Advanced Search Results

K. Ramajayam @ Appu Vs. The Inspector of Police, T-4, Maduravoyal Poli ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

- Section 3, Section 25, Section 114, Section 45, Section 45A, section 76, Section 62, Section 65B - Information Technology Act, 2000- Section 2, Section 2(t), Section 2, Section 79A - Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 - burglary and murder €“

Anu Shanthi vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Forensic Division of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram, is not an examiner of electronic evidence as contemplated under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and therefore, his evidence is not legally admissible.92. But, the learned Public … for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the offence under Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.9. As per the impugned

Nino Mathew vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Forensic Division of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram, is not an examiner of electronic evidence as contemplated under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and therefore, his evidence is not legally admissible.92. But, the learned Public … for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the offence under Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.9. As per the impugned

State of Kerala vs Nino Mathew

Court : Kerala

Forensic Division of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram, is not an examiner of electronic evidence as contemplated under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and therefore, his evidence is not legally admissible.92. But, the learned Public … for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the offence under Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.9. As per the impugned

Arjun Panditrao Khotkar Vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Election

or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), is a relevant fact. Explanation.-- For the purposes of … in electronic records.13. It is now necessary to set out the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act and the Information Technology Act, 2000. Section 3 of the Evidence Act defines “document” as follows: “Document.-- "Document" means any matter expressed or described upon

Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K.Basheer and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : MRTP

or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000(21 of 2000)., is a relevant fact. Explanation.--For the purposes of this section, … (hereinafter referred to as ‘Evidence Act’). The Evidence Act underwent a major amendment by Act 21 of 2000 [The Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IT Act’)].. Corresponding amendments were also introduced in The Indian Penal Code (45 of

Umesh S/o. Vittal Patil Vs. State Of Karnataka,

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Subject : Land Acquisition

to be discussed.64. If the forensic lab is not notified by the Central Government u/s 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 as provided in Sec 45A of the Indian Evidence Act, then the opinion of forensic expert will not … by one Sharifsab Pakrusab Nadaf, Lokayukta police registered a case in Crime No.16/2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Gist of the complaint

Dr. Geetha D/O. K. Krishna Murthy Vs. (Sic) Vasanthi S. Shetty W/O. T. ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : BankingCriminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 2, 79A, 138 and 142; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 200, 313 and 378; ;Constitution of India - Article 20 and 20(1)

Reported in : ILR2010KAR3669

within 15 days (as it stood prior to 06.02.2003 and subsequently within 30 days) of the receipt of the information by him from the Banker regarding the return of the cheque.vi) The drawer of the cheque has failed … as observed by Apex Court in the case of Electronics Trade and Technology Development Corporation Ltd. v. Indian Technologists and Engineers (Electronics) (P) Ltd. reported … part of it.' The amended part of the provision having got incorporated into the Act the provision of Section 79A of the Act as such should be read. Section 79A of the Act, has the opening words on