Chhattisgarh Court August 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.
Ravindra Kumar Parashar and ors. Vs. State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-12-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT35(CG)
Satish K. Agnihotri, J.1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 15th March, 2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh Election Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal rejected the application filed by the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners are liable to deposit at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- each petitioner, as Court fees.2. The facts, in nutshell, are that the election for the State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh was held on the 19th July, 2007 and the results were declared on the 16th November, 2007, electing 25 members of the State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh. The petitioners, being aggrieved by declaration of the result, filed a combined petition before the Tribunal under the provisions of Rule 31(1) and (2) of the Chhattisgarh State Bar Council Election Rules, 2006 (for short 'the Rules, 2006'). The petitioners deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as Court fees as prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 31 of the Rules, 2006 wi...
Pawan S/O Shri Shyam Lal Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT87(CG)
ORDERD.R. Deshmukh, J.1. At the request of learned Counsel for the parties, this criminal revision was heard finally at the stage of admission.2. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 23-7-2009 delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Dhamtari, District Dhamtari in Criminal Appeal No. 06/2009 whereby conviction of the applicant under Sections 279, 338 and 304-A of the IPC and the sentence of fine of Rs. 1,000/- each under Sections 279 and 338 of the IPC and RI for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- each for two offences under Section 304-A of the IPC awarded by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari in Criminal Case No. 171/2008, vide judgment dated 5-2-2009 was affirmed.3. Brief facts are that on 10-2-2008 at about 6.30 p.m., the applicant was driving jeep No. C.G. 07-T/0780 (henceforth 'the jeep'), Ashok was a passenger in the jeep. Devnarayan was riding the motorcycle No. C.G. 07-K/3907 (henceforth 'the motorcycle') with one Suresh Kumar as a p...
Atul Bagga Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-11-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)MPHT65(CG)
ORDERD.R. Deshmukh, J.1. This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 3-7-2009 passed by Smt. Mamta Shukla, the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund in Criminal Case No. 167/2009, whereby the application under Section 437 (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth 'the Code') Tiled by the petitioner was rejected.2. Brief facts arc that the petitioner, a transporter having 16 trucks was entrusted with the work of transporting food grains from various godowns of Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation under various agreements. It is alleged by the prosecution that between 19-1-2008 to 29-2-2008 after loading huge quantities of rice from the concerned godowns of Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation for delivering at destination at different remote places, the petitioner misappropriated and did not deliver rice worth Rs. 64,34,160/- loaded in 16 different trucks to their destination and produced false receipts showing that the consignments have be...
Bholaram Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-11-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4753
T.P. Sharma, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5-9-07 passed by the Sessions Judge, Durg in Sessions Trial No. 433/91 whereby and where under after holding the appellant guilty for the of-fence of gang rape convicted the appellant under Section 376(2) (g) and 450 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the Code) and sentenced rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, with fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years with fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.2. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence is challenged by the appellant on the ground that without any iota of evidence of commission of gang rape by the appellant learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant aforementioned and thereby committed an illegality.3. Prosecution case in brief - prosecutrix PW ...
Gayatri Sahu (Smt.) and ors. Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-10-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT1
ORDERRajeev Gupta, C.J.1. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Eighth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 23-3-2006, passed in Claim Case No. 9/2006.2. As against the compensation of Rs. 19,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Gopalram Sahu by filing a claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 13-5-2005, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the claimants along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.3. Shri JSP Chandrasen, learned Counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-only.4. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned Counsel for the respondent placing reliance on the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co...
J.P. Khantwal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-10-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT40(CG)
ORDERPritinker Diwaker, J.1. With the consent of the Counsel for the parties the matter is heard finally.2. Grievance of the petitioner is that he retired as Assistant Superintendent from the office of Deputy Director, District Handlooms Office, Raipur (respondent No. 3) on 28-2- 2003, after serving the department for about 37 years. After retirement the department had fixed the anticipatory pension of the petitioner as Rs. 2,511 per month. However, to the utter surprise of the petitioner even dated orders of 20-12-2006 (Annexures P-7 and P-8) were served upon him by which his pension was stopped and recovery of Rs. 4,80,667 was ordered. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 11-5-2006 (Annexure P-9) showing the details of recovery to be made from the petitioner which according to the petitioner has not been served on him.3. Main contention of the Counsel for the petitioner is that vide order 1 dated 18-4-1983 (Annexure P-3) the petitioner was granted exemption from passing...
Sudarshan Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-08-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT91(CG)
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Appellant Sudarshan @ Sudar stands convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code with sentences of imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-vide impugned judgment dated 17-5-2001, passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. 157/2000.2. The short facts of the case, essential for deciding this appeal are that Chitribai (since deceased) was living with accused Sudarshan @ Sudar as his wife for the last about three years, Chitribai used to earn by selling vegetables whereas accused Sudarshan @ Sudar was unemployed. There used to be frequent quarrels between the two in that behalf. In the above background, on the fateful day of 12-2-2000 when Chitribai came back to her house, the accused quarreled with her and assaulted her. The quarrel between them was pacified by their friends. Later in the night, accused Sudarshan @ Sudar again assaulted Chitribai; poured kerosene oil on her; and set her on fire by means of a matchstick, a...
Bhagirathi Sahu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh)
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-07-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT56(CG)
Ranganath Chandrakar, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4-2-2000 passed by the learned Special Court, Raigarh, in Special Case No. 48 of 1998, whereby the accused/appellant has been convicted under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and under Section 506(2) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for six months on each count. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20-2-1998 when the complainant was teaching the students in primary school at Village Laat, at about 11.45 a.m., the accused/appellant forcibly entered into the class room and abused the complainant by caste. On this, the complainant asked the accused/appellant to go away from the school, but he did not heed his words and sat there on a chair. The accused/appellant also threatened the comp...
Naresh Kumar Khubwani 'alias' Nandu and Anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-07-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT44(CG)
ORDERD.R. Deshmukh, J.1. This criminal revision arises out of the order dated 11-9-2008 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 76/2008, whereby charge under Sections 2(b) and 8(3) of the Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005 (henceforth 'the Adhiniyam') was framed against the petitioners. The charge reads as under:vkius fnukad 21&1&2008 dks 19-15 cts o blds iwoZ ujs'k cktkj] Fkkuk flfoy ykbZu] fcykliqj esa NRrhlx esa lfdz; fof/k fo:) uDlyh laxBu ds lfdz; uDlyh laxBu ds lfdz; uDlyh lnL;ks ds fy, feysVh jax dk diM+k fodz; dj o muds onhZ flyokdj laxBu ds izca/ku esa lg;ksx fd;k A ,sls uDlyh laxBu ds lnL;ks dks ckok nsus dh fu;r ls lg;ksx fd;k] vkSj uDlyh laxBu dks ckok nsus dh fu;r ls uDlyh lnL;ks ds fy, diM+s fodz; dj o muds fy, onhZ flyokdj uDlyh laxBu dh fof/k fo:) xfrfof/k;ksa es Hkkx fy;k ;k fdlh vU; ek/;e ls feysVh jax dk diM+s cspdj o muds fy, onhZ flyokdj laxBu ds fdz;k dyki es Hkkxhnkj cus gS] tks N-x- fo'ks'k tu lqj{kk vf/kfu;e 20...
Hira Ferro Alloys Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Aug-07-2009
Reported in: (2009)508CTR(NULL)508
ORDERDhirendra Mishra, J.1. This income-tax appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act') has been admitted on the following substantial question of law :Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, appellant/company is entitled for the benefit/deduction of Section 37 of IT Act, 1961 ?2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the appellant/company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of ferro manganese and silico manganese utilized for production of various grades of steel by the steel plants. The appellant filed return for the asst. yr. 1992-93 showing income of Rs. 13,35,910. However, assessment was made at a total income of Rs. 15,79,780. Claim of the appellant of Rs. 9,097 as expenditure incurred towards performing Puja during the financial year including expenditure of Rs. 6,181 incurred towards Vishwakarma Puja, was disallowed by the AO on the ground that the appellant being a company cannot profess any religion and therefore, perf...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »