1. We have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants.

1. The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 333, 353 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’).

1. Although, Leave has been granted in this case as this case was connected with other appeals, it is nevertheless brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel on both sides that there is a delay of 390 days in filing...

Being aggrieved by final order No.765-767/08-Ex (DB) dated 07.10.2008 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CESTAT’, for the sake of...

1. We have heard learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant-Department and perused the material on record.

1. Order dated 21.08.2008 passed by the High Court of Kerala has been challenged by the Corporation1 by which the appeal2 filed by the respondent was allowed.

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

1. The respondent No. 2 (original complainant) although served with the notice issued by this Court, yet has chosen not to remain present before this Court, either in-person or through an advocate, and oppose this appeal.

1. This appeal is at the instance of the Delhi Development Authority (for short, “the DDA”) and is directed against the impugned order dated 07.01.2010 passed by the High Court of Delhi in the Criminal Leave Petition No. 83 of...

1. These appeals are at the instance of the appellant/convict - Wazir Khan and is directed against the judgment(s) and order(s) dated 25.07.2017 (conviction) and 09.08.2017 (sentence) resply passed by the High Court of...