Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 40 (0.78 seconds)
Crl.Pet./356/2022 on 2 March, 2023 cites

Nevada Properties Pvt. Ltd. Through Its ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 24 September, 2019

On considering the decision of the Apex Court in Nevada Properties Private Limited (supra), we are of the view that the Apex Court has not made any interpretation or laid down any law, with regard to whether Section 457 Cr.P.C would be applicable at the stage of investigation. Accordingly, the decision made in the above case, in our view, is not applicable to the issue to be decided herein.
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 51 - S Khanna - Full Document

Visitor & Ors vs K.S. Misra on 6 September, 2007

In the case of Visitor, AMU vs. K.S. Misra, reported in (2007) 8 SCC 593 and Nathi Devi vs. Radha Devi Gupta, reported in (2005) 2 SCC 271, the Apex Court has held that that it is a well settled principle of interpretation of the statute that it is incumbent upon the court to avoid a construction, if reasonably permissible on the language, which will render the part of the statute devoid of any meaning or application. The courts must always presume that the legislature inserted every part thereof for a purpose and the legislative intent is that every part of the statute should have effect. The legislature is deemed not to waste its words or to say anything in vain and constructions which attribute redundancy to legislature will not be accepted, except for compelling reasons. It cannot add or subtract words to a statute or read something into it which is not there. It cannot rewrite or recast legislation. It is also necessary to determine that there exists a presumption that the legislature has not used any superfluous words and that the real intention of the legislation Page No.# 29/31 must be gathered from the language used.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 46 - G P Mathur - Full Document

Nathi Devi vs Radha Devi Gupta on 17 December, 2004

In the case of Visitor, AMU vs. K.S. Misra, reported in (2007) 8 SCC 593 and Nathi Devi vs. Radha Devi Gupta, reported in (2005) 2 SCC 271, the Apex Court has held that that it is a well settled principle of interpretation of the statute that it is incumbent upon the court to avoid a construction, if reasonably permissible on the language, which will render the part of the statute devoid of any meaning or application. The courts must always presume that the legislature inserted every part thereof for a purpose and the legislative intent is that every part of the statute should have effect. The legislature is deemed not to waste its words or to say anything in vain and constructions which attribute redundancy to legislature will not be accepted, except for compelling reasons. It cannot add or subtract words to a statute or read something into it which is not there. It cannot rewrite or recast legislation. It is also necessary to determine that there exists a presumption that the legislature has not used any superfluous words and that the real intention of the legislation Page No.# 29/31 must be gathered from the language used.
Supreme Court of India Cites 25 - Cited by 285 - B P Singh - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next