Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 331 (1.12 seconds)
Documents citing State Of W.B vs Mohammed Khalid on 24 November, 1994

3.Title State vs . Khalid on 27 January, 2014

23. PW-3 Sanjay Kumar has deposed that at the time of the incident he was employed as a driver in van of the complainant and on the day of incident was present in Vinod Nagar. It was further deposed by the witness that at around 3.00am when he locked the house of Lali and came down stairs he saw Asif and Khalid going towards temple and when returned back at around 3.30am he saw that the almirahs were broken and jewellery and other articles were missing and stolen. It was further deposed by him that he had joined investigation of the present case and had gone alongwith police to Nizamuddin and near Nizamuddin he saw Asif and accused Asif was also identified by Lali and was subsequently apprehended and interrogated by FIR No. 366/2001 State Vs Khalid 8 of 22 police. The accused Asif disclosed that he alongwith Khalid had comitted theft in the house of Lali and he is about to meet other accused Khalid at 12.00noon.
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Mohd Rafiq @Mohd Khalid on 6 January, 2024

11. The statements of accused 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. The incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against the accused were brought to his notice and his explanation was State Vs Mohd. Rafiq @ Mohd. Khalid SC No. 190/22 FIR No. 776/2003 7/18 sought. Accused claimed that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated in this case. Accused did not wish to lead defence evidence.
Delhi District Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Mohd. Khalid on 21 April, 2026

FIR No.: 0431/2017 PS Seema Puri 5/6 State v. Mohd. Khalid Chart for witnesses examined Prosecution witness no. Name of witness Description NIL NIL NIL Chart for exhibited documents Exhibit no. Description of the Proved by/ Attested by Exhibit A1 FIR Admitted u/s 294 Cr.P.C. without contents A2 Certificate under Admitted u/s 294 Section 65B of Indian Cr.P.C. without Evidence Act contents A3 & A4 MLCs Admitted u/s 294 Cr.P.C. without contents Digitally signed by ARUSHI ARUSHI PARWAL PARWAL Date: 2026.04.21 16:32:34 +0530 FIR No.: 0431/2017 PS Seema Puri 6/6 State v. Mohd. Khalid
Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Lt. Col. Prasad Shrikant Purohit vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 November, 2011

In State of W.B. vs. Mohd. Khalid the Court was not considering the question of cognizance in abstract without any offender in view. It was dealing with the question of time when the Court could be said to have taken cognizance offenders were already named, and in that context had stated about cognizance of offence and that too in broad and literal sense . With utmost humility I may also point out that the quote from Wharton's Law Lexicon in para 44 is not at all about cognizance of an offence, but about what we in India generally understand to be taking judicial notice.
Bombay High Court Cites 67 - Cited by 0 - R C Chavan - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next