Reported in : 2007CriLJ4506
.....of the second class specially empowered in this behalf under sub-section (2) may take cognizance of any offence -(a) upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence;(b) upon a police report of such facts;(c) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such offence has been committed.(2) the chief judicial magistrate may empower any magistrate of the second class to take cognizance under sub-section (1) of such offences as are within his competence to inquire into or try.8. on perusal of the provision, it appears by clause (b) of sub-section (1), that the magistrate can take cognizance of any offence upon a police report of such facts. no distinction has been inserted in the provision on the point that a magistrate shall be entitled to take cognizance of the offences triable by him and not on those offences which are exclusively triable by court of sessions. there is no dispute that the instant case is based on a police report, which is covered by sub-clause (b) of sub-section 1 of section 190 of the code. it also appears that cognizance of an offence is to be taken and not of the offenders. meaning.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008CriLJ1340
.....of them to 7 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of rs. 3,000/- and 3 years rigorous imprisonment respectively on each count.2. briefly stated facts of the case are that on 12-9-2003 at about 21.00 hours in the night complainant ramchandra bhati head constable posted at police station baghana while on public duty was going towards village achera. when he reached near the field of one quadar khan at that time present appellants mukesh, dilip and onkarlal accompanied by 2 others caught complaint ramchadra bhati and started beating him by means of lathi etc. and also by fist and legs and thus, forcibly took away his official dress from his possession, also looted currency notes of rs. 300/- together with wireless set and then ran away from the spot. complainant after some time reached at police station, baghana and lodged first information report on which basis police had registered a case under sections 395 and 332, ipc, sent complainant ramchandra bhati for medical examination to civil hospital, neemuch. dr. n.k. goyal (p.w. 12) examined injured complainant ramchandra bhati and found one incised wound on the frontal region of head, one lacerated wound on the frontal region.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2007(3)JCR74(Jhr)]
.....of re-enrolment in defence security crops in terms of rule 267(d) of the pension regulations for the army part i (1961). this was in view of the fact that the petitioner opted to count his former service towards the enhanced rate of pension and gratuity with service in defence security crops vide answer to question no. ii in the enrolment form, filled up by him. he had also elected to cease to draw pension on account of former service towards enhanced rate of pension and gratuity in terms of government of india, ministry of defence letter no. pc iii to mf no. 00592/dsc-2/54-c/d (gs-iv) dated 3rd march, 1983. option certificate duly signed by the petitioner on 29th august, 1983 has been relied upon.3. as far the dispute of date of birth is concerned, it is mentioned that when the petitioner was initially engaged, he had mentioned his date of birth as 1st july, 1938 and later when he was reengaged he wrongly mentioned his date of birth as 1st april, 1940, which did not match with the initial date of birth, recorded in the first enrolment form. petitioner was apprised of this and his consent was also obtained on 17th november, 1992 regarding the correction of the date of birth.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2007(2)BLJR1861; [2007(4)JCR576(Jhr)]
.....to take cognizance for the offence under section 47(a) of the act beyond the period of six months.4. heard learned counsel for the state.5. the facts and circumstances indicate that the date of offence is said to be 2.9.1996 on which date, in course of raid conducted by the excise personnel, certain quantities of illicit liquor was seized from the possession of the petitioners. it also appears that the prosecution against the petitioners in respect of the aforesaid offence under section 47(a) of the excise act was initiated on the basis of the prosecution report filed on 5.7.1997 and the learned court below proceeded to take cognizance of the offence on the same date i.e. on 5.7.1997. it is apparent, therefore, that prosecution was initiated after more than ten months of the alleged date of offence and cognizance of the offence was obviously taken after the prosecution report was filed. section 96 of the bihar excise act provides that no court can take cognizance under this act against any other person unless the prosecution is instituted within six months after the date of the act complained of. section 96 read as under:96. limitation of suits and prosecutions.- no civil.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2007(3)JCR440(Jhr)]
.....way available for the local residents to reach to the main road as well as to bus stand. as correctly pointed out in the counter filed by the respondent nos. 3 and 4 stating that if the petitioners claim easementary right, then the appropriate remedy for them would be to approach the civil court of competent jurisdiction to establish their right and writ petition under article 226 of the constitution is not the remedy.7. as a matter of fact, it is contended by the counsel for the respondents that the compound boundary wall is constructed on the government land out of the government fund through dumka municipality. therefore, there is no question of violation of the fundamental rights in the light of the materials available on record, as pointed out by the counsel for the respondents.8. consequently there is no merit in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.permod kohli, j.9. i agree.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2007(4)JCR225(Jhr)]
.....the petitioners. learned counsel adds further that the entire allegations of the complainant are false, concocted and imaginary and, as a matter of fact, neither the petitioner had ever approached the complainant with any offer for sale of their lands, nor was there any occasion for them to receive any money whatsoever from the complainant by way of consideration money for any imaginary sale of property and the instant case against the petitioners has been instituted with mala fide motive for the purpose, of causing undue harassment to the petitioners and for seeking revenge against them.2. opposite-party no. 2 has appeared through his counsel.controverting the grounds urged on behalf of the petitioners, learned counsel for the opposite-party no. 2 submits that the petitioners have not advanced any reasonable and sustainable ground for quashing of the order of cognizance in the criminal proceedings. learned counsel explains that the allegations contained in the complaint petition of the opposite-party no. 2 specifically accuse the petitioners of having cheated him of his money by dishonest means and on reading the allegations in the complaint as well as the statements of the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 103(2007)CLT710
.....since the grounds taken and the question involved in all these writ petitions are common, for the sake of convenience, we briefly indicate the facts of w.p.(c) no. 5791/2002.the union of india represented by the general manager, central organization, railway electrification, and its officers, (hereinafter called the railway) have filed the writ petition with a prayer to quash the letter dated 19.7.2001. (annexure-3) and further to issue an appropriate writ or direction declaring that the petitioner-railways are not exigible to entry tax as is being levied by the opposite parties and further to direct the opposite parties to refund the tax collected by them and paid by the petitioners under protest.the commercial tax officer, cuttack-iii circle, jajpur road, (o.p. no. 5) issued notices dated 4.7.2000 in form-e-4 under rule 10 (2) of the orissa entry tax rules, 1999 to the depot store keeper, railway electrification, dhanmandal, to the effect that entry tax to the extent of rs. 69,136/- and rs. 1,11,600/- for the months of 2/2000 and 3/2000 respectively was payable, vide annexure 1. similar notices were also issued from time to time for the subsequent periods. on 12.7.2000.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2007Ori109; 103(2007)CLT724; 2007(I)OLR750
.....than from the 2007 batch.in w.p.(c) no. 3805 of 2007 petitioner has complained of not providing him 10% weightage - marks notwithstanding the fact that he worked as a medical officer on contractual basis and also subsequently on regular basis for a period over five years and six months, i.e., from 23.04.1999 to 10.03.2005. he claims for relevant benefit.in w.p.(c) no. 3544 of 2007 petitioner states that she was holding the rank at serial no. 306 of the merit list of 2005, admission was granted up to serial no. 304 and even if serial no. 305 declined to take admission, she was not considered for counseling and admission. accordingly she prays to adjust her in the 2007 course.in w.p.(c) no. 3596 of 2007 petitioner's contention is that he is student belonging to physically handicapped category. that ate gory of candidates are entitled to 3% seat reservation and thereby four seats are available to be filled up by candidates belonging to such category, but in clause 14 of the prospectus and particularly in clause 14.3.1 it has been provided that the quota for the physically handicapped in-service candidate, if not available, to be filled up by in-service candidates from general.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2007(1)OLR784
.....the disputed part of the plot belonging to the plaintiff, there is hardly any scope for this court to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact. 2. this court in the said second appeal found that there was no difficulty to identify the disputed part of the plot belonging to the plaintiff of the said suit and there was hardly any scope to interfere with the concurrent finding of facts. the executing court also after referring to the aforesaid judgment vis-a-vis the report by the commissioner arrived at a conclusion that the suit land as described in the body of the decree was quite identifiable and no hindrance would be caused in effecting delivery of possession thereof the same to the decree holder.3. in that view of the matter, this court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. that apart it appears that the judgment-debtor to somehow or other tries to stall over the decree which was passed as long back as in the year 1979 and confirmed by this court. admittedly the duty of the court is to see the person in whose favour the decree has been passed should not be prevented from enjoying the fruits of the decree. frivolous petitions were filed in order to.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2007(II)OLR91
.....rail link project, bhawanipatna, kalahandi v. prabhabati majhi and ors. 2006 (ii) olr 720.6. on perusal of the record, it is seen that in fact the present case is covered by the ratio laid down in the above noted cases. so following the same ratio this appeal is disposed of with the direction that the union of india represented through the east coast railways is a 'person interested' because ultimately it has to pay the compensation amount for the land acquired. since the reference court did not notice such interested person before passing the impugned order in the reference proceeding, the order enhancing the quantum of compensation becomes unsustainable. the impugned order, is accordingly set aside and the matter is remitted back to the reference court for fresh determination of the quantum of compensation after giving adequate opportunity to the respondent no. 2 to participate in the proceeding and adduce evidence in support of its plea and also giving opportunity to the respondent no. 1 to adduce rebuttal evidence. since the matter is old, the appellant and respondents are directed to appear before the learned civil judge (senior division), bhawanipatna in m.j.c......
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT