Chhattisgarh Court April 2004 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.
P. Venkataramana Murthy and ors. Vs. Smt. P. Kavita Murthy
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-30-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT18(CG)
ORDERFakhruddin, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.PC has been filed by the applicants for quashing the complaint registered by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur for an offence punishable under Section 406 of IPC.2. Briefly stated the facts are that the applicant No. 1 and the respondent were married on 3-11-1995 according to Hindu Rites and Customs. They lived together but it is on 3-12-1997 the respondent was sent to her maternal home on the pretext that her husband is going to Nagpur and thereafter she received the notice. The respondent's case is that she had also reported the matter under Section 498A of IPC against the accused persons. It is stated that when the report was lodged, the list was submitted to the Police Station, Panchnama was prepared, some articles were given, whose list is there, and other articles were not given and have been misappropriated, which are her stridhan. It is further stated that she served a notice on 30-5-1998 and on 1-8-1998 a comp...
Poonaram Nagpure Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT63(CG)
ORDERFakhruddin, J.1. Heard finally.2. Counsel for the applicant has filed this petition on the ground that while directing handing over the vehicle on Supurdnama, learned Collector, Durg in Case No. 2/2004, dated 8- 3-2004, has directed to furnish hank guarantee of Rs. 2,50,000A.3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the conditions imposed for return of vehicle is onerous. It is also submitted that the direction to furnish the bank guarantee of Rs. 2,50,000/- is not at all justified. So far as handing over the vehicle on Supurdnama is concerned reliance has been placed on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujrat, reported in 2002 AIR SCW 5301, decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of Baligera Bheemudu v. State of Andhra Pradesh, reported in 1993 (4) Crimes 1074 and further reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in case of Vishal Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in 2003(2) M.P.H.T...
Santosh Vishwakarma and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattis ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT57(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The accused/applicants have preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.PC being aggrieved by the order dated 16-5-1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 454/1994, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge after hearing the Advocate for the accused persons and the Additional Public Prosecutor and after perusal of the record reached the conclusion that prima facie offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC was made out against the accused persons and accordingly, he framed the charge for the said offence against the accused/applicants.2. Brief facts relevant for the disposal of this criminal revision are that on 5-12-1994 at about 7.30 in the evening, Kartikram Dhruv lodged a missing report of his son Anand Kumar Dhruv at the Police Station, Sarkanda, which was registered at Serial No. 5/94 and on 6-12-1994 a railway gang man lodged a report at the Police Station, Civi...
Amit Kumar Singh Vs. Union Bank of India and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT48(CG)
ORDERFakhruddin, J.1. Heard.The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the orders passed by respondent No. 3, the Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur, on 28-8-2003 and 15-10-2003 in O.A. Ex. No. 131/2000, rejecting the objection and ordering sale of the house.2. Counsel for the petitioner contends that on 15-5-2003, the petitioner filed a written objection before respondent No. 3/Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal in O.A. Ex. No. 131/2000 (Union Bank of India v. Raipur Luggage Pvt. Ltd.). On 28-8-2003, the objection was rejected without assigning any legal reason. Again on 15-10-2003, respondent No. 3 directed the said House to be sold by public auction for recovery of the said debts. On 10-12-03, an auction notice was published in Hindi daily, i.e., Dainik Bhaskar, Raipur. On 8-1-2004, another notice was published in Nav Bharat, Raipur and the same were resisted and rebutted by the petit...
Rajendra Alias Gudua Kashyap Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-16-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT43(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J. 1. The accused/appellant has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the judgment dated 3rd January, 2002 passed by the Special Judge, Ambikapur in Sessions Trial No. 8/2001 whereby learned Special Judge after holding the accused/appellant guilty for commission of the offence under Section 8 read with Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act, 1985'), sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lac) and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.2. The briefly stated prosecution case necessary for the disposal of this criminal appeal are that on 20-4-2001 at about 9.45 a.m. Sub Inspector (Probationary) Dhiraj Markam, posted at Police Station, Ambikapur received a credible information that one Rajendra alias Guduva, resident of Bramhapara is selling brown suga...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›