Model: Tushar0505/fine-tuned-legal-bert
Author: Tushar0505
Pipeline: sentence-similarity
Library: sentence-transformers
Tags: sentence-transformers, safetensors, bert, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, dense, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:10048, loss:CosineSimilarityLoss, arxiv:1908.10084, base_model:nlpaueb/legal-bert-base-uncased, base_model:finetune:nlpaueb/legal-bert-base-uncased, text-embeddings-inference, endpoints_compatible, region:us
Base models (finetune): id: nlpaueb/legal-bert-base-uncased
Card metadata: tags: sentence-transformers, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, dense, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:10048, loss:CosineSimilarityLoss
base_model: nlpaueb/legal-bert-base-uncased
widget: source_sentence: conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to
commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health
(whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b)harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing
her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property
or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to
her to meet such demand.]
State Amendment
Andhra Pradesh.—In Andhra Pradesh,
sentences: ate of AP, (1987) 2 JT 361 .
835. Surendra Nath Mohanty v State of Orissa, AIR 1999 SC 2181 [LNIND 1999 SC 482] .
836. Ramlal v State of Jammu and Kashmir, AIR 1999 SC 895 [LNIND 1999 SC 60] .
837. Supra.
838. Jalaluddin v State of UP, 2001 AIR SCW 2266.
839. Bankat v State, AIR 2005 SC 368 [LNIND 2004 SC 1183] .
840. Ramgopal v State of MP, 2010 (7) Scale 711 [LNIND 2010 SC 690] .
841. Gian Singh v State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 [LNIND 2010 SC 1128] : 2012 (9) Scale
257 .THE INDIAN PENAL CO, conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to
commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health
(whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b)harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing
her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property
or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to
her to meet such demand.]
State Amendment
Andhra Pradesh.—In Andhra Pradesh,, n Territory of Delhi, (1981) 1 SCC 608 [LNIND 1981 SC 27] : AIR 1981 SC
746 [LNIND 1981 SC 27] : 1981 (2) SCR 516 [LNIND 1981 SC 27] : ( 1981 Cr LJ 306 ) etc.
10. Karamjit Singh v State, AIR 2000 SC 3467 [LNIND 2000 SC 707] : (2001) 9 SCC 161 [LNIND
2000 SC 707] .
11. Dhannajoy Chatterjee v State of WB, (1994) (2) SCC 220 [LNIND 1994 SC 34] : 1994 (3) RCR
(Cr) 359 (SC).
12. Attorney General of India v Lachma Devi, 1986 Cr LJ 364 : AIR 1986 SC 467 .
13. Murray and Co v Ashok Kr Newatia, AIR 2000 , source_sentence: xecution of
the sentence eventually conﬁrmed. This custody is different from custody of a convict
suffering from simple or rigorous imprisonment. Therefore, he cannot be kept in Cell or
solitary conﬁnement which itself is a separate punishment.246.
[s 73.1] Convicts on death row.—
The question about solitary conﬁnement or keeping condemned prisoner alone under
strict guard as provided in various jail manual has been considered in depth by the
Constitution Bench in Sunil Batra v Delhi Administrat
sentences: xecution of
the sentence eventually conﬁrmed. This custody is different from custody of a convict
suffering from simple or rigorous imprisonment. Therefore, he cannot be kept in Cell or
solitary conﬁnement which itself is a separate punishment.246.
[s 73.1] Convicts on death row.—
The question about solitary conﬁnement or keeping condemned prisoner alone under
strict guard as provided in various jail manual has been considered in depth by the
Constitution Bench in Sunil Batra v Delhi Administrat, committing such house-trespass or house-breaking
shall be punished in the manner provided in the section. A person who actually
commits murder in the course of committing house-breaking will attract the penalty
under section 302.731. Every person who is jointly concerned in committing the offence
of lurking house trespass by night or house breaking by night is to be punished with life
imprisonment where death has been caused or with imprisonment which may extend
to ten years where grievous hurt , e believes a
certain signature to be the handwriting of Z; A in good faith believing it to be so.
Here A's statement is merely as to his belief, and is true as to his belief, and
therefore, although the signature may not be the handwriting of Z, A has not
given false evidence.
(d)A, being bound by an oath to state the truth, states that he knows that Z was at
a particular place on a particular day, not knowing anything upon the subject. A
gives false evidence whether Z was at that place on the d, source_sentence: Only a house-trespass committed under such circumstances as may reasonably cause
apprehension that death or grievous hurt would be the consequence is enumerated as
one of the offences under section 103.378. But in another judgment Supreme Court
held that there is no law that right of self-defence cannot be exercised in relation to a
dispute over an open space.379. Where the trespasser was in settled possession of the
ﬁeld in question, and the party who claimed ownership started ploughing the ﬁel
sentences: Only a house-trespass committed under such circumstances as may reasonably cause
apprehension that death or grievous hurt would be the consequence is enumerated as
one of the offences under section 103.378. But in another judgment Supreme Court
held that there is no law that right of self-defence cannot be exercised in relation to a
dispute over an open space.379. Where the trespasser was in settled possession of the
ﬁeld in question, and the party who claimed ownership started ploughing the ﬁel, 745 [LNIND 2008 SC 2354] : (2008) 17 SCC 381 [LNIND
2008 SC 2354] .
807. State of UP v Indrajeet alias Sukhatha, (2000) 7 SCC 249 [LNIND 2000 SC 1148] .
808. Prabhu v State of MP, AIR 2009 SC 745 [LNIND 2008 SC 2354] : (2008) 17 SCC 381 [LNIND
2008 SC 2354] ; Mathai v State of Kerala, 2005 (2) JT 365 .
809. Jagannath v State of Maharashtra, (1995) 1 Cr LJ 795 (Bom).
810. C R Kariyappa v State of Karnataka, AIR 2018 SC 4312 .
811. State of Karnataka v Shivaraj, 2002 Cr LJ 2493 (Kant), the accused, r diﬃculties of proof by creating a
presumption.494.
[s 304B.2] Ingredients.—
The Supreme Court took occasion in Shanti v State of Haryana, AIR 1991 SC 1226
[LNIND 1990 SC 696] : 1991 Cr LJ 1713 ,495.,496. to explain the ingredients of section
304B. K Jayachandra Reddy, J, said;497.
A careful analysis of s. 304B shows that this section has the following essentials : (1) The
death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under
normal circumstances;498. (2) Such deat, source_sentence: ns (sections 231, 232).
(2)Making or selling instrument for counterfeiting (sections 233, 234).
(3)Possession of instrument for counterfeiting (section 235).
(4)Abetting in India the counterfeiting of coin out of India (section 236).
(5)Importing or exporting of counterfeit coin (sections 237, 238).
(6)Delivering counterfeit coin knowing it to be so (sections 239, 240).
(7)Delivering counterfeit coin not known to be so when ﬁrst possessed
(section 241).
(8)Possession of counterfeit coin knowing 
sentences: or collecting men and ammunition to
wage war against the Government of India (sections 121, 121A, 122, 123).
II. Assaulting President, or Governor of a State with intent to compel or restrain the
exercise of any lawful power (section 124).
III. Sedition (section 124A).
IV. War against a power at peace with the Government of India (section 125) or
committing depredations on the territories of such power (sections 125–126).
V. Permitting or aiding or negligently suffering the escape of, or rescuin, s Judge, in the service of summons to witnesses and
administration of justice. In the light of the language employed in sections 195(1) of Cr
PC, 1973, the prosecution initiated at the instance of the Assistant Sessions Judge
cannot be sustained for the reason that the Sub-Inspector of Police is not subordinate
to the said Oﬃcer. Unless a complaint is made by the competent oﬃcer as speciﬁed
under section 195(1) of the Code, the prosecution cannot be further proceeded with.
Apart from this aspect, ns (sections 231, 232).
(2)Making or selling instrument for counterfeiting (sections 233, 234).
(3)Possession of instrument for counterfeiting (section 235).
(4)Abetting in India the counterfeiting of coin out of India (section 236).
(5)Importing or exporting of counterfeit coin (sections 237, 238).
(6)Delivering counterfeit coin knowing it to be so (sections 239, 240).
(7)Delivering counterfeit coin not known to be so when ﬁrst possessed
(section 241).
(8)Possession of counterfeit coin knowing , source_sentence: CC
565 [LNIND 1994 SC 952] : 1995 SCC (Cr) 29, quoted from D F Marion v Davis, 1989 (1) SCC 494
[LNIND 1989 SC 10] : AIR 1989 SC 714 [LNIND 1989 SC 833] .
4. Kishore Samrite v State of UP, (2013) 2 SCC 398 [LNIND 2012 SC 657] .
5. Subramanian Swamy v UOI, Ministry of Law, 2016 Cr LJ 3214 : 2016 (5) SCJ 643 .'reputation' is what he is supposed to be in what people say he is. 'Character' depends
on attributes possessed and 'reputation' on attributes which others believe one to
possess. The former 
sentences: CC
565 [LNIND 1994 SC 952] : 1995 SCC (Cr) 29, quoted from D F Marion v Davis, 1989 (1) SCC 494
[LNIND 1989 SC 10] : AIR 1989 SC 714 [LNIND 1989 SC 833] .
4. Kishore Samrite v State of UP, (2013) 2 SCC 398 [LNIND 2012 SC 657] .
5. Subramanian Swamy v UOI, Ministry of Law, 2016 Cr LJ 3214 : 2016 (5) SCJ 643 .'reputation' is what he is supposed to be in what people say he is. 'Character' depends
on attributes possessed and 'reputation' on attributes which others believe one to
possess. The former , of any other reliable evidence.40. In a case where the agreement is for accomplishment
of an act which by itself constitutes an offence, then in that event, unless the Statute so
requires, no overt act is necessary to be proved by the prosecution because in such a
fact-situation criminal conspiracy is established by proving such an agreement.41.
When two agree to carry it into effect, the very plot is an act in itself, and an act of each
of the parties, promise against promise, actus contra actu, of of an offence of dowry death as well as for raising
a presumption under section 113B of the Evidence Act, 1872.
(i) Therefore, the expression "soon before" would normally imply that the interval
should not be much between the concerned cruelty or harassment and the death in
question. There must be existence of a proximate or life link between the effect of
cruelty based on dowry demand and the concerned death. In other words, it should not
be remote in point of time and thereby make it a stal
pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
library_name: sentence-transformers
Likes: 0 | All-time downloads: 142
Created: 2025-09-10 16:53:29