Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 707 (1.55 seconds)
Documents citing Gen.Manager,State Bank Of India & Ors vs Anju Jain on 25 August, 2008

State vs . Anju & Ors. on 9 February, 2010

28. PW-2/Jamil has deposed during his cross-examination that he had identified dead body of his son Ahsan and denied the suggestion that he had not identified the dead body or that he did not collect the dead body. To the contrary, as per records of the case, the dead body of deceased was identified by his maternal uncles Anees and Idris, vide Ex.PW-17/C and PW-17/D. The dead body was also received by Idris in 11 State Vs. Anju & Ors.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Through: Shri Avinish Kumar Srivastava vs Mrs. Anju Tyagi on 13 August, 2018

Accordingly, I hereby pass the following  FINAL ORDER (A) The   application   under   Order   37   Rule   3(5)   CPC   for   leave   to defend filed by the defendant is hereby rejected. (B) a decree in the sum of Rs.6,08,894/­ is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against defendant alongwith pendentlite interest @ 6% per annum and future rate of interest @ 9% per annum till its Suit No. 249/2016                                                                          Page 15 of 16 State Bank of India V. Anju Tyagi realization on the said amount of 6,08,894/­. Admittedly defendant has paid a sum of Rs.12,000/­ twice i.e. total Rs.24,000/­ was paid by   the   defendant   during   the   pendency   of   suit   and   therefore   the Plaintiff   shall   have   to   give   adjustment   of   the   said   amounts   with retrospective effect relating to the date of payment by the defendant to the plaintiff.
Delhi District Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Anju on 19 July, 2024

10. PW-5 ASI Krishan Pal deposed on oath that "On 16.03.2014, I was posted as HC at PS Vasant Kunj (South). On that day, further investigation of the present case was handed over to me and I received the case file from MHCR and gone through the same. As per previous investigation, samples have already been deposited for chemical examination and entire investigation has already been done by the previous IO. During my investigation, I collected chemical examination report and placed on record. I prepared the Page no. 7 of 14 Cr Cases 50050/2016 STATE Vs. ANJU 188 /2014 (Vasant Kunj South), u/s 33 of Delhi Excise Act chargesheet and filed before the court". Said witness correctly identified the accused. Said witness was not cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused despite opportunity.
Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . Anju on 15 April, 2011

Learned Additional Sessions Judge has obviously not kept the aforesaid infirmities in view while dealing with the evidence of FIR No. 03/00 10 State vs. Anju the said witnesses. Eliminating the evidence of ASI Hari Prakash (PW3) and Constable Salam Mohammed (PW6) there remains nothing on record to connect the accused with the alleged crime. Consequently, the conviction and sentence of the accused cannot be sustained in law."
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Anju on 16 May, 2026

26. Disclosure statement cannot be admissible as there is no recovery pursuant to the disclosure statement and there is no independent witness to the same. Moreover, there is a doubt as to the recovery of the alleged quarter bottles of illicit liquor from the possession of the accused. Derivative use of custodial statement is not permissible in law. Disclosure statement is admissible only in evidence if something is recovered from the accused which is not within the Digitally signed ISRA by ISRA ZAIDI Date: 2026.05.16 FIR No. 132/2019 Page 12 of 14 ZAIDI 15:22:46 +0530 State vs. Anju knowledge of the police before recording the disclosure statement of the accused. Hence, the same becomes inadmissible in law.
Delhi District Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next