Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.46 seconds)
Dhirajlal Deepchand Shah vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 21 April, 2015 cites

P. Ramachandra Rao vs State Of Karnataka on 16 April, 2002

In   P.   Ramachandra   Rao's   case   (AIR   2002   SC   1856)   (supra),   a  Seven  Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that criminal  Courts   should   exercise   their   available   powers,   such   as   those   under  Sections   309,   311   and   258   of   the   Code   of   Criminal   Procedure   to  effectuate the right to speedy trial. In paragraph 29 in P. Ramachandra  Rao's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld and reaffirmed  the   propositions   laid   down   in   the   matter   of   speedy   trial   in   Abdul  Rehman Autulay's case (AIR 1992 SC 1701) (supra).
Supreme Court of India Cites 31 - Cited by 938 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Raj Deo Sharma vs The State Of Bihar on 8 October, 1998

7. It was held that the decisions in the two "Common Cause" cases and   Page 8 of 18 R/CR.MA/20191/2014 CAV JUDGMENT Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar and Raj Deo Sharma (II) v. State of   Bihar, were not correctly decided on certain aspects.  It is neither advisable   nor feasible, nor judicially permissible or draw or prescribe an outer limit   for   conclusion   of   all   criminal   proceedings.   The   time­limits   or   bars   of   limitation prescribed in the several directions made in the aforesaid four   cases could not have been so prescribed or drawn and, therefore, are not   good law. Criminal courts are not obliged to terminate trial of criminal   proceedings   merely   on   account   of   lapse   of   time,   as   prescribed   by   the   directions made in the aforesaid cases.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 226 - M M Punchhi - Full Document
1