Chhattisgarh Court January 2007 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.
Atami Laxman Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-09-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1036
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23-2-2001 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. 128/2000 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The allegations are that at about 9 p.m. on 1-2-2000, the appellant committed murder of deceased Atami Bachnu, a boy aged about 5 year. The deceased was son of Atami Sonaru (P. W. 1) and the accused/ appellant is son of uncle of Atami Sonaru. Atami Sonaru (P. W. 1) was having two sons. The deceased was his elder son. On the contrary, the accused was having no male issue as he was having four daughters. The case of the prosecution is that the accused/ appellant was having suspicion that his cousin brother i.e., Atami Sonaru (P. W. 1), has done some witchcraft against him, due to which, he is not getting any male child. Just one day prior to the date of incident i.e. on 31-1...
Sheetal Das Mahant Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-08-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)MPHT77(CG)
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 27-12-1997 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur and the order dated 1-4-2002 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Director General of Police, Raipur.2. The petitioner was posted as Assistant Sub Inspector at Police Station Shakti Hall, Seepat. The petitioner was issued a show-cause notice with charge-sheet on 30-11-1997 (Annexure P-3) as under:1 iwoZ esa Li'V funsZ'k nsus ds ckotwn e`frdk Ik{k dh vuqifLFkfr esa 'ko iapukek dj foHkkxh; funsZ'kksa dh vogsyuk djukA2 exZ baVhes'ku ds p'enhn xokgksa }kjk ?kVuk ns[kus ls bsdkj djus rFkk exZ baVhes'ku ,oa iksLVekVZe esa fHkUurk gksus ds o vijk/k ?kfVr gksu dh Li'V rf; gksus ds ckn Hkh fu;ekuqlkj vijk/k iath;u u dj vius drZO;foeq[krk dk ifjp; nsrs gq, vkjksfi;ksa dks ykHk igqapkus dk iz;klA3 mDr d`R; dj viuh vkpj.k dks lafnX/krk dh ifjf/k esa ykdj turk esa iqfyl dk;Zokgh ds izfr xyr /kkj.kk fu:fir gksus dk volj nsu...
Managing Director, Bharat Aluminium Company Limited (Balco) Vs. Contro ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-08-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)MPHT1(CG)
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the impugned order dated 4-3-2006 (P-7) passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1972').2. The indisputable facts of the case are that the respondent No. 2 is an employee of the petitioner-Company. According to the petitioner, respondent No. 2 was upgraded to the post of Assistant Technical Officer vide order dated 15th July, 2003 (P-l). By the notice dated 15th November, 2005 (P-2), the petitioner was intimated that he would attain the age of superannuation, i.e., 58 years on 31st January, 2006. The respondent No. 2/employee thereafter moved on application on 7-1-2006 (P-3) for grant of gratuity.3. The respondent No. 2/employee further filed a writ petition on 30-1-2006, being W.P. No. 513 of 2006, in this Court seeking a relief to quash the notice/order dated 15-11-200...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›