Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-01-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:07.01.2013 Judgment pronounced on:01.02.2013 CRL.A. 665/2009 MEHBOOB AHMED Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S.K.Sethi, Advocate. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP. versus STATE CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. By the impugned judgment, dated 18.05.2009, the appellant Mehboob Ahmed has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short), for the murder of Rumana Praveen on 30.12.2005 in their residence, at H.No. F-277 Gali No.14 Khajuri Khas, Delhi. The appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in a default of which, he is to undergo simple imprisonment, for six months.2. The prosecution case is that on 30.12.2005, at around 10 a.m., the appellant, his step daughter- the deceased and Rubina Praveen (PW1), were present in his residence. Nasim Fatima (PW10), the mother of the d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 25/2011 % Reserved on: Date of Decision:9. h October16. h January, 2013 SANDEEP KUMAR SAHU ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sunil K. Mittal, Ms. Deepti Gupta, Mr. Kshitij Mittal, Mr. Saurabh Balwani and Mr. Anshul Mittal, Advocate. Versus THE STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP for the State. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 243/2011 KAUSHAL @ BABLOO ..... Appellant Through Mr. Rajesh Tyagi, Advocate. Versus THE STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG SANJIV KHANNA, J: Sandeep Kumar Sahu and Kaushal @ Babloo impugn their conviction, under Section 302, 397 and 506-II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and the sentences imposed upon them. They have been sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of which they are to undergo simple imprisonment for one month, for the offence under Section 302 IPC, rigorous imp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-04-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:04. 01.2013 CRL. A. 388/1997 HARGIYAN SINGH ... Appellant ... Respondent versus STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent /State : Mr Avadh Bihari Kaushik, Amicus Curiae with Mr Pankaj Kumar and Mr Prakash Chandra : Ms Richa Kapur CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MS JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 09.04.1997 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Delhi in Sessions Case No.105/1996 arising out of FIR No.232/1990 under Section 302 IPC registered at police station Nand Nagri. By virtue of the said judgment, the appellant Hargiyan has been convicted for the murders of Smt. Rukmani and Mohd Sharif and the appellant has been held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. He was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. This appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-03-2013
$~R-21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: January 03, 2013 + W.P.(C) 3283/2001 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon with Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocates versus HARISH KUMAR YADAV & ANR. Represented by: None. ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Respondent No.1 Harish Kumar Yadav had sought a voluntary discharge from the Indian Army and had to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal when his appointment as a Constable (Executive) (treating him to be an ex-serviceman) was sought to be cancelled by the writ petitioner as per its order dated September 24, 1999 on the ground that having sought voluntary discharge from the Indian Army, Harish Kumar Yadav was not entitled to be considered as an Ex-serviceman.2. Now, the Tribunal has noted that the Ex-servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 do not define as to w...
Tag this Judgment!