Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.18 seconds)
State vs Amit Kumar on 9 April, 2024 cites

State Nct Of Delhi vs Amit Sharma & Ors. on 4 July, 2018

8. PW-2 ASI Balvir deposed that on 29.04.2012, 7:35 am, Ct. Jai Kumar brought one rukka sent by HC Jagpal Singh and on the basis of said rukka, he registered FIR No. 136/12, PS Alipur which is Ex. PW2/A. At that time, CC No. 5284572/16 State Vs. Amit & ors . FIR No. 136/2012 PS Alipur 4 of 10 computer system was working properly and the FIR was properly saved in the server. No tampering was made with computerized FIR. He also made endorsement on rukka which is Ex. PW 2/B. After registration of FIR, he handed over the rukka and copy of FIR to Ct. Jai Kumar to give the same to HC Jagpal Singh.
Delhi High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 4 - P S Teji - Full Document

Pradeep Narayan Madgonkar Etc. Etc. vs State Of Maharashtra on 12 May, 1995

16.In present case prosecution was duty bound to prove the possession of the illicit liquor with accused. Same is sought to be proved by the recovery memo and testimony of the witnesses. Incident happened at 5.30 am at thickly populated area and it is admitted fact that public persons were available at the spot. It was held in Pradeep Narayana V. State of Maharashtra AIR 1995 SC 1930, that failure of police to join witness from locality during search creates doubt about fairness of the investigation, benefit of which has to go to the accused.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 1174 - M K Mukherjee - Full Document
1