Allahabad Court May 2000 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vijay Prakash and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4157
ORDER1. Heard and perused the impugned F. I. R. of case crime No. 137 of 2000, under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506, IPC, P.S. Dibiyapur, district Auraiya. According to the allegations made in the F.I.R. the complainant supplied plywood and other goods worth R. 78,740/- to the petitioners on their assurance that they would pay the price thereof within three days. But, it is further alleged, the petitioners failed to pay the price after expiry of the period aforestated and when complainant demanded the price of the plywood supplied by him he was abused and threatened of being killed on 12-4-2000. It is also alleged in the F.I..R. that the cheque issued was dishonoured. It has been vehemently submitted by Sri U.C. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the ingredients of none of the offences mentioned in the F.I.R. are made out in the FIR and as such it is liable to be quashed. Shri Mishra placed reliance on Radharaman Sahu v. Trilochan Nanda 1991 Cri LJ 1603, a judgment...
Rakshpal Singh and Etc. Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4567
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. These are seven writ petitions filed by Rakshpal Singh, Budhi Singh, Shyam Mohan, Jaswant Singh, Puran, Guddu and Jaspal Singh against their detentions vide order dated 24-6-1999 under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (in short called as the 'Act'). The District Magistrate, Mainpuri, passed the above said orders of detention on the basis of a solitary incident, vide case Crime No. 137 of 1999 under Sections 147, 148, 307 and 302/149, I.P.C., and as such all the above petitions are being dealt with by us by a common judgment.2. The allegations, as contained in the grounds of detention, are that the petitioners in broad day light at about 4.00 p.m. on 16-5-1999, murdered Kallu alias Satyabeer, aged about 28 years, by resorting to fire at the turn of the road near the house of Sishupal Singh. They had also chopped his head. When the parents and the brother of the deceased, who were following him, tried to intervene to save him, they were also fired upon, but th...
Mohd. Imran Khan Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2097
S.H.A. Raza and Kamal Kishore, JJ. 1. The factual matrix of this case as set out in the writ petition as well as the special appeal in short compass, appears to be is that on 23rd March, 1996, the appellant was appointed as Junior Clerk by the Deputy Director, Social Welfare Department. Faizabad. against a clear temporary vacancy but subsequently on 3.6.96 after the appellant joined the service, the conditions were altered and the appellant was shown to be appointed as stop-gap arrangement in the vacancy which accrued due to suspension of one Maharana Pratap Singh. On the reinstatement of Maharana Pratap Singh, the appellant was disengaged from the service on the basis of the impugned order dated 8.8.96. The appellant's representation against the dismissal was turned down by the Director, Social Welfare Department on December 23. 1996. The appellant thereafter approached the Chief Minister for the redressal of his grievance, a copy of which was also endorsed to the Principal Secretary....
Kanhaiya Lal (Decd.) Through Lrs Vs. Sri Raj NaraIn SarIn (Decd.) Thro ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2206
D.K. Seth, J. 1. This appeal arises out of an order of rejection of a plaint under Order VII, Rule 11, passed by the learned Civil Judge. Agra in Suit No. 499 of 1990, on 23rd October, 1992. Mr. G. N. Verma assisted by Mr. P. K. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned court below while deciding the question under Order VII. Rule 11, had taken aid of defence that has been brought in by the defendants and had proceeded on the basis of certain findings as to the veracity of the statement made in the plaint and in fact, has pre-empted the finding with regard to the various Issues that might have cropped up on the basis of the plaint. According to him, in order to determine a question under Order VII. Rule 11, it is only the pleadings made out in the plaint, which is to be looked into. The Court cannot look into anything beyond the plaint, it cannot consider either the written statement or the defence or other material that might have been produced by the defendan...
Dilip Kumar Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2344
R.R.K. Trivedi and U.S. Tripathi, JJ.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging order dated August 4. 1999, passed by District Magistrate. Agra under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'), under which petitioner has been detained. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.2. We have heard Sri Nasiruzzaman along with Sri Jokhan Prasad Yadav. learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Mahendra Pratap. learned A. G. A. for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and Sri K. N. Pandey for respondent No. 1.3. Learned counsel for petitioner has challenged the legality of the order on a short ground that in view of the Explanation appended to subsection (2) of Section 3 of the Act. the impugned order of detention could not be legally passed by detaining authority. Learned counsel has submitted that as in the present case, the recovery of drugs allegedly spurious is involved, the action can only be taken under the Prevention of Blackmark...
Shatrughan Nishad and Others Vs. District Magistrate/Administrator/Cha ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2452; (2000)2UPLBEC1719
Bhanwar Singh, J. 1. All these writ petitions having common issues of law and facts are taken up together for final disposal with the consent of the parties counsel.2. The common matrix of the petitioners cases is that all of them are the employees of Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Limited. Sultanpur. They have been working on Class III and IV posts for the last many years. Some of these employees are working against the permanent posts for over a period ranging from 5 to 12 years. However, in spite of their long tenure of service, they have not yet been confirmed on the posts which are available (Writ Petitions at SI. Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40. 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97.98, 99, 101, 103, 104, 104A, 105, 105A, 106, 107...
Mohd. Imran Khan Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2000
Reported in: (2000)3UPLBEC2717
S.H.A. Raza and Kamal Kishore, JJ.1. The factual matrix of this case as set out in the writ petition as well as the special appeal in short compass appears to be is that on 23rd March, 1996 the appellant was appointed as Junior Clerk by the Deputy Director, Social Welfare Department, Faizabad against a clear, temporary vacancy but subsequently on 3-6-96 after the appellant joined the service, the conditions were altered and the appellant was shown to be appointed as stop gap arrangement in the vacancy which accrued due to suspension of one Maharana Pratap Singh. On the reinstatement of Maharana Pratap Singh the appellant was disengaged from the service on the basis of the impugned order dated 8-8-96. The appellant's representation against the dismissal was turned down by the Director, Social Welfare Departmental on 23rd December, 1996. The appellant thereafter, approached the Chief Minister for the redressal of his grievance, a copy of which was also endorsed to the Principal Secretary...
Baljore Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4981
U.S. Tripathi, J.1. The appellant Baljore preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1659 of 1979 against the judgment and order dated 1-5-1979 passed by VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in Sessions Trial No. 533 of 1977 convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to life Imprisonment.2. The State of U.P. preferred Government Appeal No. 2819 of 1979 against the above judgment and order in the said sessions Trial, acquitting the respondents Mohar, Tikori and Tapsi for the offences punishable under Section 302, 324 and 323 read with Section 34 I.P.C.3. Both the appeals arise out of same judgment and common questions of the fact and law are involved. Therefore, these appeals are decided by a common judgment.4. The prosecution story, briefly stated, was that appellant Baljore, (hereinafter called the 'accused') and respondents Mohar and Tikori are sons of respondent Tapsi (hereinafter called the 'accused') and are residents of village Ultahawa Dewara, P.S. Maharajganj,...
Abdul Wahid Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1866
Binod Kumar Roy and K. D, Shahi, JJ.1. The writ-petitioner has come up with following prayers :(i) To command respondent Nos. 2 to 7 not to Interfere with his right to carry on business, of slaughtering of such animals which are not prohibited under the U. P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and from transporting flesh of such slaughtered animals in accordance with the Act after obtaining certificate from the competent authority (respondent No. 7) under the Act. (ii) To command the respondents not to insist him to obtain licence in Form 'F' fortransporting flesh of such animals. (iii) To command respondent No. 7 to issue certificate in respect of slaughtering such animals. 2. In a series of writ petitions, a larger question involved whether in view of the constitutional safeguard provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India in regard to upkeep and maintenance of health of citizens and non-citizens whether the State Government should p...
Khalil Ahmad Vs. Smt. Naurozy and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2106
P. K. Jain, J.1. This is the plaintiffs second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28.3.88 passed by the trial court dismissing Suit No. 731 of 1986 and against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court dismissing first appeal on 9.2.2000.2. Defendant Baitul Hasan died during the pendency of the first appeal and his heirs and legal representatives, the present respondents were substituted.3. The plaintiff filed suit for specific performance of the contract with the allegations that defendant Baltul Hasan was bhumidhar plot Nos. 175 and 275-Kha described In the plaint and had executed an agreement to sell on 13.6.84 in favour of the plaintiff for sale of the land of the said plots. He had received a sum of Rs. 16,000 at the time of entering into the contract and Rs. 2.000 at the time of registration of the agreement to sell. According to the terms of the contract, the balance of Rs. 2.000 were to be paid within a period of two years from the date of the registration ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »