citedby: 1562041

* Fakhruddin S/O. Hyderali vs The Union Of India on 3 December, 2010

The learned counsel further has referred to the reported judgment in Mohammad Hashim v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1993 L.A.C.1 in respect of non application of mind by the State in issuing section 4 notification to acquire the land being subject of litigation.

Bombay High Court Cites 48 - Cited by 0 - N H Patil - Full Document

Prosecution Weak And Suspicious. In ... vs . on 18 May, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Prosecution Weak And Suspicious. In ... vs . on 5 June, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Recording Of Fir. In Case Mohd Hasim vs . State 1999 Vi Ad on 8 April, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time F.I.R. No. 290/02 Page 6 / 8 or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Case Of The Prosecution Weak And ... vs . on 2 July, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Punjab vs . Gurmel Singh 1991 (2) Recent Criminal on 12 July, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Prosecution Weak And Suspicious. In ... vs . Gurmel on 9 July, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Suspicious. In State Of Punjab vs . Gurmel Singh 1991 (2) on 9 February, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State Of Punjab vs . Gurmel Singh 1991 (2) Recent Criminal on 23 July, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

In State Of Punjab vs . Gurmel Singh 1991 (2) Recent on 4 February, 2010

In case Mohd Hasim Vs. State 1999 VI AD (Delhi) 569 (Hon'b le Mr. Justice M. S. A Siddiqui) it was observed that documents prepared before registering the FIR bears FIR numbers, meaning thereby either FIR was recorded posterior in time or that documents were prepared after the recording of FIR, and was hold that in both case, prosecution case would collapse.

Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results