Showing 11–20 of 14,652 judgments, newest first 0.30 seconds

  • Decided 2003✕
Filter precedents 1 Reset all

CourtsTotal 8

Decision period

Presiding judgeslatest 300

All courts — latest judgments

  1. Bombay High Court 31 December 2003

    CRMA/291/2003 of SHRI MAHAVIR KUMAR,CHENNAI-79. Vs STATE

    Bench: A.M.Khanwilkar291 of 2003

    HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 291 OF 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Quorum, appearances,Court’s Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or directions and

    3 Pages
  2. Himachal Pradesh High Court 31 December 2003

    WRIT PETITION 11247 of 2008

    11247 of 2008

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 11247of 2008. Decided on: 23.12.2010. Lekh Ram . Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. ……….Petitioner. ……….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?[1] For the …

    1 Page
  3. Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2003

    BA1/1213/2003 of KUNWAR SINGH Vs STATE

    1213 of 2003

    COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 31st day of December, 2003. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1213 of 2003. Order on the Bail Application of the accused/applicant. CRIMINAL SIDE Kunwar Singh S/o Gopi Singh, R/o Village Harad …

    1 Page
  4. Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2003

    WPMB/1267/2003 of ANAND PRAKASH GUPTA Vs STATE and ORS

    1026 of 1997

    of 2003 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, A.C.J. Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned C.S.C. for the respondents. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue direction to the Judicial Magistrate, Khatima

    1 Page
  5. Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2003

    WPMB/3539/1991 of QAMAR AHMED Vs STATE OF U.P. and ORS

    1056 of 2001

    of 2001 (Old No. 3539 of 1991) Hon’ble P.C. Verma, A.C.J. Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. None is present on behalf of petitioners, though called twice. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed in default. Interim order, if any, is vacated. (R.T, J.) (P.C.V., A.C, J.) Dt. 31.12.2003.

    1 Page
  6. Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2003

    WPMB/1269/2003 of VIJAY PAL SINGH Vs STATE and ORS.

    OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL COURT NO.2 Writ Petition No. 1269 (M/B) 2003 Vijay Pal Singh S/o Sri Baroo Singh, R/o village Bindoo, Post Bhalsawaj Ganj, Distt. Haridwar. …..Petitioner Vs. State of Uttaranchal through Secretary Education, And three others. …Respondent Hon’ble

    1 Page

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead