Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.65 seconds)
Kalpana Pal vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 13 August, 2010 cites

Delhi Domestic Working Women'S Forum vs Union Of India And Others on 19 October, 1994

Mr. Trivedi, learned advocate for the State, placed before the Court the written instructions furnished to him by the Inspector-in-Charge, Bishnupur Police Station. It appears therefrom that the petitioner is the father of four sons and four daughters. As a result of differences that cropped up between the 114 petitioner on the one hand and the family members on the other, the petitioner has now been living in the house of a fellow villager. Several sittings were held in the police station to bring about an amicable settlement but no fruitful result yielded. A prosecution under Section 107, Cr.P.C. has been submitted against the two sons of the petitioner vide Bishnupur P.S. PR Case No.88 dated 23.3.2010.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 94 - S Mohan - Full Document

Commissioner Of Police And Ors vs Smt. C. Anita on 23 August, 2004

It has been stated in the petition that the respondent no.4 lodged a false, baseless and biased complaint against both the petitioners before the Officer-in- Charge, Sankrail Police Station on 26.5.2009. Pursuant thereto, Sankrail Police Station Case No.279 of 2009 dated 26.5.2009 under Sections 498A/323 of the IPC has been registered against the petitioners and their daughter and son-in- law. However, all the accused persons were released on anticipatory bail.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 138 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Haryana Financial Corporation & Anr vs M/S Jagdamba Oil Mills & Anr on 28 January, 2002

Having regard to the law declared in Haryana Financial Corporation v. Jagdamba Oil Mills, AIR 2002 SC 63 834, to the effect that Courts should not place reliance on decisions without discussing as to how the factual situation fits in with the fact situation of the decision on which reliance is placed, that observations of Courts are not to be read as Euclid's theorems nor as provisions of the statute, and that the observations must be read in the context in which they appear, I do not consider it proper on facts and in the circumstances to hold that in view of the decision in Aleque Padamsee (supra), the writ petitions should not at all be entertained.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 526 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 17 October, 2001

h. Discretion concededly must be reserved to the police to decide its course of action upon receipt of a complaint. However, the officer- in-charge concerned is duty-bound to register FIR on the basis of such an information disclosing cognizable offence since provision of Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. is mandatory and veracity of the allegations levelled in the complaint is not a matter for consideration of the police before registering a case [see : Ramesh Kumari v. State (supra)]; and i. If a party approaches the Superintendent of Police or the competent authority with a prayer for deputing police personnel upon payment of requisite cost by him and such prayer is not heeded, the Court would be justified in passing a mandatory direction for consideration of such prayer according to law. Exercise of writ powers under Article 226 would thus be proper, effective 72 and meaningful only upon prudent and pragmatic exercise, and that too in appropriate situations.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 847 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Jatindra Nath Biswas vs The State Of West Bengal on 20 March, 1975

W.P. 6122 (W) of 2010 (Jatindra Nath Biswas v. State of W.B. & ors.) The petitioner, aged about 85 years, is the father of the respondent no.3. It is claimed in the petition that the father and the son are residing in the same premises; that the respondent no.3 does not look after the petitioner; that the respondent no.3 abuses the petitioner in filthy language and also tortures him; that since the petitioner is a cardiac patient, it has become impossible for him to 109 bear the mental pressure and he is finding it difficult to spend the last days of his life.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 18 - N L Untwalia - Full Document

Sabita Paul (Das) vs State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 22 January, 2002

The writ petition stands disposed of, without any order for costs. W.P. 5318 (W) OF 2010 (Smt. Sabitry Das v. State of W.B. & ors.) The petitioner has four sons and four daughters. On 1.6.1990, the husband of the petitioner died. In the ground floor of her house, there are four shop rooms. The trade licenses of doctor's chamber, spectacles unit, medicine shop and grill manufacturing unit, operating therefrom are all along in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner at present is residing at the said house with her unmarried mentally challenged elder daughter namely Pratima Das, unmarried younger deaf and dumb daughter namely Baby Das, married sons Shankar Das and Ratan Chandra Das and their family. Others are staying outside.
Calcutta High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Sudhir Mohan Chakraborty vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 7 May, 2010

W.P.22614 (W) of 2009 (Sudhir Kumar Chakraborty v. State of W.B. & ors.) The respondent no.4 is the elder son of the petitioner, who is aged about 69 years. He lives on his retirement benefits. He has a house property which he purchased along with his wife jointly. The petitioner complains of the respondent no.4 having no source of income but being addicted to drinks. The petitioner is after threatened for money and assaulted physically if money is not given. Sometimes circumstances compelled the petitioner to accede to the requirement of the respondent no.4. He further complains of pressure being created by the respondent no.4 to transfer the house property in his favour. Not being able to withstand the pressure from the respondent no.4, complaint was lodged with the Inspector-in-Charge, Jagaddal Police Station. Despite receiving such complaint, 80 the police it is alleged did not cause any probe. The respondent no.4 was not even called at the police station. Accordingly, order has been prayed for on the police authorities to take appropriate steps on the complaint lodged by the petitioner and to save his life and property.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 2 - Cited by 3 - J K Biswas - Full Document

Smt. Jayasree Tagore & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 23 October, 2009

W.P. 3968 (W) of 2010 (Smt. Jayasree Mitra v. State of W.B. & ors.) The petitioner, aged about 66 years, is the mother of the respondent no.5. It is claimed in the petition that her husband having died a premature death without leaving any savings of his own, the petitioner shouldered full responsibility to bring up her son and daughter. The petitioner's mother was the owner of three buildings which she inherited after the death of her mother. The respondent no.5 after getting married in the year 2005 has been staying with the petitioner. No kind of money support is provided; on the contrary, the respondent no.5 has been constantly pressurising her to make a gift in his favour in respect of the house properties. Being under the influence of alcohol, the respondent 85 no.5 even assaulted her. Unable to bear the physical and mental torture and perceiving a threat to her life, the petitioner lodged written complaint with the Officer-in-Charge, Narkeldanga Police Station. However, no further action having been taken by the police authorities on such complaint, this petition was presented praying for an order on the respondent no.4 to take immediate action and/or measures for restraining the respondent no. 5 from continuing with his illegal conduct.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - S Banerjee - Full Document
1   2 Next