Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Appellant: om wati · Respondent: state · Page 1 of about 3 results (0.023 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Jan 28 2013

Om Wati Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Appellant : Om Wati

Respondent : State of Haryana and Others

Decided on : Jan-28-2013

Subject : Land Acquisition

CWP No.1809 of 2013 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.1809 of 2013 Date of Decision: January 28, 2013 Om Wati ..Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM:...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 06 1989

Om Wati Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Appellant : Om Wati

Respondent : State

Decided on : Oct-06-1989

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Opium Act - Sections 3, 9 and 16; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 13, 14, 100, 100(1), 100(2), 100(3) and 165; Punjab Excise Act - Sections 61; Mysore Excise Act - Sections 34 and 54; Foreign Exchange Regulation Act

Reported in : 1990CriLJ304; 1990(2)Crimes151; 40(1990)DLT69; 1990(18)DRJ162

1. Judgment of the Metropolitan Magistrate February 12, 1980, by which he convicted the appellant of an offence punishable under S. 9 of the Opium Act and the subsequent order dated March 4, 1980, sentencing the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 19 2001

Smt. Om Wati and anr. Vs. State, Through Delhi Admn. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Appellant : Smt. Om Wati and anr.

Respondent : State, Through Delhi Admn. and ors.

Decided on : Mar-19-2001

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 107, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 302; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 161, 227, 228 and 288; Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 37; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 32

Reported in : AIR2001SC1507; 2001(1)ALD(Cri)663; 2001CriLJ1723; 2001(2)Crimes59(SC); JT2001(3)SC585; 2001(2)SCALE505; (2001)4SCC333; [2001]2SCR482

Sethi, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present case reflects and demonstrates the abuse of the process of the court by the accused persons who have succeeded in protracting the commencement of trial against them for about a...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial