Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.20 seconds)Section 389 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 430 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
State Of Haryana vs Hasmat on 26 July, 2004
In the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
The State of Haryana v. Hasmat, (2004) 6 SCC 175, State of
Maharashtra v. Madhukar Wamanrao Smarth, (2008) 5 SCC 721,
Kishori Lal v. Rupa, (2004) 7 SCC 638 and Vasant Tukaram
Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 5 SCC 281 (also referred to
in Dashrath's case supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has uniformly laid
down that one of the essential ingredients of Section 389 Cr.P.C (pari
materia of Section 430 BNSS) is the requirement for the appellate
Court to record reasons in writing for ordering suspension of execution
of sentence and the requirement of recording reasons clearly indicates
that there has to be careful consideration of relevant aspects.
State Of Maharashtra vs Madhukar Wamanrao Smarth on 24 March, 2008
In the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
The State of Haryana v. Hasmat, (2004) 6 SCC 175, State of
Maharashtra v. Madhukar Wamanrao Smarth, (2008) 5 SCC 721,
Kishori Lal v. Rupa, (2004) 7 SCC 638 and Vasant Tukaram
Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 5 SCC 281 (also referred to
in Dashrath's case supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has uniformly laid
down that one of the essential ingredients of Section 389 Cr.P.C (pari
materia of Section 430 BNSS) is the requirement for the appellate
Court to record reasons in writing for ordering suspension of execution
of sentence and the requirement of recording reasons clearly indicates
that there has to be careful consideration of relevant aspects.
Kishori Lal vs Rupa And Ors on 23 September, 2004
In the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
The State of Haryana v. Hasmat, (2004) 6 SCC 175, State of
Maharashtra v. Madhukar Wamanrao Smarth, (2008) 5 SCC 721,
Kishori Lal v. Rupa, (2004) 7 SCC 638 and Vasant Tukaram
Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 5 SCC 281 (also referred to
in Dashrath's case supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has uniformly laid
down that one of the essential ingredients of Section 389 Cr.P.C (pari
materia of Section 430 BNSS) is the requirement for the appellate
Court to record reasons in writing for ordering suspension of execution
of sentence and the requirement of recording reasons clearly indicates
that there has to be careful consideration of relevant aspects.
Vasant Tukaram Pawar vs State Of Maharashtra on 15 April, 2005
In the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
The State of Haryana v. Hasmat, (2004) 6 SCC 175, State of
Maharashtra v. Madhukar Wamanrao Smarth, (2008) 5 SCC 721,
Kishori Lal v. Rupa, (2004) 7 SCC 638 and Vasant Tukaram
Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 5 SCC 281 (also referred to
in Dashrath's case supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has uniformly laid
down that one of the essential ingredients of Section 389 Cr.P.C (pari
materia of Section 430 BNSS) is the requirement for the appellate
Court to record reasons in writing for ordering suspension of execution
of sentence and the requirement of recording reasons clearly indicates
that there has to be careful consideration of relevant aspects.
1