Allahabad Court September 2012 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.
Chhedi Lal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2012
1. Submission of the petitioner is that an F.I.R. dated 16.8.2004 was lodged by them against the opposite party no. 2 which was registered as Case Crime No. 747 of 2004 under Sections 147,148, 149,323,307, 302 I.P.C. Police Station Line Bazar , District Jaunpur. Investigation in that case proceeded and charge sheet has been submitted before the concerned court and accused are facing trial. It is further submitted that as a counter blast the present F.I.R. has been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 against the petitioners which has been registered as Case Crime No. 747-A of 2004 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 326, 323,504, 506 I.p.C. at Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur. The police on investigation filed its closure report. After the closure report, protest petition was filed by the other side which has been allowed and in consequence thereof, process against the applicants has been issued. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. After the closure report is submitte...
Dharampal and Others Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2012
Vinod Prasad J. Challenge in this appeal by the ten appellants namely Dharampal (A-1), Dhiraj (A-2), Subey Ram (A-3), Mahipal (A-4), Gopi (A-5), Kanahiya (A-6), Jasmal (A-7), Bijaipal (A-8), Jai Singh (A-9), and Daya Chand (A-10) are to the judgement and order of their conviction and sentence dated 19.9.83 rendered by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar, in S.T.No. 264 of 1982, State versus Dharampal and others, relating to police station Dankaur, district Bulandshahar. Learned trial Judge has convicted appellants Dhiraj (A-2), Sube Ram (A-3), Mahipal (A-4) and Kanhaiya (A-6), u/s 302 /149 I.P.C. and has sentenced them to life imprisonment. Rest of the appellants Dharampal (A-1), Gopi (A-5), Jasmal (A-7), Bijaipal (A-8), Jai Singh (A-9), and Daya Chand (A-10) were convicted u/s 307/149 I.P.C. and were sentenced to 7 years R.I. Eschewing unnecessary details and recapitulated briefly, prosecution allegations against the appellants as was penned down by the informant Raghuraj Sing...
Fakira Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2012
Sudhir Agarwal, J. 1. Fakira and his two sons Rajvir and Sheoraj were tried in Sessions Trial No. 214 of 1980 before Sri Y.C. Raizade, IV Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr for the offences under Sections 307 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC. By the impugned judgment and order dated 11.12.1981 they have been convicted and sentenced to undergo five years' RI under Section 307 IPC and six months' RI under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC. Both the sentences were made to run concurrently. 2. Criminal Appeal 3078 1981 was filed on 14.12.1981 and was admitted by Hon'ble M. Katju, J. (as his Lordship then was) and Criminal Appeal No. 3059 of 1981 was filed on 21.12.1981 and though there was an office report that it is a duplicate criminal appeal by the same three accused appellants, it was also admitted on the same day, i.e., 21.12.1981 by his Lordship Hon'ble M. Katju, J.(as His Lordship then was). The subsequent appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 3059 of 1981 against the same judgmen...
Vinod Singh Vs. Commissioner Chitrakoot
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2012
Sudhir Agarwal, J. 1. This writ petition basically commenced with assailing the orders dated 26.7.2008 passed by Deputy Collector, Chitrakoot, cancelling fair price shop agreement of the petitioner and appellate order dated 30.7.2009, passed by Deputy Commissioner (Food), Chitrakoot Dham Mandal Banda dismissing petitioner's appeal. It was a simple case, raising a question, whether action taken by respondents was valid and just, in the facts and circumstances of the case, but has turned into a serious matter involving much larger issues having wider ramifications upon the poor people at large residing in the State, and, in particular, in the seven districts forming a part, better known as "Bundelkhand area", of State of U.P. 2. The petitioner Vinod Singh, son of Lakhan Singh, was appointed/engaged, in 1991, as an agent for distribution of essential commodities, under Public Distribution System (hereinafter referred to as "PDS"), to the beneficiaries of scheme in Village Akbarpur, Block ...
Kanhaiya Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2012
1. Heard Sri Brijesh Sahai, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. for the State. By this revision, the revisionists have challenged the order dated 23.07.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Ex Cadre), Mahoba in S.T. No.60 of 2010, whereby, in exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., the revisionists Kanhaiya, Kailash and Rakesh have been summoned to face trial along with the accused Akhilesh and Hasmat, who are already facing trial under Sections 302, 504 and 506 I.P.C. 2. The facts, as they emerge from the record, are that a First Information Report was lodged on 13.05.2010 by the opposite party no.2 against Hasmat (charge sheeted), Kanhaiya (the revisionist no.1), Kailash (the revisionist no.2), Akhilesh (charge sheeted) and Rakesh (the revisionist no.3) with respect to the murder of one Rajesh. As per the allegations in the First Information Report, the accused persons, armed with fire arms, had surrounded the deceased (Rajesh) whereas Akhilesh, from ...
Santosh Kumar Mishra Vs. U.P. Madhyamik Shiksha Seva Ayog
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2012
1. Sri Santosh Kumar Misra, since deceased, (hereinafter referred to as the 'petitioner') has set up a case that initially he was appointed as the Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade in January, 1972 and was confirmed on the said post in 1973 in the Institution, Shri Daivi Sampad Inter College, Mumukshu Ashram, Shahjahanpur, a recognised institution, under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The institution has an approved scheme of administration and a recognised Committee of Management. It was receiving grant in aid from the State government and is under the purview of the U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971. The petitioner was promoted as the Lecturer in Hindi on adhoc basis in 1985 and his promotion was approved by the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission in December, 1986 and he had started working as a permanent Lecturer from 5.1.1987. The petitioner was appointed as Chief Proctor in the institutio...
Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2012
Surendra Kumar, J. 1. Six accused persons namely, Kalloo (appellant No. 1), Jagdish (appellant No.2), Sheo Narain alias Baredi (appellant No. 3), Lala Ram (appellant No.4), Moti Lal (appellant No. 5) and Bhagwat (appellant No. 6), preferred this appeal challenging their conviction and sentence recorded vide judgment and order dated 17.5.1982 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, in Sessions Trial No. 48 of 1981-State Vs. Kalloo and five others, by which all the six accused persons (appellants herein) were convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Four appellants namely, Kalloo, Jagdish, Sheo Narain and Lala Ram were also convicted under Section 307 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. and each of them was sentenced to four years Rigorous Imprisonment thereunder, and two years Rigorous Imprisonment on being convicted under Section 148 I.P.C. Two accused persons namely, Bhagwat and Moti Lal were also convicted unde...
islam HussaIn Vs. Hajari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2012
1. HEARD Sri Sanjiv Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 04.03.1998 passed by Additional Judge, Small Cause Court, Varanasi, dismissing petitioner's suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent and revisional order dated 17.12.2003 of Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Varanasi, dismissing petitioners' J.S.C.C. Revision No. 22 of 1998. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that two shops (hereinafter referred to as the "shop A" and "shop B") were let out to respondent no. 1 but he entered into a partnership with respondent no. 2, his nephew, in 1990 and also committed default in payment of rent whereupon the suit was filed for ejectment on the ground of subletting and default in payment of rent. The respondent no. 1tenant admitted in the written statement about partnership with defendant respondent no. 2 yet both the courts below have dismissed pe...
Azad Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2012
1. THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 28.06.2012 passed by Commissioner, Faizabad Division, Faizabad as well as order dated 05.05.2012 passed by Additional District Magistrate, C.S.M. Nagar, directing externment of petitioner for a period of six months under Section 3 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 ('Act' in short). 2. BRIEFLY stated petitioner's case is that petitioner won the election of Block Pramukh while his political opponent Saurabh Singh had lost. Presently petitioner is Block Pramukh of Block Salon, District C.S.M. Nagar, and at the behest of Saurabh Singh on 14.11.2011, a show-cause-notice under Section 3(1) of the Act was issued stating therein that twenty-five cases were pending against him. Witnesses were not deposing against him on account of his terror. He was asked to submit reply by 26.11.2011. Petitioner did not file reply. Consequently, A.D.M., C.S.M. Nagar declared petitioner to be 'Goonda'...
indrajit Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2012
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. The petitioner has been appointed as a Nazarat Peon by the appointment letter dated 13th August, 1997, issued by the District Magistrate. In the appointment letter itself it was clearly mentioned that the petitioner is being appointed purely on temporary basis and the services could be terminated without giving any prior intimation. The appointment of the petitioner has been terminated by the order dated 29th December, 1997 on the ground that several complaints have been received with regard to the appointment of the petitioner and on the receipt of the complaints, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has been directed to make an enquiry. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, vide enquiry report, dated 21.11.1997, informed that the appointment of the petitioner has been made without giving any intimation relating to the vacancy to the Employment Exchange, as required under U.P. Group D Employees Services Rules, 1985, as amend...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »