Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.20 seconds)Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 186 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
State Of Haryana vs Ranbir Singh And Another on 28 January, 2010
5. PW1 Surender has deposed that he did not know anything about
the case and nothing happened in his presence. However, he stated
that he knew accused Ranbir and Satish Chander, present in court
as they were known to him from last about one year. He deposed
that he was working with a contractor in NDPL but he did not
know any person with the name of R.K. Gupta and he deposed that
nothing happened in his presence. PW1 Surender was cross
examined by the prosecution with the permission of the court as he
was found resiling from his previous statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C.
recorded by police and during his crossexamination by Ld. APP,
he admitted that he was doing work of electricity with contractor
Jagbir Khatri. He deposed that he had concern with T.O. i.e.
subordinate of JE. He deposed that if the complainant was not
heard by T.O. then the complaint was to be referred to JE and
Executive Engineer. However, he did not know who was JE and
Ex. Engineer at the relevant time. Statement of witness Mark A
read over to him but he denied having made any such statement to
FIR NO. 372/00, PS BAWANA U/S. 186/353/34 IPC
:4: State V. RANBIR SINGH & ANR.