Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 375 (1.20 seconds)
Documents citing Krishan Lal Gera vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 4 July, 2011

Kishan Lal vs . State on 28 November, 2014

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor refuted the said contentions by arguing sagaciously that since PW5 had sustained injury, there is no reason to disbelieve his testimony. It was further CA No. 41/2012 Page No. 3 of 14 Kishan Lal vs. State contended that brother of PW5 was also standing at the bus terminal, Karol Bagh and he had also witnessed the incident. Thus, prosecution has succeeded to prove that it was the appellant who was driving the bus at the time of accident. It was further contended that since the appellant had turned the bus towards right side all of sudden at high speed without giving any indication, appellant had acted rashly and negligently. It was submitted that it was the duty of the appellant to use indicator before changing the lane and he should not have taken the turn at high speed without seeing whether any vehicle was coming behind or not.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Amanpreet Kaur @ Preeti (In Jc) vs State on 2 August, 2024

14. It is argued that the decision in Kishan Lal v. State (supra) was passed before Section 36A of the NDPS Act had been added by way of an amendment. It is stated that Section 36A of the NDPS Act empowers the Special Court to extend the time of investigation up to one year on report of the Public Prosecutor indicating the progress of investigation and specific reasons for detention of accused.
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Tushar Chaudhary vs State Nct Of Delhi on 11 July, 2024

28. This court while considering the plea of default bail on the ground that charge sheet filed under Section 173(2) of the CrPC is incomplete if not accompanied with FSL report in the case of Satish Kumar & Anr. v. State : 2024: DHC:1258, concurred with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Arif Khan v. State (NCT of Delhi) (supra) and the law laid down by the Division Bench in Kishan Lal v. State (supra), and dismissed the petition. This Court held that mere non-filing of FSL Report along with the charge sheet is not sufficient to arrive at the conclusion that the charge sheet filed was incomplete. It was further observed that the said report can be filed by way of a supplementary charge sheet and in any case, FSL report is only a corroborative piece of evidence.
Delhi High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bhushan @ Veera vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 18 March, 2024

25. This court while considering the plea of default bail on the ground that charge sheet filed under Section 173(2) of the CrPC is incomplete if not accompanied with FSL report in the case of Satish Kumar & Anr. v. State : 2024: DHC:1258, concurred with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Arif Khan v. State (NCT of Delhi) (supra) and the law laid down by the Division Bench in Kishan Lal v. State (supra), and dismissed the petition. This Court held that mere non-filing of FSL Report along with the charge sheet is not sufficient to arrive at the conclusion that the charge sheet filed was incomplete. It was further observed that the said report can be filed by way of a supplementary charge sheet and in any case, FSL report is only a corroborative piece of evidence.
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gurjeet Singh vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi on 14 August, 2024

11. As noted by this Court in in Satish Kumar & Anr. v. State (supra), this Court is bound by the decision in Kishan Lal v. State (supra) as judicial discipline mandates that this Court has to decide the matters on the basis of the law as it stands and the pendency of any reference would not mean that the other proceedings involving the similar issue would remain stayed.
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ashwani vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 2 March, 2022

"19. Applying the ratio of decision in Kishan Lal (Supra) to the present case, I find that the learned trial court has rightly dismissed petitioner's bail application while holding that though the FSL report has been filed after filing of bail application and after completion of 180 days of investigation, but the charge-sheet cannot be held to be incomplete because of the pendency of FSL report over voice sample, as preparation of report on voice sample is not in the hands of IO. It cannot be lost sight of the fact that immediately after petitioner's arrest on 13.03.2020, prosecution filed an application seeking permission to obtain voice sample of petitioner/accused which was allowed on 20.03.2020 and on the same day voice samples were taken, but thereafter, because of lockdown due to covid pandemic, report could be obtained only on 26.09.2020.
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - S Prasad - Full Document

Rajeshbhai @ Raju Jivanbhai Solanki vs State Of on 22 August, 2013

14.7 In a recent decision of the Apex Court in the 10 case of Krishan vs. State of Haryana reported in (2013) 3 SCC 280, the Apex Court has held that it is not an absolute principle of law that a dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction of an accused. Where the dying declaration is true and correct, the attendant circumstances show it to be reliable and it has been recorded in accordance with law, the deceased made the dying declaration of her own accord and upon due certification by the doctor with regard to the state of mind and body, then it may not be necessary for the court to look for corroboration. In such cases, the dying declaration alone can form the basis for the conviction of the accused. But where the dying declaration itself is attended by suspicious circumstances, has not been recorded in accordance with law and settled procedures and practices, then, it may be necessary for the court to look for corroboration of the same.
Gujarat High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jainendra Kumar Jain & Anr. vs Municipal Corp., Jabalpur & Ors. on 11 August, 2015

36. Accordingly, we can now safely come to the conclusion that as per the development plan approved, the Wright Town stadium is notified as a recreational area, where sports and sports related activities can be carried out, as it has been notified to be used only as a stadium and a play ground. As such, we hold that in the area in question which is subject matter of dispute before us, in these petitions i.e... the Wright Town stadium now known as Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla Stadium, only sports and sports related activities can be carried out and we are constrained to hold so because the area has been notified as a play ground and stadium and in the case of Krishanlal Gera (supra), Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held that when an area is ear-marked for a stadium, to be used as a play-ground, the infra-structure provided therein are meant for the benefit of the sports person, it has to be used for promotion of sports and activities to promote sports and allied activities and whenever by nepotism, favoritism and unwarranted government largeness to private interest, threats to frustrate such a scheme, comes to the notice of the High Court, the High Court is duty bound to strike at such an action.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 3 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Ashok vs State Of U.P. on 20 September, 2022

In fact, in the case of Krishan vs. State of Haryana reported in (2013) 3 SCC 280, the Apex Court has held that it is not an absolute principle of law that a dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction of an accused. Where the dying declaration is true and correct, the attendant circumstances show it to be reliable and it has been recorded in accordance with law, the deceased made the dying declaration of her own accord and upon due certification by the doctor with regard to the state of mind and body, then it may not be necessary for the court to look for corroboration. In such cases, the dying declaration alone can form the basis for the conviction of the accused. But where the dying declaration itself is attended by suspicious circumstances, has not been recorded in accordance with law and settled procedures and practices, then, it may be necessary for the court to look for corroboration of the same.
Allahabad High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - K Thaker - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next