Chhattisgarh Court August 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.
Santosh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1180; 2001(4)MPHT63(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J. 1. The applicant being aggrieved by the order dated 6-7-2001 passed by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. 297 of 2001 rejecting the applicant's application filed under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has come to this Court.2. During the course of the trial the applicant/accused made an application before the Trial Court inter alia submitting that the evidence collected during the course of the inquest has not been filed by the prosecution along with the charge-sheet and as the same is required to be filed for just and proper disposal of the trial and the said statements may be required for the purposes of cross-examination the prosecution agency be directed to produce the said documents before the Court. The said application was opposed by the prosecution mainly on the ground that the prosecution agency was not obliged to file each and every document but was required to file those documents on which they were pl...
M.P. Pandey Vs. National Mineral Development Corporation and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-25-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT54(CG)
W.A. Shishak, C.J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ petitioner is seeking a direction for quashing the order of termination Annexure P-17 dated 16-1-2001 and further to direct the respondents to pay his arrear, salary and allowances and such other benefits treating him to be in continuous service. At the time of issuance of the said impugned order of termination the writ petitioner was serving as Senior Assistant Grade II (P) in the National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., Bailadila Iron Oar Project Kirandul, District Bastar.2. In order to come to a reasonable conclusion it is necessary that relevant facts for the case leading to issuance of termination order are briefly stated.3. The petitioner was appointed as L.D. Clerk on 13-10-1970, hence at the time of termination of his services in January, 2001 the petitioner had put in more than 30 years of service. The petitioner is Secretary of a Registered Consumer Society registered as '...
Janata Kanwar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-25-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT21(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J. 1. By this petition the applicant seeks to challenge correctness, validity and propriety of the order dated 29-6-2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Korba. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in an offence triable by the Court of Sessions the applicant had engaged a senior counsel but on 29-5-2001 the senior counsel was not available, therefore, his junior colleague Shri Chandel made a request to the Court for adjourning the case. The Trial Court in the hot haste rejected the said prayer and required Shri Chandel to cross-examine the witnesses. Thereafter the applicant through his counsel made an application under Section 311, Cr.PC for recall of the witnesses but by the order impugned the Court below rejected the application simply on the ground that the cross-examination was conducted by Shri Chandel. Shri H.V. Sharma further submits that the manner in which the application has beenrejected is uncalled for and further that in a matte...
Sarla Ben Kotak and ors. Vs. Raipur Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT61(CG)
ORDER1. This order shall dispose of W.P. No. 1186/2001, W.P. No. 1187/2001 and W.P. No. 1188/2001.2. These three petitions were filed on 20th July, 2001 for restraining the Municipal Corporation to demolish the shops said to be constructed in contravention of law. In fact, the petitioner has stated in para 4 of the petition itself that in the morning of 19th of July, 2001 the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have started demolishing a triple storied building raised by the respondentNo. 3 in the year 1999, in a part of which the petitioner is carrying on his business after the purchase of a small shop in the said building.3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the building, though constructed illegally, has been demolished and he is entitled for compensation from the Corporation as well as respondent No. 3.4. The respondents-Corporation have filed joint return in all the three petitions. The stand of the Corporation is that the construction...
Chhattisgarh Rajya Abhibhavak Sangh and ors. Vs. Union of India and or ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT24(CG)
ORDER1. Shri Ajay Mishra, learned Dy. Advocate General has filed affidavit of Shri R.S. Sirohi, Principal Secretary, Govt. of M.P. The order passed by this Court required a detailed affidavit but the affidavit filed is a cryptic one and states that the letter was received on 1st August, 2001 seeking comments of the Govt. of M.P. on the proposal of Govt. of Chhattisgarh. It is stated in the affidavit that since the matter pertained primarily to the Department of Higher Education, Govt. of M.P., this communication was forwarded to them in order to seek their views in this regard. It does not disclose that when it was forwarded. Para 3 further states that another letter was received from Director, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India on 10-8-2001 seeking further comments of the Govt. of M.P. on the proposal of the Govt. of Chhattisgarh and comments were desired by 16-8-2001. Para 4 of the affidavit states that an interdepartmental meeting was convened by the Chief Secretary on 17-8-20...
Rajesh Uttra Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-21-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1175
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. Heard. Anticipating arrest in connection with crime No. 124/2001 of police station, Sheorinarayan for an offence punishable under Sections 354 and 453, I.P.C. the applicant has filed the present application under Section 438, Cr. P. C.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the applicant committed lurking house trespass by making entry into the house of the prosecutrix and out-raged her modesty. Section 354, I.P.C. is bailable while Section 453, I.P.C. is not.3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from a bare perusal of the first information report, it would clearly appear that an offence punishable under Section 453, I.P.C. is not made out.4. Opposing the application, learned counsel for the State submits that if Section 339, I.P.C. is read in its true perspective it would clearly appear from the records that an offence punishable under Section 453, I.P.C. even if is not made out, at least an offence under Section 452, I.P.C., which is also non-bailabl...
Santu and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-17-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4455; 2001(4)MPHT52(CG)
ORDERR.S. Garg, J. 1. The applicants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 10-10-1995 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 65 of 1995 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh Camp Kawardha confirming the judgment of conviction dated 12-6-1995 passed in Criminal Case No. 420 of 1994 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kawardha convicting the applicants under Section 457, IPC and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for one year and pay fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo S.I. for twenty days and further convicting them under Section 318, IPC and sentencing them toundergo R.I. for six months and pay fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo twenty days simple imprisonment, have filed this revision petition.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 10-2-1990 one Ashok Kumar lodged a report at Police Station, Sahaspur Lohara that certain cash and two sarees were stolen from his hotel. On the information the police registered Crime No. 20...
The District Industries Association, Bilaspur Vs. State of Chhattisgar ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT4(CG)
ORDERFakhruddin, J. 1. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for quashing of the impugned tender notice dated 29-1-2001 (Annexure P-1) whereby respondent No. 2, the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation, has invited bidders for sale of various units in lieu of non-payment of outstanding loan amounts. The petitioner submits that he is the President of District Industries Association, Bilaspur, which has been formed for the welfare of various industries including those mentioned in the advertisement dated 29-1-2001 published in daily Navbharat, dated 30-1-2001. The petitioner further submits that separate Financial Corporation for the State of Chhattisgarh is likely to be reconstituted and while so reconstituting, some policy may be adopted as such it contends that auction should not take place.2. Annexure P-1 is the list of Industries to be auctioned which has been published vide advertisement dated 29-1-2001. The respondent...
Sardar Jaswant Singh Ajmani Vs. Public Service Commission and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-03-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT30(CG)
ORDERFakhruddin, J.(1) The petitioner has filed this petition styling as Public Interest Litigation. The petitioner has sought relief in para 7 to command all the records pertaining to marking in the interview conducted by the respondent No. 1 for the Civil Services 1999-2000 and to quash the result/appraisal made by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2. It is further prayed that the respondents be directed to further arrange for conducting the interview for all the successful candidates of the main examination, who were invited for the aforesaid interview under objective and impartial parameters fixed by the Court in the presence of experts to be appointed by the Court. It is further prayed in para 4 that the respondent No. 4 to constitute Public Service Commission for the State of Chhattisgarh.2. So far as constitution of Public Service Commission for the State of Chhattisgarh is concerned, Dr. N.K. Shukla, submits that Public Service Commission has been constituted.3. The petitioner submits...
Mahipal Prasad Sahu Vs. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-02-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT50(CG)
ORDERW.A. Shishak, C.J. 1. Heard.2. The order impugned is dated 12-7-2001 on the ground that the initial order of transfer issued on 9-7-2001 was to the effect that the petitioner would be posted as A.E, at Ambikapur. By the subsequent order in partial modification of the earlier order issued on 12-7-2001 the petitioner has been posted as A.E. at Pathalgaon.3. Mr. Alok Bakshi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no reason why within three days after the first order was issued on 9-7-2001 another order of transfer should have been issued by the Competent Authority. It is further submitted by Mr. Alok Bakshi that the petitioner is suffering from Pyrexia and Bleeding P/R. According to Mr. Bakshi, there are facilities at Korba for treatment of the aforesaid ailment. However, since Ambikapur is not so far from Korba, the petitioner is willing to go to Ambikapur as he was ordered to do so by the earlier order of 9-7-2001. However, it is submitted that since there is no f...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »