Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 69 (4.17 seconds)
Documents citing Coir Board Ernakulam Kerala State & Anr. vs Indira Devi P.S. & Ors. on 10 November, 1998

State vs Indera Devi on 18 January, 2025

25. Furthermore, another important aspect that cannot be sidelined merely as an FIR No. 293/2020 Page No. 18/20 CR Cases 7233/2021 State Vs. Indra Devi irregularity is that the recovery witness i.e., Ct. Vijay Pal was alone when he made a recovery from the possession of the female accused but no effort has been shown on record to join any public person or female individual before making a cursory search of the belongings of the accused.
Delhi District Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Indra Devi on 25 October, 2024

18.As per the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, the sample of liquor and case property were sealed by the investigating officer with the seal of 'SGV4SED'. However, the PWs have not deposed qua the handing over of the said seals to any other witness or police official and no handing over memo regarding the same was prepared. The seal in the present case was not handed over to any independent witness nor was it deposited in the Page No.12 of 17 CR Cases 4051/2018 State Vs. Indra Devi malkhana to assail the possibility of its misuse. Thus, the possibility that the case property may have been tampered with cannot be ruled out.
Delhi District Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Indra Devi on 18 January, 2025

28.Thus, in view of the foregoing analysis, this Court is of the considered opinion that the benefit of doubt ought to be granted to the accused, who is entitled to be exonerated of the charges against her in the present case. The FIR No. 5/2021 Page No. 19/20 CR Cases 1151/2022 State Vs. Indra Devi accused is hereby acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 33 of the Delhi Excise Act. Case property be confiscated to State as per rules.
Delhi District Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Indira Devi on 22 January, 2026

26.The facts that no independent witness was cited or examined, daily diary entry regarding departure of PW-1 has not been proved, possibility of misuse of seal has not been ruled out and the appearance of FIR number and case FIR No. 77/2019 CR Cases 6807/2021 State Vs. Indira Devi particulars on the seizure memos has not been explained, when kept in juxtaposition to each other, cast a cloud of suspicion over the prosecution version. In view of the aforesaid, the possibility of false implication of the accused in the present case cannot be ruled out.
Delhi District Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Indra Devi on 19 November, 2025

28.Thus, in view of the foregoing analysis, this Court is of the considered FIR No. 343/2021 Page No. 17/18 CR Cases 2284/2022 State Vs. Indra Devi opinion that the benefit of doubt ought to be granted to the accused, who is entitled to be exonerated of the charges against her in the present case. The accused is hereby acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 33 of the Delhi Excise Act. Case property be confiscated to State as per rules.
Delhi District Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Indra on 21 November, 2025

19. As per the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, the sample of liquor and case property were sealed by the investigating officer with the seal of 'BSM'. However, the PWs have not deposed qua the handing over of the said seals to any other witness or police official and no handing over memo regarding the same was prepared. The seal in the present case was not handed over to any independent witness nor was it deposited in the FIR No. 726/2023 Page No. 13/18 CR Cases 2153/2024 State Vs. Indra Devi malkhana to assail the possibility of its misuse. Thus, the possibility that the case property may have been tampered with cannot be ruled out.
Delhi District Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Executive Engineer, Gujarat Water ... vs Makwana Dhirajlal Dahyalal on 5 April, 2002

6. The Supreme Court in the matter of Coir Board, Emakulam, Kerala State and Anr. v. Indira Devi, P.S. and Ors. has held that the judgment in the matter of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa , was holding the field and further observed that the judgment in the matter of Bangalore Water Supply did not need any reconsideration. The order was passed by the Supreme Court on a reference made by a seven Judge Bench of the Supreme Court. In the said matter of Bangalore Water Supply, the Supreme Court observed that the person employed with the Board was a workman. Applying the ratio of Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board, I have no hesitation in holding that the Department in question in fact is an industry. The first submission made by the learned Counsel for the State deserves to and is accordingly rejected.
Gujarat High Court Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - H K Rathod - Full Document

The District Collector vs P.Naveen Kumar on 13 March, 2025

90.We are distressed to note that despite several pronouncements on the subject, there is substantial increase in the number of cases involving violation of the basics of judicial discipline. The learned Single Judges and Benches of the High Courts refuse to follow and accept the verdict and law laid down by coordinate and even larger Benches by citing minor difference in the facts as the ground for doing so. Therefore, it has become necessary to reiterate that disrespect to 113/128 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 11:11:52 am ) W.A.(MD).Nos.986 and 1261 of 2024 constitutional ethos and breach of discipline have grave impact on the credibility of judicial institution and encourages chance litigation. It must be remembered that predictability and certainty is an important hallmark of judicial jurisprudence developed in this country in last six decades and increase in the frequency of conflicting judgments of the superior judiciary will do incalculable harm to the system inasmuch as the courts at the grass root will not be able to decide as to which of the judgment lay down the correct law and which one should be followed.
Madras High Court Cites 76 - Cited by 0 - R S Kumar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next