Delhi Court May 2005 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2005 Page 2 of about 292 results (0.021 seconds)Dr. Madhu JaIn Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 121(2005)DLT282
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The grievance which the Petitioner has ventilated in this writ petition is against the Office Order dated 9.11.2004 whereby Dr. J.N. Banvalikar has been 'assigned the charge of post of Director (Hospital Administration) in his own pay scale without any extra remuneration, in addition to his duties till further orders'. This is consequent upon the superannuation of Dr. Sudhakar Patnaik. The Petitioner's contention is that in the final Seniority List of Specialists Grade-I effective from 27.12.199 while Dr. S. Patnaik was placed at Seriall No. 5 she was next at Seriall No.6. In that List Dr. (Mrs.) Madhur Kudesia is at Seriall No.10. It is further submitted that in the past she has often been assigned the charge of Director (Hospital Administration whenever the exigencies of service so demanded.2. It appears that a dispute pertaining to Seniority in the said Department had been raised by Dr. Madhur Kudesia, Medical Superintendent (Hospital Administration). This is cl...
Tag this Judgment!Jwala Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 120(2005)DLT382; [2005(106)FLR399]
Rekha Sharma, J.1. Kabir, the Indian sage, has put a teacher on a pedestal higher than the Creator for it is through the teacher that one reaches Him. Sadly, however, here is a sordid tale of a school teacher who outraged the modesty of his own student.2. The petitioner Shri Jwala Singh was posted as a teacher at Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya (JNV), District, Rajouri, J and K. On November 6, 2000, he escorted 13 students , i.e. 10 boys and three girls to Bringkhera School in District Muktsar, Punjab. One of the girls was Kumari Rabina Kausur, a student of 9th class.3. It was reported by the Deputy Director Education, Regional office Chandigarh, that a complaint had been received under the signatures of one Mohd. Bashir, father of said Rabina Kausur, to the effect, that the petitioner had caught hold of the hands of Rabina Kausur and had outraged her modesty while escorting the students from JNV Rajouri to JNV Muktsar, Punjab. On this complaint, a preliminary inquiry was got conducted from...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Hawa Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 120(2005)DLT361; [2005(106)FLR406]
Rekha Sharma, J.1. Shri Hawa Singh was a peon in the office of the Director General of Indian Council of Medical Research, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi. On 7/18th December, 1989 he was issued a charge-sheet containg five articles of charge.2. The sum and substance of the charges are as under :-(i) The petitioner absented himself from duty without prior permission from 25th July, 1989 to 28th August, 1989. The reason of his unauthorised absence became known on receipt of a complaint on 20th September, 1989 from Shri Mehar Chand Sharma SAO-II with whom he was posted. The said Mehar Chand Sharma alleged that on 28th July, 1989, the petitioner had kidnapped his widowed sister Smt. Pinki Sharma and her minor son. The petitioner, on the other hand, with a view to get his unauthorised absence regularised submitted an application for grant of 35 days E.L., on the ground, that he had some important piece of work at home. The petitioner however was issued a memo on 6th September, 1989 asking him to e...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhir Aggarwal and anr. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 121(2005)DLT254; 2005(82)DRJ624
Anil Kumar, J.1. This common order will dispose of the three applications Nos. 1544, 1547 and 1624 of 2004 filed by appellants Sh. Sudhir Aggarwal, Sh. Sunil Jain, Sh. Madan Mohan Aggarwal and Alok Aggarwal in their appeals for suspension of sentence during the pendency of their appeals. All the applicants (appellants) are related to each other and have been convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 27th September, 2004 for offences under Section 498A/304-B IPC read with Section 34 of IPC to life imprisonment and a fie of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default to a further rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. It all started with the suicide committed by 23 year old commerce graduate Anjali at the residence of her father just one day after the marriage with applicant Alok Aggarwal on 5th November, 1995. An FIR No. 256/1995 was lodged by the bride's father on 6.11.1995 leading to prosecution of applicants under Section 498A/304B read with Section 34 IPC. In this it was inter-alia allege...
Tag this Judgment!Srichand P. Hinduja Vs. State Through C.B.i.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 121(2005)DLT1; 2005(82)DRJ494
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of Crl. M.A. 169/2005 and 170/2005 in Crl. Rev. 271/2004, Crl. M.A. 171/2005 and 172/2005 in Crl. Rev. 272/2004, Crl. M.A. 173/2005 and 174/2005 in Crl.Rev. 273/2004, preferred by Mr. Srichand P. Hinduja, Mr. Prakash P. Hinduja and Mr. Gopichand P. Hinduja (for short collectively called 'Hinduja Brothers') and Crl. M.C. 763/2005, filed by M/s Krtongen Kemi Och Forvaltning AB (for short 'the Bofors Company') for intervention. The aforesaid matters have been specially directed and planed before me for adjudication by order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.2. I do not propose to give a detailed history of this case, but, brief facts of the case, as put by the Hinduja Brothers, are that pursuant to an FIR registered on 22.1.1990, a long and tortious investigation was undertaken which ultimately resulted in filing of a charge-sheet dated 22.10.1999. In this charge-sheet, the Hinduja Brothers were not cited as accused although the Bofors Company was m...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Laxmi Vs. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 121(2005)DLT497
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. In this case, the petitioner had been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by an order dated 23.02.2005. Upon going through that order, it appears that one of the circumstances under which the petitioner had been directed to be released on bail was that the petitioner was considered to be of 75 years of age. This would be clear from the operative portion of the order dated 23.02.2005 which reads as under:-'Considering all the circumstances though the offence is very serious, I direct the applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties in the like amount as she is a lady of the age of 75 years under Section 437 Cr.P.C.'2. Thereafter an application under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail was moved on behalf of the State. The application was moved for cancellation of bail on two grounds. Firstly, it was alleged that the age of the petitioner was not 75 years and that the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Lokesh Kumar Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 121(2005)DLT393
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This is the second bail application moved before this court by the present petitioner. The earlier bail application was disposed of by an order dated 16.03.2004 This court had directed the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within six months from the next date of hearing. It was also indicated in the said order that in case the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this court for appropriate relief.2. When the order dated 16.03.2004 had been passed by this court, the prosecution had examined 7 out of 26 witnesses. The learned counsel for the petitioner now informs this court that a further 7 witnesses have been examined during this entire period of over a year and till date only 14 out of 26 witnesses have been examined. He further submits that given this pace of the trial, it is not likely that the trial could be concluded in the near future despite the direction given by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri S.K. Rahi Vs. Bureau of Indian Standards (Bis)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 121(2005)DLT187
Vikramajit Sen, J. 1. In this batch of Petitions it has been prayed that appropriate writs/orders may issue to the Respondent directing them to promote the Petitioners to the post of Scientist-D (Joint Director) in the pay-scale of Rs.12,000-375-16,500/- from the date the same became due after the Petitioners had rendered 5 years of service in the post of Scientist-D in accordance with the Flexible Complementing Scheme (hereinafter referred to as `the FCS') on that date, being Department of Science and Technology's O.M.No.A.42014/2/86-Admn.1(A) dated 28.5.1986.2. Regulation 9 of Bureau of Indian Standards (Recruitment to Scientific Cadre) Regulation, 1988, which has been relied upon by the Petitioner read thus:'9. Promotion to the Posts up to System Scientist-E [Director (selection Grade)] ' (1) The selection for promotions shall be made from amongst the scientific cadre officers serving in the next lower grade by the standing staff committee of Selection Committee `A' as the case may ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri V.S. Murthy Vs. the State (C.B.i.)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2005(83)DRJ535
Manju Goel, J.1. These are three revision petitions arising out of the same impugned orders dated 7.5.1999 & 11.8.1999 whereby the three petitioners were charged under various sections of Indian Penal Code (in short `IPC') and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The story of the prosecution is as under:2. The accused No. 4, V.S. Murthy (petitioner in Crl.Rev. No. 432/99) at the relevant time was the Director (Finance), Bharat Dynamics Limited (in short `BDL') and was the Chairman of the Investment Committee of the BDL. During February and March, 1994, the BDL, Hyderabad had surplus funds to the extent of Rs. 100 crores which could be invested. This was disclosed by A-4 to Dr. R.S.A. Dhani (A-5), petitioner in Crl. Revision Petition No. 434/99), who in turn conveyed the same to accused Mohan Gupta (A-6), petitioner in Crl. Revision Petition No. 52/2000, who was a finance broker. Around that time, John Daniel (A-3), a NRI from Kuwait was in New Delhi and was contemplating to start an air t...
Tag this Judgment!Court on Its Own Motion Vs. Mr. Harish Abrol, Municipal Councilor
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3517
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. I have had the benefit of going through the judgment of my learned Brother, Manmohan Sarin, J, and concur with him on the question of maintaining the dignity of court. I also hold that it is imperative and essential to keep the administration of justice pure, underfeed and its course not hindered or obstructed in any manner. However, in the present case I find it difficult to hold Shri Harish Abrol guilty of having committed contempt. I feel that the affidavit of unconditional apology filed by him ought to be accepted as a genuine apology intended as an expression of regret and penitence.2. It is not essential for me to narrate the allegations and counter-allegations. Suffice it to say that from the affidavit filed by Shri Harish Abrol it appears that on 16.7.2003 at around 10.30 a.m., Shri Abrol, being an elected Councilor and Chairman of S.P. Zone, was on his daily round when he saw 100 or 150 people standing on the road. The Special Magistrate was holding mobile cou...
Tag this Judgment!