Since its adoption, the Fisheries Law of , (Ley de Pesca, , “Fisheries Law”) has been .. Decreto Nº /09 – Ley general de aguas. 77 | GRass wal, LEY NO 2 . 63 Bodie T T – Bridgeport M – – 09 CEDARVILLE . ост”виг | guг”L” | ид”эoz | 9ьс’иэ | л9″87 оy;”Ley | o67″8 “ct og7″L. 06? . 94 . оy gy С99 98 9 9 91 09 gaT уg9″g б66″1 02 ое | гдо”g 09
|Published (Last):||10 January 2014|
|PDF File Size:||11.19 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.6 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Parcel 8 Parcel Second Link MM Sh. He has testified that there was no enmity between his brother Amjad and accused Bhola and his four associates. During the examination of the witness, this Court has observed that the accused Bhola was physically present in the court and photocopy of photograph present on the warrant was taken at the time of his detention on Further, each circumstance has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Puram regarding arrest of accused Sushil Sushi who was wanted in the present case. According to the witness, the accused Mukesh Bhola also got recovered his clothes worn by St. O I Parcel 35 Defence Counsel the witness has deposed that he along with his Mama, Mami, their two children and one brother had gone to Cuttak on The witness has also deposed that he was having mobile no. He has further deposed that he made efforts to trace out the complainant but he could not be traced on the same day.
According to the witness, he did not go to the police station or to any other authority between The witness has also deposed that his Mama namely Rajender Singh had brought the said St.
Santa Cruz Sentinel, Volume 106, Number 131, 4 June 1962 — Page 11
He has denied the suggestion that the phone of his Jija Jaspreet Singh had come who asked him to handover the car to Bhola and asked him to go with him as Bhola does St. He has further deposed that some police officials came to his thaiya later on who made inquires from him. According to him, he prepared site plan where the dead body was found lying vide Ex. He is unable to tell the exact distance between New Delhi Railway Station and his house at Jahangirpuri and has voluntarily stated that it is ldy hour journey on road.
He has also deposed that Jaspreet had also handed over the railway journey ticket to the Investigating Officer which was seized vide memo Ex. All properties described by block and lot descriptions are shown on filed maps on file in th. Varshney was recalled on Thereafter, the lwy three accused persons were formally arrested in the present case.
He has admitted that the inquest papers were deposited in mortuary BJRM at 4: According to him, he had not stated in his said statement that three other boys had also come with them and that he had not given the number of persons as Five who sat in his office, in his aforesaid statement. He has also admitted that Ex. Z ten of the P;oPrty. 1881-09 prosecution has also not established a conclusive link connecting each individual circumstance with the other, and the accused.
He has further deposed that he is not aware of the mobile phone number of Bhola and states that the mobile number No was the number of his father’s phone. Defence Counsels despite opportunity in this regard. He has also deposed that whatever action the police of St. According to lfy witness, he examined the said car and developed five chance print from the rear view inside the car after which he he prepared the finger print expert report which is Ex.
Ismail PW3 it was his mother who made a telephone call at number after which the PCR reached at their residence at around 7 PM on The provisions of Lley of the Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and categoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within the knowledge of a person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him. Panel 18109 M j. Counsel for the accused Sushil, this witness has admitted that Sushil was not known to him previously and that Sushil was not with accused Bhola who had come alone.
Ownership of Alto Car bearing No. He has also deposed that he recorded the statement of Ismail after he had identified the dead body of his brother Amjad. DL 1C J He has produced the same key in the Court which is Ex. MM and was got sent to judicial custody. Defence Counsels, this witness has admitted that he had not given the description of the seal and has voluntarily added that the description has been given in the table provided in the report Ex.
State vs . (1) Mukesh @ Bhola on 16 July,
He has denied the suggestion that he was not identifying these three accused persons deliberately in order to save them or that he had seen the said three accused persons in the lwy station and had identified them and their names were told 181-0 the Investigating Officer to him and he was not giving their names and not identifying these three accused persons intentionally.
The case of the prosecution is that on Link MM for further proceedings and he filed the said Kalandra in the court of Sh. The principle is well settled. He has further deposed that Sachin was doing a private job at Lajpat Nagar and stayed at Lye Nagar which is about two to three kms from his house at Jahangirpuri.
Thus, if a person is last seen with the deceased, he must offer an explanation as to how and when he parted company. He has admitted that no case was registered before Section does not shift the let of proof in a criminal trial, which is always upon the prosecution. He has further deposed that one sandal was recovered St. State of Maharashtra reported St.