Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)Union Of India & Ors vs Kali Dass Batish & Anr on 5 January, 2006
3. The aforesaid view has also been approved later on by a
three-Judges Bench of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the
case of Union of India v. Kali Dass Batish and another (2006)
1 SCC 779. It is appropriate to mention that the petitioner Karamjit
Singh was facing prosecution under Sections 392, 323, 325 IPC read
with 392 IPC in case FIR No. 169 and he was acquitted vide order
dated 17.05.2001 (P-1).
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 304 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 323 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 325 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 392 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Delhi Administration Through Its Chief ... vs Sushil Kumar on 4 October, 1996
2. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (for
brevity 'the Tribunal'), has placed reliance on various judgments
including the observations made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in
para 3 rendered in the case of Delhi Administration v. Sushil
Kumar, (1996)11 SCC 605, which reads as under:
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
1