Allahabad Court May 2011 Judgments

Dharam Singh Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

(1) Heard Mr. Rohan Gupta for the revisionist and learned AGA for the respondent no.1 and perused the record. None responded for the respondent no.2. (2) By this criminal revision, the revisionist Dharam Singh has challenged the order dated 7.12.2007 rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Room No.7, Saharanpur in sessions trial no. 189A of 1998, State vs. Dharam Singh and others, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge refused to declare the revisionist as juvenile. (3) The revisionist moved an application for declaring him as a juvenile and contended that according to the High School record his date of birth is 1.7.1981, therefore, he was a juvenile (less than eighteen years) on the date of the occurrence and examined CW-1 Ram Pal Singh and CW-2 Rajendra Kumar Pundir in support of his case. CW-1 Ram Pal Singh, who was Head Clerk in M.P.M. Inter College, Simlana, Saharanpur, made statement in the court on the basis of the scholar register and produced the same in the court. T...

Nafees and Another Vs. the State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Affidavit filed by State is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the materials on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, made a limited prayer that the impugned order taking cognizance under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Gangsters Act') only on the basis of case crime no.144 of 2007 registered under Section 307,323,506 and 427 IPC against the petitioners would not be sustainable in Law. It is contended that the FIR in question was lodged in respect of an incident which occurred when the complainant side came to take forcible possession of a disputed land. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation, in an appeal by one Maqbool Ahmad, father-in-law of petitioner no.1 Nafees, relating to the land in question had remanded the matter for afresh consideration which was pending before the Consolidation Officer at the time of incident. According to the learned counsel, the occurrence in question c...

Tabrez Ahmad Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Imtiyaz Murtaza, J. (1) Present matter has its genesis in the report dated 30th Nov 2010 scripted by the District Judge shortlisting the events leading to registration of FIR against the petitioner. The report of the Distt Judge is accompanied with various papers including the application of the Petitioner. (2) The entire papers including application of the petitioner were placed before Hon. the Chief justice on which the Bench consisting of Hon. the Chief Justice and Hon. Vineet Saran, J. took suo motu notice vide order dated 1.12.2010 and directed the matter to be treated as Public Interest Litigation. The learned Standing counsel was also directed to file counter affidavit in the matter and in the meanwhile criminal proceeding launched against the petitioner pursuant to FIR dated 16.11.2010 was stayed till further orders by this Court. In the said order, the District Magistrate and Supdt of Police Bijnor were also directed to file affidavit. (3) On administrative side, it would appe...

Roshan Lal Yadav and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Heard Mr.M.K.Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Mohd.Tabrez Iqbal, learned counsel for the opposite party No.3 as well as Mr.Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the opposite parties 1 and 2. Counter affidavit as well supplementary counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record. The petitioners have challenged the proceedings of case No.949 of 2010, pending before the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Customs, Lucknow for trial of offences committed under Sections 498-A, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Ghazipur, district Lucknow, arising out of case crime No.1070 of 2009. The learned counsel for the petitioners invited the attention of this court towards the contents of the First Information Report and submitted that no offence has been reported to have been committed within the territorial jurisdiction of Lucknow, rather allegedly it took place at Bilaspur, Chattisgarh, therefor...

Munna Vs. State

Court: Allahabad

IMTIYAZ MURTAZA, J. Challenge in this appeal which has been preferred from Jail by the appellant is to the judgment and order dated 21.12.2006 rendered by Special Judge SC/ST Act Agra in ST No 636 of 1995 whereby the appellant has been convicted for offences under section 302/376 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life on both counts and a fine of Rs 5000/- on each counts with default stipulation of six months RI for each count. The appellant was acquitted of charges under section 3 (2) (5) of the SC/ST Act. The deceased is a tiny girl namely, Renu aged about 5 years who it was alleged by the complainant Bhagwan Das, was murdered after being ravished and her body was found in a field. The incident relates to village Jatav Garhi Jahan Singh PS Shamshabad District Agra. Initially, the report was lodged against unknown person in case crime No 165 of 1991. It would appear that a second report was lodged at the police station the same day by Devendra son of Bhagwan Das in which i...

Upasana Garg Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

RAJESH CHANDRA, J.It appears that a partnership firm, namely, M/s Garg Automobile took Cash Credit Facility from the respondent No.2-State Bank of India. One of the partners of the firm, namely, Ajay Garg, mortgaged 1/5th share in the property in question, namely, Khasra No.131, area about 0.882 Hectare i.e., 2.18 Acre, as security for the said facility, given to the partnership firm. The said 1/5th share in the property in question had been purchased by the said Ajay Garg by the sale deed dated 09-10-2002. It further appears that Smt. Upasana Garg, the petitioner herein also purchased 1/5th share in the property in question by a sale deed dated 09-10- 2002. The said 1/5th share of Smt. Upasana Garg, petitioner herein was not mortgaged with the respondent No.2 as security for the said facility given to the partnership firm.Further, it appears that the said partnership firm committed default in respect of the said facility. Consequently, the proceedings under the Securitization and Reco...

Anwar Vs. State

Court: Allahabad

FERDINO I. REBELLO, C.J.1. The appellant was charged for an offence under Section 302 IPC for murdering Chhotey Lal Yadav, son of Hari Charan Yadav on 24.10.2000 at about 3.30 p.m. between villages Marpa and Chargarha near the field of Ram Dulary Kharwar. The appellant was further charged for an offence under Section 506 IPC for having threatened to murder Rajendra Yadav, Behari Yadav, Bedeshi Yadav and Deena Nath, when they made an attempt to catch him after committing the murder of Chhotey Lal Yadav, by saying that if anybody made an attempt to apprehend him, he would murder him or sustain injuries. Charge was framed on 20.09.2001.2. The prosecution case is that, a First Information Report of the incident was lodged on 24.10.2000 at about 8.30 p.m. at Police Station Manchi by Rajendra Yadav son of Hari Charan Yadav, alleging that on 24.10.2000 at about 3.30 p.m., his brother Chhotey Lal, his wife and his younger brother Rajgiri left home to prepare periphery (mend) for the irrigation...

Smt. Sudha Singh Vs. Kashi Gomti Samyut GramIn Bank Thru Its Chairman ...

Court: Allahabad

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kartikey Saran, who has accepted notice on behalf of respondent-Bank. Undisputed facts, giving rise to the present dispute, are as under: 2. Husband of the petitioner, who was working as Branch Manager in the respondent-Bank, died in a road accident on 26.10.2009 in harness leaving behind the petitioner and one minor daughter. Petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment on 3.7.2010 which was rejected on 9.7.2010 on the ground that under the scheme enforced in Bank for compassionate appointment, there is a provision for making ex-gratia payment and since a sum of Rs.8.00 lacs has already been paid as ex-gratia, she was not liable to be given compassionate appointment. 3. Respondent-Bank has framed a scheme known as 'Revised Model Scheme for payment of ex-gratia amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate grounds and appointment of dependents of deceased employees on compassionate grounds'. The said scheme has been f...

M/S. Rajhans Infratech Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Oth ...

Court: Allahabad

Petitioners are two registered private limited companies duly incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act. They are sister companies. The petitioner-companies were allotted plot No.6-B and 6-A respectively in Sector- I, district Gautambudh Nagar by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority having value of Rs.18,11,84,248/- and Rs.22,19,63,683/-, respectively. The Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority vide letter dated 24.3.2011 required both the companies to furnish stamp papers equivalent to 5% of the value of the plots allotted to them for the purposes of execution of the lease deeds. Petitioner No.1 was required to pay stamp duty of Rs.1,24,10,000/- and petitioner No.2 Rs.1,52,02,992/- as per the calculation made by their counsel. Since the amount of stamp duty payable was very heavy, it was advised that the same may be paid in cash and a certificate of payment may be obtained in the form of an endorsement by the officer in charge of the treasury ...

Amit Kumar @ Mittal Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2011CrLJ3710

S.C. AGARWAL, J.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.This criminal writ petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR of case crime No. 84 of 2011, under Section 452, 323, 354 and 506 IPC, Police Station Phugana, district Muzaffarnagar, which was lodged against the petitioner Amit Kumar alias Mittal on 23.4.2011 at 9.30 p.m. by the victim, respondent no.4.Briefly the allegations in the FIR were that on 23.4.2011 at 4.00 p.m., the victim was all alone in her house. All of a sudden, the petitioner Amit Kumar alias Mittal entered the house and when she asked Amit why he had entered her house, he whipped out a country made pistol with a long barrel which he placed on her temple and tried to force her to comply to his wishes. Then he tried to outrage her modesty. The victim told him that he could take her life but she would not do his bidding. Then on gun point the petitioner used criminal force to outrage her modesty. Inspite of her cries the petitioner began to...