Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 166 (2.08 seconds)
Documents citing Sunil Bajaj... Appellant vs State Of M.P.... Respondent on 11 October, 2001

State vs . Sonu Yadav And Others Page No. 1 Of 69 on 26 February, 2021

All of a sudden, all the allegations surfaced after death of deceased which cannot be believed on account of ratio of judgments as relied upon by accused persons (accused relied upon judgments in cases titled as "Sunil Bajaj Vs. State of MP (2001) 9 SCC 417, State of Karnatka Vs. Dr. H. A. Ramswamy 1996 SCC Online KAR 97, Naveen Vs. State of Delhi 2014 SCC Online DEL 4355, Umed Singh and Ors Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2014 SCC Online DEL 3492, Krishan Kumar @ Setu and Anr Vs. State of Delhi 2014 SCC Online DEL 1879, Naraini Devi Vs. State of Delhi DHC 1992 Online DEL 119, State of Delhi Vs. Sohan Lal and Others 2011 SCC Online DEL 1650, Vikas and Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), Sunita and Anr. Vs. State DHC 2019 SCC Online DEL 6550, Lachman Vs. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) 2014 SCC Online DEL 2208, Raja @ Rampal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2011 SCC Online DEL 697, Kanwar Pal Vs. Shakuntala and Others DHC 2015 SCC Online DEL 6827, Laxminarayan @ Rajesh Vs. State DHC 2012 SCC Online DEL 2301, Kartar @ Rajesh Vs. State DHC 2017 SCC Online DEL 8402, Girajo Devi & Ors Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)
Delhi District Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . (1) Rakesh Sharma on 14 January, 2011

L.J 2723 ; Sunil Bajaj Vs. State of M.P AIR 2001 SC 3020; Emperor Vs. Parimal Chatterjee and others AIR 1932 Calcutta SC No. 65/2008 Page 9/25 -:10:- 760; State of Bihar Vs. Ranen Nath and others, AIR 1938 Patna 259 (V 45 C 96) ; Shri Ram Vs. The U.P, Sai Ram and another Vs. State of U.P, AIR 1975 SC, 175 ; Gurdip Kumar and others Vs. the State of Punjab, 1981 CRI L.J NoC 178 ; Brij Lal and Anr. Vs. State 1985, C.C Cases HC 130 ; Gurcharan Singh Vs. State 1983 C.C Cases 350 (HC) ; Ms. Taposhi Chakervarti Vs. State, 2000(2) JCC 466 (Delhi) ; Laxmi & Anr Vs. State 2000 (2) JCC (Delhi) 297 ; Maulaali Yakub Jamadar & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra IV (2000) CCR 624 Bombay High Court ; Alka Grewal Vs. State of M.P, 2000 CRI.L.J 672 ; Pallem Deniel Victor @ Victor Hanter and Others Vs. State of A.P 1997 (1) Crimes 499 ; Manish Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan, 1995 CRI L.J 3066 ; C. Nehru Baby Vs. State of A.P, 2002(1) C.C Cases (H.C) 300 ; Ahshan Khan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2002 91) Crimes 117 ; Pradeep S. Ahluwalia Vs. The State, 1999 (2) C.C Cases HC 414 ; K. Ravi Kumar Vs. State and Anr. 2008 (1) Crimes 345 (Mad.)
Delhi District Court Cites 63 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Liaqat Ali Age 34 Years S/O Ghulam Rubani ... vs Union Territory Of Jammu & Kashmir on 2 September, 2022

Ratio of the judgment (Supra) makes the legal proposition abundantly clear, that School registers are the authentic documents which are maintained in the official course by a public servant while discharging his official duty are entitled to credence of much weight unless proved otherwise, and the School certificate regarding the age of victim/prosecutrix in the case in hand has to be believed as genuine & authentic document and a relevant fact u/s 35 of the Evidence Act. Ratio of the judgment (Supra) squarely apply to the facts of the case in hand. It is pertinent to mention here, that the date of birth certificate of the prosecutrix/victim (PW-3) Mark-A has been prepared by PW-8 Mohd Mudasir a Govt. Teacher being a public servant in discharge of his official duty after comparing it with the original record/register, is a genuine & authentic document and is a relevant fact admissible u/s 35 of the Evidence Act, hence, is conclusive proof regarding age of the prosecutrix. Therefore, the date of birth of the prosecutrix is proved as 12-12-1995 and at the relevant time of occurrence on 04-4-2011 her age was 15 years and about 4 months and she was minor. The judgments relied by Ld. Counsel for appellant/convict reported in (i) 2013 Legal Eagle (SC) 182 [Rajesh Patel versus State of Jharkhand], (ii) 2009(8) Supreme 20 [Sunil-Appellant versus State of Haryana-Respondent] & (iii) 2011 Legal Eagle (SC) 523 [Krishan Kumar Malik versus State of Haryana] in view of the facts of the case in hand and the evidence adduced by the prosecution before the trial 12 Crl A (D) No. 5/2021 court, are quite distinguishable. Arguments, therefore, putforth by Ld. Counsel for appellant/convict that the prosecutrix at the time of occurrence was major and consenting party, are legally unsustainable, repelled, rejected and discarded.
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Tarkeshwar Prasad And Anr. vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 October, 2002

In Sunil Bajaj v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2001 Cri LJ 4700) (SC) (supra) the Supreme Court held that non-mention of demand of dowry in her letter by the deceased to her parents, written soon before her death, is an important circumstance for disbelieving the prosecution story regarding cruelty and dowry death. Consequently, I set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant No. 2 Ram Pyari also and acquit her of the offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Sunil Bajaj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 September, 2014

Prayer for bail was opposed by the learned P.P. for the State and it was contended that the person with whom the parity is being claimed was not named in the FIR nor in the statement given under section 161 of Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix and since the case of the applicant stands on different footing, his application is liable to be rejected. Apart that, it is also pointed out by the counsel for the State that some cases have also been registered against 3 Mcrc.8165/14 Sunil Bajaj Vs. State of M.P. the applicant and if the applicant is released in this case at the stage when the investigation is pending, the whole efforts of the prosecution would become futile. It is therefore prayed that the application may be rejected.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next