Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 167

Statute: Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA)

Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 461Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

both sides. The paranasal sinuses and mastoid air cells are normally developed, clear and pneumatized. The orbital contents are unremarkable. 8. As per the doctor’s opinion, injuries are grievous in nature, which are caused by a hard and blunt substance. The age of the petitioner is 18 years. There...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP (2013) 2 SCC 1

2013 2 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

69% Match

FACTS: Petition seeking action for police failure to register an FIR for kidnapping. Held: Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC (now Section 173 BNSS) if the information discloses a cognizable offence. Ratio: No preliminary inquiry is permitted if cognizable offence is disclosed; ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

come under the purview of superstructure, as mentioned in Section 2(k) of the Act, 2008. 12. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (supra), after referring Sections 8, 9 and 22 of the Act 2008 has held in paragraph-5 of the said...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Md. Afaque Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 406Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11360 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2023 Thana- KOTHI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.Md. Afaque Ansari @ Afak Ansari @ Bechan Miyan @ Md. Afak Ansari S/O Rafique Ansari R/O Villa...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Manjit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 648Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner has been made accused Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3761 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3 in this case only because of the co...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273

2014 8 SCC 273Supreme Court of India

69% Match

FACTS: Anticipatory bail application in a Section 498A IPC cruelty case. Held: Arrest should not be the default action in offences carrying punishment of less than 7 years. Ratio: Police must comply with Section 41A CrPC (now Section 35 BNSS) notice guidelines before executing arrest....

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Santosh Kumar Sahu v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 230Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

tried to forcibly evict the informant from the land in which his buffaloes were grazing and the informant was taking care of that land as caretaker on behalf of some other person. When the informant Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6504 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 2/3 opposed his eviction, the p...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

of Prasad Bhawan, East Ram Krishna Nagar, Patna, presently posted as Dresser in O.T.- 1, Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna. 18.Putul Kumari D/o Ramadhar Manjhi resident of Telpa House, Bhawar Pokhar, Vijay Gopal Banarge Path, P.S.- Pirbahore, District- Patna, presently posted as Dresser in ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Babloo Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Bihar

undefined INSC 101Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

driven by the co-accused, Shiv Shankar who disclosed the name of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3777 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3 this case. The petitioner has no c...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Deepak Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 528Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

69% Match

Yadav. 3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he came to know about the killing of his brother and named the accused persons on suspicion that they have killed his brother. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant is not an eye-witness and on suspicion t...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 3Next Page →