New Trial - Judgment Search Results
Trial Court Records Were Also Requisitioned. on 18.07.2013 It Vs. Smt. ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
Aggrieved against the same, the appellant filed the present appeal. Notice of motion was issued on 05.03.2013. The trial Court records were also requisitioned. On 18.07.2013 it Amit Kaundal 2014.04.28 13:48 was ordered that the appellant shall
The Learned Trial Court Framed the Following Issues:- Vs. Shiv Singh a ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: May-15-2014
2014.05.21 13:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Rs.No.1605 of 1997 2 The learned trial Court framed the following issues:- 1) Whether the plaintiffs have been owners of the disputed land?. OPP2 Are
American Trial Lawyers Vs. N.J. Supreme Court
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-15-1973
Supreme Court American Trial Lawyers v. N.J. Supreme Court, 409 U.S. 467 (1973) American Trial Lawyers Assn. v. New Jersey Supreme Court No. 72-691 Decided January 15, 1973 409 U.S. 467 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Ramspeck Vs. Federal Trial Examiners Conf.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-09-1953
pass on the qualifications of incumbent status examiners, and to conduct a competitive examination for nonstatus incumbents and new applicants. When the results were announced in March, 1949, 25.5% of the 212 status incumbents rated by the … Ramspeck v. Federal Trial Examiners Conf. - 345 U.S. 128 (1953) U.S. Supreme Court Ramspeck v. Federal Trial Examiners Conf., 345 U.S.
In Re: To Issue Certain Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies And Deficien ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Apr-20-2021
letter dated 18.02.2019. Written responses were invited from stakeholders and a colloquium was convened for this purpose in New Delhi at the India International Centre, on 30.03.2019. The colloquium was attended by representatives of different States/Union Territories … SUO MOTO WRIT (CRL) NO.(S) 1/2017 IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS ….PETITIONER(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. ....RESPONDENT(S) ORDER1 This suo motu proceeding under Article 32
In Re Expeditious Trial Of Cases Under Section 138 Of N.i. Act 1881
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Apr-16-2021
L. NAGESWARA RAO ]. ........................J.[B. R. GAVAI ]. ............................J.[ A. S. BOPANNA ]. ....................................J.[ S. RAVINDRA BHAT ]. New Delhi, April 16, 2021 27 | Pa ge … IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION SUO MOTU WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.2 OF2020In Re: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION138OF N.I. ACT1881 ORDER1 Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.5464 of 2016 pertains to dishonour of
In Re Expeditious Trial Of Cases Under Section 138 Of N.i. Act 1881
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: May-19-2022
before 21.07.2022. List on 26.07.2022 to review the further proceeding. ...........................................................................J.[L. NAGESWARA RAO]. …......................................................................J.[B.R. GAVAI]. ..........................................................................J.[S. RAVINDRA BHAT]. New Delhi, May 19, 2022. … REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION SUO MOTU WRIT (CRIMINAL) No.2 OF2020IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION138OF N.I. ACT1881ORDER S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. By a judgment of the Constitution Bench of
Mohd Abaad Ali Vs. Directtorate Of Revenue Prosecution Intelligence
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Feb-20-2024
argue that although in the present case, we are dealing with present Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the new Limitation Act, 1963 however, the provisions in the present Code for appeal against acquittal i.e., under Section 378 … of the four accused in a case instituted, inter-alia under Section 135(1)(b) of Customs Act, 1962. He faced trial (S.C. No.33 of 2009) where he was ultimately acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, North, Delhi vide order
Tro Vs. Custodian Appointed Under the Special Court (Trial of Offences ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Aug-17-2007
but such evidence cannot be discarded on the sole ground to the interest of such witnesses in the prosecution. The relationship per se does not affect the credibility of a witness. Merely because a witness happens to
Prasanth U vs Department of Prosecution Service, Represented by Its Se ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-17-2023
UNDODIYIL HOUSE, PERUVAYAL P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673008 BY ADVS. SAYED MANSOOR BAFAKHY THANGAL R.ANUPAMA RESPONDENTS:1 DEPARTMENT OF PROSECUTION SERVICE, [*CORRECTED] REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001. *KERALA STATE PROSECUTION SERVICE, DIRECTORATE OF PROSECUTION,
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · drag or use +/− to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free