Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.34 seconds)Section 311 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Tedhi Singh vs Narayan Dass Mahant on 7 March, 2022
6. The petition does not mention that the
financial status was challenged in the reply to the notice
issued by the complainant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court
held in Tedhi Singh v. Narayan Dass Mahant, (2022)
6 SCC 735: 2022 SCC OnLine SC 302 that unless the
financial capacity of the complainant is challenged in
reply to the notice issued by him, he cannot be expected
to lead evidence regarding the financial capacity. It was
observed at page 740:
State Of Nct Delhi vs Shiv Kumar Yadav on 20 March, 2015
8. The application was filed to recall the witness
because the accused had changed his counsel. It was laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State (NCT of
Delhi) v. Shiv Kumar Yadav, (2016) 2 SCC 402: 2015
Matru Alias Girish Chandra vs State Of Utttar Pradesh on 3 March, 1971
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of
the case, arguments advanced, and after going
through the entire judgment, this court is of
the view that the arguments advanced by the
counsel are not sustainable and that the plea
can not be taken by the revisionist's counsel
that he has been subsequently engaged;
Gopal Ansal vs State Nct Of Delhi on 16 February, 2022
11. Delhi High Court also took a similar view in
Sushil Ansal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2021 SCC
OnLine Del 4388 and observed:
1