Bharathadityalu

Supreme Court JUSTICE M. R. SHAH JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA Smt. Meena Pawaia & Ors. Vs. Ashraf Ali & Ors. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6724 OF 2021 18th November 2021 Author: M. R. Shah, J. Citation:  2021 ALL SCR (ONLINE) 660 Head Note     Now so far as the submission on behalf of the Union of India that as in the execution proceedings the claimants accepted the amount due and payable under the impugned judgment and order and accepted the same as full and final settlement, thereafter the claimants ought not to have preferred appeal for enhancement of the compensation is concerned, the aforesaid cannot be accepted. The claimants are entitled to just compensation. Merely because in the execution proceedings they might have accepted the amount as awarded by the High Court, may be as full and final settlement, it shall not take away the right of the claimants to claim just compensation and shall not preclude them from claiming the enhanced amount of compensation which they as such a

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH) DB Civil Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) Nos. 120 and 121/2016 Decided On:  26.05.2016   Rahul Pareek   Vs.    State of Rajasthan and Ors. Hon'ble Judges/Coram: M.N. Bhandari  and  J.K. Ranka , JJ. Citation: 2017 CRLJ 721 Raj Bharath L Advocate High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore   As per the provisions quoted above, custody of the accused can be after a report. In the instant case, accused petitioner seems to have remained in custody for almost six days even prior to the report. After his arrest on 11.3.2016, he was produced for taking remand by the police on 12.3.2016 before the learned Magistrate. Initially, remand was given for two days followed by other order of remand for 14 days on 14.3.2016.  The arrest as well as initial order of remand were without registration of an FIR. In our opinion, initial two orders for remand prior to registration of FIR are hit by section 167 Cr.P.C.. The first question is accordingly answered in favou