Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 40 (0.46 seconds)

R.S. Nayak vs A.R. Antulay & Anr on 17 April, 1986

16. Mr. Mukherjee learned Advocate for Mr. Singh cited several decisions reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court, page 287, Skreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli vs. State of Bombay; , Matajog Dobey vs. H. C. Bhari; 1984 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) page 172, R. S. Nayak vs. A. R. Antulay; , R. Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kerala and Anr,, 1999 Criminal Law Journal page 3101, Champabai vs. M. Girijapathy and Ors. and , Gouri Shankar Prasad vs. State and Anr., in support of his contention. We have perused those decisions wherein it has been laid down that under given circumstances sanction for prosecuting a public servant for a criminal offence is necessary.
Supreme Court of India Cites 45 - Cited by 548 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Sebastian M. Hongray vs Union Of India And Others on 24 November, 1983

Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 141 - D A Desai - Full Document

R.Balakrishna Pillai vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 5 December, 1995

16. Mr. Mukherjee learned Advocate for Mr. Singh cited several decisions reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court, page 287, Skreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli vs. State of Bombay; , Matajog Dobey vs. H. C. Bhari; 1984 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) page 172, R. S. Nayak vs. A. R. Antulay; , R. Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kerala and Anr,, 1999 Criminal Law Journal page 3101, Champabai vs. M. Girijapathy and Ors. and , Gouri Shankar Prasad vs. State and Anr., in support of his contention. We have perused those decisions wherein it has been laid down that under given circumstances sanction for prosecuting a public servant for a criminal offence is necessary.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 107 - A M Ahmadi - Full Document

Smt. Champabai vs M. Girijapathy And Others on 22 March, 1999

16. Mr. Mukherjee learned Advocate for Mr. Singh cited several decisions reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court, page 287, Skreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli vs. State of Bombay; , Matajog Dobey vs. H. C. Bhari; 1984 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) page 172, R. S. Nayak vs. A. R. Antulay; , R. Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kerala and Anr,, 1999 Criminal Law Journal page 3101, Champabai vs. M. Girijapathy and Ors. and , Gouri Shankar Prasad vs. State and Anr., in support of his contention. We have perused those decisions wherein it has been laid down that under given circumstances sanction for prosecuting a public servant for a criminal offence is necessary.
Karnataka High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 2 - M P Chinnappa - Full Document

Shreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli vs The State Of Bombay(With Connected ... on 22 December, 1954

16. Mr. Mukherjee learned Advocate for Mr. Singh cited several decisions reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court, page 287, Skreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli vs. State of Bombay; , Matajog Dobey vs. H. C. Bhari; 1984 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) page 172, R. S. Nayak vs. A. R. Antulay; , R. Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kerala and Anr,, 1999 Criminal Law Journal page 3101, Champabai vs. M. Girijapathy and Ors. and , Gouri Shankar Prasad vs. State and Anr., in support of his contention. We have perused those decisions wherein it has been laid down that under given circumstances sanction for prosecuting a public servant for a criminal offence is necessary.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 259 - V Bose - Full Document

Matajog Dobey vs H. C. Bhari(With Connected Appeal) on 31 October, 1955

16. Mr. Mukherjee learned Advocate for Mr. Singh cited several decisions reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court, page 287, Skreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli vs. State of Bombay; , Matajog Dobey vs. H. C. Bhari; 1984 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) page 172, R. S. Nayak vs. A. R. Antulay; , R. Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kerala and Anr,, 1999 Criminal Law Journal page 3101, Champabai vs. M. Girijapathy and Ors. and , Gouri Shankar Prasad vs. State and Anr., in support of his contention. We have perused those decisions wherein it has been laid down that under given circumstances sanction for prosecuting a public servant for a criminal offence is necessary.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 666 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next