Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.20 seconds)
State vs . Anil Kumar on 7 July, 2018 cites

State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs Anil Kumar Sunil Kumar & Party & Anr on 3 April, 2000

In the present case convict has been convicted for offence punishable u/s. 3 DPDP Act.  No previous conviction has been alleged or proved against convict.  The convict is not involved in any such case, as State Vs. Anil Kr.; FIR No. 1047-14; PS UN 2/2 stated by him.  Convict is having a family to support.   Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the accused/convict is facing trial for defacing the public property by putting board for advertisement and he is first time offender. I am of considered view that ends of justice would be met if the convict is admonished u/s. 3 of The Probation of Offender's Act, 1958.  Further u/s. 5 of The Probation of Offender's Act, 1958, convict is directed to deposit Rs. 1000/­ as the cost of the proceedings of the court.  The same has been deposited.  Receipt be issued.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 203 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Anil Bhatia & Ors. vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 19 February, 2015

(vi)   Reliance can be placed upon  Anil Bhatia vs. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors reported as WP(C) NO. 6711/2013 wherein the court held that  "unregulated   putting   up   of   Poster/ Banners/   Hoarding   on   the   public property lead to public nuisance and runs counter   to   public   order   within   the meaning   of   Article   19(2)   of   the Constitution."
Delhi High Court Cites 54 - Cited by 76 - R S Endlaw - Full Document
1