The Pine Crest Residence / Vin Varavarn Architects

first_img Projects 2014 Apartments The Pine Crest Residence / Vin Varavarn ArchitectsSave this projectSaveThe Pine Crest Residence / Vin Varavarn Architects Save this picture!© Spaceshift Studio+ 31 Share 2014 “COPY” ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOr Clipboard “COPY” CopyApartments•Bangkok, Thailand Architects: Vin Varavarn Architects Area Area of this architecture project Area:  6997 m² Area:  6997 m² Year Completion year of this architecture project Year:  photographs:  Spaceshift StudioPhotographs:  Spaceshift StudioLandscape Designer, Structural Engineers, Interior Designer:Vin Varavarn ArchitectsConstruction Management:Qbic Engineer & Architects Co,. LtdMain Contractor:Hyatt Construction Co., LtdInterior Contractor:Curve Line Co,. LtdDesign Team:M.L.Varudh Varavarn, Jongsarit Jinachan, Angkana NanjaiyaCity:BangkokCountry:ThailandMore SpecsLess SpecsSave this picture!© Spaceshift StudioRecommended ProductsWoodEGGERLaminatesDoorsdormakabaEntrance Doors – Revolving Door 4000 SeriesDoorsAir-LuxPivoting DoorWoodSculptformTimber Click-on BattensText description provided by the architects. The project originated as a design for a 7 storey apartment building. It is intended as a quiet and orderly residence with limited number of units which are large and spacious with 3-4 bedrooms. This aspect is quite different from other existing condominium projects.Save this picture!© Spaceshift StudioThe project owner wishes for a contemporary design which will be quite different from other surrounding buildings and could withstand the test of time. The building consists of 18 apartment units which are easy to maintain. Ground floor level consists of a lobby & reception, including a fitness room, staff quarter. The exterior area is designed for a swimming pool and changing rooms with outdoor shower areas and some open space courts. The apartment  on 2nd – 7th floor are residential  3 and 4 bedrooms units. The parking  facility is located underground.Save this picture!© Spaceshift StudioThe design concept started with a desire for a simple contemporary building with appropriate usage of various functional spaces. The basic intention is not to create an opulent architecture, but to create a design of spaces which project warmth and personal. Therefore the aim of producing a characterize of a domestic structure became more important than being trendy. Consideration was given to the facilitation of good ventilation by means of planning orientation to capture maximum natural breeze, views and natural light. This is achieved by splitting the building into 2 wings, separated by a small central garden court which contains a huge pine tree that could be seen from surrounding units.Save this picture!SectionAnd as this projects is located in Soi TonSon which mean ‘the Pine Lane’, the owner therefore named this building “ Pine Crest Residence”. By keeping this name in mind the architect decided to select the wood appearance for the external facade which resembles pine wood and yet create a warmth feeling for the large scale building. To utilize real timber would be too expensive and difficult to maintain and unsuitable for large scale building. So research was undertaken to process the fiber cement planks with acid stain in transforming the color that produces the most similar color and shades of real wood, and yet quite durable to the climate condition. The building utilizes 2 types of materials, acid stain fiber cement plank and washed stone aggregates as surface finishes. As for the washed stone aggregates, it is a very old technique used by Thai builders for many decades. Some may think it is outdated, but actually it can be appropriately applied and suitable to the overall design appearance.Save this picture!© Spaceshift StudioProject gallerySee allShow lessMarc Mimram Reveals Design for New TGV Station in MontpellierUnbuilt ProjectDEFACED Makes a Stand Against Controversial Demolition of NYC Graffiti MeccaUnbuilt ProjectProject locationAddress:Bangkok, ThailandLocation to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address. Share ArchDaily Year:  Thailand Photographs ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOr Clipboard The Pine Crest Residence / Vin Varavarn Architects CopyAbout this officeVin Varavarn ArchitectsOfficeFollowProductsWoodGlassConcrete#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousingApartmentsBangkokHousingResidentialThailandPublished on October 13, 2014Cite: “The Pine Crest Residence / Vin Varavarn Architects” 13 Oct 2014. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021. ISSN 0719-8884Read commentsBrowse the CatalogPanels / Prefabricated AssembliesTechnowoodSiding Façade SystemPlasticsMitrexSolar SidingMetal PanelsAurubisCopper Alloy: Nordic BronzeArmchairsAndreu WorldGrand Raglan – Lounge ChairSinksBradley Corporation USASinks – Frequency® FL-SeriesPlantingSikaGreen RoofsStonesCosentinoSilestone Surfaces – Ethereal CollectionMetal PanelsLongboard®Aluminum Battens – Link & Lock – 8″Panels / Prefabricated AssembliesFranken-SchotterFacade Panels – Dietfurt LimestoneWindowsRabel Aluminium SystemsMinimal Casement Windows – Rabel 8400 Slim Super Thermal PlusWoodGustafsWood Cladding in St. Erik Eye HospitalLightsKKDCLighting – Groove FLEXMore products »Read commentsSave世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否翻译成中文现有为你所在地区特制的网站?想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?Take me there »✖You’ve started following your first account!Did you know?You’ll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my streamlast_img read more

SC Sets Aside Allahabad HC Order Which Allowed Former Union Min Chinmayanand Access To Victim’s Statement Under Section 164 CRPC

first_imgTop StoriesSC Sets Aside Allahabad HC Order Which Allowed Former Union Min Chinmayanand Access To Victim’s Statement Under Section 164 CRPC Radhika Roy7 Oct 2020 11:12 PMShare This – xThe Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the Allahabad High Court order which had allowed former Union Minister and BJP leader Chinmayand to seek a certified copy of the statement of the victim recovered under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A Bench headed by Justice UU Lalit dictated the Order and stated that the appeal filed by the law student was…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the Allahabad High Court order which had allowed former Union Minister and BJP leader Chinmayand to seek a certified copy of the statement of the victim recovered under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A Bench headed by Justice UU Lalit dictated the Order and stated that the appeal filed by the law student was allowed, thereby overruling the November 7 order of the Allahabad High Court which had allowed Chinmayanand’s application seeking a certified copy of the statement of the victim recovered under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bench further reaffirmed the guidelines laid down in the 2014 case of State of Karnataka v. Shivanna wherein it had been held that, “Upon receipt of information relating to the commission of offence of rape, the investigating officer shall make immediate steps to take the victim to any Metropolitan/preferably Judicial Magistrate for the purpose of recording her statement under Section 164 CrPC. A copy of the statement under Section 164 CrPC should be handed over to the investigating officer immediately with a specific direction that the contents of such statement under Section 164 CrPC should not be disclosed to any person till charge-sheet/report under Section 173 CrPC is filed.” On 16th November, 2019, the Bench of Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran had issued notice in the plea and granted stay on the operation of the impugned order, till final disposal of the Special Leave Petition. The Petitioner had contended that the Allahabad HC’s direction, granting copy of the victim’s statement before filing of the charge sheet was contrary to law and may have far reaching effects. “The view taken by the High Court would be having far reaching effect not only in the Petitioner’s case but in all cases of sexual offences against the women, where direction for supply of copy of statement of victim u/s 164 CrPC even during investigation would unreasonably put the accused to an advantageous position to and would cause irreversible damage to the investigation and case of the prosecutrix. It is therefore, very necessary for this Hon’ble Court to interfere and add a caveat in the High Court’s order that the statement of the victim recorded u/s Section 164 CrPC cannot be given to the accused till charge-sheet is filed and cognizance has been taken by the court concerned.”A pre-condition for obtaining the copy of statement of the victim under Section 164 CrPC, is that the charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate. Sections 207 and 208 of CrPC, which contemplate supply of copy of police report, statements and documents and other documents to the accused, envisage the same. The Petitioner had further submitted that the High Court’s reliance on the judgment rendered in Raju v. State of U.P. & Ors., 2012 LawSuit (All) 723, was flawed inasmuch as the same was a reference to an approach that was adopted prior to the amendment of CrPC in 1973 and that the criminal jurisprudence had seen a overhaul since then. As per the petition, Chinamayanand had not made the law student a Respondent in his Application filed before the Allahabad HC. The order was passed by the HC on the basis of ‘concession’ by the Government Pleader that the statement can be given to the Chinmayanand. “Thus the Criminal Misc. Application was allowed in a fast track mode, just in two days, that too unopposed”, stated the SLP. According to the petition, the student had made a detailed complaint to the SIT in September. However, FIR was not registered on her complaint, forcing her to approach the High Court’s Monitoring Bench in this regard. “At this stage when FIR is yet to be registered on the complaint of the petitioner, supply of statement of the prosecutrix to the accused would cause irreversible damage to her case and the causer of fair investigation” The SIT, headed by Naveen Arora, Inspector General of Grievances, was constituted by the Supreme Court to investigate into the rape allegations, under the monitoring of the Allahabad High Court. On September 21, 2019, Chinmayanand was arrested by the SIT and sent to jail. The student was also booked on alleged charges of extortion against Chinmayanand. She was however granted bail by the High Court on December 4, 2019. On February 3, 2020, an Order was passed by Justice Rahul Chaturvedi, granting bail to the former Union Minister and BJP leader. Unusual observations were made in the bail order to the effect that the sexual intercourse was consensual and that both the parties were “using each other”. On February 20, 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to list urgently a plea challenging the Allahabad HC’s order granting bail to the accused. On April 30, 2020, the Allahabad HC had rejected the law student’s application imputing bias on part of the SIT that had investigated her rape case as well as the extortion case filed against her. Next Storylast_img read more