Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.23 seconds)
Gopal Gangaram Nepali vs Commissioner Of Police And Ors. on 29 March, 1996 cites

Mrs. Harpreet Kaur Harvinder Singh Bedi vs State Of Maharashtra And Another on 21 January, 1992

However, it will be relevant to state that the principle enunciated in Piyush Mehta (supra) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Harpreet Kaur v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1992 SC 979. I will refer to the said judgment hereinafter, after considering another judgment relied upon by the learned Advocate for the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 152 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Piyush Kantilal Mehta vs Commissioner Of Police, Ahmedabad City ... on 16 December, 1988

However, it will be relevant to state that the principle enunciated in Piyush Mehta (supra) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Harpreet Kaur v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1992 SC 979. I will refer to the said judgment hereinafter, after considering another judgment relied upon by the learned Advocate for the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 2963 - M M Dutt - Full Document

Rashidmiya @ Chhava Ahmedmiya Shaik vs Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad & Anr on 5 May, 1989

That judgment is based again on the case of Rashidmiya @ Chhava Ahmedmiya Shaikh v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad AIR 1989 SC 1703. In that case also, the Supreme Court has observed that the offences registered in the above mentioned four cases against the detenu on the ground that he was dealing in liquor have no bearing on the question of maintenance of public order in the absence of any other material that those activities of the detenu have adversely affected the maintenance of public order.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 33 - S R Pandian - Full Document
1