IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS, BAMBI THANE. At Barata
|
|
- Tyrone Booth
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS, BAMBI THANE At Barata S.C. No 123 of 2014 In the matter of Sec 227, 385, 501 and 502 of BPC read with Sec 120 B and Section 34 of Barata Penal Code State of Bambi Prosecution V. Mr. Panna Mr. Saba And Mr. Jaimil Accused Before the Honourable Sessions Judge Memorial on behalf of the Defence 1
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX OF AUTHORITIES STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION STATEMENT OF FACTS STATEMENT OF CHARGES SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ARGUMENTS ADVANCED PRAYER
3 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES Case Laws: Radhakrishnan v. State of Madras,1997 (decided on 17 th August, 1997, unreported) Girish Jadhav v. State of M.P AIR 1996 SC 3098 Ram Kishore v. State of U.P 2004 (1) Crimes All Taki Hussain, (1884) 7 All 311 Dinanath, 1939, Nag 644 Bibliography: 1. Prof. S.N.Misra, Indian Penal Code, Eighteenth Edition (Reprint) 2012, Central Law Publications, Allahabad. 2. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, Thirty Second Enlarged Edition, 2010, LexisNexis, Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur. 3. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, Law of Evidence, Twenty Fourth Edition (Eco. P/B), 2011, LexisNexis, Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur. 4. Sarkar, Law of Evidence, Vol I and II, Seventeenth Edition, 2010, LexisNexis, Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur. 5. Prof. S.N.Misra, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Eighteenth Edition 2012, Central Law Publications, Allahabad. 3
4 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION Since the offences alleged to have be committed by the Accused No.1 under Section 227 is separate and distinct and is in no way connected with the other offences of this case, the charges under Section 227 should be tried separately from the other offences since the joinder would cause grave injustice to the three accused. Therefore, the offences under Section 227 which is applicable only to Accused No.1 should be separated from the rest of the case and this case should be remitted to a Court of Judicial Magistrate having jurisdiction try the offences. 4
5 STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. That on March 2013, The Supreme Court of Barata convicted Mr. Panna as guilty under Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced him to 5 years rigorous imprisonment. That after the conviction of Mr. Panna (Accused No.1), Ms. Naika, an actress with whom a Film named Hit Factory (hereinafter referred as the said movie) was signed, refused to pursue it fearing loss of reputation. 2. That on , Mr. Saba (Accused No. 2), the Producer of the said Movie and Mr. Jaimil (Accused No. 3), the Director, visited Ms. Naika s residence to convince her to complete the movie, but she refused without any justifiable cause. 3. That Mr. Panna came out on parole on on the ground of his wife s ill health who was admitted and being treated at Star Hospital. The aforementioned hospital is reputed for renting the premises for shooting. On , Mr. Jaimil having complaint of chest pain got admitted in Star Hospital, wherein some shooting was in progress. Mr. Panna was also seen in the Hospital interacting with the Movie Crew. 4. That on , a serial was being shot with Miss Poonam, budding starlet and Smt. Mashaalji in Star Hospital. Mr. Panna who was in the hospital to see his wife, met and interacted with Smt. Mashalji during the shooting in the hospital premise. Thereafter, the shooting proceded to the Central Mall. 5. That on , Ms Naika saw ads about the release of the said movie. And thereby filed an injunction on , in the High Court of Bambi seeking permanent injunction against its release and on the same evening received two threatening calls to co-operate in completion of the movie which lead Miss Naika to file a complaint on and hence the present case. 5
6 STATEMENT OF CHARGES I..., Sessions Judge of Bambi Thane, hereby charge you Mr. Panna, Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil as Follows That you on or about the 14 th of February 2014, did printed a defamatory matter in the ads in prominent newspaper and magazine, thus intentionally causing defamation to Ms. Naika and thereby committed an offence u/s 501 of B.P.C and within the cognizance of Court of Sessions. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charges. Sd/- Sessions Judge Bambi Thane I..., Sessions Judge of Bambi Thane, hereby charge you Mr. Panna, Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil as Follows That you on or about the 14 th of February 2014, did knowingly offered for sale in the form of ads in prominent newspaper and magazine, a defamatory matter relating to Ms. Naika and thereby committed an offence u/s 502 of B.P.C and within the cognizance of Court of Sessions. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charges. Sd/- Sessions Judge Bambi Thane 6
7 I..., Sessions Judge of Bambi Thane, hereby charge you Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil as Follows That you on or about the 16 th of February 2014, at 6.05 PM and 6.15 PM threatened Ms. Naika over a phone call to withdraw her Injunction Suit from the High Court of Barata and further threatened Ms. Naika to complete a movie and thereby committed an offence u/s 385 of B.P.C and within the cognizance of Court of Sessions. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charges. Sd/- Sessions Judge Bambi Thane I..., Sessions Judge of Bambi Thane, hereby charge you Mr. Panna, as Follows That you on subsequent to release on parole on 3 rd February, did knowingly entered into business activities thereby violated the condition imposed while on parole and thereby committed an offence u/s 227 of B.P.C and within the cognizance of Court of Sessions. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charges. Sd/- Sessions Judge Bambi Thane 7
8 I..., Sessions Judge of Bambi Thane, hereby charge you Mr. Panna, Mr Saba and Mr. Jaimil, as Follows That you in connivance of all had knowingly entered into criminal conspiracy and thereby committed an offence under Section 120-B of B.P.C and within the cognizance of Court of Sessions. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charges. Sd/- Sessions Judge Bambi Thane 8
9 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS 1. Whether the act of the accused Mr. Panna comes within the purview of Section 227 of B.P.C? 2. Whether the accussed Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil threatened Ms. Naika over a phone call to complete the movie and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 385 of B.P.C? 3. Whether all the accussed had printed and offered for sale, in the form of an ad, a defamatory matter relating to Ms. Naika and thereby punishable u/s 501 and u/s 502 of B.P.C? 4. Whether all the accussed had conspired together to complete the movie through an act though legal but through illegal means in pursuance to an agreement and thereby punishable u/s 120 B read with Section 34 of B.P.C? 9
10 ARGUMENT ADVANCED I. Whether the act of the accused Mr. Panna comes within the purview of Section 227 of B.P.C? 1. The accused Mr. Panna was granted Parole on February 03, 2014 on the ground of his wife s ill health, who was admitted at Star Hospital. He visited the hospital everyday to attend to her and visits with her daughter on most of the occasions. As such, he had not violated any conditions of his Parole. 2. Further, Section 227 of B.P.C deals with violation of condition of remission to be granted by the Appropriate Government under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. The term Parole and Remission are different from one other and the conviction for an offence punishable u/s 227, B.P.C could not be maintained in view of the fact that the non-fulfilment of the conditions imposed while releasing the accused on Parole will not come within the purview of section 227 of B.P.C. 3. In the case of Radhakrishnan v. State, the Hon ble High Court of Madras on (17 th of August,1997), has clearly ruled that violation of parole if any, do not come within the purview of Section 227 of IPC as Section 227 specifically deals with violation of condition of remission under section 432 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Even if, for the sake of argument, if we assumed that the accused Mr. Panna had violated any conditions of his Parole, then the appropriate authority would be the Parole Board and not Court of Session. As such in view of the factual records of the case and the provision of law and decision cited above the charge is liable to be dismissed and set aside. 1 Radhakrishnan v. State of Madras,1997 (decided on 17 th August, 1997, unreported) 10
11 II. Whether the accussed Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil threatened Ms. Naika over a phone call to complete the movie and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 385 of B.P.C? 5. The Prosecution has failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt that the call purported to be received by Miss Naika has been made by the accused No.2 and No. 3. The investigation carried and evidence exhibited suffers from many material irregularities and shortcomings, which is fatal to the prosecution case. The Transcript (Annex.4) containing the call record details of Ms. Naika (PW 4), does not corroborates with her Statement recorded u/s 161 of Code of Criminal Procedure. And hence the said Transcript Report is not a credible piece of evidence that can be used in a trail The Transcript of call records (Annex.4) cannot be appreciated as Admissible Evidence because the Prosecution had failed to produce a Certificate of Authenticity signed by a person occupying a responsible official position as laid down u/s 65 B (4) of the Indian Evidence Act Further, a Competent Witness acquainted with the functioning of the computer during the relevant time and the manner in which the printouts of the call records were taken, was not examined or invited as a Prosecution Witness. (State v. Navjot Sandhu, AIR 2005 SC 3820). 7. The voice of accussed were not examined and verified by the Forensic Experts and as such, it cannot be used to corroborate the Statement of PW 4 recorded under Section It is also pertinent to state here that no independent investigation was carried out by the Investigation Officer (PW 2) to ascertain the voices of the accused and mere suspicion regarding the calls made by the accused cannot be a ground of conviction. Hence, the accused cannot be convicted based on such mere allegation. 2 Girish Jadhav v. State of M.P AIR 1996 SC Ram Kishore v. State of U.P 2004 (1) Crimes All 11
12 8. It is argued that the call could have been made by anybody or any fan of Mr. Panna. Everybody knew about the fact that she approached the Hon ble High Court of Bambi seeking Injunction over the release of the movie which may irritate a lot of people directly or indirectly interested in the release of the movie. It may also be a cheap publicity stunt of the prosecutrix (P.W. 5), or it may also be a calculated move of the prosecutrix to prevent the movie from being released. 9. The movie in question was signed much after 1993, when Mr. Panna was arrested under TADA, the news of which was in public domain and she had no problem then. Only later, when prosecutrix became the celebrity-representative of Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTTIF) of United Nations, and the Express of Barata carried the news, she became hesitant and refused to associate with the Mr. Panna. The Prosecutrix was under a contractual obligation to complete the movie which she was deliberately avoiding. It is pertinent to note that the Prosecutrix had no any other legal route to prevent the movie from being released solely on the ground that she did not want to seen in a movie with a person convicted of an offence. 12
13 III. Whether all the accused had printed and offered for sale, in the form of an ad, a defamatory matter relating to Ms. Naika and thereby punishable u/s 501 and u/s 502 of B.P.C? 10. That the Accused No.1,2 and 3 have been wrongly implicated on charges of defamation, as the statement so published in the form of Advertisements in papers and magazine are matters pertaining facts and as such are not defamatory. It was published to inform the public about the release of their upcoming movie and without any intention or knowledge or belief that such publication would harm the reputation of any person or to defame any person. 11. That it is a matter of record that the prosecutrix have been signed for the movie and have also performed in the movie by completing almost the entire movie, and as such the publishing and selling of the alleged defamatory matter with pictures of the prosecutrix and name so engraved is within the standards adopted by the film industry. 12. That the publication and sale of alleged defamatory matter through paper and magazine does not amount to defamation as the practice of publication and sale of advertisement showing and inferring release of movie is the standard of procedure/ technique adopted by the film industry before releasing a movie so as to enable the public the knowledge of of the film so going to be released. As such, thereby there was no any intention on the part of Accused No.1, 2 and 3 to bring imputation (by causing harm) to the prosecutrix by way of such publication and sale of the alleged advertisement showing movie to be released. That the term harm is in case of defamation is not taken in its ordinary sense in which it is used. By harm is meant imputation on a man s character made and 13
14 expressed to others so as to lower him in their estimation. Anything which lowers him merely in his own estimation does not constitute defamation Furthermore, there is already an injunction petition filed by the Prosecutrix, on the release of the movie before the Hon ble High Court of Bambi, which is pending disposal, as such the charges under this case of alleged defamation is hit by Section 10 of the Code of the Civil Procedure,1908, as the matter being sub judice. 14. That furthermore, the contention of the prosecutrix, if associated with Accused No. 1 will in any way will lower her image, cannot be a ground for unilateral repudiation of her contractual obligation. She has neither issued a Notice nor have taken any legal recourse for the rescission of her contract or to restrain the release of the movie before the release of the advertisement so floated on the February 14 th, Therefore, as such, Accused No.2 and 3 are perfectly within legal capacity to issue/ release the stated poster alleged to contain the defamatory matter. 4 Taki Hussain, (1884) 7 All
15 IV. Whether all the accussed had conspired together to complete the movie through an act though legal but through illegal means in pursuance to an agreement and thereby punishable u/s 120 B read with Section 34 of B.P.C 15. That the Accused No. 1,2 and 3 cannot be tried together under Section 120-B read with 34 as there was no prior meeting of the minds. 16. Section 120-B requires an agreement to commit an illegal act with a common intention. There should be unity of criminal behavior resulting in something, for which an individual would be punishable if it were all done by himself alone. 5 For cases under section 120-B it has to be proved that the accused pursued their acts forming the same objects by the same means, where one forms one part of the act and the other forms another part of the same act, so as to complete it with a view to attain the object which they were pursuing. The prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the three Accused had a common intention of defaming the prosecutrix. Nor can it be shown or proved beyond reasonable doubt that Accused No. 2 and 3 were involved in the alleged threatening calls or a conspiracy to execute such a call. 17. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, either the commission of an offence by any of the three accused or a conspiracy/ agreement to commit an offence in pursuance of the common intention. As such, the three accused cannot be brought within the ambit of Section 120-B read with Section 34 of BPC and hence cannot be tried together. 5 Dinanath, 1939, Nag
16 PRAYER In the premises aforesaid and in view of the facts and circumstance of the case, provisions of law and argument advanced, it is humbly prayed before this honourable Court that 1. The Prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused Mr. Panna, Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil had not committed a criminal conspiracy against Ms. Naika, punishable u/s 120 B read with Section 34 of B.P.C and they be acquitted of the Said Charges. 2. The accused be acquitted of the charges u/s 501 and u/s 502 since the accused had not printed or offered sale of any defamatory matter against Ms. Naika. 3. The accused Mr. Panna be acquitted of the charges u/s 227 of B.P.C as his case don t falls under Remission but Parole. 4. That the accussed Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil be acquitted of Charges u/s 385 because they have not committed any kind of threatening Phone Calls to put Ms. Naika into fear. Hence the accused Mr. Panna, Mr. Saba and Mr. Jaimil be granted acquittal. Counsel on behalf Defence 16
STATE OF BAMBI 1. PANNA, 2. SABA & 3. JAIMIL
SURANA AND SURANA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT AND JUDGEMENT WRITING COMPETITION COMPETITION 2014 BEFROE THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT BAMBI THANE, BARATA S.C. No. 123 of 2014 STATE OF BAMBI (PROSECUTION)
More informationIN THE COURT OF SESSIONS, BAMBI THANE
Team Code: IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS, BAMBI THANE S. C. No. 123 of 2014 UNDER SECTION 177 R.W.S. 193, 199(1) & 323 OF THE Cr.P.C. STATE OF BAMBI........ PROSECUTION VERSUS PANNA, SABA & JAIMIL..........DEFENCE
More informationWRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION
PAGE 1 TEAM CODE: BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SESSIONS COURT OF BAMBI, THANE S.C. NO.: 123 of 2014 State of Bambi...PROSECUTION Vs 1) Panna Boy 2) Saba 3) Jaimil...DEFENCE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE
More informationBAMBI, THANE IN THE CASE OF STATE OF BAMBI (PROSECUTION) (DEFENCE)
SURANA & SURANA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION - 2014 IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS BAMBI, THANE IN THE CASE OF STATE OF BAMBI (PROSECUTION) VS PANNA, SABA, JAMIL (DEFENCE) MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 265-266 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Criminal) Nos. 1815-1816 of 2016) DINESH KUMAR KALIDAS PATEL... APPELLANT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: W.P.(C) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: 21.03.2012 W.P.(C) No.1616/2012 Ex. Constable Mohan Kumar Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents
More information- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6472/2014
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6472/2014 BETWEEN: SRI DR.SENTILNATHAN S/O SRI
More informationSUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5 CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 688 of 2001 Special Leave Petition (crl.
http://judis.nic.in SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5 CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 688 of 2001 Special Leave Petition (crl.) 1875 of 2001 PETITIONER: JOHN THOMAS Vs. RESPONDENT: DR. K. JAGADEESAN DATE OF JUDGMENT:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3 rd DAY OF JULY, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3 rd DAY OF JULY, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA BETWEEN WRIT PETITION NO.85369/2013 (GM-RES) ASHOK KADAPPA JADAGOUD
More information$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 30 th July, CRL.M.C. No.2836/2015. Versus
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 30 th July, 2015 + CRL.M.C. No.2836/2015 RAJ KAUSHAL Represented by:... Petitioner Mr. Imran Khan and Mr. Habibur Rehman, Advocates
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2785/2009
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 03 RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015 BETWEEN BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2785/2009 1. BASU SHANKRAPPA CHAVAN @ LAMANI,
More informationBE it enacted by Parliament in the Thirty-second Year of the Republic of India as follows:-- CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY
THE CINE-WORKERS AND CINEMA THEATRE WORKERS (REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT) ACT, 1981 ACT NO. 50 OF 1981 [24th December, 1981.] An Act to provide for the regulation of the conditions of employment of certain
More informationIN THE HON BLE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, BAMBI THANE STATE OF BAMBI (PANNA AND OTHERS) MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE
TEAM CODE: FC-16 IN THE HON BLE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, BAMBI THANE S. C. NO. 123 OF 2014 STATE OF BAMBI (PROSECUTION) VERSUS PANNA AND OTHERS (DEFENCE) MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE (PANNA AND
More informationTitle 10 Laws of Bermuda Item 12 BERMUDA 1973 : 48 OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS ACT 1973 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. [preamble and words of enactment omitted]
BERMUDA 1973 : 48 OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS ACT 1973 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1 Interpretation 2 Obscenity 3 Offences involving obscene articles 3A Offence of advertising obscene article 4 Functions of Broadcasting
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2018 DIST. MUMBAI In the matter of Articles 14, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India; And In the
More informationK.K. MISHRA.APPELLANT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT. 2. By the order impugned, the High Court. of Madhya Pradesh has negatived the challenge
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S) 547 OF 2018 [ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL] NO.6064 OF 2017] K.K. MISHRA.APPELLANT(S)
More informationNATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Company Appeals (AT) No.101 to 105 of 2017 (arising out of Order dated 06.02.2017 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi in CP Nos. 16/152/2015,
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5096/2015 & Crl.M.A /2015 Date of Decision : January 13 th, 2016.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5096/2015 & Crl.M.A. 18348/2015 Date of Decision : January 13 th, 2016 ANGLE INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD.... Petitioner Through Mr.Akhil Sibal,Ms.Bina Gupta,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.169 OF 2014 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.1221 of 2012) Perumal Appellant Versus Janaki
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 408 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 408 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.7970 of 2014) REPORTABLE P. Sreekumar.Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Kerala &
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MEGHALAYA; MANIPUR; TRIPURA; MIZOAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Page 1 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MEGHALAYA; MANIPUR; TRIPURA; MIZOAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL 75/2003 Sri Halla Dhar Das, Son of Late Soneswar Das, Village
More informationBar & Bench (
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL RIVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE PRESENT : THE HON BLE JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI C.R.R. 897 OF 2017 With C.R.A.N. 2056 of 2017 RAMESH SOBTI @ RAMESH SOBYI VERSUS...
More informationTHE PROHIBITION OF UNFAIR PRACTICES IN TECHNICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND UNIVERSITIES BILL, 2010
CLAUSES THE PROHIBITION OF UNFAIR PRACTICES IN TECHNICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND UNIVERSITIES BILL, 2010 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI I.A. No of 2014 with I.A. No. 175 of 2011 in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) No. 904 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI I.A. No. 1409 of 2014 with I.A. No. 175 of 2011 in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) No. 904 of 2008 1. Prabir Pradhan @ Pravir Pradhan 2. Amit Dubey Appellants I.A. No. 1079 of
More informationThe Karnataka High Court Act, 1961
The Karnataka High Court Act, 96 Act 5 of 962 Keyword(s): Chief Justice, Criminal Appeal, First Appeal, Full Bench, High Court Amendment appended: 26 of 2007 DISCLAIMER: This document is being furnished
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2642/2009
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 07 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR BETWEEN M/S PREETI IMPLEX REGD PARTNERSHIP FIRM BY ITS PARTNERS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on: WP (C) 4642/2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER Judgment delivered on: 02.07.2008 WP (C) 4642/2008 M/S KESHAV SHARES and STOCKS LIMITED... Petitioner - versus - INCOME TAX OFFICER AND
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.REV.P. 76/2009 Reserved on: 30th April, 2012 Decided on: 11th July, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.REV.P. 76/2009 Reserved on: 30th April, 2012 Decided on: 11th July, 2012 ANIL KUMAR... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.S. Malik and Mr.
More informationIN THE HON BLE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, BAMBI THANE (STATE OF BAMBI) PANNA AND OTHERS MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION
TEAM CODE: FC-16 IN THE HON BLE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, BAMBI THANE S. C. NO. 123OF 2014 STATE OFBAMBI (PROSECUTION) VERSUS PANNA AND OTHERS (DEFENCE) MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION (STATE OF
More informationTHE PUNJAB EMPLOYEES EFFICIENCY, DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
1 of 9 17/03/2011 13:53 THE PUNJAB EMPLOYEES EFFICIENCY, DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 2006 (Act XII of 2006) C O N T E N T S SECTIONS 1. Short title, extent, commencement and application. 2. Definitions.
More informationCHAPTER 3.04 SAINT LUCIA. Revised Edition Showing the law as at 31 December 2008
SAINT LUCIA CHAPTER 3.04 PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT Revised Edition Showing the law as at 31 December 2008 This is a revised edition of the law, prepared by the Law Revision Commissioner under the authority
More informationCHAPTER VII PROSECUTION. 1.Sanction for prosecution
CHAPTER VII PROSECUTION 1.Sanction for prosecution Under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, it is necessary for the prosecuting authority to have the previous sanction of the appropriate
More informationTHE NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY ACT, NO. 34 OF 2008 [31st December, 2008.]
THE NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY ACT, 2008 NO. 34 OF 2008 [31st December, 2008.] An Act to constitute an investigation agency at the national level to investigate and prosecute offences affecting the
More informationTrademark Law: Articles of Trade Law: Law no. 68 of 1980
Trademark Law: Articles 61-95 of Trade Law: Law no. 68 of 1980 Pursuant to Trade Law No. 68/1980, the Kuwaiti legislator regulates the protection of trademarks in Articles 61-95. It includes a definition
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 638/2009 & Crl.M.A.2384/09 (stay) Date of reserve:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl.M.C. 638/2009 & Crl.M.A.2384/09 (stay) Date of reserve: 04.03.2009 Date of decision: 23.03.2009 D.R. PATEL & ORS. Through:
More informationTHE CHILD AND ADOLESCENT (PROHIBITION AND REGULATION) ACT, 1986 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
THE CHILD AND ADOLESCENT (PROHIBITION AND REGULATION) ACT, 1986 SECTIONS 1. Short title, extent and commencement. 2. Definitions. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY PART II PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT
More informationPARLIAMENT (POWERS AND PRIVILEGES ACT)
PARLIAMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA PARLIAMENT (POWERS AND PRIVILEGES ACT) AN ACT TO DECLARE AND DEFINE THE PRIVILEGES, IMMUNITIES AND POWERS OF PARLIAMENT AND OF THE MEMBERS THEREOF;
More informationReserved on: 3 rd February, 2010 Pronounced on: 4 th February, 2010
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl.M.C.1761/2009 Reserved on: 3 rd February, 2010 Pronounced on: 4 th February, 2010 # KAMAL GOYAL.... Petitioner! Through: Mr.Vikas Mahajan & Mr.Vishal Mahajan,
More informationAnil Goswami Appellant( Cr. Apl. No. 485 of 2009) Ashok Rawani Appellant(Cr. Apl. No. 625 of 2009) -Versus-
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.485 of 2009 With Criminal Appeal(S.J.) No. 625 of 2009 --- Against the common judgment of conviction dated 8.5.2009 and order of sentence dated 12.5.2009 passed by Shri Vijay
More informationTHE PUNJAB EMPLOYEES EFFICIENCY, DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 2006 (XII OF 2006)
THE PUNJAB EMPLOYEES EFFICIENCY, DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 2006 (XII OF 2006) CONTENTS 1. Short title, extent, commencement and application 2. Definitions 3. Grounds for proceedings and penalty
More informationTHE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961
Sections:. Short title and commencement. 2. Definitions. 3. Registrar and Deputy Registrars. THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 96 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 4. Appeals from decisions of a single Judge of the
More informationHUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINTS: INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION
HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINTS: INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Introduction Dr.V.Ramaraj * The Protection of Human Rights Act was enacted in the year 1993. The main objectives of the Act is to provide for the
More informationMoot Proposition. Drafted by: Dr. Manoj Sharma. 2 nd Dhawani Manocha Memorial National Moot Court Competition, 2016
Drafted by: Dr. Manoj Sharma Moot Proposition Indradhwaja is an Asian country whose socio-politico-legal order is similar to India. It has 29 states. It is a multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-religious
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.672 of 2006 & CRIMINAL M.B. NO.1463 OF 2006 Date of Decision: 14th August, 2007 RADHEY SHYAM Through: Mr. R.K. Thakur
More informationPrisoners Act [1900] [Act No. 3 of 1900]
Prisoners Act [1900] [Act No. 3 of 1900] An Act to consolidate the law relating to Prisoners confined by order of a Court. Whereas it is expedient to consolidate the law relating to prisoners confined
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH. Crl.O.P.No of vs.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.09.2016 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.No.15910 of 2016 1.Susi Ganesan 2.Devi Sriprasad 3.Kalaipuli S.Thanu.. Petitioners vs.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK. CRLMC No Of 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK CRLMC No. 3031 Of 2006 An application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with G.R. Case No.844 of 2003 pending on the file of S.D.J.M.,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA. Crl.A. No /2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA BETWEEN: Crl.A. No.100219/2016 SAMEER AHMED S/O SAWOODSAB KACHI,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY BETWEEN: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1194 OF 2008 1. Sharnabasappa,
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN)
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) High Court Ref No: 13858 Goodwood Case No: C1658/2012 In the matter between: STATE And RAYMOND TITUS ACCUSED Coram: BINNS-WARD & ROGERS
More informationJuvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 (XXII of 2000)
Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 (XXII of 2000) To provide for protection of the rights of children involved in criminal litigation Whereas it is expedient to prove for protection of children involved
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI V. CAUSE NO CA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
E-Filed Document Aug 5 2014 01:08:18 2014-CA-00054-COA Pages: 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DENNIS TERRY HUTCHINS APPELLANT V. CAUSE NO. 2014-CA-00054-COA
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Appeal (J) No. 63 of 2014 Bhupen Doley, Son of Late Punya Doley, Resident of Jon Misuk, Sisi Kolghor,
More informationCriminal Appeal Act 1968
Criminal Appeal Act 1968 CHAPTER 19 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I APPEAL TO COURT OF APPEAL IN CRIMINAL CASES Appeal against conviction on indictment Section 1. Right of appeal. 2. Grounds for allowing
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1534 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.1439 of 2017) N. Harihara Krishnan Appellant Versus J. Thomas Respondent
More informationTHE CRIMINAL LAW (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) ORDINANCE, 1968
THE CRIMINAL LAW (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) ORDINANCE, 1968 SECTIONS 1. Short title and extent. 2. Definitions. 3. Trial of scheduled offences. (W.P. Ord. II of 1968) C O N T E N T S 4. Cognizance of scheduled
More informationTHE FOREIGNERS ACT, 1946 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
THE FOREIGNERS ACT, 1946 (Modified as on 3rd December, 2018) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTIONS 1. Short title and extent. 2. Definitions. 3. Power to make orders. 3A. Power to exempt citizens of Commonwealth
More informationTHE SALES PROMOTION EMPLOYEES (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) ACT, 1976 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
SECTIONS THE SALES PROMOTION EMPLOYEES (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) ACT, 1976 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1. Short title, extent, commencement and application. 2. Definitions. 3. Power of Central Government to
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL, PIETERMARITZBURG Case No.: AR215/08 In the matter between:
REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL, PIETERMARITZBURG Case No.: AR215/08 In the matter between: HOPEWELL NYAMAKAZI APPLICANT and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS KWAZULU-NATAL
More informationTHE CINEMATOGRAPH ACT, 1952
SECTIONS 1. Short title, extent and commencement. 2. Definitions. THE CINEMATOGRAPH ACT, 1952 ARRANGMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY 2A. Construction of references to any law not in force or any functionary
More informationThrough: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Mr. Nitish Jain & Mr. Jatin Sethi, Advs. Versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Date of decision: 29th January, 2014 LPA 548/2013, CMs No.11737/2013 (for stay), 11739/2013 & 11740/2013 (both for condonation
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 3046/2019 (ARISING FROM SLP(C) NO(S). 4964/2019)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 3046/2019 (ARISING FROM SLP(C) NO(S). 4964/2019) THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BUNTY RESPONDENT(S)
More informationCHAPTER 59 GAMING. [30th June, 1890.] 1. This Ordinance may. be cited as the Gaming Ordinance.
Cap.59] Ordinances Nos. 17 of 1889, 37 of 1917, 3 of 1946, Acts Nos. 26 of 1957, 48 of 1961. CHAPTER 59 AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE MORE EFFICIENT SUPPRESSION OF UNLAWFUL AND OF COMMON PLACES. [30th
More informationJ U D G M E N T. impugned order dated , passed by the High Court. of Judicature at Madras, Madurai Bench in Criminal Revision
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 359-360 OF 2010 SHEILA SEBASTIAN VERSUS APPELLANT(S) R. JAWAHARAJ & ANR. ETC. RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25-01-2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI Crl. Appeal No.859 of 2000 1.Pukkraj 2.Kamalabai 3.Prakash 4.Kishore.. Appellants. Versus State rep.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF APRIL 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR R.F.A.NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF APRIL 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR R.F.A.NO.937/2012 BETWEEN: 1. SMT.MUNIYAMMA, W/O LATE DORASWAMY REDDY, AGED
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS OF 2014
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION NON REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1382 1384 OF 2014 Bal Mukund Sharma @ Balmukund Chaudhry Etc., Etc....Appellants Versus The State of Bihar...Respondent
More informationTHE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTIONS 1. Short title and commencement. 2. Definitions. 3. Liability to give relief in certain cases on principle of no fault. 4. Duty
More informationCHAPTER 96 EXTRADITION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
[CH.96 1 CHAPTER 96 LIST OF AUTHORISED PAGES 1 14B LRO 1/2006 15 21 Original SECTION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Application of the provisions of this
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7843 OF 2009 CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEE, APPELLANT(s) SRI RAM MANDIR JAGTIAL KARIMNAGAR DISTRICT, A.P VERSUS S. RAJYALAXMI
More informationHIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA, MAIN DIVISION JUDGMENT. In Re: INQUEST REVIEW (RUNDU INQUEST NO 133/2014): FESBERTU VENDA
REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA, MAIN DIVISION JUDGMENT CR No: 28/2015 In Re: INQUEST REVIEW (RUNDU INQUEST NO 133/2014): FESBERTU VENDA HIGH COURT MD REVIEW CASE NO 1449/2015 Neutral
More information- 1 - (By Sri Uday Holla, Senior Counsel for Sri Satish Ninan & Sri Santosh Mathew, Advocates)
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12 TH FEBRUARY 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10710/2012 BETWEEN Sri.Rajeev Chandrasekhar,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of decision: CRL.L.P. 598/2011, Crl. M.A.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of decision: 07.03.2012 CRL.L.P. 598/2011, Crl. M.A. 19759/2011 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through : Sh. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC.... Petitioner
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of proceedings after granting of Leave to Appeal by the Provincial High Court of Western Province Colombo Under provisions
More informationTHE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM ORDINANCE, 2000 (XXII of 2000)
THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM ORDINANCE, 2000 (XXII of 2000) CONTENTS 1. Short title, extent and commencement 2. Definitions 3. Legal assistance 4. Juvenile courts 5. No joint trial of a child and adult
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, CM(M) 374/2008 with CM Nos. 4286/2008 and 13305/2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 CM(M) 374/2008 with CM Nos. 4286/2008 and 13305/2008 Reserved on : March 04, 2009 Date of Decision : March 17th, 2009 POONAM
More informationTHE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL, 2002
THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL, 2002 A BILL further to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 and the Information Technology
More informationProstitution Control Act 1994
No. 102 of 1994 Section 1. Purpose 2. Commencement 3. Definitions 4. Objects of Act TABLE OF PROVISIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY PART 2 OFFENCES CONNECTED WITH PROSTITUTION 5. Causing or inducing child to take
More informationCONTEMPT APPLICATION No. 09 OF Ram Gopal Sharma. Applicant. Versus. Sh Sanjay Mitra IAS (WB:82), Defence Secretary, 101-A, South
1 Court No. 1 HON BLE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION No. 09 OF 2018 Ram Gopal Sharma. Applicant Versus Sh Sanjay Mitra IAS (WB:82), Defence Secretary, 101-A, South
More informationHeard learned counsel for the parties.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.27162 of 2011 ====================================================== Vijay Kumar Singh...... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar......
More informationConsolidated text PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED. The Misuse of Drugs (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Law, 1974 [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE
PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED The Misuse of Drugs (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Law, 1974 [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE This consolidated version of the enactment incorporates all amendments listed in the footnote below.
More informationAll about Execution, Suspension, Remission and Commutation of Sentences under. Chapter 32, Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. By: Nishita Kapoor
All about Execution, Suspension, Remission and Commutation of Sentences under Chapter 32, Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 By: Nishita Kapoor Q1. Differentiate between Suspension, Remission and Commutation
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL 98 OF 2010 Md. Abdur Rezzak Ahmed -Accused-appellant - Versus - The State of Assam - Opposite
More informationTHE PREVENTION OF SPORTING FRAUD BILL, 2013 A
DRAFT PREVENTION OF SPORTING FRAUD BILL, 2013 Draft PREVENTION OF SPORTING FRAUD BILL, 2013 is placed in public domain for inviting comments/suggestions of general public and the stakeholders. Suggestions/comments
More informationF. No. 96/54/2014 CX.1 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs
F. No. 96/54/2014 CX.1 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs Circular No. 1009/16/2015 CX To Principal Chief Commissioner/ Chief Commissioner of
More informationThe Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 (No. 60 Of 1986) [23rd December, 1986]
The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 (No. 60 Of 1986) [23rd December, 1986] An Act to prohibit indecent representation of women through advertisements or in publications, writings,
More informationCHAPTER 10:04 FUGITIVE OFFENDERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART l PART II
Fugitive Offenders 3 CHAPTER 10:04 FUGITIVE OFFENDERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART l PRELIMINARY SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PART II GENERAL PROVISIONS 3. Application of this Act in
More informationTHE MATERNITY BENEFIT ACT, 1961 INDEX
Sections Particulars Introduction INDEX 1. Short title, extent and commencement 2. Application of Act 3. Definitions 4. Employment of, or work by, women prohibited during certain periods 5. Right to payment
More informationNumber 27 of 2010 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2010 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART 1 Preliminary and General. PART 2 Impact of Crime on Victim
Click here for Explanatory Memorandum Section Number 27 of 2010 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2010 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1 Preliminary and General 1. Short title and commencement. 2. Interpretation. 3.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment pronounced on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Judgment reserved on:07.02.2012 Judgment pronounced on: 10.02.2012 W.P.(C) 734/2012 Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Another Petitioners Versus
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 238 OF 2019 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) No. 1434 OF 2018 PROF R K VIJAYASARATHY & ANR... APPELLANTS Versus
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.23 OF 2016 VERSUS J U D G M E N T
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.23 OF 2016 MAHENDRA SINGH DHONI Petitioner VERSUS YERRAGUNTLA SHYAMSUNDAR AND ANR Respondents J
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Crl. Rev. P. No.286/2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Crl. Rev. P. No.286/2009 Reserved on : 09.07.2010 Date of Decision : 12.08.2010 STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI).Petitioner Through : Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC versus
More informationAdvance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006
Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 [Editor s Note: This Act repeals the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 1996 and Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related
More informationCase 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 Mark D. Kremer (SB# 00) m.kremer@conklelaw.com Zachary Page (SB# ) z.page@conklelaw.com CONKLE, KREMER & ENGEL Professional Law Corporation 0 Wilshire
More informationTHE BURMA OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT [INDIA ACT XIX, 1923] (2nd April, 1923)
THE BURMA OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT [INDIA ACT XIX, 1923] (2nd April, 1923) 1 1. This Act extends to the whole of the Union of Burma, and applies also to all all citizens of the Union and all servants of the
More informationDomestic Violence, Crime and Victims Bill [HL]
[AS AMENDED IN STANDING COMMITTEE E] CONTENTS PART 1 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ETC Amendments to Part 4 of the Family Law Act 1996 1 Breach of non-molestation order to be a criminal offence 2 Additional considerations
More informationIn the High Court of Judicature at Madras. (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No of 2014
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. 18639 of 2014 Dr. S.P. Udayakumar 27, Isanganvilai Mani Veethi Parakkai Road Junction Nagerkovil 629 002.. Petitioner
More informationCONTEMPT OF COURT ACT
LAWS OF KENYA CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT NO. 46 OF 2016 Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org Contempt of Court No. 46 of 2016 Section
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA DATED: THIS THE 18 TH DAY OF APRIL 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH BETWEEN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3638 OF 2009 THE STATE OF
More information