Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 186 (1.07 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Maharashtra & Ors vs Ravi Prakash Babulalsing Parmar & Anr on 31 October, 2006

State vs Ravi Prakash on 22 June, 2024

"Courts should not overlook the act itself. In considering the act not only the result but knowledge or intention is to be considered. If the act was such that nothing more than simple hurt could reasonably be thought likely to ensue from it, then, although grievous hurt may unexpectedly have ensued, it would be Court's duty to convict the offender of simple hurt, judging that grievous hurt was not in his contemplation; for, according to Section 322 of the Indian Penal Code, a person can be convicted of grievous hurt only when the result and intention correspond or when grievous hurt had been suffered from an act which was intended to cause grievous hurt, State Vs. Ravi Prakash & Ors.
Delhi District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . (1) Ravi on 30 April, 2015

29. PW4 Ct. Harminder has also not deposed anything in his examination in chief regarding public persons being sought to be associated with the proceedings of the police team. In cross-examination he deposed that no notice was served on any passers-by to join the police team and he could not recollect the description of any person tried to be associated with the police proceedings. He further deposed that no person State vs. Ravi & Anr, FIR No. 406/10, PS Bindapur and State vs. Kamal Kishore Sabharwal, FIR No. 33/11, PS Special Cell 15/19 from the school was called to join the proceedings and that no person had gone to see whether there was any guard present at the school gate. He deposed that persons were passing the spot when the police team was there but no such person was asked to join the raid.
Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . (1) Ravi on 30 April, 2015

29. PW4 Ct. Harminder has also not deposed anything in his examination in chief regarding public persons being sought to be associated with the proceedings of the police team. In cross-examination he deposed that no notice was served on any passers-by to join the police team and he could not recollect the description of any person tried to be associated with the police proceedings. He further deposed that no person State vs. Ravi & Anr, FIR No. 406/10, PS Bindapur and State vs. Kamal Kishore Sabharwal, FIR No. 33/11, PS Special Cell 15/19 from the school was called to join the proceedings and that no person had gone to see whether there was any guard present at the school gate. He deposed that persons were passing the spot when the police team was there but no such person was asked to join the raid.
Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Fir No. 219/2014 State vs Ravi And Anr Cs No. 1327/2017 on 16 January, 2023

12. In her cross examination as well PW1 Asha Mishra had denied that she had seen accused snatching the bag from her. As per the explanation furnished by witness, the accused had snatched her bag from behind and had fled away. Thus, it must be possible that complainant had not seen the person snatching her bag. Further there is no MLC or other document on record to show that assault or criminal force was used by the accused while snatching the bag. In the absence of any testimony of complainant in this regard and also in the absence of MLC, it cannot be presumed that complainant was assaulted or criminal force was used against her. Since the State Vs. Ravi And Anr FIR No. : 219/2014 PS Hauz Khas U/s 356/379/411/34 IPC Page no.4 of 5 FIR No. 219/2014 State vs Ravi And Anr CS No. 1327/2017 complainant had denied the identity of accused, it could not be proved in the case that the purse of complainant was snatched by the accused from the hands of complainant.
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Ravi Parkash on 28 October, 2024

13. Since the star witnesses of the present case i.e. PW-2 and PW-3 (both eyewitnesses) have turned hostile in toto and have failed to identify the accused, and PW Rajdev Bharti had expired and was dropped from the list of witnesses, and further PW-1 Rohan Bharti who is cousin brother of the deceased has only identified the body of the deceased and was not present at the spot, and further since the remaining witnesses were being formal in nature who were not present at the place of incident, therefore, this court does away with the necessity of recording testimonies of remaining formal prosecution witnesses and recording statement of accused (SA). Since no incriminating evidence against the accused has been brought on record by the prosecution, therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts. Accordingly, this court acquits the accused Ravi Parkash of charges u/s Digitally signed SARTHAK by SARTHAK PANWAR 287/304A IPC. PANWAR Date: 2024.10.28 18:40:19 +0530 Pronounced in the open (SARTHAK PANWAR) Court on 28.10.2024 JMFC-05 (North), Rohini Courts New Delhi 28.10.2024 State Vs Ravi Parkash FIR no. 164/2009 6 of 6
Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next