Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-20-2013
..... the specific role ascribed to appellant raj kumar @ khujjar, we reject the contention raised on his behalf that he has been implicated falsely in place of one raju nepali.24. thus, relying on the testimony of pw-8 the factum and manner of the incident is fully established and we are inclined to support the trial court ..... the form of a confessional statement is inadmissible in evidence. it is relevant so far as it relates to discovery of any fact. raju nepali was never arrested. pw-8 in his cross-examination categorically stated that there were just three persons involved in the incident. his testimony, as stated above, is credible ..... is required to discredit an injured witness. 23. the contention raised on behalf of the appellant raj kumar that he was falsely implicated in place of one raju nepali whose name also appeared in the disclosure statement made by the juvenile is also devoid of any merit for more than one reason. the disclosure statement which is in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-20-2013
..... the specific role ascribed to appellant raj kumar @ khujjar, we reject the contention raised on his behalf that he has been implicated falsely in place of one raju nepali.24. thus, relying on the testimony of pw-8 the factum and manner of the incident is fully established and we are inclined to support the trial court ..... the form of a confessional statement is inadmissible in evidence. it is relevant so far as it relates to discovery of any fact. raju nepali was never arrested. pw-8 in his cross-examination categorically stated that there were just three persons involved in the incident. his testimony, as stated above, is credible ..... is required to discredit an injured witness. 23. the contention raised on behalf of the appellant raj kumar that he was falsely implicated in place of one raju nepali whose name also appeared in the disclosure statement made by the juvenile is also devoid of any merit for more than one reason. the disclosure statement which is in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-11-2013
..... the appellant. it was further observed that there was huge recovery of contraband, as such, there must be strong reasons to falsely implicate the accused persons who are nepali nationals. the police officers have no ill will or motive to falsely implicate them in such a serious case.22. present case stands on a much different footing, ..... at a conclusion as to what is the effect of nonexamination of panch witnesses. each case has its own facts. in that case both the panch witnesses were nepali. they could not be examined being untraceable. the complainant supported the case of the prosecution. it was observed that there is no inkling in the evidence on record ..... that being so, it cannot be said that any prejudice was caused to the appellant. in gita lama tamang (supra) also a plea was taken that appellants were nepali nationals and were not conversant with english language. it was observed that if panchnama and confessional statements made by the accused under section 67 of ndps act are read in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-11-2013
..... statement that two of the boys put knife on the stomach of anil and did not assign any specific role to ram kumar. in the crossexamination he clarified that the nepali boy (who could not be arrested) had put knife on anil s abdomen. pw-2 (anil kumar), the complainant, merely deposed that all the four assailants had come along with ..... long knives. he, however, was not specific if ram kumar had used the knife to rob him. in the cross-examination he implicated ram kumar and one nepali boy who put knives on his abdomen. ram kumar was arrested after more than three months of the incident with a knife a separate case under section 25 arms act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-17-2013
..... record gave details of the various army personnel who were not granted extension and were retired on completion of their service. the details of the claimant are extracted hereunder:- 01 / nepali screened tulasa screened date of sos not 12 nationality 11 gurung feb nok for pension gtc (depot coy) 05 date of reporting in 14 date of pension docus 29 feb .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-12-2013
..... appellant has stated: q30. do you want to say anything else? a. police took me and other workers to ps. owner bindra got released other workers and since i was nepali, he did not get me released. on that day since i was tried, i went to the basement at about 7-8 pm and went to sleep. in the morning .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-07-2013
..... agreement, i.e., 13.02.2013, there was to be no purchase target, which the petitioner was required to achieve.3. the petitioner, avers that it sold 47 stents worth nepali rupees 21,46,723/- (inr1341,702/-). it is further stated that, the petitioner had placed orders in february and june 2013 in respect of 31 and 16 stents respectively. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-17-2013
..... record gave details of the various army personnel who were not granted extension and were retired on completion of their service. the details of the claimant are extracted hereunder:- 01 / nepali screened tulasa screened date of sos not 12 nationality 11 gurung feb nok for pension gtc (depot coy) 05 date of reporting in 14 date of pension docus 29 feb .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-23-2013
..... on hearing her noise, her uncle woke up and raised alarm. the neighbours apprehended the accused at the spot. she elaborated that the accused was apprehended by her uncle, one nepali, her brother-in-law and his wife. however, he succeeded to flee the spot. the prosecution did not examine any such relative or neighbour to lend credence to the prosecutrixs .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-14-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:14. 08.2013 LPA 178/2013 NEPAL SINGH ..... Appellant versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Atul T.N. For the Respondent : Mr Manish Garg CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J 1.The present appeal impugns the order dated 21.01.2013 passed by a Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8046/2010. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein and has quashed the order dated 05.10.2009 passed by the Labour Court holding that the inquiry conducted by the respondent in respect of the charge levelled against the appellant was not fair and proper.2. The Labour Court had come to the conclusion that the findings urged by the Inquiry Officer were not based on acceptable evidence. This conclusion was arrived at by the Labour Court on the premise that the witne...
Tag this Judgment!