Ramesh vs State Of The Nct Of Delhi on 9 October, 2012
would be giving premium for the wrongs of the prosecution
designedly committed to favour to them. The Trial Court primarily based
conviction on the circumstances
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 2375 (1.32 seconds)Gurnam Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 12 December, 2012
posits that a police officer
knowing of a design to commit any cognizable offence may arrest,
without orders from a Magistrate and without a warrant ... satisfied that the offender had a definite design to commit a cognizable
offence in a particular manner and the commission of such offence could
Lac And Would Deposit The Rest Amount ... vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 21 July, 2012
this Court held :-
"...It may be that such lapse is committed designedly or
because of negligence. Hence the prosecution evidence is
required
Rc2(S)/2002: "Cbi vs Si Vinay Tyagi & Ors." Date Of Order: ... on 24 May, 2012
ability, prevent, the commission of any
cognizable offence.
150. Information of design to commit
cognizable offences - Every police officer
receiving information of a design ... commission of
cognizable offences - (1) A police officer
knowing of a design to commit any cognizable
offence may arrest, without orders from a
Magistrate
State vs 1) Gurpinder Singh @ on 15 February, 2012
held that it may
be that such lapse is committed designedly or
because of negligence and hence the
prosecution evidence is required
State vs Vijay Pal Singh on 24 August, 2012
would amount to giving premium for the wrongs of the prosecution
designedly committed to favour the appellant. In such cases, the story of the
prosecution
Nagendra Kishore Gupta vs Union Of India on 4 September, 2012
such jurisdiction.
Sec. 151 . (1) A police officer knowing of a design to commit any
cognizable offence may arrest, without orders from Magistrate and
without ... shouting
slogans demanding rehabilitation and demanding rehabilitation measures. They
had no design to commit any cognizable offence. There was nothing on record to
raise apprehension
State vs Mangroo Prasad on 30 June, 2012
would amount to giving premium for the wrongs of the prosecution designedly
committed to favour the appellant. In such cases, the story of the prosecution
State vs Mohd. Shamim & Anr. on 8 August, 2012
would amount to giving premium for the wrongs of the prosecution
designedly committed to favour the appellant. In such cases, the story of the
prosecution
State vs Rajesh @ Gora Pandit on 14 September, 2012
would amount to giving premium for the wrongs of the prosecution
designedly committed to favour the appellant. In such cases, the story of the
prosecution