Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing Rakesh Yadav And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, ... on 2 August, 2023

Rakesh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 June, 2025

ÅWaps ikS/ks@isM+ksa dks 3&4 QhV xM~<k djds yxk;sxk rkfd os 'kh?kz gh iw.kZ fodflr gks ldsaA vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djus ds fy,] vkosnd dks fjgk fd;s tkus dh fnukad ls 30 fnuksa ds Hkhrj lacaf/kr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k o`{kksas@ikS/kksa ds jksi.k ds lHkh QksVks çLrqr djuk gksxsaA rRi'pkr~] fopkj.k ds lekiu rd gj rhu eghus esa vkosnd ds }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k izxfr fjiksVZ çLrqr dh tk,xh A o`{kksa dh çxfr ij fuxjkuh j[kuk fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk drZO; gS D;ksafd i;kZoj.k {kj.k ds dkj.k ekuo vfLrRo nkao ij gS vkSj U;k;ky; vuqikyu ds ckjs esa vkosnd }kjk fn[kkbZ xbZ fdlh Hkh ykijokgh dks utj vankt ugh dj ldrk gSA blfy, vkosnd dks isM+ksa dh çxfr vkSj vkosndx.k }kjk vuqikyu ds lac/a k esa ,d fjiksVZ çLrqr djus ds fy, funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa vkonsd }kjk fd;s x;s vuqikyu dh ,d la{kfIr fjiskVZ bl U;k;ky; ds le{k izR;sd rhu ekg esa ¼vxys N% eghuksa ds fy,½ j[kh tk;sxh ftls fd ^^funsZ'k^^ 'kh"kZ ds varxZr j[kk tk,xkA o`{kkjksi.k esa ;k isM+ksa dh ns[kHkky esa vkosndx.k dh vksj ls dh xbZ dksbZ Hkh pwd vkosnd dks tekur dk ykHk ysus ls oafpr dj ldrh gSA vkosndx.k dks viuh ilan ds LFkku ij bu ikS/kksa@isMksa dks jksius dh Lora=rk gksxh] ;fn og bu jksis x;s isMksa dh Vªh xkMZ ;k ckM+ yxkdj j{kk djuk pkgrk gS] rks os vius Loa; ds O;; ij ;g djus ds fy;s Lora= gksaxsA bl U;k;ky; }kjk ;g funsZ'k ,d ijh{k.k izdj.k ds rkSj ij fn, x, gSa rkfd fgalk vkSj cqjkbZ ds fopkj dk izfrdkj] l`tu ,oa IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR CRA NO. 69 OF 2019 (RAKESH YADAV & ORS. VS. STATE OF M.P.) izd`fr ds lkFk ,dkdkj gksus ds ek/;e ls lkeaktL; LFkkfir fd;k tk ldsA orZeku esa ekuo vfLrRo ds vko';d vax ds :i esa n;k] lsok] izse ,oaa d:a.kk dh izd`fr dks fodflr djus dh vko';drk gS D;ksafd ;g ekuo thou dh ewyHkwr izo`fr;ka gSa vkSj ekuo vfLrRo dks cuk, j[kus ds fy, budk iquthZfor gksuk vko';d gSA ^^;g iz;kl dsoy ,d o`{k ds jksi.k dk iz'u u gksdj cfYd ,d fopkj ds vadqj.k dk gSA^^ ;g funsZ'k vkosnd ds }kjk Lor% O;Dr dh xbZ lkeqnkf;d lsok dh bPNk ds dkj.k fn;k x;k gS tks LoSfPNd gSA It is expected from appellants that they shall submit photographs by downloading the mobile application (NISARG App) prepared at the instance of High Court for monitoring the plantation through satellite/Geo-Tagging.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A Pathak - Full Document

Nilamangai vs R.Gnanaprakash on 25 September, 2024

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the witnesses PW1 and PW2 were examined in chief on 18.02.2023. On the same day, the accused did not cross-examine the witnesses and sought for adjournment stating that the counsel for the accused is engaged elsewhere. Citing the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vinoth Kumar Vs. Punjab State and the judgment in Rajesh Yadav and others Vs. Uttar Pradesh State, the trial Court had refused adjournment for cross-examination and closed the evidence of PW1 and PW2. Thereafter, remaining witnesses PW3 to PW8 were examined on the subsequent hearings. Those days the accused has cross-examined the witnesses on the same day. Thereafter, the accused has filed an https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/8 Crl.O.P.No.13065 of 2024 application to transfer the case from the Sessions Court to Juvenile Justice Court stating that he is a minor. But, the same was dismissed. Thereafter, the present application was filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C to recall the witnesses without citing any reason only to harass the petitioner and her daughter who is the victim of the crime and hence the order is to be set aside.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - G Jayachandran - Full Document
1   2 Next