Section 511 - Judgment Search Results

Harischandra Narayan Khadape Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1983(1)BomCR296

..... court at ratnagiri 5 the learned additional sessions judge ratnagiri framed charge under section 376 read with section 511 and section 450 of the indian penal code against the accused who pleaded not ..... additional sessions judge convicted the accused in respect of offences punishable under section 376 read with section 511 and section 450 of the indian penal code and sentenced him to suffer r .....

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Ram Lal Malik and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 22(1982)DLT208; ILR1982Delhi914; 1982LabIC1599; 1982(2)SLJ575(Delhi)

..... the learned judge accepted this contention and held that by virtue of section 511 and 516 2 of the act the resolution dated 11 6 1954 ..... support of his submission he referred us to order i rule 10 section 107 2 order 41 rule 20 of the code of civil procedure ..... addition of parties at the stage of appeal in a writ petition section 141 civil procedure code says that the code of civil procedure does not apply .....

Vijaykumar Gurunath Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR143

..... dated august 18 1980 the learned additional sessions judge convicted the accused under section 376 read with section 511 of the indian penal code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ..... learned trial judge found that the accused has committed the offence punishable under section 376 read with section 511 of the indian penal code and accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused as .....

island Trees Sch. Dist. Vs. Pico by Pico

Court: US Supreme Court

to foster a homogeneous people id at 393 u s 511 quoting meyer v nebraska 262 u s 390 262 u

Valley Forge Coll. Vs. Americans United

Court: US Supreme Court

warth v seldin 422 u s at 422 u s 511 see simon v eastern kentucky welfare rights org supra at

Lehman Vs. Lycoming Cty. Ch. Svcs. Agcy.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... most difficult noting that the literal statutory requirements for exercise of section 2254 federal habeas corpus jurisdiction can be said to be satisfied ..... this respect differs little from the situation page 458 u s 511 of other children in the public generally they suffer no ..... not imposed on other children ante at 458 u s 511 yet because unadopted children whose ties with their natural parents .....

Nixon Vs. Fitzgerald

Court: US Supreme Court

..... immunity for the president one finds surprisingly little as i read the relevant section of the page 457 u s 795 court s opinion i find just ..... because of the special nature of their responsibilities id at 438 u s 511 require a full exemption from liability id at 438 u s 508 in ..... the executive branch butz v economou 438 u s at 438 u s 511 512 see imbler v pachtman 424 u s 409 1976 extending immunity to .....

Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and anr.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: 1983CriLJ1138

..... f i r no 233 dated 29 9 1981 under sections 436 511 29 9 1981 under sections 436 511 i p c police station i p c police ..... 337 dated 24 9 1981 i p c police station c under section 436 511 i p c division amritser was police station c division registered you ..... that the state government had duly approved the detention order under sub section 4 of section 3 of the act and it was approved on merit alone .....

Northern Pipeline Vs. Marathon Pipe Line

Court: US Supreme Court

..... by justice marshall justice blackmun and justice stevens concluded that 1 section 1471 s broad grant of jurisdiction to bankruptcy judges violates art ..... of the united states american insurance co v canter 1 pet 511 26 u s 546 1828 the proposition was simple enough ..... territorial courts approved in american insurance co v canter 1 pet 511 1828 these courts have included the court of private land .....

Florida Dept. of State Vs. Treasure Salvors, Inc.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... abandoned settlements caves sunken or abandoned ships or any part thereof surely this section does not authorize state officials however to seize and hold historical artifacts ..... by admiralty process in rem 256 u s at 256 u s 511 the force of the holding in in re new york ii however ..... for public and governmental purposes 256 u s at 256 u s 511 the plurality s reading of in re new york ii is that .....