Ravinder Singh Malhotra Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr
.... ₹2.7 crores, that is, the value of shares is a big amount and it cannot be said that there is no wrongful loss and wrongful gain in the present matter. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that as per Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Complainant is the absolute own ...
Delhi High Court
Gurpreet Singh Malhotra Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr
.... ₹2.7 crores, that is, the value of shares is a big amount and it cannot be said that there is no wrongful loss and wrongful gain in the present matter. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that as per Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Complainant is the absolute own ...
Delhi High Court
Gaganpreet Singh Malhotra Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr
.... ₹2.7 crores, that is, the value of shares is a big amount and it cannot be said that there is no wrongful loss and wrongful gain in the present matter. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that as per Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Complainant is the absolute own ...
Delhi High Court
Tejinder Pal Singh Malhotra Vs State Of Delhi
.... that is, the value of shares is a big amount and it cannot be said that there is no wrongful loss and wrongful gain in the present matter. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that as per Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Complainant is the absolute owner of shares in qu ...
Delhi High Court
Anees Vs State Of Uttarakhand
.... 17.12.2024. 4. According to the FIR, the property of the informant was sold to the applicant by impersonation 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that a suit for cancellation of sale deed was filed, in which compromise has taken place and sale deed has been cancelled, ba ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Mahesh Sharma Vs State Of Uttarakhand
.... iled, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicant was granted interim bail on 30.04.2025. The conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by him. 5. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. 6. Perso ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Jagbandhu Bala Alias Jagobala And Others Vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
.... n filed by the respondent no.1. 6. There is no representation on behalf of the respondent no.2. 7. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally. 8. Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundame ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Yograj Saini Vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another
.... 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. There is a fundamental difference between a person executing a sale deed, claiming that the property conveyed is his property, and a person executing a sale deed by impersonating the owner or falsel ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Basanta Ku. Behera Vs State Of Odisha
.... and cannot be charged for the offence under Sections 420 and 109 of IPC along with other conspirators without proper and acceptable link between them. It is further made clear that if there is a link or evidence to connect him with the other conspirators for causing loss to the institution, undo ...
Orissa High Court
Rajnish Bansal Vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
.... urther submitted that the applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Kurukshetra (Haryana), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. During the course of the investigation, he was not arrested. The Investigating Officer has filed the charge-sheet aga ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
