Seasoned Advocates in Supreme Court of India - Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu 815, Sec 16D,.
If we apply the same principles here, then the words required to be made " in r. Circumstantial evidence in this context means a combination of facts creating a net-work through which there is no escape for the accused, because the facts taken as a whole do not admit of any inference but of his guilt. It may be that these injections really caused her death. which may have a somewhat remote connection with the business of prospecting, exploration or production of mineral oils.
" Sometimes an Act of Parliament, instead of expressly repeating the words of a section contained in a former Act, merely refers to it, and by relation applies its provisions to some new state of things created by the subsequent Act. I will now give some details of his activities in relation to Laxmibai's moneys. and two bombs of 5 Kg. Why should we give greater sanctity and more binding force to rules and regulations than to our own Constitution ?
2006 there was a farewell party, that is, ˜Barkhana to bid farewell to Risaldar Major Madan Lal; that drinks were served in the said party; that the appellant had entered into an altercation with Risaldar Nand Lal Prasad, PW5, and the appellant had fought with him and abused him and consequently PW5 had slapped the appellant; that the appellant had abused PW5 and the deceased; that the said altercation was intervened by Risaldar Major Raj Nandan Rai, PW4, and at that juncture he had directed Lance Dafadar Anil Kumar, PW6, and Lance Dafadar Murari Singh, PW7, to take the accused to his living barracks; that as per the directions of the authority PW-6 and PW-7 had guided the appellant to the barracks; that the deceased was found lying on the floor bleeding from mouth and nose and the appellant was found lying on his bed on his stomach with hands folded beneath in the same room by Sowar Balwinder Singh, PW26, at about 0030 hours when he had returned to the barracks; that on being alerted by PW 26, Dafadar Muneshwar, PW13, and Sowar Nakul Prasad, PW12 had made arrangements for taking the deceased for medical aid; that apart from the deceased and the appellant, no one else was present in the room as per the testimony of Dafadar Major Ghanshyam Pukan, PW18, Sowar Balwinder Singh, PW26, Sowar Nakul Prasad, PW12 and Dafadar Muneshwar, PW13; that Dafadar Major Ghanshyam Pukan, PW18, and Dafadar Muneshwar, PW13, had witnessed the appellant leaving the room quietly via the rear door; that the appellant was absent from the ˜fall in parade that was conducted at 0200 hours; and that at 0150 hours the Commanding Officer, Col.
each outside MAM Stadium, Jammu and pursuant thereto they dug a pit on the main road leading to that stadium and put the bomb weighing 10 Kg. What are the goals of pension? It will be remembered that about November 8, the appellant had taken from Laxmibai a notice to the Bank for withdrawal of money and a withdrawal slip, none of which bore any date. Why should we hesitate to do justice with firmness and vigour? Though such services may have some connection with the prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oil, the primary service rendered by the non-resident companies on the basis of the agreements is not for prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oil but various ancillary services like training of personnel etc.
Atul Kumar Bhat, PW15, met the appellant at PS Babina, wherein the appellant had surrendered. If it does seek to serve some public purpose, is it thwarted by such artificial division of retirement pre and post a certain date? Their Lordships said at page, 175 that when a statute prescribes a formality for the performance of a public duty, the formality is to be regarded as directory only if to hold it as mandatory would cause serious general inconvenience or injustice.
each could not be put because of rains, which bombs were then concealed near Tawi River. From the evidence brought on record it has been established that on 3. To rely upon the findings of the medical man who conducted the postmortem and of the chemical analyser as decisive of the matter is to render the other evidence entirely fruitless. That is a possibility which on the finding of the trial Court cannot be brushed aside.
4(b) lose their sting and the way is free and open for us to do that justice for which the Courts exist. What public interest or purpose, if any, it seeks to serve? Having dealt with the orders of dismissal in respect of the incidents before the strike of August 11, 1955, 17 we now turn to the strike itself The first question that arises in this connection, is whether the strike was illegal as alleged by the appellants and as found by the Tribunal.
Now, if that is so, then clearly the appellant is not responsible for the death of Laxmibai. Irfan and Wasim Ahmed were again deputed by Mahboob-Ul-Haq to plant one time bomb of 10 Kg. He had done nothing to induce Dr. However that may be, there is nothing to show that death was caused by hypoglycemia brought about by the two injections given by the appellant, assuming that he had given them. Anija or any of the other doctors in the hospital to give more insulin to Laxmibai.
Why should we take a narrower view of a mere set of rules than this Court and the Federal Court and the Privy Council have taken of the Constitution and the Act of a Legislature and even of a supreme Parliament? Rajiv Chib, PW27, and Lt. 1330 Street Railway Company v. The other two bombs of 5 Kg. Learned counsel for the revenue has even suggested that if it is held that the High Court ought to have examined each agreement or contract to find out its real purpose and intent the revenue would have no objection if the matters are remanded for a complete exercise to be made on the above basis.
The second reason for coming to this conclusion, according to the Tribunal, is to be found in the Conciliation Officer's report that the appellants did not agree to grant leave to the labour representatives to sit in the conciliation proceedings which were held on August 6, 1955. The appellant inserted on the notice of withdrawal the date November 15, 1956, and lodged it in the Bank on the same day or soon thereafter. We need seek answer to these and incidental questions so as to render just justice between parties to this petition.
Will it not cause injustice here? In the opinion of the autopsy surgeon the injury number 1 could be caused by knife which had caused the death of the deceased. It has to be remembered that in the hospital Laxmibai was given two further injections of insulin of 40 units each.