Gujarat Court June 1996 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.
Mayaben Arjunsinh Vasadia Vs. Arjunsinh Dhirajsinh Vasadia and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-18-1996
Reported in: (1996)3GLR35
D.G. Karia, J.1. Rule2. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties and the learned Addl. Government Pleader in charge of the matter and in facts of the case when the Criminal Appeals No. 20 and 21 of 1995 have been ordered to be stayed, both these matters are heard finally. Both the said matters arise from the following facts and circumstances and as such shall be disposed of by this common judgment.3. The petitioner. Mayaben Arjunsinh Vasadia, is the original complainant who filed Criminal Case No. 2303 of 1986 against respondents No. 1 to 3 for the offences under Sections 420, 120B. 498A. 500, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baroda. The petitioner-complainant was lawfully married to respondent No. 1 on April 25, 1985 according to the Hindu rites and rituals at Baroda. The respondent No. 1 had taken dowry from the petitioner and her father, as detailed in Para 4 of the complaint. It is alleged that the respo...
Dahyabhai Khushalbhai Ahir and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-18-1996
Reported in: (1996)3GLR845
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Dahyabhai Khushabhai Ahir and five others, by this appeal has brought under challenge the impugned judgment and order dated 13-12-1993 rendered in Special Atrocities Case No. 9 of 1993 by the learned Sessions Judge, Bharuch, wherein on their coming to be tried for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 343, 147, 148, 149 of I.P.C. read with offences punishable under Sections 3(l)(x) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1985; and under Sec 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 were at the end of the trial ordered to be convicted for the same and sentenced to R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default, to undergo R.I. for two years and various other periods of R.I. and fine for other offences, as stated in detail in the impugned judgment and order.2. To briefly narrate the prosecution case, the incident in question wherein Dahyabhai Laxmanbhai was done to death at the hands of the appellant...
Nirish Sureshkumar Shah Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-17-1996
Reported in: (1996)3GLR438
S.D. Shah, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raises an interesting question of interpretation of Rules 17 and 18 of the Rules for Admission which are framed by the respondent No. 3 for controlling and governing the admission to 1st Year M.B.B.S. Course which is run and conducted by Smt. N.H.L. Municipal College, Ahmedabad. There is one another Medical College being Government College which is also imparting education and running M.B.B.S. Course at B.J. Medical College, Ahmedabad. These colleges are affiliated to the 4th respondent-Gujarat University duly established and incorporated under the provisions of Gujarat University Act. The B.J. Medical College has also framed its Rules for Admission to 1st Year M.B.B.S. Course. Rule 5.2 of the said Rules is, though not in pari materia to Rule 18 of the Rules of respondent No. 3, it closely resembles to or is broadly comparable with the said Rule.2. It is unfortunate, but is required to be noted at the outset t...
Harivallabh Parikh Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-17-1996
Reported in: (1997)1GLR638
N.N. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner-Harivallabh Parikh, apprehending the arrest in Cr.R. No. I-110 of 1996 at Chhota Udaipur police station for offences under Sections 376, 114 of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(XII) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has approached this Court by way of Special Criminal Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking direction not to arrest him. The say of the petitioner is that he is a well-known social worker and has rendered services to the tribal people for five decades. It is stated that he established the Anand Niketan Ashram, at Rangpur in Baroda district in the year 1948 and its activities covers 3,296 villages spread in 20,000 kms. having a population of approximately 25 lakhs. The Institution imparts vocational education in several disciplines for the upliftment of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other down-trodden people. The petitioner says that National Citizenship Award was pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›