Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.22 seconds)State Of Maharashtra vs Lahu Laxman Pabale And Ors. on 24 July, 2002
10. The only public witness examined is PW2 Nawab Singh Tomar. His testimony
shows that he saw the accused persons near the shop. However, in his cross
examination, he clearly stated that he did not see them inside the shop or throwing
AKHIL Digitally signed
by AKHIL MALIK
Date: 2026.04.11
MALIK 15:21:20 +0530
FIR No. 381/12 State Vs. Laxman & Ors. Page No. 6 of 8
any articles. Therefore, his evidence only shows presence near the spot and does not
prove involvement in the offence.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 427 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 392 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
State Of Maha vs Laxman Bhau Dambre on 4 September, 2020
15. The accused Sunil @ Kale was arrested several days after the incident and not
from the spot. There is no reliable identification of the accused as the person who
committed the offence. The coaccused Vijay, who is alleged to have been involved,
was never arrested. This also weakens the prosecution case. Digitally signed
by AKHIL
AKHIL MALIK
FIR No. 381/12 State Vs. Laxman & Ors. MALIK Date:
Section 174 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Delhi (Administration) vs Laxman Kumar & Ors on 23 September, 1985
5.1 PW1, Ct. Ajay Kumar, testified that on 07.10.2012, he was on emergency
duty alongwith IO/HC Charandas from 8am to 8pm and on receipt of DD No. 11A,
they reached at the spot i.e. D167, NSA Colony and found goods scattered and some
public persons gathered there. PW1 stated that IO recorded statement of shop owner
Naseema and prepared rukka and handed over the same to him for registration of
FIR. He got registered the FIR in PS and handed over the same to IO. IO prepared
site plan at the instance of complainant. His statement was recorded.
5.2 PW2, Sh. Nawab Singh Tomar testified that on 07.10.2012, he was working
as a beldar and on that day, around 9am, he left his house where he saw Kale, Gaurav
and other person went to the shop of Naseema. Thereafter, the said person were
fighting with Naseema and belongings of Naseema were thrown out from her shop at
different places. Thereafter, police came there and interrogate him. Thereafter, his
Digitally signed
by AKHIL
FIR No. 381/12 State Vs. Laxman & Ors.
State Of Chhattisgarh vs Pandeshwar Pratap Singh 43 ... on 9 January, 2019
PW3/N. He was medically examined and sent to JC. The case property was
deposited in the malkhana, and later the file was handed over to MHC(R) on transfer
of the witness. The witness identified the case property produced in court as Ex. P1
Digitally signed
FIR No. 381/12 State Vs. Laxman & Ors. AKHILPageby AKHIL
No. 4 of 8
MALIK
MALIK Date:
1