Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Haryana vs Balkar Singh & Ors on 26 March, 2009

State vs . Balkar Singh on 6 June, 2014

11. PW-4 SI Hazari Lal being IO was examined on 01.02.2014 and deposed that on 23.01.2007 he was posted as ASI in PS Malviya Nagar and on that day he received DD no. 31-B regarding accident. He further stated that he along with Ct. Ram Ratan, again said Ct. Sheo Ram reached the spot i.e. C-56, Shivalik Road where he saw a car bearing registration no. DL-1YA (he does not remember full particulars of the car) and he also saw another FIR No. 99/07 State Vs Balkar Singh Pages 5/14 scooter which was standing there in accidental condition at the corner of the road (he does not remember the number of scooter).
Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . Balkar Singh on 8 June, 2022

However, when they became aware that title to the said property is disputed, they stopped the said sale and recovered the consideration amount. These PWs have corroborated each other only to the above stated extent. But, none of them categorically deposed as to the role of accused in forging the title documents of the said property. Given the aforesaid discussion considering that these buyers were also involved in this case, why were they not made complainant in this case. Alleged misrepresentation was made to them. Based on this misrepresentation, they had transacted with accused and paid him certain amount of money FIR No. 136/2004 State Vs. Balkar Singh 9/10 which they later refused to pay due to title of the said property being disputed. Locus-standi of complainant, who has never met accused, is not beyond being questioned reasonably.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Shunti Devi Wife Of Mohan Yadav; vs State Of Jharkhand on 17 January, 2020

21. Learned counsel for the appellants has also cited two judgments i.e. (i) State of Haryana versus Balkar Singh and others, reported in (2009) 11 Supreme Court Cases 592 and (ii) Bhirgun Mian & Ors. versus The State of Bihar, reported in 2012 4 EastCrC 533 in support of his arguments and that at least benefit of doubt should be extended to the appellants. Counsel therefore says that for all the aforesaid reasons the conviction of the accused cannot be sustained and upheld. Arguments of counsel for the State:
Jharkhand High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - R Bhengra - Full Document

State Of J&K vs Balkar Singh & Others on 12 August, 2010

Petitioner-State has preferred this criminal revision against the order dated 5.5.2009 passed by 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu in case State vs Balkar Singh & others, discharging accused Mohd. Bashir-respondent no.1, on the grounds taken in the memo of revision petition. It appears that a complaint/FIR came to be lodged by one Kewal Krishan Gandotra against the accused/respondents in Police Station Bahu Fort, Jammu. Accordingly, FIR No.35/2004 came to be registered. The said information set the police in motion. The Investigating Officer conducted the investigation and Challan came to be presented against the accused before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 467, 468 & 471 RPC. The learned CJM vide order dated 7.9.2006 committed the case to the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Jammu, who transferred the same to the Court of 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu for disposal under law.
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - M A Mir - Full Document

Balkar Singh & Anr vs Balkar Singh & Others on 11 August, 2010

The petitioners have challenged the order dated 5.5.2009 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu in case State vs Balkar Singh & others, whereby they came to be charge sheeted for commission of the offence punishable under sections 467, 468 and 471 of Ranbir Penal Code (for short, RPC) and for quashing the proceedings of the case, on the grounds taken in the memo of petition.
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - M A Mir - Full Document

Balkar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 8 January, 2024

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of order dated 01.11.2018 Annexure P-3 whereby the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed person by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Malerkotla, Sangrur in criminal case titled State Vs. Balkar Singh FIR No. 113 dated 17.10.2015 registered under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC at Police Station Amargarh District Sangrur.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - K Singh - Full Document
1