12 September, 2014

Nothing on record to show that the persons before whom confession was made were persons of accused confidence - No reliance can be placed on such extra-judicial confession

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

M.K. Mukherjee and S.P. Kurdukar, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 112 of 1988. D/d. 10.10.1996.

Billu and Ors - Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent

For the Appellants :- Mr. R.K. Kohli, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.K. Sabbarwal, Advocate.
For the Respondent :- Mr. L.K. Pandey, Mr. R. Rana, Advocates for Mr. Prem Malhotra, Advocate.

Supreme Court of India

JUDGMENT

M.K. Mukherjee, J. - The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is the judgment dated January 16, 1988 rendered by the Designated Court, Rohtak disposing of two cases, being Sessions Case No. 280 of 1986 and Arms Act Case No. 281 of 1986. By the impugned judgment the Designated Court convicted the three appellants before us under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC (two counts) and also convicted one of them, namely, Raj Kumar under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Sections 6 of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985.

Read full Judgment »

12 September, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

10 September, 2014

Murder - Extra judicial confession - Alleged that accused confessed having hit deceased on head and other parts - This extra judicial confession inconsistent with medical evidence - Conviction based on retracted extra judicial confession not proper

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before :- K. Jayachandra Reddy and G.N. Ray, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 612 of 1986. D/d. 8.9.1992.

Chhittar - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent


Supreme Court of India

JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel.
2. This is yet another case where the conviction of the sole appellant is based on the retracted extra judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant to PWs 7 and 11, nearly 20 days after the occurrence.

Read full Judgment »

10 September, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

07 September, 2014

Wife settled in Canada - Husband wanted to go Canada and paid Rs. 4 lakhs to uncle of wife and marriage was settled and performed - Husband was interviewed for grant of visa; however, he could not get through the interview - Cannot be held that there was cheating fraud on part of wife or her uncle

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before :- Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. 
RSA No. 3306 of 2007. D/d. 17.03.2010.

Beant Singh - Appellants
Versus
Jaskaranjit Kaur Sandhu and others - Respondents

For the Appellant :- Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate.

Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

JUDGMENT

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral) - This is plaintiff's second appeal challenging the judgment and decrees of the Lower Appellate Court whereby appeal filed by the defendant-respondents was accepted against the judgment and decree of the trial Court and the decree passed in favour of the appellant for recovery was set aside and suit of the plaintiff-appellant was ordered to be dismissed.

Read full Judgment »

07 September, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

04 September, 2014

Revision - Execution - Property - Attachment - Objection - In view of specific provision, the remedy of in case of attachment of property remedy lies in prefering an appeal over the said order

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Before :- Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.
CRP No. 4107 of 2001. D/d 31.12.2002.

Ushasri Agro Agencies (Chit funds), Khammam - Petitioner
Versus
Giridhar Auto Finance.(P) Limited, Khammam and others - Respondents

For the Petitioner :- Mr. T.Veerabhadrayya, Advocate.

Andhra Pradesh High Court

JUDGEMENT

Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J. - This revision petition is filed under Section 115 C.P.C., against the order dated 16.7.2001 in I.A.No.466 of 1999 in I.A.No.412 of 1999 in O.S.No.45 of 1999 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Khammam.

Read full Judgment »

04 September, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

Mere entry in the revenue record will not be sufficient to prove adverse possession of the defendants

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before :- Hemant Gupta, J.
Regular Second Appeal No. 715 of 1999. D/d. 28.3.2007.

Communist Party, Ropar and others - Appellants
Versus
Sant Saran Bhalla (Dead) through his L.Rs and Others - Respondents

For the Appellants :- Mr. Sarjit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents :- Mr. J.R. Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.S. Salar, Advocate.

Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

JUDGMENT

Hemant Gupta, J. - The defendants are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court whereby suit for possession of land measuring 1 Kanal was decreed.

Read full Judgment »

by Puneet Batish · 0

Nagar Palika versus Jagat Singh, Advocate - Supreme Court 1995

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before :- J.S. Verma, N.P. Singh and K. Venkataswami, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 290 of 1991. D/d. 28.3.1995.

Nagar Palika, Jind - Appellant
Versus
Jagat Singh, Advocate - Respondent

Supreme Court of India
JUDGMENT
N.P. Singh, J. :- The Municipal Committee, Jind, has filed this appeal for setting aside the judgment of the Additional District Judge (hereinafter referred to as 'the Court of Appeal') decreeing the suit filed on behalf of the respondent, which had been dismissed by the Trial Court. The Second Appeal filed on behalf of the appellant, before the High Court was dismissed in limine. Thereafter, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 562 of 1987 was filed before this Court, which was permitted to be withdrawn to enable the appellant to file a Review Petition before the High Court. That Review Petition was dismissed by the High Court saying that no ground for review had been made out.

Read full Judgment »

by Puneet Batish · 0

03 September, 2014

Revenue entry does not have any presumptive value on title - But it has the value to prove possession

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Before :- D.K. Seth, J.
CMWP No. 14269 of 1998. D/d. 13.5.1998.

Prashidh Singh Chaudhan and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Varanasi and Ors. - Respondents

For the Petitioners :- Mr. R.J. Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents :- Km. Farida Jamal, Advocate.

Allahabad High Court

JUDGMENT

D.K. Seth, J. - The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 had filed a suit being Original Suit No. 145 of 1996 before Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chakia Varanasi. In connection with the said suit, an application for temporary injunction was filed. By an order dated 11.9.1997 temporary injunction was granted. Appeal being Civil Misc. Appeal No. 22 of 1997 was filed by the defendants. The appeal was dismissed by an order dated 20.3.1998 passed by the Additional Judge, Small Causes Court. These are the orders under challenge.

Read full Judgment »

03 September, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

31 August, 2014

Accused residing in Canada before registration of FIR - No attempt made to serve in Canada - Accused cannot be declared proclaimed offender

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before :- Mrs. Sabina, J.
Crl. Misc. No. M-1513 of 2009. D/d. 25.05.2009.

Mehar Singh & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent

For the Petitioners :- Manu K. Bhandari, Advocate.
For the Respondent :- Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab.

Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

ORDER


Mrs. Sabina, J. - The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C. for short) for setting aside order dated 7-10-2008 (Annexure P-10) passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby they have been declared proclaimed offenders.

Read full Judgment »

31 August, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

Parties married at Jalandhar thereafter living in Canada - Demand of dowry made in Canada - FIR lodged at Jalandhar - FIR quashed, inter alia, on the ground that larger part of offence was committed in Canada

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before :- S.B. Sinha and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 908 of 2009 [Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 1793 of 2008]. D/d. 05.05.2009.

Harmanpreet Singh Ahluwalia and Others - Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab and Others - Respondents


Supreme Court of India

JUDGMENT


S.B. Sinha, J. - Leave granted.
2. Appellants are before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 13.12.2007 passed by a learned single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-40020 of 2007 dismissing an application praying for quashing FIR No. 141 dated 30.5.2006 under Section 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "the Code")

Read full Judgment »

by Puneet Batish · 0

30 August, 2014

Rape - Age of prosecutrix - Mother is the best person to tell about the age of her daughter in absence of medical evidence

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Before :- Ch. S.R.K. Prasad, J.
Criminal Appeal No. 542 of 1999. D/d. 23.7.2003

Masiripamu Nukaiah @ Nukaraju - Appellant
Versus
State of A.P. - Respondent

For the Appellant :- Mr. Ghangula Ashok Kumar Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondent :- Public Prosecutor.

Andhra Pradesh High Court

JUDGMENT


Ch. S.R.K. Prasad, J. - This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment rendered by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhimavaram in S. C. No. 7 of 1990 convicting and sentencing the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC.

Read full Judgment »

30 August, 2014 by Puneet Batish · 0

Rape on pregnant woman - For conviction of accused under Section 376(2)(e) IPC, prosecution has to prove by positive evidence that accused knew the victim to be pregnant

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before :- Arijit Pasayat and S.H. Kapadia, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 629 of 2006 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 6111 of 2005). D/d. 11.5.2006.

Om Prakash - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh - Respondent

For the Appellant :- M.P. Shorawala, Advocate.
For the Respondent :- P.K. Singh, Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Advocates.

Supreme Court of India

JUDGMENT


Arijit Pasayat, J. - Leave granted.
2. Appellant calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench upholding the appellant's conviction for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(e) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') as recorded by learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Hardoi and the sentence of 10 years imprisonment as awarded.

Read full Judgment »

by Puneet Batish · 0

©2009-2011 Geek Upd8. Some content is copyrighted to Puneet Batish and may not be reproduced on other websites.
Download Print Friendly PDF FileFree Legal Advice on Phone