Judgments - Corruption
THE STATE OF GUJARAT Versus NAVINBHAI CHANDRAKANT JOSHI ETC
State by Lokayuktha Police Versus H. Srinivas
ASIAN RESURFACING OF ROAD AGENCY PVT. LTD. & ANR. VERSUS CENTRAL BURUEAU OF INVESTIVATION
MANJU SURANA Versus SUNIL ARORA & ORS
R. S. Ashatkar Versus Central Bureau of Investigation, Bhopal
S.N. Vijaywargiya Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Law Laid Down - In terms of Section 170(1) of the CrPC, the Investigating Agency is mandated to produce an accused in custody for the non-bailable offence. The argument that the Court should have issued summons in respect of such offence stands rejected. An order dated 20.10.2016 of a Single Bench of this Court in MCRC No.17501/2016 (Rajendra Kori vs. State of Madhya Pradesh) - is overruled. Accused has no right to insist upon investigation by a particular agency – whether State Full Judgment
Radhey Shyam Yadav Vs. State Of U.P.
NARESH CHAUBEY Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH GYANENDRA PD SINGH
MR. SACHIN GANPATI DAVANDE Vs THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED AND ORS
Vinod S/o Rammlalji Chopra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
JAGDISH TYTLER Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
ABHISHEK VERMA THR. PEROKAR/FRIEND AARON SINDHU Vs. C.B.I.
JAGBIR SINGH Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Rakesh Singh Rathore Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
SARBANANDA MALI VS THE STATE OF ASSAM
DEBAJIT BORAH VS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
DATTATRAYA LAXMAN BAGDI Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
GIRISH SHARMA & ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS
JAGDISH DHANURDHAR KALBAGE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Vasant Rao Guhe VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh
Trial Court on the two major heads of income i.e. pay and agricultural earnings, the learned Trial Court not only of its own embarked on an inquiry to ascertain and compute the figures, it wholly resorted to inferences in calculating the pay for the periods omitted by the prosecution as well as in fixing 60% expenditure from pay towards household needs. Its assessment of agricultural income of the appellant to say the least is also wholly presumptive in absence of Full Judgment