Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (1.07 seconds)
Documents citing Ravinder Chaddha vs State Nct Of Delhi on 26 April, 2013

The State vs 1. Sanjay on 21 January, 2015

In this regard , I may mention the authority of Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the SC No.07/14 State vs Sanjay etc., (Page 19 of 22 ) FIR No. 454/13 D.O.D 21.1.2015 P.S S.B Dairy u/s 302 /34 IPC decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State vs Lekh Raj on 20 January, 2015

45 Now, the question arises whether only on the basis of this circumstance i.e recovery of possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused, can accused be convicted for the offence of murder. The simple answer is' NO. In this regard , I may take the SC No. 01/2014 State vs Lekh Raj (Page 28 of 32 ) FIR No. 227/13 D.O.D 20.1.2015 P.S Alipur u/s 302/201 IPC help of the decision of a case titled as Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State vs 1. Ravi @ Bauna on 29 April, 2014

35. Now, the question arises whether only on the basis of this sole circumstance i.e recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused Ravi @ Bauna , can accused persons be convicted for the offence of murder. The simple answer is' NO. In this regard , I may mention the authority as relied upon by the ld counsel SC No. 118/14 State vs Ravi @ Bauna etc (Page 24 of 26 ) FIR no. 484/2008 D.O.D 29.4.2014 P.S Narela u/s 302/34 IPC for the accused person, Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the intance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State vs Fudur Bhagat on 25 June, 2014

The simple answer is' NO. In this regard , help can be taken from the decision of a case reported as Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held that " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State vs Sher Khan @ Sheru on 20 November, 2014

In this regard , I may mention the authority of Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the SC No.83/14 State vs Sher Khan @ Sheru (Page 23 of 25 ) FIR no. 85/2012 D.O.D 20.11.2014 P.S Narela u/s 302/34 IPC circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State vs 1. Jasbir S/O Randhir Singh on 1 December, 2014

66 Now, the question arises whether only on the basis of this circumstance i.e recovery of possible weapons of offence at the instance of the accused persons, can accused persons be convicted for the offence of murder. The simple answer is' NO. In this regard , I may take the help of the decision of a case titled as Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court SC No. 155/14 State vs Jasbir & Ors (Page 60 of 66 ) FIR No.1068/2006 D.O.D 1.12.2014 P.S Prashant Vihar u/s 302/201/120 B/ IPC of Delhi held " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State vs Mohd Shafiq on 27 November, 2014

36. Now, the question arises whether only on the basis of this sole circumstance i.e recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused Mohd Shafiq, can accused be convicted for the offence of attempt to murder. The simple answer is' NO. In this regard , I SC No.72/14 State vs Mohd Shafiq (Page 17 of 23 ) D.O.D 27.11.2014 FIR No. 344/11 P.S S.P Badli u/s 307/34 may mention the authority titled as , Deepak Chaddha vs State of Delhi, 2012 (1) JCC 540 wherein Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held " We do not propose to deal with the purity of the evidence relating to the two recoveries i.e the recovery of the shirt and the knife at the instance of the appellant, for the reason, in the decisions reported as Kallo Passi Vs State, 2009(2) vs Chhatrasing & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 1753; Surjit Singh vs State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 110; Deva Singh Vs State of Rajasthan , 1999 CriLJ 265 , & Prabhoo vs State of UP, AIR 1963 SC 1113 the Supreme Court held that in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the circumstances of seizure of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused as also the recovery of a possible weapon of offence at the instance of the accused are wholly in sufficient to sustain the charge of murder against the accused".
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1