Chhattisgarh Court April 2009 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.
Sant Kumar Vs. Neera Bai and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-30-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT86(CG)
ORDERT.P. Sharma, J.1. By this petition for invoking inherent jurisdiction, the applicant has challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 1 -10-2001 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar in Criminal Revision No. 280/2001, affirming the order dated 11-5-2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baloda Bazaar in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 107/95, whereby both the Courts below have awarded maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') to non-applicant No. 3 Pappu.2. The order is challenged on the ground that Pappu is neither legitimate child nor illegitimate child of the applicant and has begotten & born after non-applicant No. 1 left the matrimonial house, i.e., the residence of the applicant and there was no occasion of physical relation between the applicant & non-applicant No. 1.3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties, perused the petition and the orders impugned.4. Vide order dated 11-5...
Akhilesh Swaroop Sharma Vs. Rashmi Akhilesh Sharma
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-28-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Chh51
Rangnath Chandrakar, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 30-3-2006 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (CG) in Civil Suit No. 519-A/2005, whereby the application filed by the respondent/wife under Section 13(1)(1a) & (1b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act, 1955) for grant of dissolution of marriage between the respondent/wife and the appellant/husband, was allowed.2. The facts of the case, in brief, as unfolded before the Family Court are that even before marriage appellant/defendant and the respondent/plaintiff were residing in the same locality at Bhilai and they knew each other. The respondent/wife herein was a student of a college at Nagpur. The appellant/defendant Akhilesh Swaroop Sharma came into contact with the respondent/plaintiff and later they fell in love with each other. However, in the year 1999 respondent/plaintiff was admitted in a college at Nagpur for studying the Computer Management. In the month of Novemb...
U.K. Kesharwani Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-28-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT77(CG)
ORDERSunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 9-1-2007 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3874/2005, which reads as follows:Shri R.K. Kesharwani, Counsel for the petitioner.Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. A.G. with Ms. Sunita Jain, P.L. for the State.The cause of action in the present case arose on 30-5-2000 (A-l), when the impugned order (A-l) was served on the petitioner. The petitioner, at the relevant point of time, was working as Superintending Engineer in the Office of Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bhopal. The order was also issued from Bhopal. Thus, the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this petition under the provision of Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, Registry is directed to transfer the case to High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur.2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:In the year 2000, the appellant/petitioner was working as a Superintending Engineer in the Water Resourc...
Chintamani Shukla Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-28-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)MPHT75(CG)
ORDERT.P. Sharma, J.1. Heard on admission.2. This is a petition for quashment of the order dated 12-2-2009 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar in Criminal Revision affirming the order dated 13-3-2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baloda Bazar in Criminal Case No. 629/04 whereby prayer for discharge was rejected.3. Order is challenged on the ground that without any prima facie material for taking cognizance Court below has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420/34, 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Court below has also taken cognizance without sanction as required under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').4. Learned Counsel for the parties arc heard.5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was working as Sub Divisional Officer and was not removable from the post by or without sanction of the Slate Government. According to the prosecution al...
Sheo Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3165; 2009(3)MPHT50(CG)
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 9-4-2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Balod, District Durg (CG) in Sessions Trial No. 394/2001, where by the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently:Conviction Sentenceunder Section 302, IPC Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine tofurther undergo RI for 3 months.under Section 376, IPC RI for 10 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-,in default of payment of fine to furtherundergo RI for 3 months.under Section 363, IPC RI for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, indefault of payment of fine to furtherundergo RI for 3 months.under Section 201, IPC RI for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, indefault of payment of fine to furtherundergo RI for 3 months.2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:On 23-7-2001, Musnu Ram Dhimar (P.W. 2) saw that the dead body of a minor girl, aged about 12 years, was ...
Ganesh Prasad Verma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-22-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT58(CG)
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 26-3-2009 (Annexure P-1) whereby the petitioner has been placed under suspension on the ground that he has hurled filthy language before the Block Education Officer, Simga, in inebriated condition.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly challenges the impugned order of suspension and issue of charge-sheet together on the ground that the petitioner was on deputation and, as such, the parent department cannot place the petitioner on suspension and thereafter at the time of suspension the petitioner cannot be attached to any other place except where he was working.3. Rule 9 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short 'the Rules, 1966') provides for suspensions. Rule 9 (1) of the Rules, 1966 clearly provides as under:9. (1) The Appointing Authority or any authority to which it is subordinate or the Disciplinary Authority or any other authority em...
Khilawan Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT32(CG)
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. Appellant Khilawan Kumar stands convicted under Sections 302 and 201, IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and RI for 3 years; with fine of Rs. 1000/- and Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for 6 months and RI for 3 months respectively by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Balod, District Durg (C.G.) in S.T. No. 395/2001 on 1-5-2002.2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:Deceased Jagautin Bai was the aunt of the appellant. She remained unmarried. She was residing in two separate rooms given to her by the father namely Ramnath (P. W. 2). She was also given 1.5 acres of land for her livelihood. Jagautin Bai was claiming 3.5 acres of land more. To claim her rights, she had locked three more rooms in the house. On 13-8-2001 she was asked by the appellant to open the lock of the room, on which, some quarrel took place between the appellant and Jagautin Bai. The allegations are that in the night at about 2 a.m., when Jagautin Bai ...
Bulu Maitra (Smt.) and ors. Vs. Udairam Verma and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-20-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)MPHT86(CG)
ORDERN.K. Agarwal, J.1. Learned Counsel for the appellants is heard on admission.2. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants/claimants, seeking enhancement of the compensation, awarded by the VIIth Additional Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'Tribunal') vide award dated 28-2-2008, passed in Claim Case No. 69/2007.3. The claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of the deceased Hemendra Kumar Maitra, preferred an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act, 1988') claiming compensation of Rs. 24,50,000/- (Twenty four lakh and fifty thousands) for his death in the motor accident which was occurred on 26-12-2005 arising out of the collision between Indica Car bearing registration No. CG 04 ZD/3540 and Truck bearing registration No. CG 04 J/0220. The deceased Hemendra Kumar Maitra, being the occupant of Indica Car, succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said accident.4. The claimants in their claim petition pleaded that decea...
Kiran Netam (Smt.) and ors. Vs. Netram Sahu and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT30(CG)
ORDERRajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Learned Counsel for the appellants is heard on admission.2. The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, District Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 31-1-2009, passed in Claim Case No. 25/2008.3. As against the compensation of Rs. 13,85,000/- claimed by the claimants, unfortunate widow, mother and minor children of deceased Jeevan Netam by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 7-3-2008 when his motorcycle was dashed by the offending vehicle Truok/Dumper bearing Registration No. CG07ZC/1301, resulting in his instantaneous death on the spot itself, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,19,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.4. Shri Indra Sen Sahu, learned Counsel for the appellants vehemently argued th...
Dr. Rajesh Kumar Bakshi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Apr-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT45(CG)
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. The brief facts, in nutshell, are that the petitioner was working as Medical Officer in the office of the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Kawardha. A charge-sheet was filed against him and two others for commission of the offence under the provisions of Section 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Consequently, the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 17-7-2002 (Annexure P-1). After trial, by judgment dated 30-6-2006, passed in Special Case No. 01/2002, the petitioner was acquitted from the charges. After acquittal in the above criminal case, the petitioner submitted the application for joining on 4-10-2006 (Annexure P-3) which was forwarded to the Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare, Raipur, C.G. by letter dated 7-10-2006 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner also made various representations but his suspension was not revoked.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that t...