Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.72 seconds)
Documents citing Ms. Shruti Singh Chauhan vs Supreme Court Of India (Sc) on 16 February, 2009

Ms. Shruti vs Union Of India And Others on 5 February, 2014

Jasbir Singh, Judge (Oral) Civil Misc. No. 278-CWP of 2014 In Civil Writ Petition No. 7101 of 2013 Civil Misc. Application is allowed. Document annexed with the application are taken on record. Civil Writ Petition No. 7101 of 2013 And Connected Petitions This order will dispose of five writ petitions viz. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 7101 of 2013 titled as "Ms. Shruti v. Union of India and Others", No. 14485 of 2010 titled as "Ravinder Pawar and Others v. Union of India and Others", No. 10862 of 2011 titled as "Pankaj Verma and Others v. Union of India and Others", No. 13457 of 2011 titled as "Devinder Singh and Others v. Union of India and Others" and No. 11934 of 2013 titled as "Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others", as the common questions of law and facts are involved therein. To dictate order, facts are being taken from Civil Writ Petition No. 7101 of 2013.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

1 State vs . Manish on 5 November, 2011

20. It is also held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nasir Sikander Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra (SC) 2005 CrLJ 2621 and in Journel Singh Vs. State of Punjab (SC) 1996 (1) RCR (Crl.) 465 that it is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent and burden lies on the prosecution to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubts. Prosecution is under legal obligation to prove each and every ingredients of the offence beyond any doubt, unless otherwise so provided by the statute.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . Surender Kumar on 11 November, 2010

This burden never shift, it always rest on the prosecution" and also in the case of Jornail Singh Vs. State of Punjab (SC) 1996 (1) RCR (Crl) 465, it was held that " the cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to be innocent and burden lies on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubts." This Court is of the opinion that accused person namely Surender Kumar be acquitted from the charges against them in this case by giving benefit of doubt as their identity cannot be proved by the prosecution.
Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

In Re: State vs Bal Kishan Etc. on 18 November, 2010

In Nasir Sikander Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, (SC) 2005 Cri.L.J. 2621 and Jarnail FIR No. 381/03 5/ Singh v. State of Punjab, (SC) 1996(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 465 it was held that it is cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent and burden lies on prosecution to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution is under legal obligation to prove each and every ingredient of the offence beyond any doubt, unless otherwise so provided by the Statute. (AIR 1962 SC 605 relied). Accused is not expected to prove his innocence to the hilt. If prosecution story is doubtful, benefit of doubt must go to the accused.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1