Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (2.03 seconds)
Documents citing Rajendra Kumar Gupta vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi &Anr. on 20 November, 2013

Vijender Gupta & Ors. vs Government Of National Capital ... on 24 January, 2025

9. Aggrieved by the inaction of the Government of NCT of Delhi, the petitioners first approached this Court by filing a writ petition bearing no. W.P.(C) 15341/2024 titled "Vijendra Gupta Vs. Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.". The petitioner sought directions to the Department of Finance, Government of NCT of Delhi to send the CAG Reports to the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor as mandated under Article 151(2) of the Constitution of India.
Delhi High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - S Datta - Full Document

Subodh Dalal vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 28 August, 2023

2023.08.28 17:07:25 +0530 CR REV No. 237 of 2023 & 238 of 2023 Subodh Dalal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Page No.2 of 6 Act (See S.A.S. Pahwa v. State 88 (2000) DLT 194, Avnish Sharma Vs. State, Crl.M.C. 1034/2005 dated 24.01.2008, Janak Raj Vs. State of NCT of Delhi 2012(3) JCC 2215 and Rajendra Kumar Gupta Vs. Govt. Of NCT of Delhi & Anr Crl. M.C.No. 175/2013 dated 20.11.2013, all passed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court).
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Rahul Yadav on 10 July, 2025

19. Even otherwise, it should be noted that the accused was only an employee of the said shop working as manager. He was not the owner of the said shop. This fact was never in dispute. It is the owner of the eating house who basically runs the eating house and employees only manage the day-to-day affairs on the field. As such, employees are not required to obtain any licence nor even to ask the owner to get any licence. Thus, the employee cannot be convicted for the offence punishable u/s 28 r/w 112 of the DP Act because there is no corresponding duty in them to obtain any licence. Reference can be taken from the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar Gupta Vs. Govt. Of NCT of Delhi & Anr Crl. M.C.No. 175/2013 dated 20.11.2013 wherein the Hon'ble Court while discussing the culpability of an employee for the offence punishable u/s 28 r/w 112 DP Act has interalia held the following:
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shyam Lal vs State on 31 March, 2015

9 During course of his submission Ld. counsel for petitioner has placed reliance on Rajendra Kumar Gupta Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. (CRL.M.C. 175/2013 & Crl. M.A. No. 655/2013). It was inter- alia observed therein that an employee/agent of owner cannot be prosecuted U/s 28/112 D.P. Act as he is not supposed to obtain a license and Kalandra should not be prepared against employee available at the premises.
Delhi District Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1