Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 80 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Chhattisgarh vs Lokendra Puri 6 Crmp/652/2019 Rajendra ... on 14 March, 2019

State vs . Kamlesh Kumar Gaur on 17 December, 2021

31. Further the prosecution relied upon the testimony of PW-3 HC Rabindra Kumar, IO of the present case in order to prove the guilt of the accused. During his examination in chief, IO gave a detailed account of investigation carried out by him in the present case. However, perusal of the FIR Number :403/17 State vs. Kamlesh Kumar Gaur 13 / 17 testimony reveals that he was also not the eye witness to the accident. The witness had reached the spot only after the accident had taken place and while he conducted the investigation in the present case, he could not explain in detail the act of rashness and negligent on the part of the accused. He did not even state the accused to be driving his car in a rash and negligent manner. Although he had gotten the mechanical inspection conducted which indicates that the vehicle was involved in the accident but the same is not sufficient to prove the act of rash or negligent driving of the accused. Therefore, even the testimony of PW3 is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused in the present case beyond reasonable doubt. Moreover, site plan Ex. PW3/B prepared by the IO is not sufficient to prove the act of rashness or negligence on the part of the accused. While it shows the location of the accident which is undisputed, it could not be inferred that accident occurred due to rash and negligent act of the accused.
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Cr. Case/7887/2017 on 24 February, 2021

In the meantime ASI Rajesh Kumar and HC Satpal from Excise Department also reached at the spot, who also had the information regarding the said person carrying illicit liquor. On inquiry the said person revealed his name as Umesh Kumar. On checking one bag over which there was design of multi colour roses and from that bag, quarter bottles of Impact Grain Whiskey of illicit liquor for Sale in Haryana only, totalling 96 quarter bottles were recovered and from the other bag which was also having multi colour design quarter bottles of Asli Santra Masaledar Desi Sharab for Sale in Haryana only totalling 82 were found. He asked 4-5 public persons to join Digitally signed ANURAG by ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date: 2021.02.24 19:07:45 +05'30' FIR no. 93/17 State v. Umesh Kumar PS Timarpur 3 of 12 investigation but none agreed and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses and for that reason no notice was served upon them. Then IO took out one quarter bottle as sample from each bag and he gave serial No. 1 to bag having design of multi colour roses and serial No. 2 to other multi colour bag. Further he marked the sample quarter bottle of Impact grain whiskey as A1 and Asli Santra quarter bottle as A2. He prepared pullanda by tying the neck of quarter bottle with white colour cloth and sealed the same with the seal of AV. He seized the aforesaid case property vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/A bearing his signature at point X. He handed over the seal after its use to Ct. Vinod. He filled Form M-29 at the spot. Then he prepared tehrir and same was exhibited as Ex. PW1/B bearing his signature at point X and handed over the same to Ct. Vinod for registration of FIR. After registration of FIR Ct. Vinod returned to the spot alongwith IO HC Mukesh and copy of FIR & original rukka. Then he narrated the whole incident to IO HC Mukesh Kumar and handed over to him the accused alongwith aforesaid seized case property and case file. IO prepared site plan at his instance. IO recorded his supplementary statement. (Accused Umesh Kumar was correctly identified by the witness). He deposed that he could identify the case property. MHC(M) produced one order of confiscation under section 59 of Delhi Excise Act, 2009 dated 02.05.2019 issued by Assistant Commissioner Excise, GNCT of Delhi, whereby the case property in present case had been destroyed on that day and photographs of the case property i.e. illicit liquor before destruction. (The photographs were shown to the witness who identified the same as that of case property). The photographs alongwith the aforesaid order were exhibited as Ex. P1 (colly). During cross-examination by ld. Counsel for the accused, he had deposed that he had attended the DD entry no.41A at about 4.45 pm. He reached Sanjay Basti Timarpur at around 5.30 pm alongwith Ct. Vinod. He had not received information about the accused through secret informer.
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Sonu@Irfan on 7 August, 2025

"that the recovery is proved by three police officials who have differed on who snatched the Kirpan from the petitioner and at what time. The recovery was from a street with houses on both sides and shops nearby. And, yet no witness from the public has been produced. Not that in every case the police officials are to be treated as unworthy of reliance but their failure to join witnesses from the public especially when they are available at their elbow, may, as in the present case, cast doubt. They have again churned out a stereotyped Digitally signed by Cr. Case No. 2962/2022 FIR No. 296/22 State Vs. Sonu @ Irfan PS Jahangir Puri 7 of 11 JYOTI JYOTI Date:
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Munna @ Roshan Chunna Khan And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 28 July, 2023

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi) Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the judgement of the Apex Court reported in J.T. 2008(() SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another), as well as judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab) and reported in (2014) Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another), the proceedings of Case No. 2877 of 2013 (State Vs. Vs. Munna and Others), under sections 325, 323 IPC, Police Station- Maudarwaja District- Farrukhabad is hereby quashed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - N Tiwari - Full Document

Nagendra Prasad vs Ragistrar General Hon Ble High Court Of ... on 14 October, 2020

Pursuant to the aforesaid notice, the petitioner submitted reply in which he has stated that he has been acquitted in the Criminal Case No.3335 of 2016 (State vs. Munna Bharti), under Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Ubhaon, District Ballia on 14.03.2019. The District Judge Banda being not satisfied with the reply of the petitioner passed an order on 10.12.2019 cancelling the candidature of the petitioner.
Allahabad High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S Srivastava - Full Document

Rakesh Gupta vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 October, 2023

In view of the foregoing discussions, proceedings of Case No. 188 of 2019 (State Vs. Munna Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 576 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 IPC, Sections 3/57/7 of U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 and Sections 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra, based on the charge-sheet stands quashed, however the proceedings against the applicant under Sections 419, 420 IPC are just, proper and legal and do not call for any interference and the said proceedings would continue against the applicants under Sections 419, 420 IPC in accordance with law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - R Gupta - Full Document

Shiv Kumar Saini And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 April, 2025

10. Considering the fact as well as on perusal of record, it appears that no heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or other offences, which may affect the society in general, are made out and both the parties have amicably settled their dispute through compromise which has been duly verified by the court below as well as in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another; (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Another (2014) 6 SCC 477, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 and State of M.P. vs. Dhruv Gurjar, AIR 2017 SC 1106, the entire proceedings including the impugned charge-sheet dated 13.04.2018 as well as impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 28.05.2018 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate- VIII, Kanpur Nagar in Case No. 26049 of 2018 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar Saini & others) arising out of Crime No. 276 of 2017 u/s 498-A, 323 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station- Nawabganj, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of learned Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)- 05, Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next