Chhattisgarh Court December 2012 Judgments
Darbar Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
1. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 5-8-2004 passed by 9th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No.459/2003. By the impugned judgment, appellant Darbar Singh has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner with a direction to run the sentences concurrently and co-accused Smt. Jamunabai and Manohar have been acquitted of the charges framed against them:ConvictionSentenceUnder Section 498-A IPCRigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.300/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergoUnder Section 306 IPCrigorous imprisonment for 1 month.Rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.700/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under : Appellant Darbar Singh is husband, acquitted accused Jamunabai is mother-in-law and Manohar is jeth (brother-in-law) of deceased Indirabai. Marriage of deceased Indirabai was solemnized with t...
Tag this Judgment!Jhaduram Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-11-2012
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 22-7-2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur in Sessions Trial No.58/2009 convicting the accused/appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 450 and 376, IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for five years with fine of Rs.500 u/s. 450 and RI for seven years with fine of Rs.500/- u/s. 376, IPC, plus default stipulations. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 1-3-2009, FIR (Ex. P-13) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-1) a mentally challenged woman aged about 25 years alleging that on 28-2-2009 when she was all alone in her house, at about 2 p.m. accused/appellant who was her neighbor gained an entry thereto, threw her on the cot and after removing her underwear committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. It is also alleged that when she tried to raise alarm, the accused/appellant gagged her mouth. On hearing her cries, grandmother and sister of the prosecutrix came there and on see...
Tag this Judgment!Manbodh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-11-2012
1. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 4-8-2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Surguja (Ambikapur), in Sessions Trial No.153/2004. By the impugned judgment, accused/appellant Manbodh has been convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: Prosecutrix (PW-4) was, on the date of incident, a 28 years' old married woman. On 5-3-2004, she had gone to forest to collect wood (bushes) along with her friend Ratiyano (PW-2). At about 3:00 p.m., when she was collecting the wood, the appellant came there, caught the prosecutrix (PW-4), gagged her mouth by his Gamchha dragged her into a pit, threw her on the ground and committed sexual intercourse with her against her will. The appellant threatened the prosecutrix (PW-4) of life. After committing sexual intercourse, t...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanu Pratap Singh Thakur Vs. the State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-06-2012
HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL No 120 of 2002 Bhanu Pratap Singh Thakur ...Petitioners VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh ...Respondents ! Shri Sunil Sahu Advocate for the appellant ^ Shri Ajit Singh Panel Lawyer for the respondent CORAM: Honble Mr G Minhajuddin J Dated:06. 12/2012 : Judgement JUDGMENT (Passed on 06th day of March, 2012) CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 2) OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.11.2001 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 195/2001, convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under section 363, 366 and 376(1) of IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment of 4 years, 5 years and 7 years respectively and in addition, fine of Rs. 500/-, 500/- and Rs. 1000/- respectively. In default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 1 month, 1 month and 2 months respectively.2. The facts, in brief,...
Tag this Judgment!Manoj Kumar Mishra Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-06-2012
1. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 24-2-2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, District Koriya in Sessions Trial No. 318/2011 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 months. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: On 14-5-2001, at about 10:00 p.m., appellant Manoj Kumar Mishra was selling liquor near Shiv Temple at Chirmiri. Injured Munnalal (PW-2), Iliyas (PW-3), Dinu Dewangan (PW-4) and one Sudhir Sharma went to the appellant and forbade the appellant from selling the liquor. The appellant started abusing Munnalal (PW-2) in filthy language, went inside his house, brought farsa and assaulted Munnalal (PW-2) with it. The appellant gave farsa blow on head, right shoulder, left hand and right hand of Munnalal (PW-2). Iliyas (PW-3), Dinu ...
Tag this Judgment!S K Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION S No 4975 of 2012 S K Soni ...Petitioners VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Others ...Respondents ! Shri Awadh Tripathi Advocate for the petitioner ^ Shri Sushil Dubey Government Advocate for the State respondents CORAM: Honble Shri Satish K Agnihotri J Dated:03. 12/2012 : Judgement ORDER (Passed on 03rd day of December, 2012) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1 With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finally.2. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 30.07.2012 (Annexure P/2) so far it relates to the petitioner, whereby, the petitioner, working as Sub Engineer, Water Resources Department, Sub Division No. 7, Section 4, Baloda Bazar, was transferred to Water Resources Department, Keshkal, Kondagaon, on administrative grounds. The petitioner further challenges the decision of the respondent No. (Annexure P/1) dated nil, whereby his representation for cancellation ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›