Delhi Court July 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.
Jaivir Sharma Vs. D.N. Taneja and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2774/2013 Decided on 19.07.2013 IN THE MATTER OF : JAIVIR SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. K.B. Andley, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jaivir Sharma, Advocate versus D.N. TANEJA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Naveen Sharma, Addl. PP for the respondent No.2/State. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 Cr.PC praying inter alia for cancellation of the bail granted to the respondent No.1 vide order dated 05.03.2013 passed by the learned ASJ in case FIR No.76/2012 under Sections 376/354/328/342/506/34 IPC registered at Police Station: Barakhamba Road. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the order dated 30.05.2013 passed by the learned ASJ, rejecting his application for cancellation of the respondent No.1s bail.2. At the outset, Mr. Andley, Senior Advocate for the petitioner has been requested to address the Court...
Tushar Keshaorao Deshmukh Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretary, De ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
V.N. Gaur, Member (A): Applicant in this OA is a hearing impaired person with disability from Other Backward Classes (OBC) category, who has made attempts at Civil Services Examination (CSE) a number of times. He has sought for the following reliefs: a) Quash the decision of Respondent No.2 UPSC cancelling the candidature of the Applicant in the Civil Services Examination 2012 communicated to the Applicant by the letter dated 15.02.2013; and b) Quash the provision in the Rule 4 of the Civil Services Examination 2012 rules notified on 4.02.2012 by the Respondent No.1 and Clause 3 (IV) of the Respondent No.2s notification No.04/2012-CSP dated 11.02.2012 for the CSE 2012 providing a maximum of seven attempts for the disabled candidates from OBC category and direct the Respondents to amend the said provisions so as to provide for a maximum of ten attempts for eligible disabled candidates from the OBC category; and c) Direct the Respondent No.2 UPSC to allow the Applicant up to ten attempts...
State Vs. Raj Kumar @ Sonu
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
$~ 7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 249/2012 & Crl.M.A.5976/2012 Judgment delivered on 19th July, 2013 % STATE ..... Petitioner Mr.Dayan Krishnan, ASC with Ms.Swati Goswami, Advocate along with S.I. Anuj Agarwal, P.S. Prasad Nagar. Through: versus RAJ KUMAR @ SONU ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Gaurav Bhattacharya for Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate for respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. The present leave to appeal has been filed by the State against the judgment of acquittal dated 2.1.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Central) in the case FIR No.170/2009 under Section 302 IPC.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 3.9.2009 at about 4:30 a.m. in front of house No.16-H/811, Gali No.8, Bapa Nagar, P.S. Prasad Nagar, the respondent herein committed the murder of Shri Mohan Lal with a fluorescent tube.3. It is further the case of the prosecution that Manoj Kumar, PW-2, an eye witness...
Bhola Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: July 05, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 18, 2013 + CRL.APPEAL 404 1998 BHOLA Represented by: .....Appellant Ms.Kamna Vohra, Amicus Curiae versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel (Crl.) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Appellant Bhola was sent to face trial on the charge that on July 05, 1995 at 7:00 PM he poured kerosene oil on his wife Gurdevi and set her on fire with the intention to cause her death and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Needless to state Gurdevi died due to burn wounds.2. At the end of the trial, during which 11 witnesses were examined, when the appellant was put the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence, to the circumstance that his wife Gurdevi was brought at the casualty of Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital New Delhi in an injured condit...
Dharmendra Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : May 23, 2013 DECIDED ON : July 18, 2013 + CRL.A. 64/2011 DHARMENDRA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.R.Rajesh, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellant-Dharmendra challenges a judgment dated 01.11.2010 in Sessions Case No.140/2007 arising out of FIR No.111/2007 registered at Police Station Nangloi by which he was convicted under Section 393/308 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years under Section 393 IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for three years under Section 308 IPC with fine ` 10,000/2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 08.02.2007 at about 03.00 A.M. he and his associates Munna Khan (since P.O.), Kalia, Subodh and Chotu (not arrested) committed trespass in a godown at Todar Mal Chowk, Mundka in occupation of Cadila Health Care Limited. Ram Avtar was Chowkidar at the said godown. After finding th...
Jaspal Walia Vs. Uoi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
$~Part IB (R-23 &24) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h July, 2013 + W.P.(C) 1366/1995 JASPAL WALIA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sankalp Goswami and Mr.Akshat Rehani, Advocates. versus UOI ..... Respondent Through + W.P.(C) 2632/1995 MOHINDER SINGH WALIA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sankalp Goswami and Mr.Akshat Rehani, Advocates. versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This common order will dispose of the two writ petitions filed by wife and husband, namely, Jaspal Walia and Mohinder Singh Walia. The two petitioners came back to India from London on 22nd September, 1990 and on inquiry by the Customs Officers had declared that they were not carrying dutiable goods except imported goods within the permissible limit. They were permitted to proceed towards the exit gate, where they were intercepted. Jaspal Walia was found to be wearing 8 gold bangles and...
Commissioner of Police and anr. Vs. Tasvir Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 18, 2013 + W.P.(C) 4473/2013 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE& ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.S.P.Sharma, Advocate with Dr.Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate versus TASVIR SINGH Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Amita Kalkal Chaudhary, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) Caveat No.617/2013 1. Since counsel as above appears for the respondent/caveator, the Caveat is discharged. WP(C)No.4473/2013 1. The petitioner is playing a cat and mouse game with the respondent and making the respondent litigate repetitively. The petitioner is guilty of changing its stand from time to time.2. It all commenced when an advertisement was issued in the year 2006 inviting applications to fill up posts of Constable (Executive) Male in the Delhi Police.3. There exists an OM No.15012/3/84-Estt.(D) dated 12.11.1983 on the subject of grant of relaxation for upper ...
Nanak Chand and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
#18 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7057-75/2004 NANAK CHAND AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Atul Nagrajan with Mr. Sushant Kumar Thakur, Mr. Surjeet Singh Malhotra and Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Advocates versus UOI & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Mr. Ruchir Mishra with Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocates for R-1 to 3. Mr. Arun Birbal with Mr. Vineet Malhotra and Mr. D.K. Singh, Advocates for R-4/DDA. Date of Decision:18. h July, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to execute a sale deed/conveyance deed in favour of the petitioners in respect of Madangir flats in their possession/occupation. The prayer clause in the present writ petition is reproduced hereinbelow:- (i) Direct respondent no. 1, 2 & 3 to allot and execute the Sale Deed in favour of the petitioners for the flats in their occupation and poss...
M.G.Goel Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 18, 2013 + W.P.(C) 1125/2007 M.G.GOEL Represented by: .....Petitioner Mr.T.D.Yadav, Advocate versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Represented by: None .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioner joined service as a Junior Auditor on July 01, 1959 and superannuated on October 30, 1994 while holding the post of a Superintendent Grade-I (DASS Cadre). Unfortunately for him, three days prior to the date of superannuation disciplinary proceedings were contemplated in view of the Anti Corruption Branch investigating a matter in which petitioner came under a cloud and in respect of which later on FIR No.5/95 was registered. To the misfortune of the petitioner investigation continued by the Anti Corruption Branch till October, 2001 and no involvement of the petitioner being found, a letter was written by the Anti Corruption Branch on Octobe...
Dharam Pal and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 92/2003 Reserved on:14. h May, 2013 Decided on:18. h July, 2013 % DHARAM PAL & ORS. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. R.N. Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 PW1, Laxmi Chand lodged a complaint on the basis of which FIR No. 197/1995 under Sections 308/34 IPC was registered at PS Najafgarh against Sahib Singh, Dharam Pal, Anil Kumar and Parvinder Kumar. Pursuant to the trial, the Appellants Dharam Pal and his sons Anil Kumar and Parvinder were convicted for offence under Sections 325/34 IPC and released on probation which period is also over. As the Appellant No. 1 is a government servant he presses the appeal and states that the conviction is illegal and contrary to the facts of law.2. Learned counsel for the Appellants contends that in the Ruqqa, besides the Appellants, PW1 named two other persons, that is, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »