Allahabad Court August 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.
MobIn (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2098
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.2. This revision arises out of judgment and order dated 13-7-1984 passed by Sri R.K. Saxena, Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 1983 upholding the judgment and order dated 30-6-1983 passed by Sri P.N. Rai, Assistant Sessions Judge, Mirzapur in S.T. No. 219 of 1981 convicting the applicant Under Section 307, I.P.C. and sentencing him to under go 5 years's R.I. with a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine the applicant was directed to under go further sentence of 3 months' R.I.3. In this case the incident had taken place on 26-5-1981 at about 9.30p.m. The victim, Sattar, was taken by the applicant, Mobin on a pretext that there is a dinner in village Basahi at the house of friend of his. Mobin, applicant, is nephew of injured Sattar. Believing the applicant, Sattar accompanied him for the dinner. They boarded a Riskshaw and at the outskirts of Basant the Rickshaw was abandone...
Ajeet Singh Alias Muraha Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ634
M. Katju, J.1. Heard Sri S.K. Shukla learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the FIR dated 19-5-2000 (Annexure-1 to the petition) registered as Case Crime No. 144 of 2000 under Sections 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. read with Section 3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Khuthan, District Jaunpur.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., AIR 1994 SC 1349. In that decision the Supreme Court observed (in paragraph 24):-24. No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the Police Officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another. The Police Officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in...
Raghubir Singh and Kamal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC2736
Binod Kumar Roy and S. K. Jain,JJ.1. The following prayers have been made in this writ petition :(i) To quash the recovery proceedings and the order dated 24.11.1977 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Allgarh. as contained in Annexure-1. (ii) To command the respondents to recover the loan amount from the mortgaged property and if in their assessment, the loan amount with Interest cannot be recovered from the mortgaged property, in that event to permit the petitioners to sell full or part of their holding to repay the loan amount with Interest. 2. The order impugned reads thus :'Perused records. Applicatton of Sri Ram Chandra dated 23.9.1977 and other objections to this regard are hereby rejected.'3. Having perused the record and heard Sri B. B. Paul, learned counsel appearing on behalf of thepetitioners and Sri P. K. Bisaria. learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, we find that serious objections were raised by the petitioners, which have bee...
Niyamit Workcharge Karmachari Sangh, Lok Nirman Vibhag Vs. State of U. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2000
Reported in: (2000)3UPLBEC2307
S.R. Singh, J.1. Heard Shri A.N. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents.2. It would appear that pursuant to the recommendation made by the selection committee members of the petitioner-Union who were working on temporary/ Irregular Work Charge Establishment were given appointment in Regular Work-Charge Establishment but they have now been reverted by the impugned order to the Irregular Work Charge Establishment and their appointments to the Regular Work Charge Establishment has been cancelled. No reason has been assigned in the order impugned herein. It also appears that the order impugned herein was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing.3. In the circumstances, the order impugned herein cannot be sustained. The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.7.2000 is quashed. Respondents are, however, given liberty to pass a fresh order after giving proper opportunity of showing cause to ...
Uma Shanker Bharti and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ362
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants Sri G. S. Chaturvedi assisted by Sri Samit Gopal, Sri K. N. Joshi, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A.2. The present appeal has come to this Court against an order of conviction under Sections 307/149, 325/149, 323/149 and Section 147 IPC. The appellants are consequently sentenced to 4 years' R.I., one year R.I., 6 months' R.I. respectively under the above said counts. The sentences were to run concurrently.3. The brief facts of the case are that appellants and victim both are collaterals. They were living in the same area. The relation between them were strained due to litigations including proceedings under Section 107/116. As a consequence of this animosity, on 2-4-1989 in the morning at about 8.00 A.M. an assault was launched by these appellants and 3 others who were acquitted by the trial Court upon Shiv Balak Bharti, Raghunath Bharti, Ram Kumar Bharti and the informant Ram Das Bharti while they were ha...
Punjab and Sind Bank Vs. Addl. District Judge Vii, Bulandshahr and Oth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC2772
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 9.9.1994 passed by the respondent No. 2 enhancing the rate of rent of the building in question from Rs. 2,100 per month to Rs. 9,000 per month, order dated 24.10.1997 rejecting the application of the petitioner for filing additional evidence and order dated 24.11.1997 passed by respondent No.1, allowing the appeal of respondent Nos. 2 to 11 and enhancing the rate of rent of the building in question from Rs. 9,000 to Rs. 12,000 per month and dismissing the Appeal No, 28 of 1994 filed by the petitioner.2. Relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that respondent Nos. 3 to11, for short, 'the contesting respondents' filed an application under sub-section (8) of Section 21 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, ...
Agemo Leather Components (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2000
Reported in: 2001(130)ELT408(All)
M. Katju, J.1. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 915 of 1999, Writ Petition No. 415 of 2000 and Writ Petition No. 923 of 1999 are being disposed of by a common judgment. Heard Shri P.K. Jain, learned Counsel, for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Central Government.2. Writ Petition No. 915 of 1999 is being treated as the leading case. The prayer in Writ Petition No. 915 of 1999 is for mandamus directing the respondents to issue drawback and DEPB licences to the petitioner in respect of the export made by the petitioner and give all benefits to the petitioner for which the petitioner is legally entitled and to decide the application of the petitioner copies of which are Annexure 3 and 5 to the writ petition. A further prayer is for a mandamus directing the respondents to comply with the circular letter dated 8-12-1997 and to give all benefits for the exports made by the petitioner.3. In para 2 of the writ petition it is alleged that the petitioner is doing business of export to ov...
Foramer Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)166CTR(All)129; [2001]247ITR436(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice dated November 20, 1998 (annexure 4 to the writ petition), issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. We have heard Sri V. B. Upadh-yay, learned senior advocate, and Sri Yashwant Verma, learned counsel, for the petitioner, as well as learned departmental counsel for the respondents.2. This writ petition being Writ Petition No. 181 of 1999, relates to the assessment year 1988-89, whereas connected Writ Petition No. 182 of 1999, relates to the assessment year 1989-90 and Writ Petition No. 183 of 1999, relates to the assessment year 1990-91. Since the petitions are similar in nature they are being disposed of by a common judgment.3. The petitioner is a foreign company incorporated in France. It is engaged in the business of oil exploration and providing expertise and assistance in the said field throughout the world.4. ...
Rakesh Kumar Verma Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC2722
ORDERBinod Kumar Roy and S. K. Jain,JJ.1. The petitioner has come up withtwo fold prayers (i) to quash the recovery proceedings started against him on the basis of recovery certificate issued by the Punjab National Bank, Branch Sohrauna, Khadda Bazar, District Deoria (respondent No. 4) in purported exercise of powers under Section 3 of U. P. Act No. 23 of 1972 and (ii) to quash the Citation dated May 4, 1991 issued by the Tahsildar, Padrauna, district Deoria (respondent No. 3) as contained in Annexure-VI.The Facts :2. According to the petitioner, he is sole proprietor of the shop 'Verma Tyre House', Khadda Bazar, District Deoria ; his date of birth is April 7, 1972, which fact has also been mentioned in his High School certificate (photocopy appended as Annexure-1) : on October 19, 1989 a loan was advanced to him on cash credit and a Cash Credit Account No. 64 was opened by respondent No. 4 on security of tyre, rim and other goods of his shop : on July 27, 1990 respondent No. 4 through...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Aqueous Victuals P. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-2000
Reported in: [2004]266ITR573(All)
1. Heard learned counsel for the Department and Sri Navin Sinha for the respondent.2. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in which the following question is sought to be referred to us for our opinion :'Whether the wooden shells and crates/bottles are plant rather than a part of stock-in-trade of packing materials ?'3. The assessee is in the business of bottling of soft drinks and for this purpose it uses wooden shells and crates/bottles on which it claims depreciation. The stand of the assessee was that the above items are plant within the meaning of section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act. A similar question came up before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Sri Krishna Bottlers P. Ltd. : [1989]175ITR154(AP) . The Andhra Pradesh High Court decided the question in favour of the assessee. Against that decision a S. L. P. was filed before the Supreme Court and the said S. L. P. was dismissed vide : [1994]209ITR85(Bom) .4. Learned counsel for the Depa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »