Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 26 of about 306 results (0.018 seconds)State Vs. Sabir
Court: Delhi
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: August 06, 2014 + CRL.A. 335/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.R.K.Jha and SI Sushil Kumar, Karawal Nagar versus SABIR Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Nasimuddin, Advocate with Mohd.Shadab Abbasi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. It is settled law that the presumption of innocence in favour of an accused is reinforced by an order of acquittal and in appeal unless it is shown that the view taken by the learned Trial Judge is perverse and not sustainable on the evidence led at the trial, the Appellate Court would not set aside the verdict of innocence.2. With the aforesaid legal principle in mine we note that the respondent faced a trial for having raped Baby T, aged 7 years when the respondent allegedly raped her on August 15, 2010. She deposed in Court on August 18, 2011 when she was aged 8 years.3...
Tag this Judgment!Scb China Ltd Vs. State Bank of Patiala and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 209/2014 SCB CHINA LTD Through ..... Appellant Mr. Sumit Bansal, Mr.Ajay Monga, Mr. Ateev K. Mathur & Mr. Devmani Bansal, Advocates versus STATE BANK OF PATIALA & ORS .... Respondents Through Mr. R.K. Sanghi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % ORDER0608.2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J (ORAL) 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant to assail the order dated 21.1.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge had granted leave to the respondent to contest the recovery suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Order XXXVII, CPC.2. The preliminary objection raised by the counsel for the respondent is with regard to the very maintainability of the present appeal. The stand of the counsel for the respondent is that the impugned order is not in the nature of a judgment through which there has been a final determination of the rights of the parties and t...
Tag this Judgment!Gaurav and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3455/2014 GAURAV & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Narendra Singh Bisht, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP with SI Anish Sharma, PS Kalkaji R-2/complainant in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No.592/2014 registered under Sections 324/341/34 IPC at Police Station Kalkaji, South Delhi, on the ground that the concerned parties have settled their dispute with each other.2. Issue notice.3. Counsel for the State accepts notice.4. The complainant, Vikram Thakur, is also present in person. The Investigating Officer, Sub-Inspector Anish Sharma, Police Station Kalkaji, also identifies the complainant, as well as the three petitioners, who are stated to be the accused.5. It is stated by counsel for the petitioners that the aforesaid FIR59...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Maqbool Vs. National Investigation Agency
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 31, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: August 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 781/2013 SYED MAQBOOL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 782/2013 IMRAN KHAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 1554/2013 WASIM AKRAM MALIK CRL.A.No.781/2013 & conn.matters ..... Appellant Page 1 of 25 Represented by: Mr.Meh...
Tag this Judgment!Afcons Infrastructure Ltd Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:05. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 4931/2012 AFCONS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Maneesha Dhir, Advocate with Ms Geeta Sharma, Mr Ishan Sanghi and Mr Karan Batura, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Mukesh Anand, Advocate for R-1 Mr Satish Kumar, Advocate for R-1 & R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. Earlier a Division Bench of this Court had dismissed the writ petition by virtue of an order dated 12.09.2013. The writ petition was essentially concerned with the payment of interest by the Revenue to the petitioner on account of petitioners succeeding in its appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal where the petitioner had earlier been directed to make a pre-deposit of `55,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Lakhs) for ...
Tag this Judgment!Maya Devi Vs. Director General of Posts (Pli) Department and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4063/2014 MAYA DEVI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D.S. Kauntae, Advocate. versus DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POSTS (PLI) DEPARTMENT & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Barkha Babbar, Adv. for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER % 05.08.2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(Oral) 1. By this Writ Petition filed by Smt. Maya Devi, the petitioner seeks direction in the nature of certiorari to set aside the impugned order dated 4th April, 2014 passed by respondent No.2 which as per petitioner is illegal and contrary to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 read with Section 39(5) of the Insurance Act, 1938. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to take all necessary steps to remit the insurance amount expeditiously, along with yearly bonus money, in favour of the petitioner, pursuant to her sons demise.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners son viz. Mandeep Singh, ...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Maqbool Vs. Nia
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 31, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: August 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 781/2013 SYED MAQBOOL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 782/2013 IMRAN KHAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 1554/2013 WASIM AKRAM MALIK CRL.A.No.781/2013 & conn.matters ..... Appellant Page 1 of 25 Represented by: Mr.Meh...
Tag this Judgment!imran Khan Vs. National Investigation Agency
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 31, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: August 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 781/2013 SYED MAQBOOL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 782/2013 IMRAN KHAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 1554/2013 WASIM AKRAM MALIK CRL.A.No.781/2013 & conn.matters ..... Appellant Page 1 of 25 Represented by: Mr.Meh...
Tag this Judgment!Sant Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 355/2012 SANT KUMAR SINGH Through: ....Petitioner Mr. Sanjeev Sahay & Ms. Sanya Bhatnagar, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Barkha Babbar, Advocate for UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER0508.2014 % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek the following reliefs:a) Issue appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing of the memorandum dated 04.04.11 issued on behalf of the respondent No.3 and representation dated 23.10.10 may be allowed; b) Direct the respondent No.3 to review the ACR for the period 2007-2008 and ACR for the period 2008-2009 afresh and adverse grading be expunged; c) Direct respondent No.2 to review the DPC dated 17.06.11, on the basis of which Promotion-cum-posting list dated 24.06.11 was made, afresh for considering the petitioners case ...
Tag this Judgment!Pooja Saxena Vs. Union Bank of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4056/2014 Decided on :05. 08.2014 IN THE MATTER OF POOJA SAXENA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. V.P.S. Tyagi, Advocate versus UNION BANK OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr. O.P. Gaggar, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia that the respondent/Union Bank of India be restrained from terminating her services in the capacity of a Customer Relationship Executive (in short CRE) and further, the respondent/Bank be directed to regularize her appointment relating back to the date of her initial appointment.2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that initially, the petitioner was employed by the respondent/Bank as a CRE, vide letter of appointment dated 16.6.2011 (Annexure P-4). The said appointment was for a period of two years, expiring on 3.7.2013. W.P.(C) 4056/2014 the contractual appointment of the petitioner was extended for ...
Tag this Judgment!