn the order of acquittal if the same was passed upon misappreciation of the evidence.The deceased was found dead in her matrimonial home in December 1997. The Respondent-accused initially reported that she died of accidental electrocution while ironing. However, medical evidence revealed she died of strangulation, with burn marks inflicted post-mortem.Supreme Court Restores Criminal Case Against Ex-MLA For Allegedly Using Fake Caste Certificate In ElectionCause Title: Komal Prasad Shakya v. Rajendra Singh and OthersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1004The Supreme Court restored the criminal case against former MLA Rajendra Singh and others accused of fraudulently procuring a Scheduled Caste certificate to contest elections from a reserved constituency of Guna, Madhya Pradesh.A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan set aside the MP High Court's Gwalior Bench order, which held a mini-trial, despite having a prima facie case, stating that once a complaint discloses prima facie offenses of cheating, forgery, and conspiracy, the matter must go to trial and cannot be interfered at the quashing stage.The complainant alleged that Rajendra Singh, historically recorded as belonging to the General Category, obtained a fraudulent Scheduled Caste (Sansi) certificate in 2008, enabling him to contest and win from the Guna (SC Reserved) constituency.Uncontrolled Use Of Firecrackers Affecting Health Can't Be Permitted Solely Based On Traditions & Religious Norms : Supreme CourtCase Title – MC Mehta v. Union of IndiaCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1005While allowing the limited use of green crackers in the National Capital Region for Diwali, the Supreme Court said that commercial interests and festive celebrations cannot outweigh concerns about public health and the environment, while considering issues related to the manufacture and use of firecrackers.The Supreme Court acknowledged that bursting firecrackers...

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up: October 13, 2025 To October 19, 2025

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags