Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.25 seconds)

State Of U.P. And Another vs M/S Harveer Singh Bulandshahar on 8 July, 2019

2. Present appeal arises against the judgment and order dated 04.07.2022 passed by Sri Chhote Lal Yadav, learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Court No. 2, Muzaffarnagar in Sessions Trial No. 1184 of 2011 (State of U.P. Vs. Mamta, Anil, Shubham, Lokesh, Pramod, Manoj, Mohit, Dharmendra, Ravindra, Vinod, Vidit, Bablu alias Ajay, Bobby Sharma alias Vineet Sharma and Bobby Tyagi alias Vineet Tyagi), Sessions Trial No. 1164A of 2011 (State of U.P. Vs. Smt. Meenu alias Vandana Tyagi and Sessions Trial No. 70 of 2012 (State of U.P. Vs. Harveer Singh). By that judgment and order, the learned court below convicted and sentenced the appellants as below:
Allahabad High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 9 - K Thaker - Full Document

Jafarudheen vs State Of Kerala on 22 April, 2022

47. To support his submissions on the delayed F.I.R. and its effect, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Jafarudheen & Ors. vs State of Kerala, (2022) 8 SCC 440 and also in Khema @ Khem Chandra & Ors., State of U.P., (2023) 10 SCC 451, to support his further submission that no reliance may be placed on evidence led by the witnesses whose statements may be recorded very late during investigation, again, reliance has been placed on the aforesaid two decisions.
Supreme Court of India Cites 62 - Cited by 87 - M M Sundresh - Full Document
1   2 Next