Suraj vs.state - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Jan-14-2019

Court: Delhi

LAW: Page 1, Page 2, Section 7 and Rule 12, the Juvenile Justice Act, Section 3IPC, Page 4, Page 5, Section 7A and Rule 12, Juvenile Justice Act

CARDINAL: 01.2019, 06.06.2018, 17.11.2016, 8, 10, 6, 28.05.2014, 3, 30.05.2015, 11, two, four, 7, 15

ORG: CRL, State, SI Durgadas CORAM:-"HON’BLE MR, Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence, Reliance, the Supreme Court, Ministry of Defence’, the Medical Board, PP, the Medical Board’s, the Judgment in Veer Pal Singh, Medical Board, Radiodiagnosis, the Safdarjung Hospital, CW-1, Court, the Board

DATE: 1143/2018, 49859-60/2018 1, 8 2, about 19, between 14 to 20, 2013, 18 years and, 9 months, between 18 years, 11 months, 19 years, 17.11.2016, 22.06.2015, 30.05.2015, 18 years, more than 18 years, between 18 years 11 months to 19 years 11 months, 05.08.1995, between 20-21 years on the day, around 18 years 11 months, 18 years 9 months

PERSON: Mayank M. Mukherjee, Adv, Hirein Sharma, Addl, SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, M.A., Learned Addl, CW1, Order Dasti, JANUARY14

GPE: M.A., Suraj, IO

ORDINAL: first