1987 Cri Lj 1856 - Judgment Search Results

Mahendrakumar Shantilal Shah and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR428; 1994CriLJ2667; 1994(2)MhLj1371

But a rather recent decision of the Supreme Court in Ram Naresh Yadav AIR 1987 SC 1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856, may ex facie appear to strike a different note and to have ruled that 'the Court can dismiss … disposal, including dismissal, on the merits only after examination of the records. The dictum in Ram Naresh Yadav 1987 Cri LJ 1856 (supra), therefore, to the effect that 'the Court can dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution' may appear at the

Yunus Alias Bhaiya and Another Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995CriLJ3205

But in a subsequent decision in Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar AIR 1987 SC 1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under at page 1856 of Cri LJ :- 'It is no … appeal from the appeal of the co-appellant Puran son of Sukhram. State of Bihar AIR 1987 SC 1500 :1987 Cri LJ 1856 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under at page 1856 of Cri LJ :It is no doubt

M.D. Farooq Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1990CriLJ286; ILR1990KAR161; 1989(1)KarLJ346

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar (AIR 1987 SC 1500) : (1987 Cri LJ 1856) that dismissal of Criminal Appeal for default is not proper and the learned Sessions Judge should have appointed … following observations in the case of Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar (AIR 1987 SC 1500) : (1987 Cri LJ 1856) : 'It is an admitted position that neither the appellants nor counsel for the appellants in support of

S.Veeramani Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thevaram

Court: Chennai

find it difficult to agree with the suggestion in Ram Naresh Yadav case [AIR 1987 SC 1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856] that if the appellant or his pleader is not present, the proper course would be to dismiss an

Selvam Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thevaram

Court: Chennai

find it difficult to agree with the suggestion in Ram Naresh Yadav case [AIR 1987 SC 1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856] that if the appellant or his pleader is not present, the proper course would be to dismiss an

Mokkaiyan Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Court: Chennai

find it difficult to agree with the suggestion in Ram Naresh Yadav case [AIR 1987 SC 1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856] that if the appellant or hispleader is not present, the proper course would be to dismiss an appeal

Surendra Prasad Vs. Niraj Thapa and anr.

Court: Sikkim

Reported in: 2009CriLJ4516

on this question. In Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar, reported in AIR 1987 SC 1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856, the Supreme Court has candidly observed that in criminal matters convicts must be heard before matters are decided

Bilbar Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1994CriLJ1299

the apex Court, while in deciding Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC 1500 : (1987 Cri LJ 1856), wherein their Lordships, made the following observations (Para 2):'2. It is an admitted position that neither the appellants

Bashir Ahmad Wani S/O Haji Ghulam Mohd. Wani Vs. State of Jammu and Ka ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003(1)JKJ610

two Judge Bench of this court in Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC: 1500: (1987 Cri LJ 1856) that in such a situation the court could only dismiss the appeal for default has been held erroneousby

Radheshyam Soni and anr. Vs. State and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 1991CriLJ2926,95CWN655

But a rather recent decision of the Supreme Court in Ram Naresh Yadav AIR 1987 SC 1500 : (1987 Cri LJ 1856) may ex facie appear to strike a different note and to have ruled that 'the Court can dismiss … has, at one stage, argued that the dictum in Ram Naresh Yadav (supra), AIR 1987 SC 1500 : (1987 Cri LJ 1856) being patently against the plain statutory provisions in Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, would not