Allahabad Court September 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.
Satya Pal Singh and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State respondent. Present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 23.5.2010 and 22.7.2010, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Kanpur-Dehat, in Case No.675 of 2008, State v. Satya Pal and others, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, whereby non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicants. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that on one date, the applicants could not appear before the Court below and non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicants. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contentions. 4. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at t...
Virendra Pandey and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State respondent. The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings of complaint case no.322 of 2010, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC, pending before the Munsif-II/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.15, Basti. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complaint was lodged after 20 days of the alleged incident and it was alleged that three persons were assaulted with Lathi and Danda. It is further contended that it is no injury case. 3. The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. 4. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out ...
Ved Pal. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State respondent. The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 29.6.2009, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hapur, District Ghaziabad, in complaint case no.1036 of 2009, under Section 420 IPC, Manoj v. Ved Pal and others.2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the matter is purely of a civil nature, which has been dragged into criminal prosecution at the behest of opposite party no.2, which is nothing but gross misuse of the process of the Court. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. 3. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be ...
Ravindra Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. The appellants claim that they belong to the Physically Handicapped Category of candidates, and are duly selected for being admitted to the Special B.T.C. Training Course of the years 2007 and 2008 respectively. They contend that they had been selected in their respective categories upon having fulfilled all necessary formalities including the submission of the Physical Disability Certificates, which were duly verified by an authorized Medical Board under the Persons With Disabilities Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Rules, 1996'). 2. The appellant-petitioners, in the writ petition giving rise to this appeal, challenged a communication dated 15th of July, 2010 of the Director, State Council for Education Research and Training pursuant to a Government Order dated 3rd November, 2009, which makes a provision for the constitution of fresh Medical Board in order to verify and assess the disability of the appellants afresh. The ground taken is that the Persons With Disabiliti...
Committee of Management Kalyankari Junior High School Baghra Distt. Mu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. We have heard Sri S.K. Mishra, for the petitioner-appellant. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents. 2. The Committee of Management, Kalyankari Junior High School, Baghra, Distt. Muzaffarnagar through its Manager Sri Ghanshyam Singh S/o Shri Indra Raj Singh has filed this Special Appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court against the judgment of Single Judge dated 17.1.2008 in Writ Petition No.3183 of 2008 by which the writ petition to quash the order dated 7.12.2007 passed by the Secretary, Basic Education, Lucknow and to direct him to include Kalyankari Junior High School, Baghra, Distt. Muzaffarnagar in the grant-in-aid list of the State Government pursuant to notification dated 9.9.2006 was dismissed. 3. The petitioner had earlier filed a Writ Petition No.15467 of 2007, which was disposed of on 22.3.2007 with directions to decide the petitioner's representation for grant-in-aid to the Junior High School in pursuance to the Notification dated 9.9.200...
Dr. Sharad B. Sahai and Another. Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax, C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. By means of the present writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 28.3.2005 issued by respondent no. 3 for the assessment years 1998-99 and 2000-01 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"); notice dated 3.3.2006 issued by respondent no. 3 for the assessment year 1999-2000 under Section 148 of the Act; and the notice dated 13.5.2004 issued under Sections 274 read with Section 271 of the Act by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle Meerut, Ghaziabad. 2. Since all the writ petitions raise common dispute, they are being decided together. 3. It appears that the petitioners are the income-tax assessees and were under the jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Noida. It appears that search and seizures were made on 19.3.2002 at the premises of Dr. Sharad B. Sahai and Dr. (Mrs.) Anita Sahai. After the search the Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ghaziabad, v...
Nanhey Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. The appellant contested the elections of Village Pradhan governed by the provisions of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 with the name of Nanhey son of Lalla and was declared elected in the elections held in the year 2005. He was continuing as the elected Pradhan and it appears that certain allegations were made against his continuance in office upon which a show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 31st October, 2008 by the District Magistrate, Rampur calling upon him to submit a response. After receipt of the reply, the appellant has been removed on the ground that his continuance stands curtailed as he had become incapable of acting as Pradhan upon having been found that he was an accused and charged for an offence involving moral turpitude in which he was charge sheeted and is on bail. The removal order was challenged on several grounds and the writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge by order dated 03.07.2010 on the admitted fact that the appellant had...
Tarkeshwar Nath Chaubey And Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh'
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. The challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 7.1.1982 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Ghazipur, in S.T. No.218 of 1979 (State Versus Tarkeshwar Nath Chaubey and others), convicting and sentencing the Appellants under Section 302/149 IPC for the life imprisonment, under Section 307/149 IPC for four years rigorous imprisonment and under Section 323 read with Section 149 for six months rigorous imprisonment. THE FACTS 2. The incident is said to have taken place on 22.6.1978 at about 7:00 hours. In this incident one Hardev Lonia (Deceased) died. Ravindra Nath Chaubey (the Informant) lodged the FIR on the same day at about 13:30 hours at Police Station Dildar Nagar, District Ghazipur. 3. The allegations as contained in the FIR are as follows; Hardeo (Deceased), his sons, Sankatha and Kalika as well as his wife Smt. Janak Dulari and Smt. Lalita wife of his son (Sankatha) were present at their house; Accused-Appellant no.3 Ramakant came alongwith female servant wi...
ishtiyak Ahmad Makrani Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :- "i. to issue a writ of certiorari or an order or a direction in the nature thereof calling for the records and quashing the impugned seniority list issued vide order dated 3.3.2005 (filed as Annexure No.13 to the writ petition). ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or an order or a direction in the nature thereof commanding the respondent no.1 to place the petitioner at serial no.1 above Shri Narshimha Reddy who has wrongly been placed at serial no.1 in the final seniority list issued vide order dated 3.3.2005 (filed as Annexure no.13 to this writ petition). iii. to issue a writ of mandamus or an order or a direction in the nature thereof commanding the respondent no.1 to promote the petitioner from the date Shri Mahavir Singh has been promoted and give all consequential benefits to the petitioner. iv. to issue any other writ order or direction wh...
Ms Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. Dhampur, District Bijnor. Vs. Assistant Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs: (a) "issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 5.3.2002 (Annexure-6) issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Najibabad, District Bijnor, respondent no. 1. (b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 27.9.2002 (Annexure-14) issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Najibabad, District Bijnor, respondent no. 1. (c) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining respondent no. 1 from proceeding with reassessment proceeding under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act for the assessment year 1995-96. (d) issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (e) award cost to the petitioner." 2. The brief facts of the case giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner is a Company incorpor...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »