Delhi Court January 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
C. Parthasarthy Vs. Bulls and Bears (Stock Brokers) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL M.C. NO.4200/2002 Decided on :4. h January, 2013 C. PARTHASARTHY Through: Petitioner Mr. Anshu Mahajan & Mr. Karan Arora, Advocates. Versus BULLS AND BEARS (STOCK BROKERS) LTD. Respondent Through: Mr. P.K. Arya, Mr. Ashish Sharma, Mr. Narinder Chaudhary & Mr. Rahul Tomar, Advocates. WITH CRIMINAL M.C. NO.2253/2003 PRADEEP VAKIL Through: Versus STATE & ANR. Through: Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Mittal, Advocate. Respondents Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State. Mr. P.K. Arya, Mr. Ashish Sharma, Mr. Narinder Chaudhary & Mr. Rahul Tomar, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This order shall dispose of abovementioned two petitions as similar facts and common question of law and facts are involved in both these cases, however, for facility of reference, the facts of only Criminal M.C. No.4200 of 2002 are given.2. These are the petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of Complaint No.44/1/2001 filed und...
Rashmi Sharma and ors. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:4. h January, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 2/2013 RASHMI SHARMA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. K.K. Sharma, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CRL.MA.30/2012 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The Application is allowed. CRL. M.C. 2/2013 1. This is a Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) preferred by the Petitioners for quashing of FIR No.354/2012, under Section 420/34 IPC, Police Station Bindapur and consequential proceedings arising out of the same.2. FIR No.354/2012 was registered on the basis of the statement of Smt. Jaswant Sandhu (Respondent No.2 herein) under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC on the allegations that Respondent No.2 had purchased a Flat not F-1, E-38, E Block, Arya Samaj Raod, New Delhi from Naresh Kuma...
Additional Commissioner of Police Vs. Sushil Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: January 04, 2013 + WP(C) 930/2011 ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Represented by: Mr.Aditya Madan, Advocate. ..... Petitioner versus SUSHIL KUMAR & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.C.Hariharan, and Mr.Sunil, Advocates for R-1. Mr.Sachin Datta, and Ms.Niti Arora, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. In the year 2005 Maj.Gen.(Retd.) R.K.Kaushal became an accused in FIR No.671/04 for offences punishable under Section 420/120-B IPC read with Section 24 of the Emigration Act. It was alleged against him that he cheated several persons by offering them jobs abroad and after taking huge sums of money did not honour his word.2. The investigation was entrusted to the respondent, SI Sushil Kumar i.e. the respondent who after obtaining orders from the Court took on remand the accused for purposes of investigation and recoveries and ...
Ms. X and anr. Vs. Sk Srivastava and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:11. 12.2012 Judgment delivered on:04. 01.2013 % + CONT.CAS(C) 330/2012 MS. X & ANR ..... Petitioners versus SK SRIVASTAVA & ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners: Mr Jayant K. Mehta & Mr Sukant Vikram, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr S.K. Gupta & Mr Vishnu Sharma, Adv. for Respondent no.1. Ms Maneesha Dhir & Ms Mithu Jain, Advocates for Respondent no.2. CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J 1.Since this is a case in which the petitioners have sought to invoke the contempt jurisdiction of this court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with the relevant provisions of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 (in short the said Act), based on repeated and consistent acts of gross misdemeanor by the respondent, to which I would be making a reference hereinafter; I have thought it fit to obliterate the name of the petitioners, so as to avoid any unintended igno...
Paramjeet Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Appeal No. 586/2012 Reserved on:4. h October, 2012 Date of Decision:4. h January, 2013 % PARAMJEET SINGH Through ....Appellant Ms. Anita Abraham, Advocate. Versus STATE Through Respondent Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. P. GARG SANJIV KHANNA, J.Present case is a heart rendering and perplexing one because the appellant father, arraigned before the Court, was charged and has been convicted for murdering his very own daughter, by inflicting continuous, deep and multiple stab wounds with blades of scissors. As alleged, in intense rage he indiscriminatingly attacked his wife and the three children, including the deceased, in the intervening night of 3rd and 4th April, 2004. The appellant has impugned his conviction in Session Case No. 29/2008, arising out of FIR No. 194/04, vide judgment dated 16th November, 2011. By the order of the same day, he has been sentenced to life imprisonment, wi...
Laxman @ Janga Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:04. 01.2013 CRL. A. 144/2010 LAXMAN @ JANGA ... Appellant versus STATE ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent /State : Mr Siddharth Aggarwal : Mr Sanjay Lao AND + CRL. A. 850/2010 PAWAN ... Appellant versus STATE ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent /State : Ms Charu Verma : Mr Sanjay Lao CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MS JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 30.11.2009 in Sessions Case No. 36/2009 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, North-East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, whereby the appellants Pawan and Laxman have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC and they have also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363/34 IPC. The said case arose out of FIR 391/2003 registered a...
Union of India and ors. Vs. A.K.Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
$~ 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: January 4, 2013 + W.P.(C) No.4338/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.V.S.R.Krishna, Advocate with Mr.Abhishek Yadav, Advocate. versus A.K.SHARMA Represented by: ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) 1. The matter was called out once and since none appeared for the respondent was passed over. None appears for the respondent even at the second call.2. Vide impugned order dated February 07, 2012 the Central Administrative Tribunal has allowed O.A.No.778/2011 filed by the respondent. A direction has been issued to the writ petitioner to issue letter appointing respondent to the post of ACM.3. The reason why the direction has been issued by the Tribunal is that the respondent successfully cleared the written test held on September 04, 2004 for promoting Group-C employees to Group-B post i.e. the post of ACM...
Defence Estate Officer Vs. Lac and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: December 13, 2012 Pronounced on: January 04, 2013 + (i) R.F.A. No. 838/2002 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms.Sonia Mathur and Mr.Sushil Dubey, Advocates versus ADIL SINGH & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Ravinder Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr.Ajoy B.Kalia, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms.K.K. Kiran, Advocates for UOI/LAC Mr.Rajesh Yadav and Ms.Ruchira, Advocates for Respondent No.4. + (ii) LA. APP. No. 305/2007 DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Sonia Mathur and Mr.Sushil Dubey, Advocates versus LAC & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms.K.K. Kiran, Advocates for UOI/LAC Mr.Rajesh Yadav and Ms.Ruchira, Advocates for Respondent No. 2(a) to 2(d). + (iii) R.F.A. No. 324/2003 DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Sonia Mathur and Mr.Sushil Dubey, Advocates versus LAC & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms.K.K. Kir...
Shri Kapil Chopra and ors. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:4. h January, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 3572/2012 SHRI KAPIL CHOPRA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Rashid Hahmi, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) preferred by the Petitioners for quashing of FIR No.593/2007, under Section 420/34 IPC, Police Station Paharganj and consequential proceedings arising out of the same.2. FIR No.593/2007 was registered on the basis of the directions issued under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. by the Metropolitan Magistrate on the basis of a Complaint made by Respondent No.2 (Geeta Chopra).3. The sum and substance of the averments made in the Complaint is that the Petitioner No.1 at the behest of Petitioner No.2 and 3 got a Sale Deed in respect of portion o...
Union of India and ors. Vs. R.S.Atal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: January 04, 2013 + WP(C) 4339/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Rajesh Katyal, Advocate. Versus R.S.ATAL Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Minal Sehgal, Advocate for Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. The respondent R.S.Atal had a not too happy career with the Director- General, Department of Culture, National Museum, New Delhi. He joined service on ad-hoc basis with the National Museum as a Gallery Attendant on February 04, 1978 and was regularized on said post on May 26, 1981. On November 30, 1996 he was appointed to a post in a higher pay-scale on ad-hoc basis for a period of 6 months; and the post is that of a Museum Lecturer, since redesignated as Assistant Curator.2. Being relevant it needs to be highlighted that R.S.Atals appointment, albeit ad-hoc, as a Museum Lecturer was not fortuitou...
- ‹ Prev
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- Next ›
- Last »