cites: 197795664

1 - 10 of 13 (0.49 seconds)

State vs Sanjeev Sharma Etc. on 29 April, 2011 cites

U.P.State Road Transport Corpn., ... vs Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. Etc on 1 September, 1998

20. In my opinion, the judgments relied upon by Ld. Defence Counsel are clearly distinguishable on facts from the case in hand. FIR No. 118/98 State Vs. Sanjeev Sharma Etc. 7 of 14

Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 13 - B N Kirpal - Full Document

Section 354 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 115144

Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 748445

Section 341 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 253171

Section 33 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 1156

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Union of India - Act Cites 0 - Cited by 423370

The Indian Penal Code, 1860

Union of India - Act Cites 0 - Cited by 699242

Shiv Prakash Yadav Son Of Ram Nath, ... vs The State Of U.P. Through The Principal ... on 29 October, 2007

In Hari Prasad's case (cited at (vi) supra), diligent search for the witness was not done when he was recalled for cross examination and thus, it was held that his evidence cannot be FIR No. 118/98 State Vs. Sanjeev Sharma Etc. 9 of 14 brought on record u/s 33 of Indian Evidence Act without first making a diligent search for him.

Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 54 - Full Document

Section 323 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 555422

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Union of India - Act Cites 0 - Cited by 66100

1 2 Next

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results