Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.29 seconds)

Pratibha Manchanda vs The State Of Haryana on 7 July, 2023

26. He submitted that the permission dated 10 September 2011 was obtained on a declaration made on behalf of one Dhaneshwar Patil, who had passed away on 30 May 2008. Based on this declaration, Sharad and Shubham were shown as entitled to purchase the land. He relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pratibha Manchanda and another versus State of Haryana 11 ::: Uploaded on - 25/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/11/2025 21:04:42 ::: aba2633-2025.doc and another, reported in (2023) 8 SCC 181. He submitted that in cases involving land grabbing the Supreme Court has held that anticipatory bail should not be granted. He submitted that the Supreme Court has held that delay in filing the FIR is not material when the forgeries are evident and when the complainant had no prior knowledge of collusive civil proceedings and successive transactions.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 75 - S Kant - Full Document
1   2 Next