Datasets:
helloboyn
/
WMT25-TS

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
10
360
none of those witnesses has ever been declared hostile.
all the three assailants had fled towards the north.
they had pleaded Sunita, hence the trial proceeded.
for this, the prosecution has examined four eye-witnesses.
the informant narrated the incident which was around 8 p.m.
this evidence has come in para 3 of PW1.
hence his conviction under Section 302 IPC is upheld.
all the wounds were besieged by the black region.
as noticed above, Will is marked as Exhibit-1.
the testator had signed each page of the will.
an opportunity will be given to make a representation.
the representation was made on 29th July, 2013.
the petitioner prays that the said representation be considered.
accordingly, the suit of the plaintiff was decreed.
the investigation can also be ordered by the CBI.
this argument is taken note of only to reject.
it is just being made to cover their failure.
persons in three positions have been employed on contract.
the said miscellaneous case was also dismissed on 16.03.2012.
hence, he has to be dealt with accordingly.
in such circumstances, the petitioner should be prosecuted.
he tested and found the weapons and ammunitions effective.
the said notice was duly answered by the petitioner.
the interlocutory application No.700 of 2013 is disposed of.
obviously, the petitioner has failed in that test.
there is no dispute on this finding of fact.
he was armed with Lathi, Bhala and Pharsa.
Nago Singh had brought his two sons on horse.
2- The subject matter is in a short compass.
a departmental proceeding was also initiated against the delinquent.
the delinquent cannot have any further cause of action.
he is also a attestation witness of the fardbeyan.
20- In the result, this appeal is allowed.
these facts are not disputed in the counter affidavit.
no provision of appeal has been arranged against it.
it does not exclude judicial review under Article 226.
the case was committed to the Court of Session.
that person disclosed his name to Prem Prakash Yadav.
he had provided the telephone number to the police.
the man who accompanied him went away leaving him.
as has been calculated by the learned trial court.
he has no idea where VIP bag was seized.
the seizure list has already been marked as Exhibit-3.
they have fully supported the case of the prosecution.
21- In the result, these appeals are dismissed.
the police had taken both the persons into custody.
a telephone number was given of Bettiah Police Station.
at that time, Bhola had also accompanied her.
on 27.11.2011, he left the train for Bettiah.
but Bhola had remained with her for a day.
he has proved the formal FIR (Exh.7).
confessional statement of Krishna Yadav was recorded on 07.12.2011.
thereafter, they took them to hospital for treatment.
12- PW-3 Arvind Kumar is the brother of the informant-
4- PW-4 Md. Hasal is brother's gotra.
in this context, two facts may be noted.
12- In the result, this appeal is allowed.
7- They had been working in the same manner.
the facts of the present case are totally different.
thus, the matter was reached the Supreme Court.
the informator was taken to Sadar Hospital for treatment.
Gopal Chaudhary's business is in the serai.
Dinesh Chaudhury's house is from the east.
he has supported the case of prosecution like PW-1.
the cervical cavity contained blood clots and brain material.
formal FIR by way of Exh.5 has been proved.
he did not examine how they got their injuries.
17. PW-3 is the son of Dinesh Choudhary.
Ram Kumar Choudhary had come there armed with pistol.
he admitted that there is Government Hospital in Begusai.
he had not gone to Government Hospital at Bedusai.
such injuries are not fatal and are not visible.
13- I have heard learned counsels for the parties.
she also claims that Sanjay used to take tuition.
the aforesaid suggestion has been denied by the witnesses.
his name was also given by the former landlord.
the other witnesses are the eye-witnesses of the incident.
Hon'ble Rakesh Kumar, J. Madhulay and others.
respectively marked as exhibit Exts.2, 3 and 4.
they had raped her for about 10 days continuously.
she states that police did not record her statement.
she was moving from place to place without resistance.
I also agree with the test in that case.
8- In the result, this appeal is allowed.
after declaring them hostile, the prosecution examined them.
the sample was taken from one or two packets.
no inventory was prepared to justify the seized guarantee.
the material exhibits were never produced in the court.
hence, the accused is entitled to be acquitted.
it is mentioned that she has constructed a temple.
this, in my opinion, cannot be said.
the plaintiff is not a member of the family.
in my opinion, there is no such protest.
he had no jurisdiction at all in the matter.
both the persons had died in the same accident.
one who declares the age of youth or child.
whenever she offered marriage to him, she denied.
19- PW-2 is Dr. (Smt) Annapurna Singh.
his age was assessed between 19 - 20 years.
20- PW-3 Raj Kumar Paswan is an hearsay witness.