Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.24 seconds)
Documents citing State Through Central Bureau Of ... vs Inder Kumar Sharma on 19 November, 2009

State vs Inder Kumar on 28 November, 2024

4.2. During examination in chief, PW-2 Ct. Kana Ram deposed that On 21.02.2022, he was posted as Ct. at PS Ambedkar Nagar. On that day he was present in the PS. He had gone to the spot along with IO where they met Ct. Deep Ram who had handed over the case property and the custody of accused to the IO. Thereafter, IO had asked 3-4 public persons to join the FIR No. 158/2022 State Vs Inder Kumar Page No.4 of 16 PS Ambedkar Nagar investigation of the present case but nobody joined the same and left the spot by giving some valid reason. No notice was served to anyone due to lack of time. Thereafter, IO had recorded the statement of Ct. Deep Ram which is already Ex. PW1/1. Thereafter, IO had checked the katta and counted the half bottles of illicit liquor and found 24 bottles of make ADS Fresh Motta Masaledar Desi Sharab for sale in Haryana only measuring 375 ML each.
Delhi District Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs . Inder Sharma on 24 January, 2020

6. The PW­1 Ashok Kumar (complainant) was cross­examined by Sh. N.K. Kaushik Ld. counsel for the accused Inder Sharma. In his cross­ examination, he admitted that his complaint given to the SHO written in Hindi language was not on record. He also admitted that his complaint given in the court was not signed and he stated that the same was filed by his advocate. He further admitted that he was known to the accused Inder Sharma for the past State vs. Inder Sharma FIR No. 341/05 PS Adarsh Nagar Page 3 of 7 4­5 years before the present complaint. That no dispute was pending between him and the accused before the filing of this case. He never visited Assam during the investigation of the case. IO did not seize any bill / bilti / challan in his presence from the accused. He made payment to the accused Inder Sharma at the instance of Kishan Bhatani. That he gave money to the accused Kishan Ghatani after having conversation with the accused Inder Sharma. That the money was physically handed over to one Deepak at the instance of Kishan Ghatani. He further admitted that the 'Rs. 10 note' was signed by Deepak and not by the accused Inder Sharma. That he did not obtain any call record of the conversation which took place between him and the accused Inder Sharma over phone. He also admitted that he never met the accused Inder Sharma during the said transaction. That he did not file any civil suit against the accused Inder Sharma. He stated that he had mentioned in his ITR of the relevant time regarding the transaction between him and the accused Inder Sharma, but, the copy of the same was not placed on record.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1