Ravi Arora
16 February 2009 at 22:26
Dear Friends
I need one Citation.
Offence of robbery and murder: - Circumstantial evidence, offence committed on 21st of January in a foggy and dark night. F.I.R. and Statements of witnesses do not state the source of light; there is no evidence to show that streetlights were burning and it is also not shown in NAKSHA NAZARI,
But later witness improves in the court that streetlights were burning and some more lights were burning
I need a good citation on this point because what I ve is not very good
Ravi Arora
16 February 2009 at 18:35
Dear Friends
I need one Citation.
Offence of robbery and murder: - Circumstantial evidence, offence committed on 21st of January in a foggy and dark night. F.I.R. and Statements of witnesses do not state the source of light; there is no evidence to show that streetlights were burning and it is also not shown in NAKSHA NAZARI,
But later witness improves in the court that streetlights were burning and some more lights were burning
I need a good citation on this point because what I ve is not very good
amit
15 February 2009 at 14:09
atul runs a firm having c&f of many companies & his father is a govt. servant getting a scale of 1st class. according to ledger of atul. mr.rajeev has to pay rs.2 lacs to atul according to ledger balance of mr.rajeev. after some time rajeev gave two cheques of rs.10,000/-to atul & fraudulently give a notice through his advocate making party to atul's father & second party to his atul's firm that you have not supplied me goods for which i have given u two cheques for rs.10,000/- each hence committed offence u/s 406 & 420.
here i want to ask this that can atul's father suit case of defamation on mr.rajeev? as atul's father is a govt servant & has no concern with business & what atul can do, because the cheques given in favour of atul's firm was in account of previous balance of mr.rajeev
Rekha.....
14 February 2009 at 18:46
Confusion over conclusive proof.
Hello! Respected Members of the Forum
Wud u please make me enlighten on this issue?. Why L.C (School Leaving Certificate) can not be called as a conclusive proof in a minor girl rape case? Please explain it exclusively as I found Hon’ble Judge’s explanation as well as Ld advocates arguments are not satisfactory to me in the Court proceedings.
V.G.Rao Advocate
14 February 2009 at 11:55
Hi all,
I am a complainant side advocate in 138 NI act case filed by me, I have examined complainant as pw-1, and subsequently he was cross examined by counsel for accused,now the matter is coming up for complainants side further evidence, while matter stood thus, the complainant died leaving behind his wife and two children who are still minors, now my question is whether his legal heirs can continue his case filed under sec 138 NI act, if yes under what provision of law i can seek leave of the court to bring LR's of complainants side on record, provide me information citing any case laws in support of my case.
P.Muthusamy
12 February 2009 at 17:06
My friend's brother X had some enmity with my friend Y regarding a property. The case regarding the propety is in the court. Once
X scolded Y's wife pretending that she had tresspassed his property which is under dipute.Y's wife complained to the police about this. The SI called X to the police station. But X didnt turned up. The matter was subjected to its natural end.
One week ago Mr.X left the town and during that time My frined while crossing the property building he had a terible electic shock when he touched the wall of the locked house situated in the propery.
At once he was taken to a near by clinic and after some time he complained about this at the police station. The S.I visited the spot and arranged with the E.B to disconnect the supply to the house.
At that time the SI told that he will take actiono againstX when he returns to the town.
Yesterday X returned to town and the SI called X to the station.But as usual he didnt bothered. But today he came to the police station and told to the SI that he is innocent and as he was out of station he has nothing to say about the incidence and he is totally unware of that.
However The SI received a statement from X that he has not commited any crime and he will not do in future also.
But My friend is totally disappinted with this and he feels as if justice is not done to him.
The SI has not attempted to see what Mr X has done in the locked house to give electric shock when any one touches.
In one or two days Mr X will return to the house. ( He is having another house in the town and he will use this house also frequenty)
My friend Y says that when X opens the house he will dismantle all the elctrical connections and will pretend as if the shock was due to some electrical leakage in the wire.
How to establish the truth and what action my friend must take. It seems that the SI is favouring Mr X for reasons unknown
Bhavna
11 February 2009 at 11:19
Hello Sir/ Madam,
This is inform you that my marriage is broken, reason being the extreme mental and physical torcher I had been through. That guy and his family are so greedy, so cruel, they used to abuse me and beat me like hell, my husband tried to kill me one day. Finally my Father came to take me out of that hell. We tried a lot from our side to save the relationship but that fellow wanted Octavia car (worth approx. - 17 lack) that we couldn't afford finally he desserted me. Now he wants divorce.There was no option left for us rather than legal actions, this matter has gone to court.
My Husband was arrested and he was there at Jail for 4 day, then he managed to get the bail.He is charged Under Law Section 498A, 506, 34. The case is going on.
That Guy in fact never wanted me to be with him, inspite of trying to patch up using conjugal rights etc, he has applied for judicial separation. I want to know that if the matter is in court is it advisable to go to Human rights commission and national women's counsil, If Yes how can i approach them ?
I need some legal advice from you people regarding my case.
Thanks.
Ziaur Rahman
09 February 2009 at 22:02
A person was wanted in a criminal case.He surrendered before the magistrate.The magistrate granted him bail.But in order sheet he did not write that he was first taken into custody by him on his surrender and then granted bail.Subsequently he was acquitted from the case. The said person applied for a governmentjob and in his verification form in answer to a question "whether arrested?" he wrote "No". He was denied the job for making a false declaration.His advocate says that since the magistrate while enlarging him on bail did not write in the order sheet that he was taken into custody on his surrender so it can be safely presumed that he was not arrested and that the surrender did not meant arrest.The law officer of government opined that the surrender before the magistrate and subsequent enlargement on bail will be deemed to be arrest by the the magistrate and then enlargement on bail. What is the position of law? Can a magistrate Grant Bail to an accused person on surrender before his court without taking him in the custody? Since the magistrate has not written in the order sheet that the accused was taken into custody and then granted bail then will it be considered an implied custody? kindly answer with the reference of the law or rulings whether the law is in favour of the candidate or not?
kanwar Lal
09 February 2009 at 18:53
Complaint u/s 138 is pending against the accused.court declared po to the accused. now can complainant go for attachement of movable property of the accused? if yes under which provision.can we attache movable property or not.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Sec. 138 NI Act & Sec. 22 Banking Regulation Act
I case is transferred before me by an Advocate.
Facts :- the Complainant sold his 3 Bonds Certificate to the Accused and the accused haded him 3 cheques of "Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha".
Subsequently those cheques were bounce and the complainant filed complaint u/s 138 against the accused. The first Advocate of the accused send reply to the notice of complainant that the "The said pat santstha falls u/s 22 of the Banking Regulation Act and therefore that pat santshta is not the bank and therefore does not issue the cheque they issue only the voucher and thus the voucher is not the Negotiable Instrument"
My query is that how to take discharge my client i.e. accused under above circumstance (if any pls. provide citation)