Chhattisgarh Court September 2004 Judgments
Praveen Kumar Lakhotia and anr. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-27-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT54(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The petitioners Praveen Kumar Lakhotia and Pradeep Kumar Lakhotia, who are partners in M/s. Aashirwaad Agency, have preferred three Writ Petition Nos. 1925/2003, 613/2001 and 47/2001 under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. By Writ Petition No. 1925/2003 the petitioners have challenged the termination order of dealership dated 2-5-2001 (Annexure P-10), by Writ Petition No. 613/2001 the petitioners have prayed for directing the respondents Corporation to restore the supply of agreed petroleum products by issuing a writ of mandamus and by Writ Petition No. 47/2001 the petitioners have prayed for quashment of the show-cause notice (Annexure P-7) and further prayed to direct the respondent Corporation to regularize the supply of petroleum products, i.e., Diesel (HSD) & Petrol (MS) etc.2. Brief facts leading to filing of these writ petitions are that by an agreement dated 1-2-1997 (Annexure P-l) the petitioners and respondents-Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. e...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip Chhabariya Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT78(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J. 1. The accused/applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.PC apprehending arrest in Crime No. 52/2004, registered at Police Station, Bhatapara for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for releasing him on anticipatory bail before arrest.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 15-3-2004 at about 1.30 p.m. when complainant Rajendra Miri, member of Municipal Council, Bhatapara was in his office, at that time accused/applicant along with 15-20 members came to his office, abused him in the name of caste, slapped him 4 to 5 times and threatened him with dire consequences. On this report, the case was registered for the above mentioned offences and the matter is still under investigation.3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. Lea...
Tag this Judgment!Dudhichappe and anr. Vs. State of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh)
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT10(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J.1. Since Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1996, Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 1996 and Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1996 filed by accused/appellants Dudhichappe and Dirdo Lakhma are arising out of the same judgment and relate to the same incident, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The accused/appellants have preferred these appeals being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 8-11-1995, passed by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial Nos. 221 of 1990, 222 of 1990 and 223 of 1990 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding accused/appellant Dudhichappe guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the murders of Sukka, Deva and Dudhi Muda and holding accused/appellant Dirdo Lakhma guilty of the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code for committing the murders of above said persons sentenced each of them in each case...
Tag this Judgment!Banshilal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT66(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J. 1. Since Criminal Appeal No. 1887 of 2000 filed by accused/appellant Banshilal and Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2001 filed by Murlimanohar are arising out of the same judgment and relate to the same incident, therefore, these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Both the accused persons are real brothers of the deceased. The accused/appellants have preferred these appeals being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30-5-2000, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir in Sessions Trial No. 456 of 1998 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding the accused/appellant Banshilal guilty of the offences under Sections 302 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Murlimanohar for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two...
Tag this Judgment!Gomukhi Sewa Dham Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Four ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT1(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision being aggrieved by the order dated 25-3-2004 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Bilaspur, in Criminal Revision No. 111/2004, whereby the learned Special Judge allowed the revision of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and reversed the order of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Katghora, passed in Criminal Case No. 225 of 2004 on 1-3-2004, directed that the cattle in question be handed over to the revisionists as they are the owners of the cattle and further directed that each of the revisionists should execute Supurdginama to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate and they were further directed that during the disposal of the criminal case without the permission of the Court they will not transfer or sale or otherwise dispose of the cattle which are 270 in number.2. Brie facts leading to filing of this criminal revision, necessary for its disposal are that on 22-12-2003 at about 1....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›