Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.83 seconds)
Documents citing Chiman Lal vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 23 April, 2009

State vs . on 13 September, 2019

67. The next charge against the accused persons is for the offence punishable under Section 304­B/34 IPC. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Hansraj Sharma and Ors. Vs. State (supra) has held that before a person can be convicted under this Section, which deals with what is described as "dowry death", the prosecution must necessarily prove the following ingredients:­ i. The death of a woman must have been caused by burn or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstance;
Delhi District Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . on 21 October, 2019

59. The next charge against the accused persons is for the offence punishable under Section 304­B/34 IPC. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Hansraj Sharma and Ors. Vs. State (supra) has held that before a person can be convicted under this Section which deals with what is described as "dowry death", the prosecution must necessarily prove the following ingredients:­ i. The death of a woman must have been caused by burn or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal SC No. 186/2016 Page 35 / 43 circumstance;
Delhi District Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sc No. 746/16 State vs . Rakesh Kumar 1/63 on 9 October, 2018

68. The   next   charge   against   the   accused   is   for   the   offence   under Section 304­B IPC. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Hansraj Sharma and Ors. Vs. State (supra) has held that before a person can be convicted under this Section, which deals with what   is   described   as   "dowry   death",   the   prosecution   must necessarily prove the following ingredients:­ i. The death of a woman must have been caused   by burn or bodily injury or otherwise than under   SC No. 746/16                State Vs. Rakesh Kumar                                                  42/63 normal circumstance;
Delhi District Court Cites 39 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Hardeep Singh vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 2 February, 2012

Counsel submits that after filing of the instant petitions, certain developments have taken place and a fact finding report was submitted by the Sub Divisional Officer-cum-Magistrate, Pilibanga to the District Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Hanumangarh on 19/05/2011 and the description of all local inhabitants including the petitioners has been furnished indicating the alleged encroachments made by the individuals and it has been noticed by the authorities for the purpose of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9389/2011 & 2 connected matters Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - G Mathur - Full Document

Hardeep Singh vs State & Ors on 15 February, 2012

Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [ 2 ] adjudication any of the issues sought to be raised by the parties in this matter; and it appears in the fitness of things and in the interest of justice that the impugned order dated 31.07.2007 be annulled qua the present petitioner subject to the observations that annulment of this impugned order shall not be of any prejudice to either of the parties. In other words, the respondents shall be free to pass the fresh appropriate transfer/posting orders regarding the petitioner in case so necessary, but strictly in accordance with law and in that relation too, it shall be open for all the concerned to take recourse to the appropriate remedies in accordance with law.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - D Maheshwari - Full Document
1