Judgments - INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860
SHAIK AHMED VERSUS STATE OF TELANGANA
SASIKALA PUSHPA RAMASWAMY VERSUS GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
PRAMOD GIRI VERSUS STATE OF DELHI
RAM KISHAN VERSUS THE STATE
SUBHASH VERSUS STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Sunil Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh
ABC Versus State Of Chhattisgarh
Hirdesh Sahu s/o Jagdish Sahu Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - The examination of the witness shall be held as expeditiously as possible; and the same shall be continued on day to day basis till its conclusion. The Judge ought to have seen the sensitivity of the matter and should not have given such long date for the purposes of cross[1]examination which has led to the material witness turning hostile, seriously jeopardizing and undermining the efforts made by the police officers to bring home the charges against the accused Full Judgment
Prosecutrix (Minor) through her Natural Guardian Vs. State of M.P. and others
Chamru Sai Yadav Versus State of Chhattisgarh
Narad Tamrakar Versus State of Chhattisgarh
Sudesh Kumar Rai and Anr Versus State of Chhattisgarh
NATASHA NARWAL VERSUS STATE OF DELHI NCT
DEVANGANA KALITA VERSUS STATE OF DELHI NCT
ASIF IQBAL TANHA VERSUS STATE OF DELHI NCT
HC/RO Md Hussain Versus Director General of Police
RELIGARE FINVEST LTD. VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
RAJESH LAL VERSUS STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
SHAKUNTALA DEVI GOLYAN VERSUS STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Raju @ Vijay s/o Daulji Ahirwar V/s State of M.P & one another
Law laid down - The procedure prescribed under section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is to be adopted by the committee or board but where the accused claiming himself to be "Child in conflict with law" is produced before the Magistrate or Sessions Court empowered under Cr.P.C.to conduct trail and an objection is raised about juvenility at the time of commission of offence, the procedure prescribed under section 9 (2) of the JJ Act, Full Judgment