Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.76 seconds)

Rajbir @ Raju & Anr vs State Of Haryana on 22 November, 2010

The High Court no doubt made a half-hearted attempt to justify the framing of the charge independent of the directions in Rajbir case [Rajbir v. State of Haryana, (2010) 15 SCC 116 : (2013) 2 SCC (Cri) 149 : AIR 2011 SC 568] , but it would have been more appropriate to remit the matter back to the trial court for fresh orders rather than lending support to it in the manner done by the High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 26 - Full Document

Shiv Nandan Dixit vs State Of U.P on 19 December, 2003

17. Reference may also be made to the decisions of this Court in Ishwarchand Amichand Govadia v. State of Maharashtra [(2006) 10 SCC 322 : (2006) 3 SCC (Cri) 554] and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rajendra Singh Sethia v. State [1989 Cri LJ 255 (Cal)] and that delivered by the Allahabad High Court in Shiv Nandan v. State of U.P. [2005 Cri LJ 3047 (All)] which too are to the same effect. In any such fresh exercise which the trial court may undertake, it shall remain uninfluenced by the observations made by the High Court on merits of the case including those touching the probative value of the autopsy surgeon's opinion.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Rajbir & Anr vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 26 May, 2009

The High Court no doubt made a half-hearted attempt to justify the framing of the charge independent of the directions in Rajbir case [Rajbir v. State of Haryana, (2010) 15 SCC 116 : (2013) 2 SCC (Cri) 149 : AIR 2011 SC 568] , but it would have been more appropriate to remit the matter back to the trial court for fresh orders rather than lending support to it in the manner done by the High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 162 - Full Document
1   2 Next