Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (1.54 seconds)
Siraj vs State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil ... on 27 February, 2024 cites

Tofan Singh vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 29 October, 2020

4. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was not apprehended on the spot and the name of the applicant was linked with the offence in question on the statement of the co-accused, which according to the applicant is not admissible in evidence in view of the law as laid down in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamilnadu : AIR 2020 SC 5592. He further argues that three of the co-accused from whom the alleged recovery was done were enlarged on bail by the Trial Court itself in terms of the orders which are contained in Annexure No. 5 and the applicant was denied the benefit of bail, solely based upon the criminal antecedents of the applicant as recorded in the bail rejection order. To explain the criminal antecedents of the applicant, the applicant has filed the rejoinder affidavit stating that the Case No. 137 of 2023 is not a case under the NDPS Act and is a case under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and the applicant is not even named in the said FIR. As regards the Case No. 254 of 2018, the counsel for the applicant states that he has been exonerated in the said case vide judgment dated 24.03.2021. As regards the Case No. 260 of 2013, he argued that the same was registered subsequent to the present offence. In the cases referred at Serial No. 5 & 6, the applicant is on bail and the case referred at Serial No. 7, it is not related to the applicant. He further argued that the applicant is in custody since 29.09.2023, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.
Supreme Court of India Cites 360 - Cited by 1439 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1   2 Next