The Bombay Separation Of Judicial And Executive Functions Extension And The Code Of Criminal Procedure Provision For Uniformity Act 1958 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: the bombay separation of judicial and executive functions extension and the code of criminal procedure provision for uniformity act 1958 Page 1 of about 301 results (2.27 seconds)Brajnandan Sinha Vs. Jyoti Narain
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC66; 1956CriLJ156; [1955]2SCR955
be served and if he resides within calcutta madras or bombay then through the supreme court of judicature thereto when the thereof their opinion upon each of the articles of charge separately with such observations as they think fit on the whole report or findings were not a definitive judgment or a judicial pronouncement inasmuch as they were not binding and authoritative and the respondent is a member of the bihar civil service executive branch the state government received reports to the effect that that according to our law a court may perform various functions parliament is a court its duties as a whole are act and is not to be extended where such an extension is not warranted 14 sections 19 and 20 of the of justice which as defined in section 20 indian penal code 1860 denotes a judge who is empowered by law to given to civil and criminal courts by the code of criminal procedure 1898 and shall have the same powers for the to civil and criminal courts by the code of criminal procedure 1898 and shall have the same powers for the summons the contempt of courts act 1952 and while considering the provisions of that act the learned judges of the nagpur high without the sanction of government and to make the same uniform throughout india it is enacted as follows 30 section 2 1860 9 the word court was not defined in the act and the expression courts subordinate to the high courts would
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTHimachal Pradesh Administration Vs. Mt. Shiv Devi
Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959HP3,1959CriLJ448
that the obvious course for jai singh was to live separately when he found that his relations with mt shiv devi nothing to prevent the court fromtaking into consideration the extra judicial confession along with other evidence as corroboration of the retracted extra judicial confession made by respondent discovery of poison from extension pot statement made by respondent to committing magistrate and existence observed that sub section 4 of section 173 criminal procedure code makes it obligatory on the police to furnish to the in my opinion is not capable of precise measurement in criminal appeal no 6 of 1957 mangsaru v state of himachal the amending act of 1955 in order to simplify the procedure in respect of inquiries leading upto a sessions trial and consider the statement made by an accused but whereas the provisions in section 342 give some latitude to the court to had been poisoned by mt shiv devi and devku the actual words used in the report are us ne kaha ki on aher raja khima v state of saurashtra s air 1958 sc 217 p where the majority view was in an
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of U.P. Vs. Durga Prasad
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC2136; 1974CriLJ1465; (1975)3SCC210; [1975]1SCR881
not sanctioned by the act bisesar house v state of bombay 1958 9 s t c 654 and ramakrishna ramnath v entire fourth quarter but as it was done without showing separately the assessment of tax payable in respect of each quarter for intentionally giving false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding under the relevant part of section 191 penal code and member of the force provides that they must promptly execute all orders lawfully issued to them by their superior authority is in important respects different from the scheme of the code and there is intrinsic evidence in the act to show out in accordance with the provisions of the cede of criminal procedure section 14 provides that the provisions of this act 1 of railways property unlawful possession act 1966 and criminal procedure code 1898 whether inquiry under section 8 1 can be the act shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the cede of criminal procedure section 14 provides that charge of such station there is no provision in the act before us corresponding to section 78 3 of the bihar sanctioned by the act bisesar house v state of bombay 1958 9 s t c 654 and ramakrishna ramnath v sales
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTPampapathy Vs. State of Mysore
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC286; 1967(0)BLJR422; 1967CriLJ287; 1967MhLJ741(SC); [1966]SuppSCR477
been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and to whom the judicial committee has given special leave to appeal against his conviction to be recorded by it in writing order that the execution of the sentence or order appealed against be suspended and of the high court mentioned in s 561a criminal procedure code can be exercised only for either of the three purposes sentence and the order of bail made under s 426 criminal procedure code such a situation could not have been in the bail in a case falling under s 426 criminal procedure code it was argued by mr ramamurthy that even if it will not be permissible to take recourse to the provisions of s 561a to clothe the appellate court with power foreign country to escape the trial or he may commit acts of violence in revenge against the police and prosecution witnesses
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState by Inspector of Police Vs. Sivakumar
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2003(4)CTC695
the file of the first additional sessions judge cum chief judicial magistrate erode was enlarged on bail subject to certain conditions no dispute that the petitioner has fulfilled the conditions and executed a bond for a sum of rs 10 000 with erode town police station under section 439 2 of the code of criminal procedure to cancel the bail granted to respondent the said conviction the respondent has filed a petition in criminal m p no 5440 of 2002 praying for suspension of station under section 439 2 of the code of criminal procedure to cancel the bail granted to respondent accused no 5 the bail granted earlier with reference to the above statutory provision has been considered in the above decisions 7 in bhagrirathisinh
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState Vs. Gorakh Fulaji Mahale
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1965Bom124; (1964)66BOMLR799; 1965CriLJ193; ILR1965Bom61; 1965MhLJ94
or authority imposed or conferred on him either by the bombay police act or by and other law rule order or was not taken as required by s who delivered a separate but concurring judgment classified the several decisions of the high of bribery is now concluded by the decisions of the judicial committee in and and must be answered in the negative act was done by the public servant in the purported execution of his duty the federal court took the view that a public servant under s 409 of the indian penal code the supreme court approved of the view expressed by varadachariar from the wording both of s 197 1 of the criminal procedure code and s 270 1 of the government of that sanction was necessary under s 197 of the criminal procedure code for the prosecution of the accused under s 409 the sole question which arises in the background of these provisions and on the few facts state above is whether the kotval seeks to make 16 the decisions cited above have uniformly taken the view that an act cannot be said to of his office if he is challenged while doing the act some of the decisions which we have discussed are indeed
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTQamaruddIn Vs. R.P. Sharma and anr.
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1989(17)DRJ278; ILR1989Delhi544
7 his emphatically reliance is on a judgment of the bombay high court in the case of miss shakuntah v roshonlal the petition merits dismissal and is dismissed accordingly criminal procedure code sections 397 2 and 482 an order granting bail is the provisions of section 397 2 of the code of criminal procedure and thus the order passed by the additional sessions reasons the petition merits dismissal and is dismissed accordingly criminal procedure code sections 397 2 and 482 an order granting bail the maintainability of the revision petition in view of the provisions of section 397 2 of the code of criminal procedure act and section 5 of the imports and export control act on his arrival at lndira gandhi international airport on the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRadhakrishnan Alias R.K. Vs. the State and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2003CriLJ4167
on erroneous use of judicial discretion without showing how the judicial discretion was wrongly exercised a considered order of the sessions of 2003 he shall be released on ball on his executing a personal bond for a sum of rs 1 lakh run by others such as amway oriflame quantum international etc functioning in the city which is nothing but selective discrimination shown to grant anticipatory bail under section 438 of criminal procedure code should be exercised with utmost care and caution the state any with the said magistrate at the time of surrender criminal anticipatory bail section 438 of criminal procedure code 1973 section to the benefit of section 438 of code of criminal procedure and all that is uttered against granting the anticipatory bail business in marketing the product would not attract the penal provisions of either section 420 or that of the provisions of the petitioner shall not in any manner indulge in such activities of tampering the witnesses of causing hindrance to the onward
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJiwat Ram and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1978CriLJ693; 1977()WLN621
in which it was held that the functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary not overlapping and that the cri lj 413 in which it was held that the functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary not overlapping saves such inherent power which the court possessed before the code of criminal procedure was enacted if such a power is jurisdiction of statutory authorities to exercise power in accordance with criminal procedure code 11 reliance was also placed on state of has the statutory sanction as laid down in the criminal procedure code under the inherent powers the court will not interfere instituted against the accused person must be tried under the provisions of the code and the high court would be reluctant there is no apprehension that the investigating agency will not act in an impartial and upright manner it was also contended
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe State Vs. B. Chikkavenkatappa and anr.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1965Mys253; 1965CriLJ379; (1965)1MysLJ26
bombay district municipal act 1901 hereinafter referred to as the bombay act section 23 7 of the bombay act reads as accepted criminal sanction sections 197 and 438 of criminal procedure code 1898 order discharging accused 1 public servant on want of that word has to be taken in interpreting section 197 criminal p c according to the concise oxford dictionary one of word remove is not defined in the code of criminal procedure or in the bombay act in the absence of such i think there is no material difference between these two provisions the word remove is not defined in the code of were not done by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties and hence no
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT