Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.32 seconds)Section 125 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 153 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 125 in The Representation of the People Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 153A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Manzar Sayeed Khan vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 5 April, 2007
In this regard, the court has relied upon
the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Manzar Syed
Khan supra which would clearly indicate that the act
was not committed with an intention to cause any
community or ill-will for committing offence of rioting.
The alleged provocation did not cause any rioting nor it
was construed to be a provocation till 19.4.2018 i.e.,
till the date of filing of the complaint by the member of
flying squad i.e., PW1 Nagesh Dattu Kolkar. All the
aforesaid act was not been considered by the learned
trial court. In my humble opinion the evidence of
ocular evidence does require corroboration, since PW3
and Pw4 were considered as partly hostile. Even at the
time of considering them as hostile, it has not been
mentioned why they were treated as hostile witness.
Ramesh.S/O Chotalal Dalal vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 February, 1988
(Ramesh case [Ramesh v. Union of
India, (1988) 1 SCC 668 : 1988 SCC
(Cri) 266] , SCC p. 676)
"13. ... the effect of the words must be
judged from the standards of reason-
Ramesh Birch & Ors. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors. Etc on 21 April, 1989
lished in law. This Court has approved
this view in its decision
in Ramesh v. Union of In-