Chhattisgarh Court April 2001 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.
Laxminarayan Giri and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-27-2001
Reported in: II(2001)DMC436
ORDER1. Taking into consideration that the father of appellant No. 1 Laxminarayan died on 12.4.2001, we consider present to be a fit case for grant of temporary bail to the appellant No. 1. The application is allowed.2. The appellant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his surrender positively on or before 1st of June, 2001. On his failure to surrender, the Trial Court shall immediately forfeit the bail bonds and recover the bond amount and take him back to the custody....
Mayank Mishra and ors. Vs. Chief Executive and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT23(CG)
ORDERW.A. Shishak, C.J.1. The matter concerns re-examination of Indian School Certificate Examination for the year 2001 in respect of some subjects and particularly in respect of Rajkumar College at Raipur.2. While issuing notices on 18-4-2001, this Court had passed the following interim order:'Until further orders, the examination scheduled to be held from April 19th to 27th shall not be held and the time table prepared in this regard shall remain suspended and shall not be acted upon. The respondents, however, are given liberty to approach this Court for modification, variation or vacation of this interim order, if so advised.'3. Returns have been filed. Learned counsel representing the parties have been heard finally. In view of the urgency of the matter, I propose to disposed of the matter in the open Court now.4. Indian School Certificate Examinations were scheduled from 1st March to 3rd April. Examinations were concluded. Therefore, in respect of Raj Kumar College, Raipur-respond...
Ram Bai Vs. State of M.P. (Chhattisgarh)
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT117(CG)
R.S. Garg, J. 1. The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 18-7-2000 passed in Sessions Trial No. 412 of 1998 by the learned Sessions Judge, Raipur convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to undergo imprisonment for life has filed this appeal.2. The prosecution case in brief is that appellant Ram Bai is wife of the elder brother of the husband of the deceased. Deceased Vidya Bai was married to Balram who has been examined by the defence as D.W. 2. As alleged Ram Bai was generally quarrelling with deceased Vidya Bai on very small issues, in particular relating to children. The deceased, therefore, started living in a separate room with her husband and children. On 8-10-1998 Balram (D.W. 2), husband of deceased Vidya Bai, had gone to his duties, the present appellant Ram Bai had some quarrel with deceased Vidya Bai. On the return of Balram at about 2.30 P.M., Vidya Bai informed him about the said quarrel. Balram went to wash himsel...
Rajudas Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT17(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. Heard.2. It appears that in Sessions Trial No. 243 of 1995 the applicant was convicted and being aggrieved by the said judgment he preferred Criminal Appeal No. 2148 of 1997. On 14-2-2000 the High Court directed that the matter be remitted to the trial Court so that the present applicant may further cross-examine the witnesses. As the witnesses were not turning after remittance of the matter the applicant filed an application before the trial Court for his release under Section 439, Cr.P.C. The trial Court had rejected the application. Being aggrieved by the said order the applicant has come to this Court.3. True it is that the learned trial Court has rejected the application on the ground that the facts were such under which the applicant was not entitled to bail but in the opinion of this Court, the trial Court, in fact, had no jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. The provisions of Section 439, Cr.P.C. apply to a situation where the...
Shri Gurucharan Singh Vs. Premabai Shrivastava
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-19-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT87(CG)
R.S. Garg, J. 1. By this appeal the appellant/defendant challenges the correctness, validity and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 22-4-99, passed in regular appeal No. 4-A of 1998, by the-learned Third Additional District Judge, Durg, confirming the judgment and decree dated 1-1-98, passed by the Addl. Civil Judge, Class I, Durg, in Civil Suit No. 58-A of 1997, decreeing the plaintiffs suit and directing eviction of the appellant from the suit premises.2. The facts in nut-shell are that the land-lady filed a civil suit for eviction of the present appellant, inter alia stating that her grand-sons have attained majority and she being the grand-mother was required to settle them in the life and in the said process, she was requiring the suit premises bona fide for the business prospects of her grand-sons. In Paragraph 3 of the plaint she pleaded that her grand-son Vivek Shrivastava needed the premises. In Paragraph 4, she pleaded that she was in need of the premises for her anot...
Laldas Alias Lilardas Sahu Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-19-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT49(CG)
R.S. Garg, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1989 (Laldas v. State of M.P.), Criminal Appeal No. 208 of 1989 (Kamal Mahar v. State of M.P.) and Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 1989 (Sukhdeo v. State of M.P.).2. The appellants Laldas, Kamal Mahar and Sukhdeo have filed these criminal appeals, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 23-12-1988, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh (Rajnandgaon) in Sessions Trial No. 7 of 1988, convicting them under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC, and sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment.3. Appellant Laldas in his criminal appeal has also prayed that the motor-cycle which has been confiscated under the said judgment deserves to be released in his favour, because the prosecution has failed to prove that the motor-cycle was used in commission of the offence.4. The facts in brief are that on 11-11-87 Hukum Singh (since deceased) left his office for going to his house, but did not reach his home upto 13-11-87, the...
Laxminarayan Giri and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-16-2001
Reported in: II(2001)DMC340
ORDER1. The said application has been made for appellant No. 2 (Ramlal) and No. 3 (Jundribai). Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the application for appellant No. 2 has become infructuous in view of his death. The application so far as it relates to appellant No. 2 is concerned, is rejected. However, learned Counsel for the State may, verify from the concerned police station about the date of death of the appellant No. 2 within a period of four weeks and place the information on record.2. Taking into consideration the age of the appellant No. 3 which is shown to be about 75 years and further that she is a woman we are of the opinion that appellant No. 3 for this only reason deserves to be released on bail. The application for the appellant No. 3 Jundribai is allowed.3. The substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellant No. 3 is suspended and she is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amo...
Ram Kumar Tiwari and Others Vs. Deenanath and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-12-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT1(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J. 1. The present applicants apprehending their dispossession in execution of the decree passed in favour of respondent No. 1 submitted their objections before the Executing Court inter alia submitting that the property in dispute was purchased by them much before the institution of the suit and as their vendor and they themselves were not joined as party in the suit the decree passed in favour of the decree-holder was not executable against their interest. They prayed for an inquiry in accordance with the Order 21 Rules 98 and 101. The decree-holder opposed the application tooth and nail and submitted before the Court that as the present applicants/objectors had purchased the property during the pendency of the suit, therefore, and in view of the bar contained under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, the present petitioners/objectors have no rights in their favour, their application was worth rejection. 2. After hearing the parties, under order 18-7-2000, the ...
Prem Chand and Others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT93(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J. 1. By this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the applicants seek to challenge the correctness, validity and propriety of the order dated 23-2-2001 passed in Criminal Revision No. 10/2001 by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Ambikapur (Sarguja) confirming the order dated 15-1-2001 passed on M.J.C. Nos. 5/2001, 8/2001 and 7/2001 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ramanujganj (Sarguja) rejecting the applications of the applicants submitted under Section 451, Cr.P.C.2. The facts leading to the present petition in nut-shell are that in connection with Crime No. 160/2000 in relation to offences punishable under Sections 11(1) (a), (h) and (n) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Sections 6, 7 and 11 of M.P. Krishi Pashu Parirakshan Adhiniyam, 1959, 94 cattle including ox, cows, etc. were seized from the custody of Sahmud Khan (applicant No. 3). Similarly, from the custody of applicant No. 2 Mohd. Sultan and applicant No. 1 Premchand, 49 and 8 cattle...
M/S. Sun Bright Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Raipur Vs. the Commissioner (Exci ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-04-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT57(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner claims the relief that the records relating to the contract end issuance of the notice to the petitioner, be called; the impugned notice dated 11-10-2000 (Annexure P-15) be quashed; the petitioner be given credit for 3 days i.e., 1st, 2nd and 3rd April, 2000, as the licence in question was issued on 3rd April, 2000 itself; the respondents be directed to give credit of 13 days to the petitioner for which the petitioner's shops remained closed on account of undeclared dry days; the petitioner he given 25 days grace period so that he may compensate the losses.2. The petitioner being a successful bidder was awarded contract of country liquor/foreign liquor for the District Raipur, for the period commencing from 1-4-2000 to 31-3-2001. As per the sale memo and the auction notice, the contract was to commence w.e.f. 1-4-2000, but because of certain administrative problems, the contract/li...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »