Joseph Palanivel Jeyapaul Vs. Union of India

Decided On : Nov-14-2014

Court : Delhi

LAW: Section 482, Section 7(4, Section 5 of Extradition Act, The Extradition Act, the Extradition Treaty, Section 609.342, Article 7 of Extradition Treaty, Article 7 of the Extradition Treaty, Article 7 of Extradition Treaty, Section 5 of The Extradition Act, Section 7 of The Extradition Act, Section 7 of The Extradition Act, the Extradition Act, the Division Bench, Section 7 of the Act, Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 228, Section 29, Section 7, Section 228 CrPC, Section 7 of the Act, Section 5 of the Act, Section 7(4, Section 7(4, Article 7 of Extradition Treaty, Section 609.342, Article 7 of the Extradition Treaty, Section 7 of the Extradition Act, Section 3, the Indian Evidence Act, Section 10 of the Act, the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 51A, the Constitution Bench, the Evidence Act, Section 90 of the Evidence Act, Section 10 of the Act, Article 9 of the Treaty, Article 9.4, Section 5, the Extradition Act

PERCENT: 14.11.2014 %, 1 SCC234

PERSON: JOSEPH, Mohit Mathur, K.V. Balakrishan, Badar Mehmood, Praman N.Mathur, Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, D.K.Ghosh, Joseph Palanivel Jeyapaul, Petitioner, Shri Ajay Garg, Joseph Palanivel Jeyapaul, laws.6, Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Joseph Palanivel Jeyapaul, Exhibit E.9, Joseph Palanivel Jeyapaul, D.K.Ghosh, Mohit Mathur, Ripu Daman, Mohit Mathur, Mohit Mathur, Surender Kaushik, Leachinsky, D.K.Basu, Ripu Daman, Rick Singh, Niranjan Patel, N.K., Gian Chand, Rick Singh, facie case.20, facie, Schtrak, Reid, Hodson, Charles Sobhraj, Pillai, Nina Pillai, Sarabjit, Rick, Singh Kohli, MANU, Sarabjit, Rick, Singh, Nina Pillai, Singh Kohli, Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Mohit Mathur, Petitioner, Petitioner, Surender Kaushik, T.T.Antony, Petitioner, Rick Singh, Crl, Ernestine B. Gilpin, stricto sensu, Vishwanathan, V. Narasaiah, MANU, Vishwanathan, Michael Ryan ', Mealey, Alan Lane Blackly, Ramgopal Ganpatrai Ruia, Anr, Queen Empress, Namdev Satvaji I.L.R., Juala I.L.R., facie, Niranjan Patel, Petitioner, Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Leachinsky, Manoj, D.K.Basu, No.(vi, Petitioner, Superintendent, Petitioner, Charles Sobhraj, Jail Superintendent, M.A. No.16896/2014, M.B. No.10838/2014

ORG: JEYAPAUL, UNION OF INDIA Through, Ministry of External Affairs, JUSTICE, Court, Court, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Patiala House Courts, the Government of India, the Petitioner by Union of India, Union of India, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Patiala House Courts, OLD CC No.48/1/11, New CC No.13/1/13 titled, Union of India, Respondent/Union, the Embassy of USA, Government of India, Extradition Magistrate, the Government of Republic of India, the Government of USA, Potential Sentences and Statutory Provisions, Complaint, the Warrant of Arrest, Minnesota Statute, Minnesota Statute, Joseph Palanivel Jeypaul of Count One, Complaint, Complaint, the Warrant of Arrest, Minnesota Statute, Minnesota Statute, Minnesota Statute, State of Minnesota, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Minnesota Statute, Complaint, Court, Complaint, Complaint, Learned Extradition Magistrate, Consultant Extradition, Ministry of External Affairs, Extradition Magistrate, Government of India, Court, Government of India, Government of India, the Union of India, Extradition Inquiry Report, the Government of Republic of India, the Government of the United States of America, the Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Minnesota Statute, the District Court, Extradition Inquiry Report, the Requested State, Extradition Magistrate, Requesting State, the Requesting State, the Communication No.2011127/CONS, Extradition Magistrate, Learned Extradition Magistrate, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Government of India, Court, the Government of Republic of India, the Government of the United States of America, Court, Extradition Magistrate, Requested State, State, U.P., State, State of Madhya Pradesh, State, the Respondent/Union of India, the Extradition Magistrate, FC, the Respondent/Union of India, Extradition Magistrate, Enquiry Court, the Extradition Magistrate, FC, the Respondent/Union of India, Union of India, Union of India & Anr, Union of India 2012 IV AD, State of Himachal Pradesh, Babulal, Extradition Magistrate, Extradition Inquiry Report, Government of India, Court, FC, State, Nina Pillai & Ors, Union of India & Ors, Union of India (Supra, the Supreme Court, Extradition Magistrate, State, Magistrate, Magistrate, Magistrate, Kamlesh Babulal Aggarwal, Union of India & Anr, Magistrate, Magistrate, Magistrate, Court, Magistrate, Magistrate, Court, Magistrate, Darshan Kumar, MANU/DE/8283/2006, Court, Government, Government, the Extradition Magistrate, Act, Court, Court, State, Magistrate, Magistrate, State, the Government of Republic of India, the Government of the United States of America, the Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Minnesota Statute, the District Court, State, the Prosecutor of the proceedings, Minnesota Statute, Court, Complaint, Complaint, the Petitioner, Prosecutor’s Affidavit, the Requesting State, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Extradition Magistrate, the Requested State, the Requesting State, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Extradition Magistrate, u/s 375, IPC, U/s. 354 IPC, IPC, Requesting State, Requested State, Requested State, Requested State, the Requesting State, Affidavit, the Prosecutor on the aspect, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Extradition Magistrate, Extradition Magistrate, State of U.P.(Supra, State, the Government of United States of America, the District Court, the Supreme Court, Union of India (Supra, Court, the Supreme Court, SLP, The Supreme Court, Consular, Treaty, State, the Department of Justice of the United States of America, the Office of the International Affairs, Criminal Division,, Department of Justice, International Affairs, Criminal Division,, Department of Justice, Extradition Magistrate, the Supreme Court, State, Magistrate, Magistrate, Magistrate, Court, Reliance, Land Acquisition Officer, Court, Cement Corporation of India Ltd., Court, DEA, Magistrate, Court, The State of Bombay, Court, the Bombay High Court, the Allahabad High Court, Magistrate, Court, Magistrate, the Central Government, Union of India (Supra, the Government of USA, the Requesting State, Sections, Extradition Magistrate, Extradition Magistrate, the Requesting State, the Requesting State, Extradition Inquiry Report, the Prosecutor’s Affidavit, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Extradition Magistrate, Extradition Magistrate, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Magistrate, Extradition Magistrate, the Extradition Inquiry Report, United State of America, Church, Magistrate, Reliance, Madhu Limaye & Ors, State of, Madhya Pradesh (Supra, State, Extradition Magistrate, Extradition Magistrate, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Extradition Magistrate, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Government of India, Annexure-R1, the Counter Affidavit, the Respondent/Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs, the Government of the United States of America, the Central Government, CPV, Court, Kamlesh Babulal Aggarwal, Union of India & Anr.(Supra, Court, the High Court, Magistrate, Court, Magistrate, the Extradition Inquiry Report, Extradition Magistrate, Government of India, Extradition Magistrate, Court

GPE: RANI, India, P.C., New Delhi, United States of America, the State of Minnesota, the United States, United States of America, the County of Roseau, the State of Minnesota, India, Kerala, Delhi, Rajasthan, question.13, Nina, the County of Roseau, United States of America, India, India, India, Kerala, the County of Roseau, United States, United States of America, Embassy, India, Washington DC, the United States of America, United States of America, United States of America, India, Counsel, Lachman, India, United State of America, Delhi

NORP: J.1, Magisterial

CARDINAL: 226, 227, 25.08.2014, 23, 22, 30.10.2014, 30.10.2014, 4, 14 to 28, One, Two, 609.342, 1(c).7, 609.342, 1(e)(i, 609.342, 12, 12, 609.345, 8, 30.10.2014, 30.10.2014, 30.10.2014, 12, 28.12.2010, 28.12.2010, 13, 5, 6, 3, 15, three, 2, 104, 221, 35, 19, 12, 29, 3, 4, 93, 142, 2007)DLT209, 129, 19, 12, 28.12.2010, 1, 2, 3, 12, 12, 609.345, 16, 16, 25, 12, 16, 26, two, two, 28.12.2010, 2001].2SCR141, 2004)8SCC270, one, 11, 372, 161, 48, 17, 4, 29, 34, 13, 13, 30.10.2014, 30.10.2014, 30.10.2014

DATE: 1962, 31.10.2014, 25.08.2014, 1962, 1962, 30 years, Two 30 years, more than one year, the age of 18 years, the later of nine years, three years, all fall of 2004, December, 15, 2006, 25.08.2014, 25.08.2014, October, 2006, October 2006, 2013, 2001, 1969, 1999, 2008, 2008, 2001, 6 SCC71and State of Madhya Pradesh, 2008, 1962, 35, 1973, 1962, 1962, 1986, 2007, 21, 22, October, 2006, 4, the age of 18 years, the later of nine years, three years, all fall of 2004, December, 15, 2006, more than one year, October, 2006, October, 2006, 28th December, 2010, 28th December, 2010, 28, 35, 1973, 1958, 1887, 1882, 48, 31, 32, October, 2006, October 2006, 33, weekly, 35, more than 23 years, 16.03.2012, 37, September 1, 2014, 38, 40

TIME: 4.00 pm, 24 hours

WORK_OF_ART: Note Verbal No.2011-127/CONS, SCC148 T.T.Antony, SCC181 Madhu Limaye & Ors, Treaty, Purya and Ors, Inquiry Report

MONEY: 40,000, 40,000, 609.342

FAC: the Warrant of Arrest, the Requesting State, the Requesting State, the Fugitive Criminal, the Fugitive Criminal, Maninder Pal Singh Kohli, the Requesting State, the Requesting State, the Requesting State

ORDINAL: second, first, second, first, first, first, second, first, first, first, first, second, first, first, first, second, first, first, second, second, first, second, First, second, first, second, first, first, first, second

LOC: No.68-CR-06-465, No.68-CR-06-465, Affidavit, No.68-CR-06-465, Central Jail No.4

PRODUCT: SCC292