Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.28 seconds)
Sh. Anuj Kaushik vs The State on 18 January, 2023 cites

Syed Khawaja Moinuddin vs Government Of India And 3 Ors on 18 January, 1967

14. Ld. SEM, was under obligation to examine prosecution witnesses with opportunity to opposite party to cross-examine those witnesses to rebut allegations. However, in the absence of examination of witnesses, Ld. SEM was precluded not to pass CR No. 159/22 Sh. Anuj Kaushik Vs. The State & Anr. Page No. 10/11 any order of furnishing surety as laid down by condition (B) of the abovesaid judgment. Similarly, as per condition (D), the Magistrate was not supposed to sign the order in a mechanical manner on a cyclostyled paper and ought to be well reasoned and detailed one. As such, the impugned order passed by Ld. SEM is against all judicial norms and is liable to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 16 - V Bhargava - Full Document

Rajender Singh Pathania & Ors vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 12 August, 2011

9. Power of arrest under Section 151 Cr.P.C originates only on the knowledge of a design to commit cognizable offence if it appears that the commission of offence cannot be prevented unless power of arrest is exercised. The object of Section 107 Cr.P.C is just to stop/prevent any possibility or apprehension of disturbance of public peace in the society and that danger to CR No. 159/22 Sh. Anuj Kaushik Vs. The State & Anr. Page No. 7/11 public peace and tranquility must be imminent, only than this section would come into play to stop it. The object of this section has been elaborated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a case titled "Rajender Singh Pathania v. State (NCT of Delhi", (2011) 13 SCC 329 as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 73 - B S Chauhan - Full Document
1   2 Next