Filter by Date
Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Smt. Nandani Ramchandani And Ors. Vs. The State Of U.P And Ors.

APPLICATION U/s 482, 1568 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 29, 2015

Section 3 of PML Act clearly speaks that whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of the crime and projecting it as untainted property shall be guilty of the offences of money laundering. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the person who acquired the proceeds of crime is being helped by anybody directly or indirectly knowingly to convert that Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

State Of U.P. And Another Vs. Anil Kumar Bharti

SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE, 302 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 28, 2015

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Chief Justice's Court AFR Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 302 of 2015 Appellant :- State Of U.P. And Another Respondent :- Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

SHABNAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Writ Petition (Crl.), 88 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 27, 2015

The present writ petitions are filed on the allegations that on 21.05.2015, death warrants have been issued by the learned Sessions Judge, which are impermissible inasmuch as various remedies which are available to the convicts, even after the dismissal of the appeals by this Court, are still open and yet to be exercised by them. It is submitted that these convicts can file review petition seeking review of Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Sandeep and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Appeal (Crl.), 1554 of 2014, Judgment Date: May 26, 2015

The incompatibility or inconsistency can be said to arise if the assertions in one dying declaration are so diametrically opposed to the statements in the other that both cannot stand together. 21. In view of the above, the law on the issue of dying declaration can be summarised to the effect that in case the court comes to the conclusion that the dying declaration is true and reliable, has been recorded Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Guriya Swayam Sevi Sansthan Thru' Its President Vs. Union Of India Thru' Principal Secy. & 5 Others

WRIT - A, 4579 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 26, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Mohd. Naseem And Ors. Vs. The State Of U.P And Anr.

CRIMINAL MISC. CASE, 1654 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 26, 2015

It is not res integra that learned Magistrate while accepting the final report can treat the protest petition as complaint. It is not in dispute that by accepting the final report, the order of taking cognizance has been passed. The provisions of Section 300, Cr.P.C. could not be attracted. It is well settled principle of law that after accepting the final report, the Magistrate can proceed on the basis of complaint or on the basis of protest petition treating it Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Prem Prakash And 3 Others Vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others

307 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 25, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Mahesh Thakur And 4 Others Vs. State Of U.P. & Another

APPLICATION U/s 482, 13953 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 21, 2015

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CR.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Kaptan Singh And 5 Others Vs. State Of U.P. & Another

APPLICATION U/s 482, 13977 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 21, 2015

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CR.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Anar Singh And Another Vs. State Of U.P.

APPLICATION U/s 482, 12717 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 20, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. And Anr. Vs. Nitin Kumar And 9 Others

SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE, 310 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 19, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

K.L BAKOLIA Vs. STATE TH. DIRECTOR,C.B.I.

AA, 797 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

For coming to the finding of guilt for the offence under Section 13(1)(d) of the Act, firstly, there must be a demand and secondly, there must be acceptance in the sense that the accused received illegal gratification. Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

PREM RAM Vs. M.D. UTTARAKHAND PEY JAL & NIRM.NIGM&ORS

Appeal (Civil), 4474 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

If engagement in a work- charged establishment rest on a criterion, no better than the absolute discretion of the authority engaging them or the fortuitous circumstances of a vacancy or need in a work-charged establishment, then, there is indeed no difference between a daily-wager on the one hand and work-charged employees on the other. No distinction can resultantly be Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

CANARA BANK & ANR. Vs. M. MAHESH KUMAR

Appeal (Civil), 260 of 2008, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

Common question of law falling for consideration in these civil appeals is whether the dependant family members of the deceased employee of the appellant-Canara Bank were entitled to seek compassionate appointment on the basis of ‘Dying in Harness Scheme’ which was passed Vide Circular No.154/1993 w.e.f. 8.05.1993. (i) Compassionate employment cannot be made in the absence of rules or regulations issued by the Government or a public authority. The request Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

RANJEET KUMAR RAM @ RANJEET KUMAR DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Appeal (Crl.), 1831 of 2011, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

RAMANLAL & ANR. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Appeal (Crl.), 2279 of 2009, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S GMG ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES & ORS. Vs. M/S ISAA GREEN POWER SOLUTION & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 4472 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

MANYATA DEVI Vs. STATE OF U.P & ORS

Appeal (Civil), 4475 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

District Magistrate should have simply certified her character because that was the only question which the former was called upon to examine while dealing with the request made by the appellant. The District Magistrate, however, appears to have been swayed by considerations wholly extraneous to the question whether the appellant had a good moral character. it is Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

C.I.T MUMBAI Vs. M/S SARKAR BUILDERS

Appeal (Civil), 4476 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

BILASPUR RAIPUR K.GRAMIN BANK AND ANR. Vs. MADANLAL TANDON

Appeal (Civil), 4467 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 15, 2015

Full Judgment