Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 21 (0.88 seconds)

The State vs . Deep Chand on 13 May, 2009

12. Admittedly, it is not a case of chance recovery. The police officials in question were on vehicle checking duty and were checking two­wheeler scooters. When accused was signaled to stop, he tried to run away and was overpowered on the basis of suspicion. However, I also simultaneously, cannot be oblivious of the fact that the picket was situated at a very busy and congested area of Delhi i.e. Vishram Chowk, Rohini. It has also come on record that immediately after the accused was overpowered, Ct. Devraj had gone to nearby PCO in order to intimate the higher police officials and despite that no necessity was felt to associate such PCO owner as witness. I have seen the testimony of PW1 Ct. Ashok Kumar and he has admitted in his cross­examination that PCO owner was not made a witness of recovery. PW1 Ct. Ashok Kumar had left the spot with rukka and pullandas in a rickshaw and State Vs. Deep Chand ­:5:­ even rickshaw puller was not asked to become a witness to recovery. There is a police picket at the spot and the writing work was done outside the picket. As already noticed above, the area in question is a very busy area and the persons from public were, naturally, available at that regular busy hour of the morning. Accused was allegedly apprehended right at Rithala bus stop and it was very easy for the police to have associated persons from public. However, no concrete effort in that direction had been made at all.
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Deep Chand @ Changa on 8 April, 2024

4. PW-1: ASI Ramesh Chand deposed that on 10.09.2015, he was posted as duty officer at PS Inder Puri. On that day, his duty hours were from 04:00 PM to 12:00 midnight. On that day, he received an information regarding illicit liquor FIR No. 267/2015 Page 3 of 13 State Vs. Deep Chand @ Changa and made an DD entry No 35A [Ex. PW1/A] in this regard. Ct. Satpal handed over him tehrir/ rukka, sent by HC Shamsher Singh for registration of FIR. On the basis of the tehrir, he registered the present case FIR no. 267/15, PS Inder Puri. He recorded the FIR at about 10.20 PM and had also made endorsement on the tehrir at Ex. PW1/B bearing his signature at point A. He brought the original register of FIR Copy before Court [Ex. PW1/C (OSR)], bearing his signature at point A. After registration of FIR, he handed over copy of FIR along with original rukka to Ct. Satpal to be handed over to HC Shamsher Singh. Witness was not cross-examined despite giving opportunity.
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Superintending Engineer, Faizabad ... vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P., ... on 4 March, 2020

Similarly, a coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.6910 (MS) of 2002: Superintending Engineer Provincial Division P.W.D. Barabanki versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Lucknow has dismissed the writ petition on 20.3.2017 by observing that the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Bangalore water supply case (supra) has been followed in two coordinate Bench decisions in Sant Kumar Dubey versus Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal (IV), Uttar Pradesh, Agra and others: 1997 Labour and Industrial Cases 777 and in State of U.P. and others vs. Deep Chandra and others (2004) 1 UPLBEC 816, wherein it has been held that the Public Works Department of the Government of U.P. is an industry and covered by the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act as the petitioners therein had not taken the trouble to file any written statement before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and there was no question of showing any interference in the Award.
Allahabad High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - S Chandra - Full Document

Deep Chand vs State Of U.P. .And Another on 13 October, 2023

2. The present application has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including the charge-sheet and summoning order dated 09.01.2023, passed in of Criminal Case No. 4 of 2020, (State vs. Deep Chand), Case Crime No. 981 of 2013, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Subhash Nagar, District Bareilly, pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge, P.C.Act, Court No. 1, Bareilly.
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - R B Singh - Full Document

Krishna Swaroop Saxena vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 October, 2023

2. The present application has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4 of 2020, (State vs. Deep Chand & Ors.), Case Crime No. 981 of 2013, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13(1)(d) and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Subhash Nagar, District Bareilly, pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge, P.C.Act, Court No. 1, Bareilly.
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - R B Singh - Full Document

Kailash Chandra @ Kailash And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 August, 2024

2. By means of the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicants have prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 06.05.2018, cognizance order dated 07.07.2018 and order dated 31.07.2018, of criminal case no. 460 of 2018 (State of U.P. Vs. Deep Chandra and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 0594 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 354-B, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Konch, District- Jalaun at Orai, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Konch (Jalaun).
Allahabad High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - R B Singh - Full Document

Deep Chandra And 9 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. / ... on 23 October, 2024

3. The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1900/2024 (State vs. Deep Chandra and others) arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 0114/2024, against petitioner No.1 to 4, under Section 147, 149, 504, 506 I.P.C., petitioner No.5 and 6, under Section 147, 148, 149, 336, 504, 506 I.P.C., petitioner No.7 and 8, under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., petitioner No.9, under Section 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506, 427 1.P.C. and petitioner No.10, under Section 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Jaitpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar.
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - R Singh - Full Document

Chandu @ Chandrabhan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 January, 2020

This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging order dated 22.10.2019 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jhansi, in Special Trial No. 86 of 2014, (State Vs. Deep Chandra @ Deepu and others), under Sections 323/34, 325/34, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (X) SC/ST Act, P.S. Uldan, District Jhansi, arising out of Case Crime No. 70 of 2013, under Sections 147, 307, 325, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 (1) (X) SC/ST Act, P.S. Uldan, District Jhansi, whereby present applicant has been summoned under Section 319 Cr. P. C. to face trial in above mentioned sessions trial.
Allahabad High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - R Misra - Full Document
1   2 3 Next