Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 9152 (1.14 seconds)
Documents citing Union Of India vs K.A. Najeeb on 1 February, 2021

Sunil Tudu vs Union Of India (Through Nia) on 13 January, 2025

(iv) Further, Petitioner was also identified by sole surviving constable driver Sukhlal Kudada who was eye witness of the instant crime who identified the petitioner during TIP carried out in presence of learned Judicial Magistrate on 7.1.2020. therefore, appellant's prayer for bail is fit to be dismissed u/s 43D (5) of the UA (P) Act as prima facie there is enough materials available against the petitioner. (V) It has further been submitted that the ratio of judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant as rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (Supra), is not applicable in the instant case, reason being that in the aforesaid case, nature and background of the offence was different.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 48 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Kunwar Ganjhu vs Union Of India Through National ... on 15 January, 2024

(v) The ratio of judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant as rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (Supra), is not applicable in the instant case, reason being that, in the aforesaid case, accused having no criminal antecedent and in the said case, nature and background of the offence was different but in the instant case, it has come on record that appellant has direct nexus with the banned organisation and altogether, there are two criminal case pending against him, in which, one is related to section 10/13 of the UA(P) Act and second is related to section 17(i)(ii) of CLA Act.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Balram Sahu @ Bolo @ David @ Raju @ Ali Khan vs The Union Of India Through National ... on 3 April, 2024

(iv) It has been submitted that even the case of Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb (supra) is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the fact was altogether different i.e., in the aforesaid case some of the co-accused persons since have been convicted for a period of 8 years in consequence of the splitting of the trial and when the accused, K.A. Najeeb was subjected to criminal trial then he remained in custody for about five years and at that time 276 witnesses were left to be examined. The Hon'ble Apex Court called for a report from the NIA as -8- to whether there is any chance for reducing the number of witnesses or not to which the NIA has shown no inclination to screen its endless list of witnesses and in that view of the matter, the Hon'ble Apex Court opined that there is no likelihood of trial being completed within a reasonable period of time. In those circumstances, the order granting bail by the High Court was not interfered with. But in the case at hand only two witnesses are left to be examined and the next date fixed before the trial Court is 15th April, 2024.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

P.S. Chauka vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 March, 2025

23. But here in the instant case, as per the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant out of 10 witnesses, 01witness has already been examined. Thus, this Court is of the view that in the facts and circumstances the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex court in Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (supra) will not be applicable in fact and circumstances of instant case.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Sajjan Kumar Bhuiya vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Nia on 6 February, 2024

(v) The ratio of judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant as rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (Supra), is not applicable in the instant case, reason being that, in the aforesaid case, accused having no criminal antecedent and in the said case, nature and background 7 of the offence was different but in the instant case, it has come on record that appellant has direct nexus with the banned organization.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 52 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next