... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP WITH

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP WITH"

Transcription

1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: November 05, 2009 Judgment delivered on : November 10, CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.136/1998 RAJENDER MASTER Through:... Appellant Mr. K.K.Sud, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kunal Malhotra, Advocate. Versus STATE Through:... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP WITH + CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.170/1998 SRIKANT Through:... Appellant Mr. K.K.Sud, Sr. Advocate/ Amicus curiae with Mr. Kunal Malhotra, Advocate. Versus STATE Through:... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BHARIHOKE 1. Whether Reporters of local papers Yes may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be Yes reported in Digest? Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 1 of 17

2 AJIT BHARIHOKE, J. 1. Appellants Rajender Singh and Srikant feeling aggrieved by their conviction under Sections 302 read with Section 34 IPC in terms of the judgment dated in Sessions Case No.107/97, FIR No.221/91, Police Station Janak Puri and sentence of imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, failing which to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months in terms of order on sentence dated , have preferred the above appeals. 2. Briefly put, case of the prosecution is that on around 7:30 a.m., appellants Rajender Singh and Srikant are stated to have reached the jhuggi C-2/B, Janak Puri along with their co-accused Lal Chand and asked Ms. Manju (deceased) if her father was there. When she replied that her father was not at home, appellant Srikant who was carrying a one ltr. tin of Rath containing kerosene oil poured kerosene on her from that can and the co-accused Lal Chand lit a matchstick and set her on fire. PW1 Ram Ratti, mother of the deceased, at that time is stated to have gone to answer the call of nature and when she returned she saw her daughter on fire and a crowd of people was trying to extinguish the fire. She also helped in extinguishing the fire and in the process, suffered burn injuries on her hands. Injured Ms. Manju was taken by PW1 and few other neighbours to RML Hospital in a taxi. The injured is stated to have made a dying declaration to her mother that she was set on fire by the appellants Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 2 of 17

3 Rajender and Srikant as also Lal Chand(P.O.). Manju (deceased) was admitted in the hospital at about 9:00 a.m. Head Constable Jaswant Singh, PW17 was the Duty Constable posted at RML Hospital at the relevant time. He conveyed the information about the admission of the deceased Manju with burn injuries to Police Station Janak Puri, which was recorded as DD No.4A. On the receipt of the DD report, SI Khushi Ram, PW16 is stated to have gone to RML Hospital and there he obtained the MLC of injured Manju on which the Doctor had opined that she had suffered 85% burn injuries. The Doctor at the Burns Ward declared injured Manju to be fit for making statement. SI Khushi Ram thus requested the services of SDM, Punjabi Bagh for recording her dying declaration. Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM, PW5 reached at the hospital around 11:30 a.m. and recorded the dying declaration of Ms. Manju (Ex.PW5/A) in question answer form wherein she stated that the appellants along with Lal Chand had visited her jhuggi in the morning at 7:30 a.m. and asked about her father. When she told them that her father was not available at the residence, Lal Chand (P.O.) suddenly poured kerosene oil upon her from a one ltr. tin of Rath Vanaspati and the appellant Srikant lit a matchstick and set her on fire. Thereafter all three of them ran away. PW5, Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM, obtained the thumb impressions of the deceased Manju on first and last page of the dying declaration and directed the Investigating Officer to register the case under relevant provisions of the IPC against the appellants and Lal Chand. The Investigating Officer sent the dying declaration along with Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 3 of 17

4 his remarks to the Police Station and on the basis of said dying declaration, formal FIR under Section 307/34 IPC was registered. Manju died of the burn injuries in the morning of , which information was conveyed to the Police Station vide DD No.3 dated Consequently, the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC was added. 3. Inquest was conducted and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination. The Investigating Officer obtained the report of post mortem examination, recorded the statements of the witnesses, completed the formalities of investigation and submitted challan against the appellants and Lal Chand(P.O.) under Section 302/34 IPC. 4. The appellants were charged for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. So far as their co-accused Lal Chand is concerned, he absconded and he was declared proclaimed offender. 5. On conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge relying upon the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A stated to have been made by the deceased before the SDM, Shri H.C. Gaur (PW5), convicted both the appellants Rajender Singh and Srikant on charge under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each. 6. It transpires from the record that pursuant to the order of this Court dated , appellant Srikant was released on bail. Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 4 of 17

5 Thereafter he absconded and failed to turn up for hearing. When his presence could not be procured despite of best efforts, Shri K.K. Sud, Sr. Advocate, who is representing appellant Rajender Singh, was requested to assist the Court as Amicus in the appeal filed by the appellant Srikant. 7. On perusal of record, it transpires that the case of the prosecution rests solely upon the dying declarations made by the deceased in presence of her mother PW1 Ram Ratti and before the SDM, Shri H.C. Gaur, PW5. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that though there is no bar under law to convict an accused on sole basis of a dying declaration, yet before acting on a dying declaration, it is incumbent upon the court to satisfy itself about the veracity of the dying declaration and also that it is not the result of some tutoring or prompting and that the declarant, at the time of making the statement, was in a fit state of mind to make a clear and concise statement about the cause or circumstances leading to his or her death. He has submitted that from the record it is established that neither of the dying declarations is worth of any credence. 9. Regarding the first dying declaration purportedly made by the deceased in presence of her mother, learned counsel has submitted that the testimony of PW1 Ram Ratti is full of contradictions and improvements, as such her version regarding the dying declaration Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 5 of 17

6 made by the deceased is not trustworthy. It was further submitted on behalf of the appellants that as per the version of PW1 Ram Ratti, the deceased made the dying declaration to her at the spot of occurrence when she was extinguishing the fire and also on her way to the hospital. She also deposed that several neighbours helped in extinguishing the fire and the neighbours Ram Kishan, Mohan, Bhola and Hamid accompanied her and the deceased in the taxi to the hospital. It was argued if said version is to be believed then the dying declaration was made in the presence of the neighbours who helped in extinguishing the fire and also in presence of the above named persons who accompanied the deceased to the hospital in the taxi and atleast someone out of them was expected to hear the deceased making the dying declaration. None of those neighbours have been examined as witnesses to corroborate the version of PW1 Ram Ratti. 10. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that PW1 Ram Ratti has made several improvements in her testimony given in the court vis-a-vis her statement made to the police and had to be confronted with her earlier statement Exhibits PW1/DA, Ex.PW1/DB and Ex.PW1/DC given to the police. Not only this, it was pointed out that PW1 stated that the deceased told her that appellant Srikant poured kerosene oil on her and Lal Chand ignited her which is contrary to the case of prosecution that it was Lal Chand who poured kerosene oil upon the deceased and Srikant set her on fire. Learned counsel for the appellants also drew our attention to the testimony of initial Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 6 of 17

7 Investigating Officer SI Khushi Ram, PW13, who in his crossexamination has admitted that in the case diary it is recorded that deceased Manju did not state anything to her mother about the manner in which she got burnt, which also rules out the possibility of the deceased having made any dying declaration in presence of PW1 Ram Ratti. In view of the above, he has urged us to disregard the testimony of PW1, being unreliable. 11. On the other hand, regarding the first dying declaration, learned counsel for the State has argued that there is no reason to doubt the testimony of PW1 Ram Ratti because her presence at the spot of occurrence is established from the fact that she herself sustained burn injuries on her hands while extinguishing the fire of the deceased, as is apparent from her MLC Ex.PW16/A and there is no reason as to why she would depose falsely to implicate the appellants. 12. We have considered the above submissions made on behalf of the parties. We find merit in the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellants. From the infirmities pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellants, we do not find PW1 Ram Ratti to be a reliable and trustworthy witness, particularly when she in her cross-examination has admitted that there was long term animosity between her family and the appellant Rajender Singh. 13. Coming to the second dying declaration Ex.PW5/A stated to have been made by the deceased in presence of SDM. PW5, Shri H.C. Gaur, Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 7 of 17

8 the then SDM, Punjabi Bagh has categorically stated that on the receipt of information from the Police Station Janak Puri, he had visited RML Hospital, Burns Ward on at about 11:30 a.m., where he recorded the dying declaration of the deceased Manju Ex.PW5/A. He stated that he recorded the statement in question answer form after satisfying himself that she was in a fit state of mind. He has proved the dying declaration in question answer form as Ex.PW5/A. 14. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that even the second dying declaration Ex.PW5/A purportedly made by the deceased in presence of the SDM is of suspect. He has referred to Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act and submitted that aforesaid provision being an exception to law of hearsay evidence has to be construed strictly. He has submitted that according to Section 32(1), when the cause of death of a person comes into question in a court, then the statement made by that person relating to the cause of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death is relevant and admissible in evidence. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that in view of the aforesaid position in law, the SDM was required to confine the recording of statement of the deceased, whose condition was precarious, only to the aspect of the cause of death of Ms. Manju or the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in her death. The SDM, however, has gone beyond that. Expanding on this argument, he has drawn our attention to the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A, which shows that the cause of death and the Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 8 of 17

9 circumstances relating to the cause of death of Ms. Manju were disclosed in the answer given by the deceased in response to Question No.1. Therefore, the dying declaration complete in all respects, having come in response to the question No.1, the SDM was not required to ask further questions to the deceased. Despite of that the SDM went on to ask superfluous questions to the deceased which were not necessary for the purpose of recording the dying declaration as envisaged under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act. 15. From this, he has urged us to infer that the SDM was biased and he was keen on promoting the case of investigating agency or the complainant to implicate the appellants. Thus, according to learned counsel for the appellants, the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A is suspect. 16. In order to appreciate the contention of learned counsel for the appellants, it is necessary to have a look at Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, as also the other questions put to the deceased by the SDM while recording her statement which is being projected as the dying declaration. Section 32(1) is reproduced as under:- 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant.-... (1) When it relates to cause of death.- When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person s death comes into question. Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 9 of 17

10 Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question. 17. On perusal of the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A, it transpires that following five questions were put to the deceased by the SDM: Q.1. How your clothes caught fire? Q.2. Why Lal Chand, Srikant and Master Rajender set her clothes on fire? Q.3. Who extinguished your fire? Q.4. Whether your husband Anand Swarup has any role in setting your clothes on fire? Q.5. How much time has lapsed since your marriage? 18. Indeed, Section 32(1) deals with the law relating to the admissibility of dying declaration in evidence and it specifies which statements can be termed as dying declaration. It is true that in response to Q.No.1 referred to above, the deceased had clearly stated about the cause of her injuries which ultimately proved to be fatal and about the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in her death by responding that the appellants and Lal Chand had visited her Jhuggi at about 7:30 a.m. and asked about her father. When she told that her father was not present at the Jhuggi and she was alone, Lal Chand threw kerosene oil upon her from a one ltr. can of Rath and Srikant, after lighting a matchstick, threw it upon her and set her clothes on Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 10 of 17

11 fire. Thereafter all three of them ran away. Even if the SDM had not gone further to ask subsequent Q. Nos.2 to 4 to the deceased, her dying declaration was complete in all respects. However, in our considered view, the nature of Question Nos.2 to 4 put to the deceased is not such which could justify imputing any motive upon the integrity of the SDM, who had no axe to grind with either of the appellants or the proclaimed offender Lal Chand. If in his wisdom to elicit more facts, he had asked certain questions to the deceased while recording her dying declaration, it would not render the dying declaration suspect. Otherwise also, when the SDM was recording the statement of the deceased, he could not have been sure that the deceased would die. If at all some part of the statement Ex.PW5/A is beyond the scope of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, in view of the provision of law, that portion cannot be taken into consideration being inadmissible in evidence, as that part of the statement is hit by the law relating to hearsay evidence. The answer to Question No.1 given in the dying declaration referred to above squarely falls within the ambit of Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act. Therefore, in our view, the learned trial Judge was right in relying upon the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A of the deceased. 19. It is further argued that PW5, Shri H.C. Gaur, the SDM has stated in his cross-examination that he did not obtain any certificate in writing from the treating Doctor that the deceased Manju was fit to make statement. It was further stated that he did not even request the Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 11 of 17

12 Doctor to remain present at the time of recording of statement of the deceased nor he perused the MLC of the deceased before recording her statement nor he tried to ascertain as to how much percentage of burns were suffered by the deceased and he could not even tell if the patient had suffered 10% burns or 100% burns on her body. He could not even tell if the entire body of the deceased except the face of patient was covered or that she was covered with a net or she was on oxygen or she was on a glucose drip etc. It was further submitted that PW5 Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM, deflected all the questions in the crossexamination by taking shelter of lapse of memory and saying that he does not remember. From the above circumstances, learned counsel for the appellants has urged us to infer that PW5 Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM is not a reliable witness and he has deliberately concealed the facts. 20. We are not convinced with the submissions made on behalf of the appellants. It is apparent from the record that the incident took place on and PW5, Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM was examined as a witness for the first time more than five years later on and his crossexamination was conducted almost about a year later on We do not find it surprising that the SDM, Shri H.C. Gaur who had examined the deceased in his official capacity could not remember the details about the circumstances under which he recorded the dying declaration of the deceased. This infirmity can easily be attributed to fading of memory because of lapse of time. Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 12 of 17

13 21. Next submission on behalf of the appellants is that PW5 Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM has stated that he asked the Doctor about the fitness of the patient to make statement before proceeding to record her dying declaration, yet there is no certification to that effect by the treating Doctor. Therefore, it is doubtful whether or not the deceased was fit for making statement at the relevant time. Aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the appellants is belied by the MLC of deceased Manju Ex.PW19/A. Perusal of the MLC of the deceased reveals that it contains two different endorsements made by Dr. Sanjay Barnwal declaring the patient fit for making statement. The first endorsement appears to have been made by the Doctor concerned on the request of the Investigating Officer. The second endorsement on the MLC has been exhibited as Ex.PW19/B. This endorsement is also in the hand of Dr. Sanjay Barnwal and it bears the time 11:50 a.m. under the signatures of the Doctor. As per the testimony of PW5, the SDM, he had reached at the hospital at 11:30 a.m. and thereafter he asked the Doctor whether or not the patient was fit for statement and the Doctor declared her fit for statement. Aforesaid version finds support from the second endorsement Ex.PW19/B on the MLC of the deceased made at 11:50 a.m. declaring her fit for statement. Thus, there is no doubt in our mind that statement of the deceased Manju was recorded by the SDM after ensuring from the Doctor that she was fit for making statement. Therefore, we find no reason to suspect the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A on this count. It was also submitted on behalf of Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 13 of 17

14 the appellants that the dying declaration is neither attested by a Doctor nor by a nurse nor by the Ward Boy on duty at the Burns Ward at the relevant time. Non-attestation of the dying declaration by the Doctor or any other employee of the hospital, in our view, is no reason to disbelieve the version of PW5, Shri H.C. Gaur, SDM, particularly when there is ample evidence on record that it was actually recorded in a fair manner by the SDM. Otherwise also, the SDM, Shri H.C. Gaur is a public servant. He had no axe to grind with the appellants and there is no reason why he should mix up with the complainant or the police to create false evidence against the appellants. Thus, we are of the considered view that the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A is beyond suspicion and the learned trial Judge has rightly acted upon the dying declaration of the deceased. 22. Learned counsel for the appellants has lastly submitted that assuming the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A is accepted, then also there is no evidence on record to justify the conviction of appellant Rajender Singh for the offence under Section 302 IPC with the aid of Section 34 IPC. He has submitted that the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A only established that the appellant Rajender had accompanied Lal Chand and Srikant to the jhuggi of the deceased where the occurrence took place. There is nothing in the dying declaration to attribute any overt or covert act to the appellant Rajender to justify the inference that he shared a common intention to kill the deceased with the other co- Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 14 of 17

15 accused persons or that he developed common intention with them at the spot of occurrence. 23. On perusal of the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A, it transpires that the only role attributed to the appellant Rajender Singh is that he accompanied his co-accused Lal Chand (PO) and Srikant, (appellant) to the spot of occurrence where after enquiring about the father of the deceased, Lal Chand suddenly threw kerosene oil on the deceased and the appellant Srikant lit a matchstick and set her on fire. In absence of any evidence of appellant Rajender having played any overt or covert role in the act of setting the deceased on fire, merely because he was in the company of the appellant Srikant and Lal Chand(PO), who played an active role in the commission of crime and he then ran away from the spot, we find it difficult to infer that he either shared common intention with his co-accused persons to kill the deceased by setting her on fire or he developed such common intention at the spot when the deceased told them that her father was not available. Even if for the sake of argument, it is assumed that the appellant Rajender Singh had accompanied Lal Chand (PO) and Srikant (appellant) to the jhuggi of the deceased with common intention to kill her father, then also in absence of any evidence, it is difficult to conclude that at the spot of occurrence on coming to know that father of the deceased was not available at the jhuggi, the common intention to kill the father got transformed into the common intention to kill the deceased. From the dying declaration Ex.PW5/A, it is obvious that the incident took place Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 15 of 17

16 suddenly when Lal Chand threw kerosene oil on the deceased and Srikant (appellant) threw a lighted a matchstick on her. The suddenness of the event would not possibly have given time to appellant Rajender Singh to react to prevent his companions from committing such heinous act. In the matter of Daya Shankar Vs. State of M.P., AIR2009 SC 1426, Hon ble Supreme Court held that mere fact that the appellant was in the company of the accused who were armed, would not be sufficient to attract Section 34 IPC when it was undisputed that the appellant in that case was not armed and he had no animosity with the deceased. 24. In this case also only role attributed to the appellant is that he accompanied his co-accused persons to the place of occurrence. There is no evidence on record to suggest that the appellant Rajender was either armed or he had any enmity with the deceased or he was aware that the co-accused Lal Chand, (P.O.) was carrying kerosene oil in the can and he had intention to cause harm to the deceased or her father. In view of the above factual matrix, we are of the considered view that Section 34 IPC does not come into play so far as appellant Rajender is concerned and the learned trial Judge was not right in concluding that he nurtured common intention with his co-accused to kill the deceased by setting her on fire. Thus, conviction of the appellant Rajender under Section 302 IPC with the aid of Section 34 IPC cannot be sustained. We, however, do not find any fault with the conviction of the appellant Srikant under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC because he did Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 16 of 17

17 play an active role in setting the deceased on fire by throwing lighted matchstick upon her after the co-accused Lal Chand (P.O.) had poured kerosene oil on her. 25. The result of discussion above is that the appeal of appellant Rajender is allowed and he is acquitted of charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. So far as the appeal of Srikant is concerned, we find no infirmity in the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence. Accordingly, his appeal is dismissed. 26. Appellant Rajender Singh is on bail. His bail bond and surety bond are cancelled and discharged. 27. Appellant Srikant has absconded after he was released on bail in terms of orders dated of this Court. The concerned court is directed to initiate proceedings for his arrest so that he can be sent to judicial custody to undergo the remaining terms of his sentence. 28. The police authorities should also endeavour to apprehend Lal Chand who absconded during trial. 29. Appeals are disposed of accordingly. AJIT BHARIHOKE, J. NOVEMBER 10, 2009 SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. pst Crl.A.Nos.136/1998 and 170/1998 Page 17 of 17

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

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 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 information

Judgment reserved on : October 26, 2009 Judgment delivered on : October 30, 2009

Judgment reserved on : October 26, 2009 Judgment delivered on : October 30, 2009 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on : October 26, 2009 Judgment delivered on : October 30, 2009 + CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.68/1996 DAYA RAM & ANR. THE STATE Versus Through: Through:...

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:

IN 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 information

... Respondent Ms.Fizani Husain, APP. 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

... Respondent Ms.Fizani Husain, APP. 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 6 th November, 2009 Judgment Delivered on: 11 th November, 2009 + CRL.REV.P.575/2001 DHARAM PAL Through:... Petitioner Mr.Rajesh Mahajan,

More information

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 48/2015 Date of decision:

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 48/2015 Date of decision: $~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 48/2015 SHIV KUMAR & ANR. Through: Date of decision: 03.12.2015... Petitioners Mr.Vikas Padora and Mr.Vaibhav Aggarwal, Advocates. STATE versus

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Appeal No 1289 of SK. KHABIR Appellant(s) VERSUS J U D G M E N T

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Appeal No 1289 of SK. KHABIR Appellant(s) VERSUS J U D G M E N T NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No 1289 of 2012 SK. KHABIR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T N. V. RAMANA,

More information

Sharda vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 December, 2009 REPORTABLE

Sharda vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 December, 2009 REPORTABLE Supreme Court of India Author:...J. Bench: Aftab Alam, Deepak Verma Crl.A.No. 699/08 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.699 OF 2008 Sharda...Appellant

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRL.L.P. 316/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRL.L.P. 316/2013 DATE OF DECISION : IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRL.L.P. 316/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 21.01.2014 STATE... Petitioner Through Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Additional Standing Counsel

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 30 th October, 2009 Judgment Delivered on: 06 th November, 2009 + CRL.R.P.985/2002 TIKA RAM versus Through:... Petitioner Mr.Harish Malhotra,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Appeal No(s). 1025/2011 VERSUS JUDGMENT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Appeal No(s). 1025/2011 VERSUS JUDGMENT 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No(s). 1025/2011 MADAN @ MADHU PATEKAR Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s) JUDGMENT N.V.

More information

Sultanabegum vs State Of Maharashtra on 8 February, 2007

Sultanabegum vs State Of Maharashtra on 8 February, 2007 Supreme Court of India Author: C Thakker Bench: C.K. Thakker, Lokeshwar Singh Panta CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 141 of 2006 PETITIONER: SAYARABANO @ SULTANABEGUM RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DATE OF JUDGMENT:

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT: ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Appeal No. 357of 2013 Sri Rabindra Das Appellant -Versus- The State of Assam Respondent -BEFORE- HON

More information

Anil Goswami Appellant( Cr. Apl. No. 485 of 2009) Ashok Rawani Appellant(Cr. Apl. No. 625 of 2009) -Versus-

Anil 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 information

Through Mr. K.B. Andley, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 450/1998. Versus. ... Respondent

Through Mr. K.B. Andley, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 450/1998. Versus. ... Respondent IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 383/1998 Reserved on: 10th January, 2014 Date of Decision: 24th January, 2014 CHANDER PAL SINGH... Appellant Through

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS OF 2014

IN 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 information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh ) Crl.Appeal No.101 of 2009

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh ) Crl.Appeal No.101 of 2009 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh ) Crl.Appeal No.101 of 2009 Sri Ratia Gowala S/O Sri Kishan Gowala R/O Nimana Garh T.E. P.S. Mathurapur, Dist.-Sivasagar,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: CRL.A. 121/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: CRL.A. 121/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: 01.04.2014 CRL.A. 121/2010 RAHUL & ORS. Through: Mr M.L. Yadav, Adv.... Appellant versus STATE OF DELHI Through: Mr

More information

... Petitioner Through: Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP

... Petitioner Through: Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 16 th March, 2010 + Crl.L.P.No.129/2009 STATE... Petitioner Through: Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP versus RAJESH GUPTA @ TITU... Respondent Through:

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MEGHALAYA; MANIPUR; TRIPURA; MIZOAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN 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 information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT ( THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH ) Criminal Appeal No. 188 (J) of 2007 Shri Ajit @ Anil Mahapatra. Versus The State

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM:NAGALAND:MEGHALAYA:MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM:NAGALAND:MEGHALAYA:MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) 1 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM:NAGALAND:MEGHALAYA:MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL REVISION No.236 of 2004 Ala Uddin Laskar, Son of late Yusuf Ali Laskar, Village-Gangpar

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. # SUNIL SONU... Appellant! Through: Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Adv. with Mr.J.L.Singh, Advocate.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. # SUNIL SONU... Appellant! Through: Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Adv. with Mr.J.L.Singh, Advocate. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl.A.No.446/2005 % Reserved on: 18 th March, 2010 Date of Decision: 25 th March, 2010 # SUNIL KUMAR @ SONU... Appellant! Through: Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Adv. with

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2010 VERSUS J U D G M E N T

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2010 VERSUS J U D G M E N T NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2010 LALTU GHOSH STATE OF WEST BENGAL VERSUS...APPELLANT...RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Judgment delivered on: January 08, 2014 CRL.A. 1452/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Judgment delivered on: January 08, 2014 CRL.A. 1452/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Judgment delivered on: January 08, 2014 CRL.A. 1452/2010 PRASHANT JAIN... Appellant Through Mr.Harin Raval, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Vineet

More information

BEFORE HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN

BEFORE HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND MIZORAM) Criminal Appeal No. 129(J) of 2013 Appellant/Accused. Brindaban Mandal and another Respondents. The State of Assam

More information

Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 136 of 2000(R)

Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 136 of 2000(R) 1 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 136 of 2000(R) Against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.3.2000 and 31.3.2000 respectively passed by 2 nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T. No.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: 31st October, 2014 CRL.A. 431/2013 & CRL.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: 31st October, 2014 CRL.A. 431/2013 & CRL. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: 31st October, 2014 CRL.A. 431/2013 & CRL.MB 654/2013 RAHUL Through: Ms. N.R. Nariman, Advocate versus... Appellant

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN 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 information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.248 of Versus. Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.248 of Versus. Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.248 of 2007 REPORTABLE Bhadragiri Venkata Ravi Appellant Versus Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P., Hyderabad Respondent

More information

1. The appellant was convicted under section 302 of Indian. Penal Code (for short IPC) vide judgment dated

1. The appellant was convicted under section 302 of Indian. Penal Code (for short IPC) vide judgment dated * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 17.11.2009 + CRL. A. No.101 of 1995 PRABHU DAYAL Through: Nemo. APPELLANT Versus THE STATE Through:...RESPONDENT Mr. Sunil Sharma, Advocate.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN 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 information

K.K. MISHRA.APPELLANT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT. 2. By the order impugned, the High Court. of Madhya Pradesh has negatived the challenge

K.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 information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.458/2008. Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.458/2008. Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.458/2008 Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008 MUKESH KUMAR DECD. THR. LR'S and ANR.... Appellants Through: Mr.K.G.Chhokar,

More information

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 308 OF Venkatesan.Appellant. Versus J U D G M E N T

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 308 OF Venkatesan.Appellant. Versus J U D G M E N T REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 308 OF 2001 Venkatesan.Appellant Versus State of Tamil Nadu.Respondent J U D G M E N T Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

More information

-versus- -versus- ----

-versus- -versus- ---- 1 Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1679 of 2003 WITH Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1547 of 2003 WITH Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1548 of 2003 WITH Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1568 of 2003 --- [Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence

More information

IN 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 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 information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1177/2012. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Appellant(s) VERSUS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1177/2012. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Appellant(s) VERSUS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1177/2012 STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Appellant(s) VERSUS SHRIRAM & ANR.. Respondent(s) O R D E R 1. This criminal appeal

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2785/2009

IN 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 information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Crl. Revision 11/2004 Sri Pintu Das, Son of Late Arun Das Resident of Philobari

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS of 2008 SHEIKH JUMAN & ANR. ETC... APPELLANT(S) :VERSUS:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS of 2008 SHEIKH JUMAN & ANR. ETC... APPELLANT(S) :VERSUS: 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.484-487 of 2008 REPORTABLE SHEIKH JUMAN & ANR. ETC.... APPELLANT(S) :VERSUS: STATE OF BIHAR... RESPONDENT(S) Pinaki Chandra

More information

Crl. Appeal No. 334/2015 VERSUS. The State of Assam & Anr. B E F O R E HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

Crl. Appeal No. 334/2015 VERSUS. The State of Assam & Anr. B E F O R E HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Crl. Appeal No. 334/2015 Md. Ziaur Rahman @ Jiaur Rahman @ Jaibur Rahman VERSUS The State of Assam & Anr. Appellant

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of Decision: Versus

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of Decision: Versus * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.10056/2009 % Date of Decision: 12.04.2010 Radhey Shyam. Petitioner Through Mr. Bhawani Shankar Sharma, Advocate Versus Government of NCT of Delhi and

More information

versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : December 11, 2015 + BAIL APPLN. 1596/2015 & Crl.M.A. Nos.7527/2015 & 7810/2015 HARI SINGH Through: versus... Petitioner Mr.Deepak Prakash,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL. A. NO.361/2004 DATE OF DECISION : versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL. A. NO.361/2004 DATE OF DECISION : versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL. A. NO.361/2004 DATE OF DECISION : 20.03.2008 SURYA... Through: Appellant Mr.Manoj Sharma, Amicus Curiae STATE... versus Through:

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984 STATE Through: Mr. M.N.Dudeja, Advocate.Appellant Versus SHYAM SUNDER..Respondent

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(C) 6034/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(C) 6034/2013 DATE OF DECISION : IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(C) 6034/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 16.07.2014 SANDEEP KUMAR... Petitioner Through: Mr. K.G. Sharma, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA

More information

-:1:- IN THE COURT OF SH. NARINDER KUMAR ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK COURTS ROHINI DELHI

-:1:- IN THE COURT OF SH. NARINDER KUMAR ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK COURTS ROHINI DELHI -:1:- IN THE COURT OF SH. NARINDER KUMAR ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK COURTS ROHINI DELHI SC No. 100/2 dated 20/12/2006 Date of Decision: 02/04/2007 State Versus 1. SURESH S/o Sh. Sukhbir Singh R/o

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION Judgment reserved on : 26.04.2011 Judgment delivered on : 28.04.2011 R.S.A.No. 109/2007 & CM No. 5092/2007 RAMESH PRAKASH

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH. Crl. Appeal No.

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH. Crl. Appeal No. IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH Smt. Moni Orang - Versus The State of Assam - Appellant - Opposite party BEFORE HON

More information

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE: BHUBANESWAR. PRESENT:- Sri I.K. Das LLB, Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar.

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE: BHUBANESWAR. PRESENT:- Sri I.K. Das LLB, Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar. 1 IN THE COURT OF THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE: BHUBANESWAR. PRESENT:- Sri I.K. Das LLB, Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar. Crl. Appeal No. 2/18 of 2012 (Arising out of judgment dtd. 12.4.12 in GR case No.

More information

2. This appeal preferred by the State challenges the. judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal

2. This appeal preferred by the State challenges the. judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 31 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 1204 of 2015) STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Appellant Versus RAJ KUMAR...Respondent

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.13/2012 The State of Mizoram. Appellant. -Versus 1. Sh. David Lalthuammawia, 2. Sh. B. Lalruatfela,

More information

IN 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: 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 information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Decided On : CRIMINAL APPEALS NOS.1179, 1250 AND 1506/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Decided On : CRIMINAL APPEALS NOS.1179, 1250 AND 1506/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Decided On : 14.02.2012 CRIMINAL APPEALS NOS.1179, 1250 AND 1506/2011 CRL APPEAL-1179/2011, CRL.M.(BAIL) 1657/2011 BIJENDER @ VIJAY FAUJI

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE K. N. KESHAVANARAYANA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.882/2005 (C)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE K. N. KESHAVANARAYANA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.882/2005 (C) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 13 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE K. N. KESHAVANARAYANA BETWEEN: CRIMINAL APPEAL No.882/2005 (C) Amjad, S/o Sabjan,

More information

... Petitioner Through: Ms.Richa Kapoor, APP.... Respondent. Through: None

... Petitioner Through: Ms.Richa Kapoor, APP.... Respondent. Through: None * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 16 th February, 2010 + Crl.L.P.No.266/2009 & Crl.M.A.No.14823/2009 STATE... Petitioner Through: Ms.Richa Kapoor, APP Versus SHIBBU Through:

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN 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 information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgement delivered on: 2 nd December, CRL.M.C. 2392/2015

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgement delivered on: 2 nd December, CRL.M.C. 2392/2015 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement delivered on: 2 nd December, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2392/2015 STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) RUPAK RANA AND + CRL.M.C. 3322/2015 RAJPAL RANA STATE & ORS....

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA BETWEEN: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No. 100025/2014 ULAS S/O RATANAKAR

More information

J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2007 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No of 2006) Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2007 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No of 2006) Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Supreme Court of India Shaik Mastan Vali vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 3 August, 2007 Author:. A Pasayat Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, Lokeshwar Singh Panta CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 1003 of 2007 PETITIONER:

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Crl. Leave Petition 28/2014 Smt. Rekha Bhargava, Wife of Sri Amrit Bhargava, D/o. Sri Satya Narayan Bhargava,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.

IN 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

IN 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: 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 information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MAC. APP. No. 32/2008. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: 4th August, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MAC. APP. No. 32/2008. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: 4th August, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Motor Vehicles Act MAC. APP. No. 32/2008 Judgment reserved on: 24.03.2008 Judgment delivered on: 4th August, 2008 R. Murgadas and Ors.... Appellant. Through:

More information

+ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 141 of versus -

+ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 141 of versus - * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Judgment delivered on: 22 nd July, 2010 + CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 141 of 1994 Rajneesh Kumar & Anr.... Appellants - versus - State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)...Respondent

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.515-516 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 6453-54 of 2015) MUNSHIRAM APPELLANT (S)

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF Versus

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF Versus 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1193 OF 2011 CHANDRU @ CHANDRASEKARAN APPELLANT(S) Versus STATE REP. BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CB

More information

Point: MURDER: The act was committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight and in the heat of

Point: MURDER: The act was committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight and in the heat of 1 Criminal Appeal Present: The Hon ble Justice Debiprasad Sengupta And The Hon ble Justice Prabhat Kumar Dey Judgment on: 19.01.2010 C.R.A. No. 347 of 2000 NIRANJAN SINGHA ROY Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

More information

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, being aggrieved by the judgment. dated , passed by the Member (Technical), Railway Claims

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, being aggrieved by the judgment. dated , passed by the Member (Technical), Railway Claims IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI --- Miscellaneous Appeal No. 324 of 2013 --- Sri Paramanand Vimal, S/o Sri Sukhdeo Singh, Resident of Village Raunia, P.O. Raunia, P.S. Khijarsaray, District-Gaya,

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM:: NAGALAND:: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRL.A. No.36(J)/2007

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM:: NAGALAND:: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRL.A. No.36(J)/2007 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM:: NAGALAND:: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRL.A. No.36(J)/2007 MEGU MANKI -Versus- APPELLANT STATE OF ASSAM RESPONDENT PRESENT HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE RESERVED ON : 28th January, 2013 DECIDED ON : February 05, 2013 CRL.A.No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE RESERVED ON : 28th January, 2013 DECIDED ON : February 05, 2013 CRL.A.No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE RESERVED ON : 28th January, 2013 DECIDED ON : February 05, 2013 CRL.A.No.323/1999 SUBHASH & ANR.... Appellants Through : Mr.K.B.Andley,

More information

J U D G M E N T. impugned order dated , passed by the High Court. of Judicature at Madras, Madurai Bench in Criminal Revision

J 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 information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL (J) NO.

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL (J) NO. IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) APPELLANTS 1. Sri Dharmendra Gogoi 2. Sri Chakra Bora CRIMINAL APPEAL (J) NO.14/2004

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Indian Penal Code. Judgment reserved on : November 17, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Indian Penal Code. Judgment reserved on : November 17, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Indian Penal Code Judgment reserved on : November 17, 2008 Judgment delivered on : December 02, 2008 Crl. A. No.317/1999 Chanchal and Others... Through:

More information

IN 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, 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 information

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : 18 th March, 2010 Judgment Pronounced on: 26 th March, 2010 + CRL.APPEAL NO.193/2008 PREM PAL STATE Through: versus Through:... Appellant

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF Navaneethakrishnan... Appellant(s)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF Navaneethakrishnan... Appellant(s) REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1134 OF 2013 Navaneethakrishnan... Appellant(s) Versus The State by Inspector of Police... Respondent(s) WITH

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Date of Reserve: 5th July, Date of judgment: November 06, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Date of Reserve: 5th July, Date of judgment: November 06, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Date of Reserve: 5th July, 2007 Date of judgment: November 06, 2007 CS(OS) No.1440/2000 Mela Ram... Through: Plaintiff Ms.Sonia Khurana

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Crl.Rev.260/2011 Date of Decision: Versus...

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Crl.Rev.260/2011 Date of Decision: Versus... THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Crl.Rev.260/2011 Date of Decision: 27.04.2012 SANDEEP DIXIT Through: Mr.Anurag Jain, Advocate.... PETITIONER STATE Through: Ms.Fizani Husain,

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, 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 information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 3710/2007. Date of decision: February 06, 2009.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 3710/2007. Date of decision: February 06, 2009. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl.M.C. 3710/2007 Date of decision: February 06, 2009 GEETIKA BATRA... Through : Petitioner Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sheel

More information

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Test Case No. 01 OF 2003 Smt. Gita Mukherjee Appellant -Versus- Smt. Purnima Mukherjee and another..respondents BEFORE

More information

Fresh charge sheet filed. It be checked and registered. : Ld. APP for the State. Put up for consideration on at 02:00 PM.

Fresh charge sheet filed. It be checked and registered. : Ld. APP for the State. Put up for consideration on at 02:00 PM. FIR No.1443/15 PS Tilak Nagar Fresh charge sheet filed. It be checked and registered. : Ld. APP for the State. Put up for consideration on 08.07.2016 at 02:00 PM. West/THC : FIR No.235/13 PS Paschim Vihar

More information

IN 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: 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

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal(DB)No.458 of 2014 Santosh Sahu son of Sri Aklu Sahu, resident of village Arya, PO & PS-Kisko, District-Lohardaga.... Appellant -Versus- The State of

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Crl. Rev. No. 12/2002. Reserved on October 16, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Crl. Rev. No. 12/2002. Reserved on October 16, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Crl. Rev. No. 12/2002 Reserved on October 16, 2008 Pronounced on December 20,2008 Dr. Harish Vohra @ Dr. Harish Bora Through :- Mr.Sumit

More information

IN 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 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 information

O.M THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS

O.M THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS O.M CHERIAN @ THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2387 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2487/2014) O.M.

More information

REGISTRAR GENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA... Respondents Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Standing Counsel for CBI with Mr. Tarun Verma, Advocate.

REGISTRAR GENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA... Respondents Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Standing Counsel for CBI with Mr. Tarun Verma, Advocate. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Crl. Rev. P. No. 120 of 2010 % Date of Reserve: July 29, 2010 Date of Order: 12 th August, 2010 12.08.2010 MOHAN LAL JATIA... Petitioner Through: Mr. K.K. Sud,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 141 OF 2015 [Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.6449 of 2014) vs.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 141 OF 2015 [Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.6449 of 2014) vs. 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 141 OF 2015 [Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.6449 of 2014) MANIK TANEJA & ANR.... Appellants vs. STATE OF

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: FAO (OS) 298/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: FAO (OS) 298/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: 17.01.2013 FAO (OS) 298/2010 SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABHANDHAK COMMITTEE AND ANR... Appellants Through Mr. H.S.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE. CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No /2009(Stay)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE. CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No /2009(Stay) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No. 10941/2009(Stay) Reserved on: 17th February, 2012 Decided on: 1st March, 2012 YASHPAL KUMAR

More information

Criminal Revision PRESENT: The Hon ble Justice Ashim Kumar Roy Judgment On: C.R.R. No of 2009

Criminal Revision PRESENT: The Hon ble Justice Ashim Kumar Roy Judgment On: C.R.R. No of 2009 1 Criminal Revision PRESENT: The Hon ble Justice Ashim Kumar Roy Judgment On: 06-01-2010. C.R.R. No. 3581 of 2009 Goutam Singh versus The State of West Bengal Point: FRAMING OF CHARGE: Rash and negligent

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) 1 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Criminal Revision No.543 of 2004 & Criminal Revision No.590 of 2004 Criminal

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P.403/2003 & CRL.M.A.717/2003

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P.403/2003 & CRL.M.A.717/2003 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 17 th November,2009 Judgment Delivered on: 19 th November, 2009 + CRL.REV.P.403/2003 & CRL.M.A.717/2003 STATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF

More information

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

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 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 information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2013 VERSUS J U D G M E N T

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2013 VERSUS J U D G M E N T REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1656 OF 2013 VIJAY MOHAN SINGH VERSUS APPELLANT STATE OF KARNATAKA RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T M.R. SHAH, J.

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT: ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 2013 Abdul Baten Appellant -Versus- State of Assam & 15 Others Respondents -BEFORE-

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009. Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009. Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, 1972. BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009 Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011 Judgment delivered on: 16th January,2012 SUDESH KUMAR

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) APPELLANTS 1) Tafar Tappo 2) Milkush Lekra CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.13(J)/2005 By advocate

More information