Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing Brij Pal Singh & Another vs State Of U.P. & Others on 12 May, 2011

Munni Lal Verma, S/O- Sri Jai Ram Verma, & ... vs State Of U.P., Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 23 December, 2015

To strengthen his aforesaid contentions, Mr. Amit Bose has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in State of U.P. Vs. Babu Ram Upadhya : AIR 1961 SC 751, Union of India Vs. Tulsi Ram Patel : 1985 (3) SCC 398 and the judgment of this Court in Dhani Ram Vs. Superintendent of Police, Hardoi : 1989 (1) UPLBEC 624, Brij Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P. & others (Civil Misc.
Allahabad High Court Cites 45 - Cited by 1 - D K Arora - Full Document

Sudhir Kumar Goyal And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 12 August, 2025

13.2 It is further contained in the written instructions that various constitutional courts have delivered varied judgments, and that is why an inconsistency persists in the practical application of the law as on date. The compilation provided by the police in the form of a letter further elaborates through a comparative analysis chart explaining as to how, on similar issues and laws, different outcomes have been arrived at by various constitutional courts. In some states, FIRs have been permitted to be registered for offences qualified by "bar in taking cognizance by courts" under the Cr.P.C. (viz. sections 195, 198 and 199) or Special Laws (a term used in the letter addressed by SSP to denote those special legislations whereunder a distinct provision/clause is provided that contains a "bar to take cognizance" clause while in other states, such registration of FIR is impermissible. On certain occasions, to arrive at definitive conclusion, the matter has been referred to the constitutional court as is observed in Dr. Brij Pal Singh (supra) of this court, and has been observed later in the Jayant' case (supra) of the Supreme Court. However, such references have been limited to the specific legislation in question, without addressing the issue comprehensively for all Acts containing a similar "bar to take cognizance" clause. Given the aforesaid discussion, it appears imperative and relevant to establish a final and uniform legal position on the interpretation and application of all such legislation containing similar or identical provisions/clauses. A list of most of such legislations - routinely used- has been prepared by the Directorate of Prosecution for police and prosecutors.
Allahabad High Court Cites 70 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Brij Pal Singh vs Kanchan Verma, President / Vice ... on 13 February, 2020

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the demand of additional amount of Rs. 4,41,464/- is held to be illegal and the GDA is directed to redetermine the final cost of the house allotted to the petitioner as on the date of allotment afresh in accordance with law keeping in mind the proportionate variation in the estimated cost announced by it in accordance with law referred to above within a period of two months from the date of placement of this judgment before it and it is expected that the fixation of cost shall be informed to the petitioner whereupon on deposit of the increased amount, GDA will complete the formalities of execution of sale deed/lease deed and transfer of actual possession to the petitioner within a further period of one month thereafter.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - M C Tripathi - Full Document

State Of U.P. vs Brij Pal Singh And 4 Others on 6 February, 2024

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner-State has assailed the order dated 09.07.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Jhansi Division, Jhansi in Stamp Appeal No.509 of 2021 (computerized Case No.C2021060000509) (Brij Pal Singh and another Vs. State of U.P.), by which the appeal of the respondent under Section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act against the order dated 20.03.2021 passed by the Collector Stamp in Case No. 1962 of 2020 (computerized case No.D202006370001962) under Section 33/47A of Indian Stamp Act has been set aside.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S Srivastava - Full Document
1