VIKAS GARG
11 March 2010 at 02:29
somebody told me that there is judgment of apex court or on any high court which says that court can review its decision of issuing summons to accused in cheque dishonoring if cheque is issued in as security and surety instead for present liability. here in my case complainant expressly admitted that cheque issued by accused no.1 for future liability and by accused no. 2 as a surety. could you plz just any such judgment which suports my case.
i m representing both accused.
plz suggest me other judgment which might say that section 138 of ni cannot be invoked if cheque is issued for future liability means as a security and also judgments which also bars invoking of 138 if cheque is issued as surety.
thanks
Arvind Singh Chauhan
09 December 2009 at 22:06
Sir if one accused files surrender application before court, and court asks report from concerned police station mentioning time limit of one week for report.
whether police can arrest the accused during this period of one week.
Expecting citation and provision if any
???????
VIKAS GARG
10 February 2009 at 18:44
hello friends i m working on project "Approach of apex court on labour laws: recent trends". As this is my first formal research work and i don't have any experience in research ..plz help me and suggest me what should i do and from where and how should i start...plz provide me relevant case laws or articles etc..and suggest me proper synposis also....
my email id: vikasgarg_advocate@yahoo.co.in
thanks
VIKAS GARG
12 September 2008 at 13:31
Article 14 of constitution of India says :
The state shall not deny to any person.....
Here i want to know "any person" stands for natural person only or it means both natural and legal person?
Is there any precedent on this issue?
Next I want to know whether "any person" means india citizen only or citizen of any country?
VIKAS GARG
11 September 2008 at 21:23
As you know for any recruitment exam candidate is required to get his photo and document attested from any gazetted officer. Recently in Delhi Judicial Examination also every candidate is required to submit documents which must be attested by gazetted officer. Not only documents but photographs are also required to be attested by gazetted officer.
Here I would like know
By which law (act or rules or regulations etc) Gazetted officer are empowered to attest such documents and photographs?
Is it discretionary to attest such documents?
If any particular gazetted officer deny to attesting any document without
assigning any reasons or
says he has no time or
says he doesn’t have power or
says its not binding to attest the document or
says go to other officer or particular officer or
says they are instructed not to do that or
makes any other pretend
then I would like to know
whether such officer is justified to do that or
is there any legal remedy available to applicant?
I would like know more about all aspects of law which deal with above matter.
Please enlighten me on above issue. I am personally aggrieved by indifferent attitude of Gazetted officers.
Thanks
Anil Kumar kamboj Delhi M-9650
09 September 2008 at 19:13
pls define Evidence act neither synonymous nor co-extensive.
VIKAS GARG
03 September 2008 at 16:03
As we know that causation is one of constituents of any offence. Means offence must be caused due to act or omission of offender. Offence may be done directly (by causing some act and omission) or indirectly by abetment (by causing some act and omission).
Just read illustration (b)of section 299 of ipc, which is as follows:
(b) A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it A, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z's death, induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z. Here B may be guilty of no offence; but A has committed the offence of culpable homicide.
Just read another illustration (f)appended with exception 2 of section 300 of ipc, which is as follows:
(f) Z strikes B. B is by this provocation excited to violent rage. A, a bystander, intending to take advantage of B's rage, and to cause him to kill Z, puts a knife into B's hand for that purpose. B kills Z with the knife. Here B may have committed only culpable homicide, but A is guilty of murder.
Just read one more illustration appended with exception 5 of section 300 of ipc, which is as follows:
A, by instigation, voluntarily causes, Z, a person under eighteen years of age to commit suicide. Here, on account of Z"s youth, he was incapable of giving consent to his own death; A has therefore abetted murder.
Now my question here if these illustrations are correctly appended with respective provisions then how abetment is different with direct causation. Don't you think the circumstances given under these illustrations of section 299 and 300 of IPC should come under the topic of abetment?
Please help me to get rid of this confusion.
N.K.Assumi
01 September 2008 at 09:48
Can the citizen of India waive his fundamental rights guaranteed by part III of the Constitution?
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
stamp and registration act
here my question is that if any consent decree is passed by court in relation of immovable property then "is it necessary to pay stamp duty to get it registered?"
plz tell clarify the law in this regard.