Citation network
State Vs. Sunil Batra Alias Bobby
Cites for this judgment
- Delhi High Court
- Feb 23, 1978
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Rex v. DeanSearch
-
Rex v. SmierciakSearch
-
The King v. AlfredSearch
-
and Rex v. HalsamSearch
-
Rex v. SmierciakSearch
-
R. v. TurnbullSearch
-
Mr. Ram Jethmalani's argument that the avertment of v. JaggiSearch
-
in theparade having to be rated higher than even that of the rest of theappellants overlooks the fact that even v. JaggiSearch
-
been taken to Bhopal and brought back by air along with theappellants to Delhi, are destructive of the suggestions that v. JaggiSearch
-
had also spoken about this fact. The JailorCentral Jail, Tihar, (P.W. 87) has also spoken about the appellants(except v. JaggiSearch
-
when they were received in the jail, after being produced byP.W. 142 and remanded to judicial custody. The version of v. JaggithatSearch
-
Ravi had done nothingthen, even though, according to plan Ravi had to snatch the guard'sgun Public Witness 1 and v. JaggiSearch
-
worth recalling that the search warrants wereobtained at Delhi on the 10th only in respect of the appellants otherthan v. JaggiSearch
-
the recovery altogether.IT is seen from the judgment of the learned trial Judge (para 647)that it was the contention of v. Jaggi'sSearch
-
counsel that v. Jaggi'sSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
(Except v. JaggiSearch
-
and of v. JaggiSearch
-
Om Prakash v. StateSearch
-
with them to Shahwar'ahouse. It may be noticed, m this context, that from the Kitol ParkCafeteria the appellant (except v. JaggiSearch
-
according to the evidence orP.W.J and Public Witness 35 was used for target practice in the house underconstruction of v. JaggiSearch
-
to P. W.1 whenSunil and Shahwar were practicing with the revolver (Ex. P.9), tiring oneor two bullets in the air, v. Jagg'sSearch
-
friend Anil Kumar Pun (P.W. 35)came to the terrace. W. 35 had met v. JaggiSearch
-
and Shahwar fired at' the top corners of theasbestos sheet, measuring 3'' x 1',' placed outside the wall of the terraceof v. Jaggi'sSearch
-
stated so(this would be substantive evidence). The asbestos sheet was recoveredas a consquence of being pointed out by v. JaggiSearch
-
A is the pointing out memo prepared by Public Witness 140. It is very important to note thatit was v. JaggiSearch
-
Suniland v. JaggiSearch
-
as a prior statement under Section 157 of the Evidence Act, for corroboration. Hisbias in favor of his friends, Sunil and v. JaggiSearch
-
Jf v. JaggiSearch
-
accused to figure as a witness. Hisbeing a witness to the target practice would not have been known tothe police but for v. JaggiSearch
-
Sat Pal v. DelhiAdministrationSearch
-
which he accepted, that the sun set at 5 P.M. in September. There isa statement made under S. 27 of the Evidence Act by v. JaggiSearch
-
relating to the stay of Ravi, Shahwar, and Public Witness 1 in thehotels specified by v. JaggiSearch
-
Mahanta Singh Natha Singh v. HetSearch
-
Yashwant & Ors. v. StateSearch
-
Ramazan & Ors. v. EmperorSearch
-
Rex v. Haslam(1925Search
-
Arthurs v. AttorneySearch
-
Davies and Cody v. TheSearch
-
In Rex v. BagleySearch
-
Rex v. DeanSearch
-
Rex v. SmierciakSearch
-
The King v. AlfredSearch
-
and Rex v. HalsamSearch
-
Rameshwar Singh v. StateSearch
-
Raj Sikka v. DelhiSearch
-
SatyaNarain v. TheSearch
-
Raj v. DelhiSearch
-
(Except v. JaggiSearch
-
Om Prakash v. StateSearch
-
Suniland v. JaggiSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial