Chhattisgarh Court December 2006 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.
Sunil Singh Alias Sonu, Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT69(CG)
Dhirendra Mishra, J.1. The above criminal appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as all these appeals arise out of the judgment dated 25-6-2001 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon in S.T. No. 132/98 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding the accused/appellants guilty under Sections 364, 365, 506-II and 395 of the Indian Penal Code, sentenced each of them to undergo RI for five years and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, RI for three years and pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, RI for three years and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- respectively and in the event of default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months for default in payment of Rs. 500/- each in the multiple, respectively. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 16-5-1998 a Bus bearing registration No. M.P. 23-J/0409 proceeded from Raipur to Nagpur at about 10.30 p.m. Apart...
Amrendu Jyoti and ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-19-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1511
ORDERDilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. The petitioners have filed an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire proceedings arising out of the first information report lodged by Madhusudan Sinha on 31-12-2005 at Police Station-Ambikapur which culminated in filing of charge-sheet before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur under Section 498A of IPC.2. Brief facts are that Kiran Sinha is the daughter of Madhusudan Sinha and Annapurna Sinha. She was married to petitioner Amrendu Jyoti on 21-4-2003 in Patna. Petitioner No. 2 Shardendu Jyoti is the elder brother of the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 3 Neelu is his wife. The petitioners reside at Delhi which is the matrimonial home of Kiran Sinha. A written report dated 10-5-2005 was lodged by Madhusudan Sinha in Police Station-Ambikapur stating that at her matrimonial home at Delhi, Kiran Sinha was treated with utmost cruelty by the petitioners and was subjected to harassment and mental torture on account of a dem...
Mohd. Akbar Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-19-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Chh39; 2007(2)MPHT1
S.R. Nayak, C.J.1-A. I have had the opportunity of reading the draft judgments prepared by Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, J. and Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. in these writ petitions. The conclusions reached by Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. with respect, are not acceptable to me. I agree with Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, J.2. In the result, I dismiss all the writ petitions with no order as to costs. The registrar of Co-operative Societies, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur is directed to hold elections to the Co-operative Societies concerned within a period of six months from today as directed by Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, J. in his order.Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, J.3. I have had an opportunity to read the draft order prepared by my learned Brother Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. Having perused the same with due consideration, I regret my inability to agree with the opinion of Deshmukh, J. Hence, this separate opinion of mine.4. Constitutional validity of the Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act...
Pilloo Singh Rajput Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-15-2006
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT18(CG)
ORDERD.R. Deshmukh, J.1. Heard.2. This is a repeat application for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The first bail application was dismissed on 18-9-2006 in M.Cr.C. No. 2558 of 2006 since withdrawn by the applicant.3. Brief facts are that in Crime No. 166 of 2006 of Police Station Manendragrarh for offence punishable under Sections 302 and 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the applicant herein was arrested on 27-7-2006. He was produced before the Magistrate on 28-7-2006. Before the filing of challan at 02.45 p.m. on 26-10-2006 the accused had exercised the indefeasible right under the Proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 167, Cr.P.C. for being released on bail at 11.25 a.m. Challan was filed at 2.45 p.m. on the same day. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manendragarh, rejected the application filed by the accused under Sub-section ...
Ajit P.K. Jogi Vs. National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Schedu ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-15-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Chh90
S.R. Nayak, C.J.1.This writ petition preferred under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the proceedings of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the first respondent herein registered in file No. 2/FCS 2/2001-SSW-l and the 'findings' contained in the report dated 16-10-2001. The petitioner has sought for quashing of the impugned proceedings by writ of certiorari and also prayed for a writ of mandamus to declare the findings contained in the report dated 16-10-2001 as void and inoperative. In addition, the petitioner has sought for a direction restraining the respondents from conducting any proceeding or taking any action pursuant to the complaint filed by the sixth respondent herein or the impugned findings of the first respondent-Commission.2. The facts of the case leading to filing of this writ petition may be noted in the first instance and they, as stated by the petitioner himself, in brief, are as follows:The petitioner b...
Madan Lal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-11-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)MPHT42(CG)
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentenced awarded to the appellant in Sessions Trial No. 389/2001 on 13-2-2002 by the Special Judge, under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Bastar at Jagdalpur, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 376(1), IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Special Act') and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 1 1/2 years and RI for 3 years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for six months, respectively.2. The case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix Ku. Javendri @ Pushpa, a girl aged about 15 years, was subjected to sexual intercourse by this appellant for many times saying that he would marry her. As a resul...
Sanjay Kumar Shrivastava Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)MPHT81
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the order dated 6-10-2003 (Annexure P-17), whereby the representation of the petitioner for regularisation of his service on the post of Sub-Engineer in the Public Works Department has been rejected by respondent No. 2 - Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, Raipur. The petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order dated 6-10-2003 (Annexure P-17) and absorption and regularisation of his services on the post of Sub-Engineer in the Public Works Department from the date of his initial appointment or with effect from the date his juniors have been regularised, with all consequential benefits.2. The indisputable facts in brief are that the petitioner was serving in the Public Works Department as daily wager Sub-Engineer. He was initially appointed and posted at Jashpur by order dated 2-5-1990, but later on, by order dated 21-5-1990 (Annexure P-1), the appointm...
Ghanshyam Yadav Vs. Rameshwar Sahu and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-05-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)MPHT86
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. The respondent No. 1 was elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Chhind, Tehsil Saragarh, District Raigarh in the election held on 15-1-2005. The no confidence motion was brought against the respondent No. 1 after issuance of notice on 31-3-2006. The Prescribed Authority, i.e., Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Sarangarh, while issuing notice, directed Shri K.S. Mandavi, the then Tehsildar, Sarangarh to preside over the meeting of no confidence motion, which was to be held on 13-4-2006 at 12 o'clock.2. In the meantime, Shri K.S. Mandavi was transferred from Sarangarh and one Shri Sameer Nag joined the office of the Tehsildar, Sarangarh on 4-4-2006. By virtue of the order dated 31-3-2006, whereby Shri Mandavi, the then Tehsildar was authorized to hold the meeting, Shri Nag presided over the meeting of no confidence motion on 13-4-2006.3. The no confidence motion against Sarpanch/respondent No. 1 was carried out by 16 votes out of 21 Panchas of the said G...
Bhikamlal Devangan Vs. Bank of Maharashtra
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-05-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)MPHT60
V.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Third Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Durg, vide judgment and decree dated 27-7-1994 passed in Civil Suit No 87-A/94 disallowed the recovery of possession of ground floor of suit house, damages, means profit and profit of arrears of rent.2. Facts of the case, in brief, as unfolded before the Lower Court, is that pLalntiff is the owner of House No. 46, Sanichari Bazar, Durg (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit house'), respondent hired the suit house on rent on 11-4-1979. The ground floor was let out for Banking business and a portion of first floor was let out for residence of Bank Manager. Initially the rent was Rs. 1,020/- per month and the same was enhanced from March, 1982 at a rate of Rs. 1,275/-. Appellant made a request to the Bank for enhancement of rent and the Bank vide letter dated 3-9-1985 proposed to pay rent at a rate of Rs. 3,357 : 50 on additional conditions. Appellant accepted the proposal with some modification, but respondent ...
JaIn Traders, Partner Vs. Shailesh Singhaniya
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-05-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)MPHT68
V.K. Shrivastava, J.1. This is an appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated 17-8-1999 passed by VII Additional District Judge, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. 61-B/95, whereby decreeing the suit for recovery of Rs. 17,252/- along with interest in favour of pLalntiff/respondent.2. Facts in brief as unfolded before the Lower Court are that the pLalntiff/respondent filed a suit against the defendant/appellant for recovery of Rs. 17,252/- averring that he is consigning and forwarding agent of Birla Tyres with whom defendant/appellant who is dealer of Birla Tyres purchased tyres vide Invoice Nos. 575,581 and 582 total costing Rs. 1,82,550/-. Consignment was sent to him on 8-9-1993 and the goods were received by defendant/appellant on 10-9-1993. According to sale agreement defendant/appellant was required to make payment within sixty days, but he did not pay the same within stipulated period, therefore, the security deposit of Rs. 50,000/-, credit note in his favour for Rs. 29,359/- an...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »