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):||13 December 2006|
|PDF File Size:||2.34 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.47 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Alto Car which is Ex.
Ismail at the spot at leu time of the incident and had seen the accused Mukes Bhola taking away his brother Amjad and secondly the prosecution has failed to establish that there is a proximity between the time Mohd. He has denied the suggestion that after conducting the aforesaid proceedings he knowingly gave wrong information to Police Station Jahangirpuri upon which DD No.
He has proved that the cause of death was cranio cerebral damage as a result of fire arm injury which was ante mortem in nature and was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.
According to the witness, he perused the case 18-09 and found that sanction under Section 39 Arms Act had not been obtained and the FSL result was awaited therefore he obtained the sanction under Section 39 of Arms Act which is Ex. There are a large number of missing links and it is writ large that the investigations were diverted to connect the accused with the offence.
He has denied the suggestion that on The witness has testified that pullanda in serial No.
He has denied the suggestion that he was deliberately withholding the facts to save himself from the prosecution or that Bhola was a soft target for him and he falsely implicated him in the present case and created a false story of his having taken the car on The accused have preferred not to examine any witness in their defence.
He has denied the suggestion that he had stated to the Investigating Officer that one of the two boys who came on the motorcycle was known to him or that he was not giving this fact deliberately to favour the accused persons.
Defence Counsel for the accused and hence, his testimony has gone uncontroverted. The witness has denied the suggestion that the accused was not apprehended in the manner as deposed by him and that he had made a false statement only to justify his arrest of the accused.
He has denied that in order to save the accused persons he was not telling the facts that Mukesh along with Sushil had taken his aforesaid car from his cousin Sachin deliberately or that Sachin had also made telephonic call on P6; one Shirt, one pant with St. He has also denied that accused did not make any disclosure statement to him and he recorded the same only to connect him with the present case. He has admitted that there were a large number of public persons in the corridor including lawyers and litigants but the Investigating Officer did not join any one of them in the proceedings in St.
He has further placed on record the copy of the election card in support of address which is Ex. Pradeep went to Village Khera Kalan along with accused Sushil Sushi who was on police custody remand and they went to the village in government vehicle bearing no.
Santa Cruz Sentinel, Volume 106, Number 131, 4 June 1962 — Page 11
Vipin Kumar Bhatia had deposited Rs. He has deposed that the secret informer also met them at the T Point of fruit mandi and they took along with them and at his instance they reached at KDR factory and apprehended the accused Mukesh Bhola.
He would at least have raised an alarm and sought help of the police which he did not do. 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 the spot and he narrated to the police whatever he had seen, in his statement. He has also deposed that after verifying the facts in the application the St. He has denied the suggestion that Ismail did not identify the accused Sushil in the Police Station when he was taken on police remand and he had deliberately recorded the wrong statement of Ismail to that extent.
My findings are as under:. He has also deposed that accused took the police team in the fields near a well and told that he leey with his associates had lye one Amjad on He has testified that accused Mukesh Bhola was arrested on PP for the State wherein he has denied the suggestion that the accused Sushil was the same person who had taken away his brother along with other St.
Corte Constitucional de Colombia
According to the 18-09, 8 mm is the diameter of the projectile of cartridge and in case of the present projectile it may or may not get deformed if fired on human body and has voluntarily added that it depends upon 181-90 trajectory of the bullet, the distance from which it is fired and the portion of the body which is targeted.
Therefore, I hereby hold that the prosecution has not been able to prove and St.
According to him, the dandas lying inside the well were already there. According to the witness, on Parcel 9 He has testified that on St. He has denied the suggestion that he was under pressure from the side of accused persons that is why he was not identifying the accused Bhola in the Court.
According to the witness, he did not recollect how many times Sachin must have called on his father’s mobile and has voluntarily stated that he thought he had not even called on the said mobile. P6; the test fired cartridge which is Ex. According to the witness, there was no caretaker and he had taken the keys of his house. He has also deposed that on the same night he came back to his house and tried to contact his Jijaji but phone could not be connected.
He has testified that he did not inform any authority that Bhola had taken his Jija’s car and had switched off his mobile phone since even on previous occasions he had been taking his vehicle. According to the witness, he along with Ismail reached to police station Samaypur Badli where SI Ashok met him who thereafter sent the dead body to mortuary for postmortem.
The witness was unable to identify the accused Bhola. He has again said that the dead body after its recovery from well was directly sent to mortuary St. He has also deposed that when he ordered the photograph of the body in the well the eyes were not covered. Somvir vide RC No. He has denied the suggestion that he 1811-09 a partner in the crime and the crime was committed by him in the car which was abandoned by him at some unknown place or that he had running away from the police leg he had no clue how to save himself.