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):||11 November 2011|
|PDF File Size:||15.31 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.88 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
However, the prosecution has not been able to conclusively establish the presence of Mohd. Ismail the real brother of Amjad did not immediately raise an alarm or make a PCR call 1810-9 even report the matter St. State and not redeemedwil? He has also proved having examined the various exhibits biologically and serologically which reports are Ex.
Tax Collector of Santa Cruz County. He has denied that he did not make any statement to the police or that the police never met him and has voluntarily stated that the police met him after three to four days of his return but he cannot tell the date.
He has deposed that Ex. let
The witness has also placed on record the certificate under section 65 B of the Evidence Act in respect of the aforesaid mobile numbers which is Ex.
He has not St. Corner St Street Ave. School H2 Block Jahangir Puri and the pointing out memo of the said place was prepared by him which is Ex. He has admitted that he had handed over his railway tickets to the Investigating Officer which were taken into possession by the Investigating Officer which tickets are marked as X2 and X3.
This witness has further deposed that the accused Sanjeev Baba was taken to Jail No.
MM of Police Station Paschim Vihar with the directions that he should move this application before the competent illaka magistrate. Vipin Kumar Bhatia vide memos Ex. Attention is hereby directed to the Addenda to this published delinoueni lit Froperty listed in this Addenda and heretofore sold to the State w. There is nothing on record to definitely establish which of the accused actually committed the offence and who did not participate oey the crime.
He does not remember which day of the week it was. He has admitted that no public witness was sited at the time of arrest of accused persons in the Court and that the disclosure statements of accused Vijay and Vishal were not recorded on His deceased brother Amjad in order to threaten Mukesh Bhola and to establish his supremacy in the area, had accosted and injured the brother of accused Mukesh Bhola about 15 days prior to the present incident.
According to the accused persons they refused to participate in the Test Identification Parade because they were shown to the witnesses in the office of ACP Prem Nath and also in the Police Station prior to the date of Test Identification Parade Proceedings.
The circumstance of last seen together does not by itself and necessarily lead to the inference that it was the accused who committed the crime.
The Official Athletics Site of the Ragin’ Cajuns
Ismail falsely implicating the accused Mukesh Bhola in view of their previous animosity, cannot be ruled out. Vipin Bhatia was called there. He has proved having prepared the report which is Ex.
He has further deposed that some police officials came to his thaiya later on who made inquires from him. It also stands established that the death of Amjad was caused due to cranio cerebral damage as a result of firearm injury which injury was caused on account of a closed range firearm injury at Further, as per allegations on 4.
He has denied the suggestion that in order to save the accused persons he was not telling the facts mentioned in his statement or that he had been won over by the accused persons.
He has testified that he along with Insp. There may be cases where on account of close proximity of place and time between the event of the accused having been last seen with the deceased and the factum of death a rational mind may be persuaded to reach an irresistible conclusion that either the accused should explain how and in what circumstances the victim suffered the death or should own he liability for the homicide According to the witness, he prepared the rough measurements there at the instance of Inspt.
He has also concealed that Amjad was involved in a criminal case registered against him about 15 days prior to the present leg when there was an incident of quarrel between the deceased Amjad, Tota and Bharon one one side and the brother of Mukesh Bhola on the other side wherein they had inflicted stab injuries on him in order to threaten him and Mukesh Bhola and had asked him to inform his brother Mukesh Bhola that they would not permit their dadagiri in the area.
The witness has also denied the suggestion that Sachin St.
Santa Cruz Sentinel, Volume 106, Number 131, 4 June 1962 — Page 11
He has further deposed that he did not know if Mohd. SHO known as Bhatia ji. According to him, no FIR was registered at Police Station Samaypur Badli after receiving the aforesaid information and after recording the statement of aforesaid Rajan. He has further deposed that on The witness has also deposed that the accused also got recovered his clothes i. He has proved that the accused Mukesh Bhola was interrogated 1181-09 whatever the accused had stated 18-09 his disclosure statement was recorded separately vide Ex.
Court Opinions: Index
Savita has deposed that lye Defence Counsels, the witness has deposed that Mohd. He has also deposed that he did not have any other conversation with him apart from this. Ved Prakash Bhagwan Dia Vs.
He has produced the said Car in the Court which car is Ex. He has further deposed that the aforesaid connection was in the name of his mother Wahida which was being used by him and after some time police came to le spot and he narrated to the police whatever he had seen, in his statement. Sachin Prakash has also been examined St.
He has also deposed that he cannot confirm on which mobile he had been contacting him and has voluntarily stated that he had two – three St. He has denied that accused Mukesh Bhola never gave any disclosure statement or that the disclosure statement of Mukesh Bhola was fabricated.
He has also deposed that accused took the police team in the fields near a well and told that he along with his associates had murdered one Amjad on He has denied that he did not receive any call from Sachin, but has admitted that he had not received any call from Bhola during travel. Sunil Gupta, Room No. In his cross examination, he has denied the suggestion that ely did not join the investigation of this case with the Investigating Officer.
According to him, no rent receipt was ever issued by him to accused Sushil.