Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Manne Siddaiah @ Siddiramulu Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALT247; 2000(1)ALT(Cri)368
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy convicted the appellant herein for the offence punishable Under Section 3(1)(xii) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (P.A.) Act, 1989 (for Short 'the Act') read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the Code') and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for a period of ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for one year. The judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, dated 25-9-1997 in SC/ST S.C. No. 16 of 1996 is challenged by the appellant in this criminal appeal.2. It may be necessary to briefly notice the prosecution case against the appellant. It is the case of the prosecution that on 23-1-1995 Papolla Salavva - P.W.5 left the house for attending the work in her fields situated at Shankapur village limits, and while she was alone attending to her work...
Shaik Bande Ali Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD(Cri)512; 2000(3)ALT381; 2000(1)ALT(Cri)412; 2000CriLJ2033; 2000(70)ECC715
B. Sudershan, J.1. The learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, convicted the appellant herein for the offence punishable Under Section 8(b) read with Section 20(i)(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to him to under go rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 (Rs. Three thousand only) in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant challenges the conviction, as well as the sentence imposed on him by the learned Sessions Judge. The Judgment dated: 02-07-1997 in Calendar Case No. 90 of 1995 on the file of the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, is impugned in this criminal appeal.2. It may be necessary to briefly notice the case of the prosecution before adverting to the questions that may arise for consideration in this case. The Station House Officer, Khanapur P.S., in pursuance of the information about the cultivation of raided the land in th...
Kukkadapu Bala Krishna Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD(Cri)603; 2000CriLJ2555
ORDERVaman Rao, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the orders of the learned Sessions Judge, Nalgonda dated 21-2-2000 passed in Crl. M.P. No. 201 of 2000 (common order passed along with Crl. M.P. No. 194 of 2000,232 of 2000 and 238 of 2000) in Cr. No. 12 of 2000 of P.S. Huzurnagar under which the bail granted to the petitioner has been cancelled.2. The petitioner herein is accused of offences under Sections 409, 420, 419, 468, 471 read with Section 34, I.P.C. along with other accused in the First Information Report recorded as Cr. No. 12 of 2000 at Huzurnagar Police station. The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Huzurnagar and was directed to be released on bail by the learned Magistrate by an order dated 7-2-2000 in Cr. No. 12 of 2000.3. 0n behalf of the prosecution the said Crl. M.P. No. 201 of2000 was filed for cancelling the bail granted to the petitioner. The cancellation of the bail was sought for the...
S. Sreeramachandra Murthy and anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income T ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: (2000)159CTR(AP)436
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.The petitioner has questioned the notice dated 27-3-1998 issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in a bid to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 1992-93 which was completed on 10-3-1993. The petitioner filed a return under protest and filed this writ petition questioning the jurisdiction of the first respondent to reopen the assessment.The reassessment proceedings have been initiated on the ground that the petitioner underestimated the cost of construction of a commercial complex constructed during the year 1992-93 and the differential cost is attributable to unexplained income.2. In order to attract section 147 of the Act, the first and foremost requirement is that the assessing officer should have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. It is not in dispute that in the present case, the proviso is attracted. If so, the further requirement on...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›