Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.30 seconds)Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of Rajasthan vs Talevar And Anr on 17 June, 2011
The act of the Appellants falls
6
under the offence under Section 411 IPC only. Looking to the entire
evidence, chain of circumstances is not complete. Therefore,
conviction of the Appellants is not sustainable. Reliance was
placed on Sonu @ Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal
Appeal No.57 of 2013, Supreme Court, Limbaji v. State of
Maharashtra, (2001) 10 SCC 340, Ratan Lal v. State of Rajasthan,
(2015) 15 SCC 754, Raj Kumar @ Raju v. State (NCT of Delhi),
(2017) 11 SCC 160, State of Rajasthan v. Talevar, (2011) 11 SCC
666, Nagappa Dondiba Kalal v. State of Karnataka, 1980 (Supp)
SCC 336, Sujit Biswas v. State of Assam, (2013) 12 SCC 406,
Bharat v. State of M.P., 2003 CriLJ 1297, State of Uttar Pradesh v.
Wasif Haider etc., AIR 2019 SC 38, Vijay Kumar v. State of
Rajasthan, AIR 2014 SCW 1364 and Hari Nath v. State of U.P., AIR
1988 SC 345.
Nagappa Dondiba Kalal vs State Of Karnataka on 29 July, 1980
The act of the Appellants falls
6
under the offence under Section 411 IPC only. Looking to the entire
evidence, chain of circumstances is not complete. Therefore,
conviction of the Appellants is not sustainable. Reliance was
placed on Sonu @ Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal
Appeal No.57 of 2013, Supreme Court, Limbaji v. State of
Maharashtra, (2001) 10 SCC 340, Ratan Lal v. State of Rajasthan,
(2015) 15 SCC 754, Raj Kumar @ Raju v. State (NCT of Delhi),
(2017) 11 SCC 160, State of Rajasthan v. Talevar, (2011) 11 SCC
666, Nagappa Dondiba Kalal v. State of Karnataka, 1980 (Supp)
SCC 336, Sujit Biswas v. State of Assam, (2013) 12 SCC 406,
Bharat v. State of M.P., 2003 CriLJ 1297, State of Uttar Pradesh v.
Wasif Haider etc., AIR 2019 SC 38, Vijay Kumar v. State of
Rajasthan, AIR 2014 SCW 1364 and Hari Nath v. State of U.P., AIR
1988 SC 345.
The State Of Uttar Pradesh Home ... vs Wasif Haider on 10 December, 2018
The act of the Appellants falls
6
under the offence under Section 411 IPC only. Looking to the entire
evidence, chain of circumstances is not complete. Therefore,
conviction of the Appellants is not sustainable. Reliance was
placed on Sonu @ Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal
Appeal No.57 of 2013, Supreme Court, Limbaji v. State of
Maharashtra, (2001) 10 SCC 340, Ratan Lal v. State of Rajasthan,
(2015) 15 SCC 754, Raj Kumar @ Raju v. State (NCT of Delhi),
(2017) 11 SCC 160, State of Rajasthan v. Talevar, (2011) 11 SCC
666, Nagappa Dondiba Kalal v. State of Karnataka, 1980 (Supp)
SCC 336, Sujit Biswas v. State of Assam, (2013) 12 SCC 406,
Bharat v. State of M.P., 2003 CriLJ 1297, State of Uttar Pradesh v.
Wasif Haider etc., AIR 2019 SC 38, Vijay Kumar v. State of
Rajasthan, AIR 2014 SCW 1364 and Hari Nath v. State of U.P., AIR
1988 SC 345.
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Limbaji And Others vs State Of Maharashtra on 14 December, 2001
The act of the Appellants falls
6
under the offence under Section 411 IPC only. Looking to the entire
evidence, chain of circumstances is not complete. Therefore,
conviction of the Appellants is not sustainable. Reliance was
placed on Sonu @ Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal
Appeal No.57 of 2013, Supreme Court, Limbaji v. State of
Maharashtra, (2001) 10 SCC 340, Ratan Lal v. State of Rajasthan,
(2015) 15 SCC 754, Raj Kumar @ Raju v. State (NCT of Delhi),
(2017) 11 SCC 160, State of Rajasthan v. Talevar, (2011) 11 SCC
666, Nagappa Dondiba Kalal v. State of Karnataka, 1980 (Supp)
SCC 336, Sujit Biswas v. State of Assam, (2013) 12 SCC 406,
Bharat v. State of M.P., 2003 CriLJ 1297, State of Uttar Pradesh v.
Wasif Haider etc., AIR 2019 SC 38, Vijay Kumar v. State of
Rajasthan, AIR 2014 SCW 1364 and Hari Nath v. State of U.P., AIR
1988 SC 345.