Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.49 seconds)
Documents citing Nemi Chand vs The State Of Rajasthan And Ors. on 30 September, 2016

Shivaji Rajaram Take And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 23 January, 2023

Further, reliance has been placed on the decision in Nemi Chand vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2006 Cri. L.J. 4258 (Rajasthan High Court), wherein it has been held that the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that appointment of advocate representing complainant as Special Public Prosecutor would affect fair trial was devoid of merit, when Advocate on behalf of the complainant can address the Court along with the Public Prosecutor, he can also be appointed as Special Public ::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2023 21:56:15 ::: cwp379.22 15 Prosecutor. The only embargo provided by Section 24(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that he should have 10 years standing as an advocate. It is submitted by the learned APP that respondent No.2 is covered under the said parameters.
Bombay High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - V V Kankanwadi - Full Document

Shrikant Sambhaji Take vs Shivaji Rajaram Take And Others on 23 January, 2023

Further, reliance has been placed on the decision in Nemi Chand vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2006 Cri. L.J. 4258 (Rajasthan High Court), wherein it has been held that the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that appointment of advocate representing complainant as Special Public Prosecutor would affect fair trial was devoid of merit, when Advocate on behalf of the complainant can address the Court along with the Public Prosecutor, he can also be appointed as Special Public ::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2023 21:56:22 ::: cwp379.22 15 Prosecutor. The only embargo provided by Section 24(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that he should have 10 years standing as an advocate. It is submitted by the learned APP that respondent No.2 is covered under the said parameters.
Bombay High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - V V Kankanwadi - Full Document

Shrikant Sambhaji Take vs Shivaji Rajaram Take And Others on 23 January, 2023

Further, reliance has been placed on the decision in Nemi Chand vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2006 Cri. L.J. 4258 (Rajasthan High Court), wherein it has been held that the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that appointment of advocate representing complainant as Special Public Prosecutor would affect fair trial was devoid of merit, when Advocate on behalf of the complainant can address the Court along with the Public Prosecutor, he can also be appointed as Special Public ::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 05:34:47 ::: cwp379.22 15 Prosecutor. The only embargo provided by Section 24(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that he should have 10 years standing as an advocate. It is submitted by the learned APP that respondent No.2 is covered under the said parameters.
Bombay High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - V V Kankanwadi - Full Document

Shivaji Rajaram Take And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 23 January, 2023

Further, reliance has been placed on the decision in Nemi Chand vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2006 Cri. L.J. 4258 (Rajasthan High Court), wherein it has been held that the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that appointment of advocate representing complainant as Special Public Prosecutor would affect fair trial was devoid of merit, when Advocate on behalf of the complainant can address the Court along with the Public Prosecutor, he can also be appointed as Special Public ::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2023 05:34:41 ::: cwp379.22 15 Prosecutor. The only embargo provided by Section 24(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that he should have 10 years standing as an advocate. It is submitted by the learned APP that respondent No.2 is covered under the said parameters.
Bombay High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - V V Kankanwadi - Full Document
1