Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.31 seconds)Section 438 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The State vs Captain Jagjit Singh on 14 September, 1961
Also see AIR 1962 SC 253 titled The
State Vs. Captain Jagjit Singh. There is apprehension in the
mind of the Court that if petitioners are released on anticipatory
.
Murugan & Anr vs State By Pub.Prosecutor, Tamil Nadu ... on 30 September, 2008
See
AIR 2011 SC 1691 title Murugan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu.
Gurcharan Singh & Ors vs State (Delhi Administration) on 6 December, 1977
7. At the time of granting bail following factors should be
considered: (1) Nature and seriousness of offence. (2) Character
of the evidence. (3) Circumstances peculiar to the accused. (4)
Reasonable possibility of presence of accused in trial or
investigation. (5) Reasonable apprehension of witnesses being
tampered with . (6) Larger interest of the public or State. See AIR
1978 SC 179 titled Gurcharan Singh and others Vs. State
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:03:35 :::HCHP
5
(Delhi Administration.
Section 35 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Illamdin vs State on 18 February, 1953
See AIR 1953
J&K 21 (DB) title Illamdin Vs. State. It is well settled law that
birth certificate issued by Secretary Gram Panchayat Kuthed
relating to minor prosecutrix is relevant fact under Section 35 of
Indian Evidence Act 1872 because certificate has been given by
public official in discharge of official duties and birth entry of
prosecutrix in public record was recorded ante litem motam.
1