Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 208 (1.12 seconds)
Documents citing Sher Singh @ Partapa vs State Of Haryana on 9 January, 2015

Anil Kumar vs Chandigarh Police, Ut on 14 August, 2018

24. The judgment cited by learned counsel for the applicants in SUKHBIR SINGH ETC. V. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS, (C.A. Nos. 93-95 of 1989 - an unreported decision of the Lordships of the Supreme Court), was considered by the Full Bench of Hon‟ble High Court in Sher Singh's case (supra) and after considering the same, the directions as reproduced above and which are being followed by me, were passed. It was held as under :-
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - P Gopinath - Full Document

Akshay Kumar vs Chandigarh Police, Ut on 14 August, 2018

24. The judgment cited by learned counsel for the applicants in SUKHBIR SINGH ETC. V. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS, (C.A. Nos. 93-95 of 1989 - an unreported decision of the Lordships of the Supreme Court), was considered by the Full Bench of Hon‟ble High Court in Sher Singh's case (supra) and after considering the same, the directions as reproduced above and which are being followed by me, were passed. It was held as under :-
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - P Gopinath - Full Document

Sunil Kumar vs Chandigarh Police, Ut on 14 August, 2018

24. The judgment cited by learned counsel for the applicants in SUKHBIR SINGH ETC. V. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS, (C.A. Nos. 93-95 of 1989 - an unreported decision of the Lordships of the Supreme Court), was considered by the Full Bench of Hon‟ble High Court in Sher Singh's case (supra) and after considering the same, the directions as reproduced above and which are being followed by me, were passed. It was held as under :-
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - P Gopinath - Full Document

Himmat Singh vs Chandigarh Police, Ut on 14 August, 2018

24. The judgment cited by learned counsel for the applicants in SUKHBIR SINGH ETC. V. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS, (C.A. Nos. 93-95 of 1989 - an unreported decision of the Lordships of the Supreme Court), was considered by the Full Bench of Hon‟ble High Court in Sher Singh's case (supra) and after considering the same, the directions as reproduced above and which are being followed by me, were passed. It was held as under :-
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - P Gopinath - Full Document

Duli Chand Yadav vs Haryana Warehousing Corporation And ... on 26 March, 2019

6 of 17 ::: Downloaded on - 29-04-2019 04:53:29 ::: CWP No. 11797 of 2016 and other connected cases 7 In pursuance to the said Scheme, the cases of the employees were taken up for consideration for appointment and in the case of the present petitioner, he was appointed as a fresh candidate with the Haryana State Warehousing Corporation on 30.10.2006. Petitioner continued working till he retired. The present writ petition was filed by the petitioner relying upon the order passed by this Court in CWP No. 8021 of 2009, decided on 05.03.2010 titled as Sher Singh Vs. State of Haryana, wherein, a Coordinate Bench of this Court allowed the claim of the petitioner therein for counting the service which Sh. Sher Singh had rendered with the Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewell Corporation for the grant of ACP benefit.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 11 - H S Sethi - Full Document

State vs . 1. Vijay Kumar on 29 February, 2020

In a judgment passed by Honble Supreme Court of India titled as Sher Singh Vs. State of Haryana, having Criminal Appeal No. 1592 of 2011 decided on 09.01.2015, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has Sessions Case No.441064/2016 State Vs. Vijay Kumar & Ors. Page No. 59/74 observed that "We are aware that the word 'soon' finds place in section 304B; but we would prefer to interpret its use not in terms of days or months or years, but as necessarily indicating that the demand for dowry should not be stale or an aberration of the past, but should be the continuing cause for the death under section 304B or the suicide under section 306 of the IPC. Once the presence of these concomitants are established or shown or proved by the prosecution, even by preponderance of possibility, the initial presumption of innocence is replaced by an assumption of guilt of the accused, thereupon transferring the heavy burden of proof upon him and requiring him to produce evidence dislodging his guilt, beyond reasonable doubt." This judgment is fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Delhi District Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next