w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



State of U.P. v/s Ram Chandra


Company & Directors' Information:- H CHANDRA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65990MH1952PTC008894

    Government Appeal No. 570 of 1982 Connected with Crl. A. Nos. 2920 & 3021 of 1981

    Decided On, 24 February 2014

    At, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH TIWARI

    For the Appellant: --------. For the Respondent: M.D. Misra, S.L. Yadav, Advocates.



Judgment Text

Rakesh Tiwari, J.

1. Since, Government Appeal No. 570 of 1982 and both the connected Criminal Appeal Nos. 2920 of 1981 and 3021 of 1981 arise out of the impugned judgment and order dated 27.11.1981 passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge. Gorakhpur in S.T. No. 614 of 1980, State v. Harbansh and others, by which respondent-accused Ram Chandra was acquitted of the offence under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C. but the learned trial court convicted appellants Harbans. Raimal and Rajendra for the offence under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and 5 years' rigorous imprisonment under each count respectively, therefore they are being heard and decided by a common judgment.

2. It is apparent from the report of C.J.M., Gorakhpur dated 20th March, 2007 that appellant Harbans died during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 3021 of 1981, therefore, the appeal against him was abated vide order dated 14.2.2008.

3. It further appears from the report of C.J.M., Gorakhpur dated 28.2.2006 that appellant Raimal died during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 2920 of 1981, hence the appeal against him was abated vide order dated 13.3.2007.

4. Heard Sri D.I. Faridi, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State of U.P.-appellant in Government Appeal No. 570 of 1982 and in Criminal Appeal No. 2930 of 1981 for the State of U.P.-respondent. Sri M.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent-accused in the aforesaid Government Appeal and for appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 2930 of 1981 and perused the record.

5. In order to appreciate the facts of the case it is necessary to reproduce a pedigree of the accused in order to show relationship of the accused and one Smt. Sharda.

6. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that first informant Mahendra son of Ram Bilas and the accused persons are the resident of village Chilbilia Tola Padrahia P.S. Gulariha Bazar, District Gorakhpur. His uncle Santraj got an agreement to sell executed by Smt. Sharda widow of Ram Awadh in respect of land measuring an area of 1-1/2 bigha in his favour. Being felt aggrieved, accused Haribans moved an application for mutation proceedings in the Court of Tehsildar which was decreed in his favour on 7.3.1980, on account of which accused Harbans started nursing grudge against him.

7. It was averred in the F.I.R. that on 26.3.1980 at about 4.45 a.m. Mahendra and his uncle Santraj were going from village at their cloth shop situate in Bhathat Bazar. When they reached near the wheat field of Ramjan alias Bannar and east of their house, accused, namely, Harbans son of Jokhan Bhar, Rajendra son of Harbans armed with 'pusi' Ram Chandra son of Jokhan Bhar armed with 'bhala' (spear) and Raimal son of Jokhan armed with lathi, who were lying in ambush in their arhar fields suddenly came out and assaulted them, as a result of injuries Santraj and Mahendra fell down on the ground. On their hue and cry. Ram Chandra son of Santraj rushed to their help from his house. On seeing him the accused also assaulted him from their respective weapons as a result of which he also fell down in the field of Ramjan. On his raising alarm, Sadik Ali, Saifullah, Ram Shankar Singh, Ram Niwas and others came at the spot and saw the occurrence. On their challenging, the accused persons with their respective weapons ran away towards north. Thereafter, the first informant with the help of the villagers brought his uncle Santraj Singh and brother Ram Chandra Singh to Bhathat hospital where Ram Chandra succumbed to his injuries. Dr. Ram Iqbal Singh (P.W. 4), Medical Officer, at P.H.C., Bhathat, Gorakhpur conducted the medical examination of injured Santraj Singh and Mahendra on 26.3.1980 at 5.30 a.m. and 5.45 a.m. respectively. The S.O. P.S. Gulariha was informed for taking necessary action about the dead body of Ram Chandra Singh. A report (Ex. Ka-1) written by Mewa Lal on the dictation of Mahendra Singh, the first informant was handed over at P.S. Gulariha Bazar, District Gorakhpur on the same day, i.e., 26.3.1980 at 8.15 a.m.

8. On the basis of written report, the check report was scribed by Head Constable, Sri Kali Charan Sharma. After making entry in the G.D. the F.I.R. of the incident was registered at Case Crime No. 72 of 1980 under Sections 323, 324, 307 and 302, I.P.C. against accused persons Haribans, Rajendra, Ram Chandra and Raimal.

9. Dr. Ram Ikbal Singh (P.W. 4) examined the injuries of injured Sant Raj Singh son of Sri Mahatam Singh on 26.3.1980 at 5.30 a.m. and found following injuries on his person:

1. Incised injury on left side of skull 7 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep on the left side of scalp 12 cm. above from the left ear margin sharp fresh bleeding.

2. Incised wound 7 cm. x 1 cm. bone deep on middle of scalp 10 cm. behind the forehead, margin sharp bone seen divided x-ray advised.

3. Incised wound 6 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep just behind the injury No. 2, margin sharp clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

4. Incised wound 4 cm. x 1 cm. on middle of scalp deep in back part adjacent to injury No. 3, margin clean cut and sharp, fresh bleeding found.

5. Incised wound on head backside 5 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep, margins sharp 6 cm. above the occipital protuberance. Fresh bleeding found.

6. Incised wound 7 cm. x 1 cm. bone deep, bone has been seen divided on Rt. side of scalp 11 cm. above from Rt. ear, margin sharp advised x-ray. Fresh bleeding.

7. Incised wound 5 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep on Rt. side of scalp 4 cm. above the Rt. ear, margin clean cut and fresh bleeding found.

8. Incised wound 4 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep on Rt. side of scalp just in front of injury No. 6 sharp margin, fresh bleeding.

9. Incised wound 5 cm. x 1/2 cm. muscle deep on Rt. side of the scalp 8 cm. above the pterier.

10. Incised wound 8 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep on the back of skull margin sharp...... behind and above the Rt. ear. Fresh bleeding found.

11. Incised wound 10 cm. x 1 cm. scalp deep on the back of skull below the occipital region on Rt. side 7 cm. above the shoulder. Fresh bleeding, margin sharp.

12. Incised wound 10 cm. x 1 cm. on the left side of skull on the back part 5 cm. behind the left ear scalp deep, margin sharp and fresh bleeding.

13. Incised wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. bone deep on the back part of Rt. ear, margin clean cut, fresh bleeding.

14. Incised wound 4 cm. x 1 cm. on the Rt. side of the neck just behind the injury No. 13 on the back of Rt. ear. Margin clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

15. Incised wound 3 cm. x 1/2 cm. on the front of Rt. ear of Rt. side of face, margin clean cut, fresh bleeding found.

16. Incised wound 4 cm. x 1/2 cm. on the front of Rt. ear on Rt. side of face 1 cm. below the injury No. 15. Margin sharp and fresh bleeding.

17. Incised wound 8 cm. x 1 cm. on the dorsum Rt. hand at metatarso fallagial joint bone deep 4th metacarpal bone seen cut. Advised x-ray, margin clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

18. Incised wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. on the Rt. index finger on the outer part 4 cm. behind the tip of finger, margin clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

19. Incised wound 6 cm. x 1/2 cm. on the outer and upper part of left arm 5 cm. below the elbow joint, margin clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

20. Incised wound 8 cm. x 1/2 cm. skin deep on middle and front part of Rt. thigh 20 cm. above the Rt. knee joint.

21. Incised wound 7 cm. x 1/2 cm. skin deep on the Rt. leg outer part 10 cm. above the Rt. ankle joint, margin clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

All the injuries were bleeding and B.P. not recordable, he has been put in I.V. drop life shaving drugs. All the injuries are simple except injuries Nos. 2, 6 and 17, which are grievous. Confirmation subject to x-ray report caused by sharp cutting heavy weapon as gandasa. Duration-fresh injury.

10. He also examined the injuries of injured Mahendra Singh son of Ram Bilas Singh on 26.3.1980 at 5.45 a.m. and found the following injuries on his person.

1. Incised and cut wound on left side occipital region 3 cm. x 1/2 cm. scalp deep, margin sharp, fresh bleeding.

2. Incised and cut wound on left hand 4 cm. x 1 cm. skin deep, margin clean cut. Fresh bleeding found.

All the injuries are simple caused by sharp object as grasa. Duration-fresh injury.

11. The investigation of the case was handed over to S.O. Sri Harinath Yadav (P.W. 6), who recorded the statements of Mahendra Singh and Chaukidar Kailash Yadav immediately at Police Station, took in his custody, the blood stained clothes of Mahendra and prepared its memo (Ex. Ka-9). Thereafter, he visited the P.H.C. Bhathat and took into custody the dead body of Ram Chandra Singh (deceased) and prepared its inquest report, photo nash and challan nash (Exts. Ka-10 to 12). The dead body was sealed in his presence and handed over to constable Ramakant Pandey and Village Chaukidar Kailash Yadav for taking it to the Mortuary for post-mortem examination. The Investigating Officer then collected the blood stained and simple earth from the place of occurrence and also prepared its recovery memos (Exts. Ka-16 and 17).

12. Dr. I.P. Singh (P.W. 5), who was posted as Medical Officer at District Hospital, Gorakhpur conducted the autopsy on the body of deceased Ram Chandra Singh on 27.3.1980 at 3.30 p.m. On external examination he found the probable age of deceased to be about 30 years who had met his death about one and half days prior to the autopsy. His eyes were closed. The body of the deceased was muscular. Rigor mortis was passed off. Mouth was opened. Decomposition had started and skin from various parts of chest and abdomen pealing off. On internal examination it was found that lacerated membranes were ruptured. Blood clots were present on the face of the brain and.......Margins ruptured under above injury. Stomach, Gall Bladder, small and large intestines were empty.

13. The ante-mortem injuries found on the person of deceased Ram Chandra were:

1. Incised wound 4 cm. x 1 cm. x scalp deep on the head 11 cm. above the left ear.

2. Lacerated wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep on the forehead 2-1/2 cm. above the right eye brow middle.

3. Multiple contusions in an area of 15 cm. x 8 cm. on left upper back (scapular region).

4. Abrasion 2 cm. x 1 cm. on the front of left leg upper 1/3rd.

Injuries are caused by No. (1) some sharp edged weapon. Injuries Nos. (2) and (3) by some hard and blunt object and No. (4) due to friction against a hard and rough surface.

14. In the opinion of the Doctor the death had occurred as a result of shock and haemorrhage due to ante-mortem injuries.

15. After conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet (Ex. Ka-18) in the Court of Munsif Magistrate, Gorakhpur under Sections 302/307/324 and 323, I.P.C. against all the accused persons. The Munsif Magistrate, Gorakhpur vide his order dated 15.12.1980 committed the case for trial to the Court of Session. Charges under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C. were framed against all the accused persons. All the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

16. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined seven witnesses, namely, Santraj Singh (P.W. 1), Mahendra Singh (P.W. 2), Sadik Ali (P.W. 3), Dr. Ram Ikbal Singh (P.W. 4), Dr. I.P. Singh (P.W. 5), Investigating Officer Sri Hari Nath Yadav (P.W. 6) and Constable Rama Kant Pandey (P.W. 7).

17. The respondent-accused in Government appeal and arrayed as appellants in criminal appeals, in their statements u/s 313, Cr. P.C. denied the charges and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. Accused Raimal stated that prior to the occurrence he had undergone an eye operation and was having a green patti on his eyes. Accused Ram Chandra and Harbans further stated that they came to know in the village that the three injured while returning to the village from their shop were assaulted at about 9.00 p.m. by unknown persons near a pond. They did not examine any witness in their defence.

18. The Government appeal has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment and order dated 27.11.1981 on the grounds that the acquittal of respondent-accused Ram Chandra is contrary to the weight of evidence on record as Sant Raj (P.W. 1), Mahendra (P.W. 2) and Sadiq Ali (P.W. 4) consistently stated that respondent-accused had participated in the incident in which Ram Chandra (deceased), Santraj (P.W. 1) and Mahendra (P.W. 2) received injuries. Therefore, the judgment impugned is bad in law and has resulted in miscarriage of justice as such is liable to be set aside.

19. Learned A.G.A. has placed reliance upon paragraph 3 of the statement of Dr. Ram Iqbal Singh (P.W. 4) which reads thus:

20. He submits that some time punctured wounds also appear like incised wounds, hence the learned trial Judge erred in holding that respondent-accused who was armed with spear, did not cause any injury to the victims.

21. Sri M.D. Mishra, learned counsel for respondent-accused Ram Chandra in Government Appeal has submitted that Santraj (P.W. 1), his nephew Mahendra (P.W. 2) and Sadiq Ali (P.W. 3) are interested and partisan witnesses, therefore, no reliance can be placed upon their testimonies and that there is no evidence on record to show that respondent-accused Ram Chandra has inflicted spear injuries to any of the victims, hence the learned trial court has rightly acquitted respondent-accused Ram Chandra and no interference in the finding of acquittal recorded in favour of respondent-accused is required by this Court. He has relied upon the following relevant excerpt of the statement of Dr. Ram Iqbal Singh (P.W. 4) in support of his case:

22. On the basis of the above statement of P.W. 4 Sri M.D. Mishra. learned counsel for the respondent-accused has strenuously argued that there is no injury of spear on the person of any of the victims, therefore, the respondent-accused could not said to have committed the offence. However, the nature of injuries noted in the post-mortem report of the deceased and the medical examination report of the injured conclusively shows that these injuries have been caused by Gandasa, therefore, we prefer to rely upon the medical evidence rather the question asked on the probability.

23. Submission of Sri M.D. Mishra, learned counsel for appellant Rajendra in Criminal Appeal No. 2920 of 1981 is that the conviction of the appellant is against the weight of evidence on record, bad in law and the sentence awarded to him is too severe. It is stated that as there is no evidence on record to show that appellant Rajendra used 'pharsa' for causing injuries to the victims: that except Santraj (P.W. 1), his nephew Mahendra (P.W. 2) and Sadiq Ali (P.W. 3), no other independent witnesses have been examined by the prosecution, the conviction of the appellant is liable to be set aside in the facts and circumstances of the case.

24. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the respondent-State of U.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 2920 of 1981 has supported the conviction and sentence of the appellant and submits that from the evidence of the Doctor as well as statement of the witnesses it is clear that the appellant has inflicted 'pharsa' injuries to the victims, hence, no interference is required by this Court.

25. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record we find that the learned trial court by the impugned judgment and order dated 27.11.1981 has acquitted respondent-accused Ram Chandra of the offence under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C. but the learned trial court convicted appellants Harbans, Raimal and Rajendra for the offence under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and 5 years' rigorous imprisonment under each count respectively. We have carefully perused the findings of acquittal and conviction recorded by the learned trial court and its reasoning and have tallied the records with the findings recorded by the learned trial court.

26. From perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that respondent-accused Ram Chandra is said to have been armed with spear. From the statement of Dr. Ram Ikbal Singh (P.W. 4) it is apparent that 21 incised wounds were found on the person of injured Santraj; that except injuries Nos. 2, 4 and 17 which were grievous in nature remaining injuries were simple. He found two incised wounds on the person of injured Mahendra Singh, which were simple in nature. The injuries on the person of both the injured could have been caused by sharp edged weapon like pharsa and gandasa. Dr. I.P. Singh (P.W. 5) found one incised wound, one lacerated wound, one abrasion and multiple contusions on different parts of the body of deceased. He opined that incised wound appeared to have been caused by sharp edged weapon like pharsa and injuries Nos. 2 and 3 appeared to have been caused by lathi whereas injury No. 4 by friction.

27. From the medical evidence on record it is clear that Santraj and Mahendra Sing

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

h sustained injuries from sharp edged weapon like pharsa and gandasa and Ram Chandra Singh (deceased) received injuries by sharp edged weapon like pharsa, gandasa and lathi as a result of which he died. Thus, the medical evidence on record corroborates the oral testimony of the injured that they were assaulted by pharsa and lathi. From perusal of the medical evidence it appears that the use of a sharp edged weapon like spear has been excluded from the medical, evidence. A suggestion was given to witness Dr. Ram Iqbal Singh (P.W. 4) as to whether injuries could have probably been caused by a spear in the manner used as spear to which the witness has replied that it could come. 28. We find from the evidence and material available on record that the prosecution has successfully proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt regarding the place, manner and time of assault against appellants Harbans, Rajendra and Raimal. The participation of respondent-accused Ram Chandra appears to be doubtful in the absence of spear injury on the person of any of the victims, hence the learned trial court has rightly acquitted him. Reference made by the learned A.G.A. as well as Sri M.D. Mishra, Advocate to the relevant extract of evidence of P.W. 4 extracted in the body of the judgment shows that reliance has been placed on probability and conjectures but they would not have any credibility when the medical evidence shows that in fact there was no injury caused by the spear. We do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment and order dated 27.11.1981, in so far as recording conviction and sentence against appellants Harbans, Rajendra and Raimal in aforesaid criminal appeal is concerned. 29. For the reasons stated above, Government Appeal No. 570 of 1982, State v. Ram Chandra and Criminal Appeal No. 2920 of 1981, Raimal and others v. State of U.P. are liable to be dismissed and are accordingly. dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

03-07-2020 Satish Chandra & Another Verma Versus Prabhakar Singh Chandel, The Chairman, State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh, H.O. High Court Premises, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
26-06-2020 For the Respondents: Vibhav Prakash Tripathi, Advocate. For the Respondents: G.A., Subhash Chandra Yadav, Advocate. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
19-06-2020 Chandra Marbles Mattannur, Rep By Its Properties C.M. Jeeja Versus C.H. Ramachandran & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-06-2020 Bhabesh Chandra Biswas @ Bhupesh Biswas Versus State of Assam & Another High Court of Gauhati
17-06-2020 Sri Dhiren Chandra Borah Versus Smti Pallavi Kalita High Court of Gauhati
01-06-2020 Nagen Chandra Das & Others Versus The State of Assam, Rep. by the Comm. And Secy., Deptt. of Urban Development Deptt., Dispur & Others High Court of Gauhati
08-05-2020 Union of India Versus Narayan Chandra Jena & Another Supreme Court of India
29-04-2020 Suresh Chandra Mishra Versus State of Odisha & Another High Court of Orissa
28-04-2020 Ratan Chandra Gogoi & Others Versus State of Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
20-04-2020 Umesh Chandra Saxena Versus State of U.P. & Another High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
20-03-2020 Suresh Chandra Das Versus The State of Tripura to be represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Civil Secretariat, New Secretariat Complex, West Tripura & Another High Court of Tripura
19-03-2020 Ram Chandra Prasad Singh Versus Sharad Yadav Supreme Court of India
12-03-2020 Ramesh Chandra Singh & Another Versus Central Bureau of Investigation High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
10-03-2020 Chandra Versus State represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police Q Branch CID High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-03-2020 B. Chandra Shekar Versus Kurapati Narenaer High Court of for the State of Telangana
04-03-2020 Phool Chandra Versus State of U.P. High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
04-03-2020 Kailash Chandra Agarwal & Others Versus State of Rajasthan & Another High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
28-02-2020 Ashok Chandra Tamta Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others High Court of Uttarakhand
24-02-2020 Chandra Bhushan Shukla Versus Surmila (Dead) & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
21-02-2020 Chandra & Others Versus Sri Kakumani Adikesavalu Chetty Charities, Rep. by its Managing Trustees, Madras & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-02-2020 Harish Chandra Singh Versus State of M.P. Through State House Officer, Police Station Ratlam & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
19-02-2020 State Of Uttarakhand Versus Ramesh Chandra Joshi & Another High Court of Uttarakhand
13-02-2020 Chandra Shekhar Azad Versus State of Bihar High Court of Judicature at Patna
06-02-2020 Gopal Chandra Mishra & Others Versus The Chairman, Vananchal Gramin Bank, Dumka & Others High Court of Jharkhand
06-02-2020 Rakesh Chandra Savita Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager & Another Madya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bhopal
06-02-2020 Vir Singh Versus Chandra Lata & Another High Court of Delhi
05-02-2020 Govinda Chandra Tiria Versus Sibaji Charan Panda & Others Supreme Court of India
05-02-2020 Chandra Shekhar Dubey & Others Versus Narendra & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwailor
05-02-2020 Dipak Chandra Dhar, Senior Trackman, Under Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) N.F. Railway, Silchar Versus Union of India, Represented by the General Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
04-02-2020 Dr. Satish Chandra Versus M/s. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi
04-02-2020 S. Pugazhendi, President, Subash Chandra Bose Podhu Nala Sangam, Nagapattinam Versus Dy.Superintending Engineer/Public Information Officer, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Highways Department, Madurai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-02-2020 School Management, St. Xavier Public School Korba Versus Raghuvanshi Chandra National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-02-2020 K. Chandra Sekhar Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh High Court of for the State of Telangana
01-02-2020 Bipul Chandra Das & Another Versus Rakhi Acharjee & Others High Court of Tripura
31-01-2020 Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Others Versus Panna Mahesh Chandra Dave & Another Supreme Court of India
28-01-2020 Biresh Chandra Giri Versus State of Orissa High Court of Orissa
23-01-2020 Justice Valluri Seethamahalakshmi Versus Sara Chandra Environ Solutions Pvt Ltd. High Court of Andhra Pradesh
23-01-2020 Arunabh Sinha Versus Panuganti Vijay Chandra Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
22-01-2020 Ganapathy Versus Chandra High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-01-2020 Somireddy Chandra Mohan Reddy Versus State of Andhra Pradesh High Court of Andhra Pradesh
20-01-2020 Chandra Kanta Versus State of Rajasthan High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
13-01-2020 Prakash Chandra Jain Versus Director, Danish Grih Nir Sanstha MYDT Madya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bhopal
10-01-2020 Dr. Uday Sankar Chatterjee Versus Sankar Chandra Mondal & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
10-01-2020 State of Odisha & Others Versus Ganesh Chandra Sahoo Supreme Court of India
08-01-2020 Chandra Shekhar Azad Versus Authorised Officer, Indian Bank Assets Recovery Management Branch West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
07-01-2020 Shanti Chandra Pal & Another Versus State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
07-01-2020 Birat Chandra Dagara Versus Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd. High Court of Orissa
06-01-2020 Union of India Versus Amal Chandra Hore National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-01-2020 Nethaji Subash Chandra Bose @ Nethaji Versus State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kancheepuram High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-12-2019 Khokan Chandra Jana & Others Versus State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-12-2019 Ram Chandra Versus Sirdari High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
19-12-2019 Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Versus Sadhan Chandra Mondal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
18-12-2019 Shuba Deep Chandra & Others Versus M/s. Aliens Developers Pvt., Limited & Others Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
13-12-2019 M/s. Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Granites, Rep. by its Managing partner Nakka Chandra Shekar, Warangal Versus M/s Kapil Chits (Kakatiya) Pvt., Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Warangal District & Others Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
11-12-2019 Sterlite Technologies Limited Rep by Chief Manager K. Sundar & Another Versus Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Rep by Managing Director, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-12-2019 Purna Chandra Soren Versus The State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
06-12-2019 Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited Lucknow & Another Versus Chandra Bhan Singh (Dead) & Others Supreme Court of India
05-12-2019 Gopal Chandra Bairagi Versus Panchanan Mondal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
05-12-2019 Satish Chandra Adhikary & Others V/S The Union of India, Through General Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
04-12-2019 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., Mahalingapuram, Pollachi Versus Rohit Kumar Chandra & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-11-2019 Bijay Chandra Das Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, To the Government of India, Central Public Works Departments (CPWD), New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
26-11-2019 The Special Tahsildar, (Adi Dravidar Welfare), Vellore District Versus Chandra Sekar & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-11-2019 Sushil Chandra Bag Versus M/s. Capable Construction Rep. by its prop., Goutam Halder West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
25-11-2019 Chandra & Another Versus K. Mathiazhagan & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-11-2019 G. Chandra Shekhar Versus State of Karnataka Represented by its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department High Court of Karnataka
15-11-2019 Santosh Chaturvedi Versus Kailash Chandra & Another Supreme Court of India
14-11-2019 Soma Barman Nee Datta Versus Sunil Chandra Podder & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
13-11-2019 Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Versus Subhash Chandra Agarwal Supreme Court of India
01-11-2019 Kamal Navin Chandra Modi & Another Versus R.T. Construction Prop. Rabi Tiwari & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
01-11-2019 Jivan Chandra Handique Versus The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to the Government of Communication, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
31-10-2019 Praveer Chandra Versus Aprajita & Others High Court of Delhi
23-10-2019 The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India & Another Versus Ripan Chandra Kar West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
21-10-2019 Barun Chandra Thakur Versus Ryan Augustine Pinto & Another Supreme Court of India
17-10-2019 Chandra Sekhar Bahalia @ Baja Versus State of Orissa High Court of Orissa
15-10-2019 Command Hospital (Southern Command) & Others Versus Sachin Satish Chandra Dubey & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-10-2019 Chandra Sundararaj (died) & Others Versus C.M. Dhinakaran @ Suresh & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-09-2019 Ramesh Chandra, Branch Manager, PNB MetLife India Insurance Co. Ltd., Tiger Hills, Kasaragod, Kerala through Motty John, General Manager-Legal Versus K. Narendran, Mayura Art Press, Kasaragod & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
20-09-2019 Girish Chandra Srivastava Versus Reeta Srivastava High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
19-09-2019 Suprava Chandra & Others Versus Urmila Mohanty & Others High Court of Orissa
17-09-2019 Tapan Banerjee Versus Goutam Chandra Das & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
17-09-2019 Budha Chandra Singha Versus Dhaneshwar Singha High Court of Gauhati
16-09-2019 For the Appellant: Brijesh Sahai, Chandra Bhushan Prasad, Nirvikar Gupta, Pradeep Kumar Chaurasia, Rajesh Pratap Singh, Advocates. For the Respondent: Govt. Advocate. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
12-09-2019 Chandra Mohan Singh Bhandari Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Delhi
12-09-2019 Mohan Chandra Tamta (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Versus Ali Ahmad (D) Thr Lrs. & Others Supreme Court of India
06-09-2019 Ram Chandra Rungta and Others V/S The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Ranchi APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT NEW DELHI
04-09-2019 Ramesh Chandra & Another Versus Vinod Bhargav & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwailor
03-09-2019 Jiten Chandra Talukdar Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary Ministry of Micro & Small Medium Enterprises (MSME), New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
28-08-2019 Chandra Kumar Singhi & Another Versus India Green Reality Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
28-08-2019 Alok Nath Chandra Versus State Bank of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
26-08-2019 Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Kanpur Versus Dinesh Chandra Jain High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
21-08-2019 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Kamlesh Chandra Tiwari & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-08-2019 Narasimhamurthy Versus Suresh Chandra Gupta, Dead by his Lrs: Ravi Agarwal, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
14-08-2019 Punia Alias Purna Chandra Naik Versus State of Orissa High Court of Orissa
09-08-2019 Chandra Prakash Sharma & Others Versus State of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
08-08-2019 Jagdish Chandra Kandpal & Others Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others High Court of Uttarakhand
05-08-2019 Ramesh Chandra Roy Versus The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
05-08-2019 Bibekananda Swain Versus Nirmal Chandra Mohanty & Another High Court of Orissa
24-07-2019 Ram Chandra & Another Versus Bipin Kumar Agnihotri High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
24-07-2019 Rajesh Chandra Narayan Versus State of Bihar & Another High Court of Judicature at Patna
23-07-2019 Sanjay Bhardwaj @ Bablu & Another Versus Dinesh Chandra Gupta & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


LawyerServices is a Premium Legal Tech solution.


Lawyers, Law Firms, Government Departments and Corporates rely on us for, Workflow Automation, Data Aggregation, Timely Updates, Case Management, Intelligent Research, Latest Legal Data Updates and a LOT more!

If you are a legal professional, CONTACT US, in order to see how our UNIQUE solution can benefit your organization.

Features Intro Close Box