Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)

Amarjit Singh vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 8 January, 2002

5. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considered the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in case of Amarjit Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi reported in JT 2002 (1) SC 291 and in the case of Sandeep Jain v. National Capital Territory of Delhi Rep. By Secretary, Home Deptt., reported in (2000) 2 SCC 66 as well as in the case of Jani Yoginiben Kumarbhai and others v. State of Gujarat vide order dated 12.02.2013 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.2400 of 2013. I am of the opinion that the present application requires consideration and the same is allowed. Condition No.9 imposed by 6th (Ad-hoc) Additional Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Feb 06 02:45:08 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/1602/2016 ORDER Sessions Judge, Ankleshwar, District-Bharuch vide order dated 18.01.2016 in Criminal Misc.Application No.9 of 2016 is hereby deleted. However, the applicant No.1 shall deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) 25,000/- each with local surety as well as applicant No.2 shall deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with local surety within a period of 10 days from today. Rest of the conditions imposed by the Trial Court shall remain as it is. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 28 - R P Sethi - Full Document

Jani Yoginiben Kumarbhai & vs State Of Gujarat on 12 February, 2013

5. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considered the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in case of Amarjit Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi reported in JT 2002 (1) SC 291 and in the case of Sandeep Jain v. National Capital Territory of Delhi Rep. By Secretary, Home Deptt., reported in (2000) 2 SCC 66 as well as in the case of Jani Yoginiben Kumarbhai and others v. State of Gujarat vide order dated 12.02.2013 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.2400 of 2013. I am of the opinion that the present application requires consideration and the same is allowed. Condition No.9 imposed by 6th (Ad-hoc) Additional Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Feb 06 02:45:08 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/1602/2016 ORDER Sessions Judge, Ankleshwar, District-Bharuch vide order dated 18.01.2016 in Criminal Misc.Application No.9 of 2016 is hereby deleted. However, the applicant No.1 shall deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) 25,000/- each with local surety as well as applicant No.2 shall deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with local surety within a period of 10 days from today. Rest of the conditions imposed by the Trial Court shall remain as it is. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Gujarat High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 1 - A J Desai - Full Document
1