Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (1.88 seconds)
Documents citing Venkategowda & Ors vs State Of Karnataka on 6 November, 2006

State vs . Mohd. Shahid Khan Etc. on 7 February, 2013

38 In the case titled as Venkategowda vs. State of Karnataka, 2007 (1) R.C.R (Criminal) 152, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has also observed that :­ "Discrepancies in statements of P.Ws who were subjected to S. C No. 91/08 : State vs. Mohd. Shahid Khan : Page No.18 / 21 19 lengthy cross­examination and questions, numbering more than hundred were put to each witness in such type of cross examination by defence, some improvements, contradictions and omissions are bound to occur in their evidence, but they are not of serious nature and they cannot be treated as vital and significant contradictions so as to disbelieve and discard the substratum of the prosecution case."
Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Drugs Inspector vs Satish Sharma on 2 April, 2018

In support of this line of argument relied upon the ruling rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of Venkategowda & Ors., Vs. State of Karnataka, reported in 2006 (4) Crimes 338 (SC.), wherein, it is held that "Discrepancies and contradictions were minor and might be by reason that their cross examination was done after long gap and their examination was recorded after almost 10 Years."
Bangalore District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chikkalanerpu Agricultural Co ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 May, 2025

35.6. Thus, the right under Article 19(1)(c) is not an absolute right but is governed by the provisions of the KCS Act, 1959, the KCS Rules 1960 and any subordinate or delegated legislation made thereunder. Suffice it to say that the formation of association or unions or Co-operative Societies is not a right without any restriction, but the restrictions are already contained in the KCS Act, KCS Rules, etc. 35.7. The decision in Venkategowda's case rendered by this Court recognizes the aforesaid rights to form a Society, and laid down grounds of unconstitutionality. In the present case, the Constitutionality or otherwise of any provision is not in question and hence, the said decision in
Karnataka High Court Cites 74 - Cited by 0 - S Govindaraj - Full Document

Ramapura Vyvasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 May, 2025

35.6. Thus, the right under Article 19(1)(c) is not an absolute right but is governed by the provisions of the KCS Act, 1959, the KCS Rules 1960 and any subordinate or delegated legislation made thereunder. Suffice it to say that the formation of association or unions or Co-operative Societies is not a right without any restriction, but the restrictions are already contained in the KCS Act, KCS Rules, etc. 35.7. The decision in Venkategowda's case rendered by this Court recognizes the aforesaid rights to form a Society, and laid down grounds of unconstitutionality. In the present case, the Constitutionality or otherwise of any provision is not in question and hence, the said decision in
Karnataka High Court Cites 74 - Cited by 0 - S Govindaraj - Full Document

Kamaganahalli Milk Producers Womens Co ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 May, 2025

35.6. Thus, the right under Article 19(1)(c) is not an absolute right but is governed by the provisions of the KCS Act, 1959, the KCS Rules 1960 and any subordinate or delegated legislation made thereunder. Suffice it to say that the formation of association or unions or Co-operative Societies is not a right without any restriction, but the restrictions are already contained in the KCS Act, KCS Rules, etc. 35.7. The decision in Venkategowda's case rendered by this Court recognizes the aforesaid rights to form a Society, and laid down grounds of unconstitutionality. In the present case, the Constitutionality or otherwise of any provision is not in question and hence, the said decision in
Karnataka High Court Cites 74 - Cited by 0 - S Govindaraj - Full Document

Sri M R Mallanna vs State Of Karnataka on 11 January, 2022

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners brings to the notice of this Court a decision of a co-ordinate bench of this Court in W.P.No.48973/2019 and connected matters in the case of Sri Venkategowda and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others, dated 04.08.2021, wherein the vires of the said provisions were questioned and this Court has upheld the validity of the said provisions. It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners -31- that by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioners were permitted to cast their votes in the elections which was held on 14.11.2021.
Karnataka High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - R Devdas - Full Document

Sri S Basavaraju vs The Secretary on 28 January, 2022

5. The learned Single Judge after hearing the matter has dismissed the writ petition by relying upon the decision of this Court in writ petition No.48973/2019 and connected matters in the case of (Sri Venkategowda and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others) dated -9- 04.08.2021, wherein the vires of the aforesaid provisions of Section 20 clause a(iv) and a(v) of the Act, 1959 have been upheld. In view thereof, the learned Single Judge has come to the conclusion that the eligibility criteria imposed therein would be applicable to the petitioners and the petitioners not being eligible they could not have cast their vote. Taking that into account, the learned Single Judge has directed respondent No.2-Returning Officer to take note of these aspects and permit only those of the candidates who are eligible in terms of Annexure-C to the writ petition to cast their votes and the votes cast by the other petitioners shall not be taken into consideration. The learned Single Judge has also directed that if by this time the votes are counted, the same shall stand rescinded. The Returning Officer shall conduct re-polling once again within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

R. Mohammed Rafi vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 January, 2022

2. Recently, this Court had an occasion to consider similar prayers made in W.P.No.24223/2021. This Court by order dated 10.01.2022, took note of the fact that in W.P.No.48973/2019 and connected matters in the case of Sri Venkategowda and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others, dated 04.08.2021, wherein the vires of the said provisions were questioned and this Court has upheld the validity of the said provisions.
Karnataka High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R Devdas - Full Document
1   2 Next