Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (2.34 seconds)Section 7 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Ram Krishan And Another vs The State Of Delhi(With Connected ... on 9 March, 1956
In case of M.W. Mohiuddin v State of Maharashtra 1995 (2) SCR
864, the Supreme Court referring to the case of Ram Krishan and
another v State of Delhi (1956) SCR 183 as well as dictionary
meaning of the word "obtains" observed as under:
C.K. Damodaran Nair vs Govt. Of India on 8 January, 1997
In the case of C.K. Damodaran Nair v Govt. of India 1997 Crl.L.J.
739, the Supreme Court considered the word "obtain" used in
Section 5(1)(d) and held as under:
Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh And Another vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh on 22 May, 1953
In the case of Rao Shiv
Bahadur (supra) the evidence relating to conduct on which
Crl.Appeal No.602/2002 R.K. P. Nishad v. CBI Page 24 of 27
reliance was placed was to the effect that the accused was
confused and could not furnish any explanation when questioned
by the officer.
State Of Andhra Pradesh vs V. Vasudeva Rao on 13 November, 2003
In this regard, the Supreme Court in the
case of State of A.P. v V. Vasudeva Rao, (2004) 9 SCC 319, the
Supreme Court observed thus:
Subash Parbat Sonvane vs State Of Gujarat on 24 April, 2002
In the case of
Subash Parbat Sonvane v State of Gujarat, AIR 2003 SC 2169, the
Supreme Court held as under: