Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 104 (0.51 seconds)

Cc No.9/2016 Cbi vs . S.C. Pathak & Ors. Page 1 Of 95 on 7 January, 2017

In Ved Prakash Vs. State of Haryana, reported as AIR 1981 SC 643, the court has observed that sentencing an accused person is a sensitive exercise of discretion and not a routine or mechanical prescription acting on hunch. The trial court should have collected material necessary to help award a just punishment in the circumstances. The social backgrounds and the personal factors of the crime doer are very relevant.
Delhi District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . Amrit Pal on 23 May, 2012

In case Ved Parkash vs. State of Haryana (supra), the convict was released on probation considering the facts and circumstances involved in that particular matter. In the said case, the real cause of committed offence was land dispute between the parties, which had already been settled between the parties. That was one of the important factors to extend the benevolent provisions of Probation of Offenders Act to the convict.
Delhi District Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Satish vs State Of Haryana on 9 October, 2020

The legal position is well settled. This Court in Microqual Techno Limited and others Vs. State of Haryana and another 2015(32) RCR (Criminal) 790; Rajneesh Khanna Vs. State of Haryana and another 2017(3) LAR 555 and CRM-21242 of 2018 titled as 'Ved Parkash Vs. State of Haryana', decided on 21.05.2019, in identical circumstances held that since the main petition under Section 138 of N.I.Act stands withdrawn, in view of an amicable settlement between the parties, therefore, continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A, IPC shall be nothing but an abuse of process of law.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S Sehgal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next