Allahabad Court October 2010 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.
Smt. Shobha Sharma and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
1. These two appeals have been filed against the same judgment of learned Single Judge dated 1.12.1997 passed in writ petition No. 12882 of 1995 and two other connected writ petitions. The appellant Shiv Charan Lal Kushwaha filed writ petition No. 12882 of 1995 and appellant Smt. Shobha Sharma filed writ petition no. 17788 of 1995 which were connected and decided by common judgment, allowing the writ petitions partly. 2. We have heard Sri G.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the appellant in appeal No. 9 of 1998 and Sri S.D. Kautilya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in appeal no. 13 of 1998. Sri Zafar Naiyer, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Y.S. Bohara, learned Standing Counsel have been heard for the State. 3. The facts leading to filing of the above mentioned writ petitions have been noted in detail by Hon'ble Single Judge, which need no repetition except noticing few facts that are necessary for deciding these appeals. It is sufficient to refer the facts o...
Rajendra Singh Vs. State of U.P and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') has been filed by Rajendra Singh, S/o Sri Ram Surat Singh, R/o Village Kanehata, P.S. Kaisherganj, District Bahraich for quashing the Order dated 17.5.2010 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich and for directing him to pass fresh order on his application moved under Section 156 (3) of the Code. 2. The facts giving rise to the present petition may be briefly stated as under: 3. The petitioner moved an application under Section 156 (3) of the Code before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich for directing the police of P.S. Kaisherganj to register and investigate the case on the basis of his application. He had alleged in his application that the Opposite Party No. 1-Babadeen and Opposite Party No. 2-Dulare are son and father. The Opposite Party No. 2-Dulare was recorded owner of Revenue Plot No. 256 area 0.134 hectare situated in Village Khanehta, Pa...
Sri Pal Singh Vs. the Dy. Labour Commissioner, Ghaziabad Region and Ot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The special appeal relates to an individual workman. The appellant-petitioner moved an application before the Conciliation Officer for conciliation and to refer the matter under Section 2 (a) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Additional Labour Commissioner vide order dated 31.10.2010 has rejected the request for reference on account of delay. 3. The learned Single Judge considering the petition filed in the year 2010 and the fact that the scheme in question under which the petitioner took benefit was of the year 1997 refused to interfere and dismissed the petition. 4. One of the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant-petitioner is that there is no limitation and for that reliance has been placed in the case of Sapan Kumar Pandit v. U.P. State Electricity Board, [2001 (90) FLR 754]. 5. It is true that there is no limitation to ta...
Dharmendra Rajput Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
1. This writ petition under article 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 1.7.2010 (annexure 13 to the writ petition) and order dated 19.6.2010 (annexure 10 to the writ petition) passed by Sessions Judge, Jhansi and criminal revision no.171 of 2010 and criminal revision no. nil of 2010 respectively and also to quash preliminary order dated 7.6.2010 under section 145 (1) Cr.P.C. (annexure 4 to the writ petition) and order dated 10.6.2010 under section 146 (1) Cr.P.C. (annexure 5 to the writ petition) passed by Additional City Magistrate, Jhansi and other consequential prayers for direction to the Magistrate to lift the attachment of the shop in dispute and dropping the proceedings under section 145 Cr.P.C. 2. The facts are that the petitioner and respondent no.2 are closely related and are cousins. Respondent no.3 is wife of respondent no.2. The dispute revolves around a shop situated in Sipri Bazar, Jhansi wherein a business in the...
Aftab Quressy Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
1. Heard Sri Arvind Mishra, counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sudhir Mehrotra Assistant Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 and Sri Shachi Kant Mishra Advocate on behalf of Union of India respondent no. 1. 2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. The habeas corpus petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. The instant habeas corpus petition is preferred challenging the detention order of the petitioner Aftab Quressy dated 16.1.2010 passed by the District Magistrate, Meerut. The petitioner along with two other co-accused namely Mohd Rafiq and Sadab Quressy were apprehended on 23.10.2009 at 2.30 P.M. by S.I. Rajesh Verma, SOG, District Meerut on receiving information that the accused are involved in dealing with fake currency notes. At the time of his arrest, 30 notes of denomination of Rs. 500/- each serial numbers; 6AH 542660 to 542664 5 notes, 6AH 543141 to 543142 2 notes, 6AH 543144 to 543151 8 notes, 6AH 543155 one note, 6AH 543162 ...
Dr. Barun Sarkar and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-2010
1. This criminal misc. application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been moved for quashing the entire proceedings of complaint case no.387/03 including the cognizance order dated 6.11.03 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-1, Agra, under Section 304-A, IPC in case no.387/03, Vimal Kumar v. Dr. Barun Sarkar and others and also for quashing the order dated 30.11.04 rejecting the preliminary objections filed by the applicants before the Judicial Magistrate, Agra. 2. It appears from the record that applicant no.1, Dr. Barun Sarkar is a surgeon and former Associate Professor in Obsterics and Gynaecology, S.N. Medical College, Agra while applicant no.2, Dr. B. Lahiri is a pathologist and was formerly the Head of the Department of Pathology, S.N. Medical College, Agra. 3. An application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. was moved by Shri Vimal Kumar, O.P. No.2 against the applicants and one Dr. R.D. Sharma in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra....
Smt. Pushpa Devi W.O. Late Vishnu Kumar and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Thr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-2010
1. Heard Sri T.N. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri N.C. Mehrotra on behalf of the respondent. 2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the voter-list published by the respondents for conducting the Election of Pradhan in Mulahimpur Vikas Khand Khairabad District Sitapur under Panchayat Raj Act. 3. Facts in brief as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners are to the effect that the petitioners are resident of Village Arjunpur, Hamlet Mulahimpur Vikas Khand Khairabad, District Sitapur. On 24.09.2010, for the first time they came to know that a supplementary voter-list has been published by the concerned respondent for the purpose of conducting the election of Pradhan for Gram Panchatyat at Mulahimpur Vikas Khand, Khairabad, District Sitapur (hereinafter referred to as the Election in question). In the said voter-list, the name of the petitioners does not find place. 4. Learned counsel for t...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Khatoon and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-2010
1. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Insurance Company against the judgment and order/award dated 7.8.2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kanpur Dehat in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.306 of 2006, filed by Smt. Khatoon (since deceased) (claimant-respondent no.1) and Iqbal Ahmad (claimant-respondent no.2) on account of the death of Shamsuddin in an accident which took place on 25.5.1993 at about 12.30 P.M.. 2. It was, interalia, stated in the Claim Petition that on 25.5.1993, the deceased Shamsuddin alongwith other persons was coming back to his own village from village Kashipur, Bhaunara, Rura, Kanpur Dehat on a Tractor bearing Registration No. UP77A-1013 after attending a Tilak Ceremony; and that when at about 12.30 p.m. the said Tractor reached near village Niwada on G.T. Road under Police Station Billhaur, District - Kanpur Dehat, a Truck bearing Registration No. USE 4795 (hereinafter referred to "the vehicle in question"), which was being driven ...
Laxmi Mohan Sharma and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-2010
1. Heard Sri Vijay Gautam for the petitioners and Sri M.C.Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel along with Piyush Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all the petitions, which involve a common question of law and fact, are being decided finally at this stage under the rules of the Court. 2. The petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions are either Sub-Inspector or Constables in U.P. Police Force and have been transferred from one place to another by various orders of transfer which are impugned in these writ petitions. 3. Sri Vijay Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioners assailed before this Court the impugned orders of transfer only on the ground that the same have been passed without obtaining any approval whatsoever from the Police Establishment Board pursuant to the Apex Court decision in Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 1. In a Full decision of this Court in Vinod Kumar v. Stat...
State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home and ors. Vs. Krishna Pal So. Raj K ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-2010
1. Heard learned standing counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the claimant respondent and perused record. 2. According to petitioners' counsel, the claimant respondent was selected for the post of Constable in the year 2006. He, on 8.6.2006, filed an affidavit that in case it is found that declaration given by him, is incorrect, appropriate action may be taken against him. While filing affidavit, it was stated by the claimant respondent that no criminal case was pending against him in any court of law. It appears that later on, it was found that an FIR was lodged against the claimant respondent under Section 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC on account of certain incident occurred in the college namely, Krishna Inter College, Baghpat. The investigating officer submitted final report which was accepted by the court concerned. The claimant respondent after completion of training, resumed duty on the post of Constable. Later on, it came to knowledge of the Superintendent of Police conce...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »