Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 303 (0.69 seconds)
Documents citing Devender Pal Singh Bhullar & Anr vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 12 April, 2013

Devender Singh vs . State Of Nct Of Delhi on 1 June, 2015

Announced in the open Court today               (Inder Jeet Singh ) on Monday, 11 Jayaistha, Saka 1937       Additional District Judge­02 (South),       Saket / New Delhi /01.06.2015 PC/LA No. 23/14 Page 6 of 6  Devender Singh Vs. State of NCT of Delhi PC/LA No. 23/14 01.06.2015 Present :  Petitioner with counsel Sh. Rajeev Chauhan for petitioner None for State/ General public/ respondent no. 1.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Devender vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 1 March, 2014

6. After perusal of the materials placed on record, having gone through the judgments relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the revisionist, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case Crl. Rev. No. 11/14; Devender Vs. State of NCT of Delhi Page No. 3 of 4 and the impugned order dated 20­02­2014 of the Ld. CMM, I am of the considered opinion that the present revision petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. TCR along with copy of this order be sent back to Ld. Trial Court. Copy of this order be given dasti to the Ld. Counsel for revisionist. Revision file be consigned to Record Room.
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

S.A.Miyajan vs Union Of India Represented By Its on 5 February, 2014

In Devender Pal Singh Bhullar case (cited supra), it has been held that the power of the President under Article 72 and the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution is manifestation of prerogative of the State and it is neither a matter of grace nor a matter of privilege but it is an important constitutional responsibility to be discharged by the highest executive keeping in view the considerations of larger public interest and welfare of the people and the President, while exercising power under Article 72, is required to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and the Central Government is duty bound to objectively place the case of the convict with a clear indication about the nature and magnitude of the crime committed by him, its impact on the society and all incriminating and extenuating circumstances.
Madras High Court Cites 52 - Cited by 0 - M Sathyanarayanan - Full Document

Prakashvati Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Others on 26 February, 2021

9. Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 submits that petitioner have not alleged any malafides against the Governor or have averred that it was a case of non-application of mind and founded on extraneous or irrelevant considerations with the result the Governor's order cannot be reviewed on the points given under the judgment of Devendra Singh Bhullar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manoharan vs State By Inspector Of Police, Variety ... on 1 August, 2019

preservation the killer has to be killed, the community may well withdraw the protection by sanctioning the death penalty. But the community will not do so in every case. It may do so in rarest of rare cases when its collective conscience is so shocked that it will expect 49 the holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise of retaining death penalty. The same analogy has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the matter of Devender Pal Singh vs. State (NCT of Delhi) [AIR 2002 SC 1661] wherein it was held that when the collective conscience of the community is so shocked, the court must award death sentence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 65 - Cited by 14 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next