Gujarat Court May 2007 Judgments
Pragnesh Hariprasad Parikh Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-14-2007
Reported in: (2007)3GLR2716
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Pragnesh Hariprasad Parikh, applicant, original accused No. 2, has filed this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') with a prayer that this Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 30-4-2007 passed by the City Sessions Court in Revision Application No. 176 of 2007. By the impugned judgment the learned Sessions Judge has directed that so far as the present applicant No. 2 is concerned, he should remain present before the Investigating Officer from morning 9-00 to evening 6-00 for two days i.e. on 1-5-2007 and 2-5-2007 for interrogation. The learned Sessions Judge thereby partly allowed the Revision Application filed by the State against the order dated 5-4-2007 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad in C.I.D. Crime First Crime Register No. 1 of 2006 --an application for remand. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate by his order dated 5-4-200...
Tag this Judgment!Amrishbhai Manubhai Brahmbhatt and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3651
C.K. Buch, J.1. Both the appellants --original accused Nos. 1 and 2 have been held guilty of the charge of offence punishable under Sections 7, 12 and 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' or 'the PC Act'), by the Id. Special Judge, Ahmedabad in Special Case No. 8/ 1990 vide judgment dated 22-3-1993. Both the accused, vide impugned judgment, are directed to undergo S.I. for period of 2 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and to undergo in default punishment for a period of 2 months for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the PC Act. Both the accused are again asked to undergo S.I. for period of 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and to undergo in default S.I. for period of 2 months for the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Act. Both these accused have been imposed S.I. for period of 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and to undergo in default punishment of S.I. for the period of 2 months puni...
Tag this Judgment!Gulabsinh Balusinh Parmar Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3468
H.N. Devani, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20th June, 2005 passed by learned Additional Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 267 of 2004 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence under Section 302 of the IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2000/-and in default simple imprisonment for two months and for the offence under Section 498-A of the IPC, he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.2. Mr. P. K. Soni, learned Advocate for the appellant had submitted that he has a copy of the relevant record necessary for deciding the appeal. However, by order dated 8-3-2007, the record and proceedings of the case had been called for from the trial Court....
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Dalichand Koticha and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-08-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Guj181; (2007)2GLR1642
M.S. Shah, J.1. Rule. Ms. Trusha Patel learned A.G.P. waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, Mr. B. T. Rao learned Advocate waives service on behalf of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 on caveat. As far as respondent No. 4 A.P.M.C., Upleta is concerned, it is formal party and its presence is not required.2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, considering the urgency involved in the election matter, with the consent of the learned Advocates:, the petition is taken up for final disposal, and is accordingly being disposed of by this judgment.3. The Director of Agricultural Produce Market Committee declared the programme for election of A.P.M.C., Upleta, District Rajkot on 19-2-2007. As per the said programme, the relevant dates are as under:Publication of final list of voters : 3-4-2007Date for submitting nomination forms : 3-5-2007Publication of nomination forms : 3-5-2007Scrutiny of nomination forms : 4-5-2007Date for withdrawal of nomination forms ...
Tag this Judgment!Greengold Timber Private Limited Vs. Shipra Ocean Trade Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Guj157; (2008)1GLR251
ORDERRavi R. Tripathi, J.1. The petitioner original defendant is before this Court being aggrieved by order dated 16-10-2006 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhidham below Exhibits 15 and 18 in Special Civil Suit No. 19 of 2003.It is prayed that the said order be modified and the present petitioner defendant be permitted to defend the suit unconditionally and the condition of furnishing bank guarantee of Rs. 60 lakhs be quashed and set aside.2. The matter was argued by the learned senior Counsel for the petitioner Mrs. Ketty A. Mehta, who did not point out that the order under challenge is passed after the matter was remanded by this Court. The learned advocate Mr. Soni for the respondent original plaintiff pointed out to this Court that earlier the respondent herein had approached this Court by Special Civil Application No. 17851 of 2005 and by order dated 12-7-2006 (Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Kanadial, the matter was remanded. Learned Advocate Mr. Soni in...
Tag this Judgment!Bhikhaji Chaturji Thakore and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4539
R.S. Garg, J.1. The facts necessary for disposal of the three Criminal Revision Applications and Special Criminal Application No. 839 of 2006 are that the original complainant, Chiragbhai son of Rambhai Patel reported to the Police Station, Sector-7, Gandhinagar in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 471, all read with Sections 34, 109, 114 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and such report, being CR. No. I-147 of 2004, was registered at the police station. After registration of the criminal case, the police went into investigation and after collecting the material necessary for framing the charges, filed charge-sheet before the competent Magistrate.. The Magistrate took cognizance in the matter and registered Criminal Case No. 6867 of 2004. The accused persons were summoned and thereafter, they were taken into custody. The accused persons made various applications for their release on 'bail, but, the applications came to be dismissed on various...
Tag this Judgment!Premilaben R. Jaishwal and ors. Vs. B.M. Jadeja and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4165
ORDERD.H. Waghela, J.1. The petitioner, a widow, along with her three children, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code') after serving a written complaint upon the Police Commissioner, Vadodara in respect of custodial death of her husband on 17-9-1994 at around 7.00 p.m. after being picked up from their house at around 4.00 p.m. on 16-9-1994. According to the petition, the husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of the other petitioners was aged 42 years when, on 16-9-1994 at around 16.00 hours, several police personnel led by respondent No. 4, the Police Sub-Inspector, ordered him to go with them to the police station. She and her husband informed respondent No. 4 about his illness at that time, but he was taken to the police station and detained under Section 151 of the Code. She afterwards learnt from the persons who were present in the police station that the detainee had requested...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanvarsingh Pukhrajsingh Chauhan Vs. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR882]; (2007)2GLR2140; (2008)ILLJ701Guj
D.H. Waghela, J.1. The petitioner has invoked Articles 14, 16 and 226 of the Constitution for the prayer of setting aside the order dated 17.7.2001 by which his services were terminated. After admission of the petition in January 2003, interim relief was refused and an application for wages on the basis of the provisions of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') was also rejected. Therefore, after several applications for that purpose, learned Counsel for the petitioner has insisted for early final hearing of the petition. On 13.4.2007, learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that, under the policy of the respondent, disputes in the nature of the one raised in the petition were required to be settled outside the court and necessary efforts would be made for that purpose by necessary communication with learned Counsel for the petitioner. And, if the matter was not settled, learned Counsel would address arguments on merits on the next date of hearing...
Tag this Judgment!Jayaben W/O. Narayandas Nathumal Hemrajani Vs. District Collector and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: (2008)1GLR202
D.N. Patel, J.1. The present petition has been preferred against the order dated 4th July/August, 2005 passed by the District Development Officer, Vadodara (Annexure 'G' to the memo of the petition) to the effect that under Section 67 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879, there is a breach of condition by the present petitioner, and therefore, penalty has been imposed upon the petitioner for the fact that after getting N.A. permission for the land in question, the petitioner has not started non-agricultural usage of the land in question.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner who has submitted that initially the petitioner had in mind non-agricultural usage for the land in question, and therefore, an application was preferred for getting N.A. permission which was granted by the concerned respondent authority vide order dated 26th March, 1997 and 4th October, 1997. But thereafter, for the reasons beyond the control of the present petitioner, the non-agricultural usage wh...
Tag this Judgment!Ravjibhai Prabhudas Patel Vs. Additional Collector and Competent Autho ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: (2007)2GLR1690
R.S. Garg, J.1. Shri B.S. Patel, learned Counsel for the petitioner; Shri Dipen Desai, learned A.G.P. for the State. Parties are finally heard.2. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order dated 31-5-1999 (Annexure-E to the petition) whereunder the competent authority has refused to issue No Objection Certificate under the provisions of Section 21 of the Urban Land Ceiling Act or even otherwise has refused to grant No Objection Certificate for raising certain construction, is before this Court.3. The short facts necessary for disposal of the present writ application are that the petitioner is the owner of the land of Survey Nos. 350 and 330 admeasuring 1 Acre and 1 Guntha and 2 Acres and 16 Gunthas situated at Manjalpur, Vadodara. On 14-8-1976, the petitioner made an application in Form-5 under Section 21 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 seeking permission to develop the land in accordance with Section 21 of the Act. During pendency of the said application, the Stat...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »