.....cognizable offence, he can not be said to have been engaged in the continuous unlawful activity or organized crime under section 2(e) of the mcoc act. thus prima facie i am of the view that the bar under section 21(4) of the mcoc act will not come in the way as there is no sufficient material placed on record that the applicant/ accused is involved in the commission of the said offence. hence, though there are antecedents, the applicant/ accused is entitled to bail. 6. hence, i grant bail as under: a) the bail application is allowed. b) the applicant/accused be enlarged on bail upon furnishing p.r. bond in the sum of rs.50,000/-(fifty thousand) with one or two surety/s in the like amount. c) he shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not pressurize the complainant or other prosecution witnesses. d) he shall not indulge into any criminal activity, while on bail. e) he shall make himself available and attend all the court dates regularly. f) he shall not abscond and furnish his permanent residential address to the police station along with the address proof. g) violation of any of the conditions imposed shall amount to cancellation of bail forthwith. 7. bail application.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....of the criminal procedure code. the applicant/accused is prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 302, 120b r/w 34 of the indian penal code and also under sections 27, 25(1)(3) of the arms act. it is the case of the prosecution that one sachin ashok bandivadekar, the son of the deceased ashok bandivadekar, gave information to the police that his family and cousin one dr.prakash bandivadekar have rivalry due to their agricultural profession. co-accused dr.prakash bandivadekar was convicted for murder and is undergoing life imprisonment. it is the case of the prosecution that on 20.4.2012, his father, who was in the salon for shaving, two persons arrived there in the salon and he was shot dead. it is the case of the prosecution that the co-accused prakash and other accused persons hatched conspiracy to eliminate ashok bandivadekar. accordingly on 20.4.2012 at about 1215 hrs, the persons who were hired by prakash killed his father. the applicant/accused santosh jamune was arrested on the next day i.e., 21.4.2014. hence, this application for bail. 2. the learned counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that there is no sufficient evidence against the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....and 3 as party no. 2 and 3 along with petitioner no. 1 / plaintiff in the counter claim made by respondent no. 1, it is not necessary to discuss the facts of the case in detail. 4. it appears from the record that petitioner no.1 i.e. mr gurmit singh bagga had filed suit for injunction as against respondent no. 1, which was registered as civil suit no. 211/2008. in the suit filed by petitioner no. 1, the petitioner has alleged that respondent no. 1 i.e. mrs. indrajit kaur bagga, who is the wife of mr iqbal singh bagga (petitioner no. 3 herein) the marriage between them was solemnized long back and since the year 1992, respondent no. 1 was not residing with petitioner no. 3. she has filed various proceedings against petitioner no. 3 and other family members including the criminal case u/s 498-a of the indian penal code. without any cause or any reason respondent no. 1 was to make false complaints with the police. on the basis of these false complaints, the police personnel visited the house of petitioner no. 1. in view of the alleged act of respondent no. 1, the petitioner filed petition seeking prohibitory injunction against the respondent no. 1 not to cause any injury, damage to.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....3(1)(b) of the maharashtra local authority members disqualification act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as âthe disqualification actâ?). the facts giving rise to the filing of the above petitions can be stated thus: 3. since the facts are identical, the facts in writ petition no.4261 of 2015 would be referred to for the sake of convenience. the petitioner in writ petition no.4261 of 2015 is an elected councillor of the pandharpur municipal council. the elections to the said pandharpur municipal council took place in the year 2011. the petitioner in the said writ petition is belonging to âteerthkshetra vikas aghadi, pandharpurâ? (hereinafter referred to âthe said aghadiâ?). the said aghadi contested all the 33 seats of the pandharpur municipal council. however only 18 of its candidates which include the petitioner above named were elected as municipal councillors. after the elections, a meeting of the said aghadi took place on 14.12.2011 in which all the 18 councillors were present including the above petitioner and the petitioners in the other petitions. in the said meeting, one mr. sudhakar dhumal was appointed as the group leader and that he was authorized to issue.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....that the act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law, for the time being in force. thus, section 26 is in fact in consonance with section 36 of the d.v. act. 15. in the present matter, it is to be noted that a preliminary issue whether the respondent no.2 is a necessary party is based on and decided as per the facts and merit of that particular case independently. the case against the respondent no.2 considering the merits of the matter and evidence, may fail and the court is free to hold on merit that she may or she may not be liable to the reliefs prayed by the wife. 16. in the case of brundaban patra (supra), relied on by mr.wagh, the daughter in law filed application under section 23(2) of the d.v. act before the family court for interim relief under sections 18, 20 and 22 of the d.v. act, after the death of her husband against the relief of her husband. the jurisdiction of the family court was challenged and in the said judgment, the high court has highlighted the object of the enactment of the d.v. act. however, it directed that instead of quashing the proceedings before the family court, the learned judge of the family court shall.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....instituted these civil revision applications occupy parts of the same house no.86. the impugned orders proceed on basis of substantially similar facts and reasoning. after certain stage, common evidence came to be recorded in the two matters. for all these reasons, it would indeed be appropriate if these two civil revision applications are disposed of by this common judgment and order. 3. the civil revision application no. 770 of 2013 is instituted by vasant m. gujar (gujar). this concern two rooms, together admeasuring about 240 sq.ft. in house no. 86, dr. sabane road, mahabaleshwar (suit premises no.1), of which the respondents are the landlords. the suit premises no.1 were let out by one mr. bhise, the previous owner since last several decades. the suit premises are being used by the tenant gujar for residential purposes. 4. the civil revision application no. 167 of 2014 has been instituted by smt. khatija panhalkar and others (panhalkar). this concerns road facing premises admeasuring about 40 sq.ft., again being part of house no. 86, dr. sabane road, mahabaleshwar (suit premises no.2) of which, the very same respondents as in civil revision application no. 770 of 2013.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....in paragraph 46 of the written statement that the wife did not want to come back to the matrimonial home and desperately stay there. the said fact was also stated by the wife in her examination-in-chief. it is submitted that in the cross examination she had admitted that she used to stay alone in one room and she threw the clothes and other belongings from the suitcase in the house and sat in the car that was brought by her father to the matrimonial home. it is submitted that the wife had admitted that after great persuasion by the family members, the wife re-entered the house. it is submitted that the family court ought to have considered the other facts and evidence tendered by the husband to prove that the wife had treated the husband with cruelty. it is submitted that certain material evidence has not been looked into by the family court while granting the decree of divorce. it is submitted that the family court ought to have granted a decree of divorce under section 13(1)(iii) of the hindu marriage act, as the wife suffered from a mental disorder of such a nature that it was virtually impossible for the husband to live with the wife under one roof. the learned counsel.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....the root of the decision but the power of revision is not available to re-hear the matter and re-appreciate the evidence. it is laid down that the fact that different view is possible on re-appreciation of evidence cannot be a ground for exercise of revisional jurisdiction. in view of this position of law and aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court holds that interference in the finding of aforesaid fact is not permissible. 13. the learned counsel for the tenant vehemently argued the ground of limitation. he submitted that it is duty of the court to ascertain that the suit is filed within limitation in view of provision of section 3(1) of the limitation act and such point needs to be decided by the court when there is doubt about it. there cannot be any dispute over this proposition. learned counsel for the tenant then submitted that in view of the pleadings, the court ought to have held that cause of action for the suit on the aforesaid ground had arisen more than 12 years prior to the date of the suit and so in view of article 66 of limitation act, the trial court ought to have held that the suit is not within limitation. he placed reliance on one case of this court.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....the relevant period and civil court held that there was default committed by tenant. in subsequent suits also similar finding is given. thus, the fact that tenant had not paid rent for the period of 23 months is proved before the civil court. appeal against this decision of civil court was dismissed. 16. the ground of default is provided by section 15 (1), (2) (i) read with proviso to section 15 (2) of hyderabad rent control act, which runs, as under: â15. eviction of tenants. â“ (1) a tenant shall not be evicted whether in execution of a decree or otherwise except in accordance with the provisions of this section. (2) a landlord who seeks to evict his tenant shall apply to the controller for a direction in that behalf. if the controller, after giving the tenant a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the application, is satisfied - (i) that the tenant has not paid or tendered the rent due by him in respect of the house, within fifteen days after the expiry of the time fixed in the agreement of tenancy with his landlord or in the absence of any such agreement by the last day of the month next following that for which the rent is payable; or ... ... ... ........
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....goods are claimed to have been lost or destroyed. he submitted that the decision in state of rajasthan chemists association was distinguishable on facts since it was not dealing with sale of petroleum products. further, the provision in the rajasthan legislation which was being considered in that case was different. he referred to the judgment dated 17th january 2014 of the division bench high court of punjab and haryana in cwp no. 21948 of 2012 (all haryana petroleum dealers association, bhiwani v. the state of haryana) (which is currently the subject matter of slp (civil) no. 20904/2014 in the supreme court) where a similar challenge to the levy of vat under the haryana value added tax act on the sale price of petrol/diesel to the ultimate consumer was negatived. the central issue 17. the above submissions have been considered. there are two distinct transactions of sale that take place in the purchase of diesel and petrol by the ultimate consumer. in the first stage there is a sale of the product by the oil companies to the dealer. in the second stage there is a sale by the dealer to the ultimate consumer. although the price at which the dealer can sell petrol and diesel to.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT