Gujarat Court January 2011 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.
Rameshbhai Keshavbhai Patel. Rameshbhai Keshavbhai Patel. Vs. Gujarat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. The present application is for condo nation of delay of 566 days in preferring the appeal against the order dated 23.10.2008 passed by learned single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No.8718 of 2008 whereby the learned single Judge has quashed the award passed by the Labour Court and allowed the petition.2. We have heard Mr.Paul, learned counsel for the applicant on the aspect of condo nation of delay as well as on the aspect of merits of the main LPA in order to see that on account of the delay, the merits of the main LPA may not be frustrated.3. If the application for condo nation of delay is considered as it is, it appears that such a long time of 566 days is not sufficiently explained and the delay does not deserve to be condoned.4. Apart from the above, if the merits of the appeal is considered, the contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that the cash was not checked and, therefore, it cannot be said that the misappropriation was proved. Learned counsel...
Dudabhai Savjibhai Rajput. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. RULE. Learned APP, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.2. The petitioner, by way of this petition, seeks anticipatory bail in connection with the complaint, bearing C.R. No. I-52/10, filed before Vaav Police Station, Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections-394, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and the only role attributed to him in the complaint is that of having given threats over telephone. Even, as per the complaint, the petitioner was not present when the alleged incident of 18^th December, 2010 took place, involving other accused.4. I have perused the contents of the complaint, prima facie, considering the role attributed to the petitioner, it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, in connection with C.R. No. I-52/10, filed before Vaav Police Station, Banaskantha, he shall be RELEASED on anticipatory bai...
Raghavjibhai Himmatbhai Balar. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. RULE Mr. L.B. Dabhi, learned APP appears and waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State of Gujarat.2. By instant application field under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant convict, who vide judgment and order dated 22.3.2010, rendered in Sessions Case No. 93 of 2006, by the learned Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Amreli, has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer RI for 10 years, has prayed for suspension of sentence and to enlarge him on bail during the pendency and final hearing of Criminal Appeal No. 813 of 2010.3. This Court vide order dated 13.5.2010 has Admitted Criminal Appeal No. 813 of 2010.4. At the time of hearing of this application, Mr. Y.N. Oza, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. M.J. Mehta, learned Advocate for the applicant does not press this application and seeks leave to withdraw the same in view of the order dat...
Mohd. Siddique @ Ganti Rafikbhai VorA. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with the FIR, bearing I-C.R. No.198 of 1997, registered with Dani Limda Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections-302, 120(B), 201, 202 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, Section-135(1) of the Bombay Police Act and Sections-25(1)(A) and (B) of the Arms Act. The complaint was filed on 23.11.1997. The petitioner, however, could be arrested only on 28.07.2010. The petitioner, therefore, remained absconding for a period of about 13 years.2. Under the circumstances, the petitioner cannot be expected to come back to face the trial, if released on bail. Only on this ground, I am not inclined to accept the request of the petitioner.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the other accused have been acquitted by the trial Court and such acquittals have been upheld by the High Court. 4. This is, however, an entirely different aspect of the matter. Since, in the cases of the other accused persons, the decisions have been ...
Raidhanbhai Ravjibhai BavaliyA. Vs. State of Gujarat,
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. The application is filed u/s.439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Datha police station C.R.No.I 58 of 2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 366, 376(g), 504, 506(2), 450 r/w.Section 120-B of the IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.2. Mr.Tolia, learned advocate representing the applicant submitted that the police investigation is over and chargesheet is filed. Considering the FIR and more particularly the statement of the prosecutrix, who is aged about 20 years, it transpires that the only role assigned to the applicant is that between 27.8.2010 and 2.9.2010 when the prosecutrix was under confinement, he provided food by bringing the same in tiffin. It is submitted that as per the prosecution case, the incident of alleged kidnapping occurred on 24.8.2010 and from 24.8.2010 to 26.8.2010, the applicant was not at all in the picture. It is further submitted that almost similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Vanrajbhai Prabhatbhai Kuvadiya, Sabbirhusen Vi...
State of Gujarat and anr. Vs. Vallabh Mohan and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. Since common issue is involved in all these Civil Revision Applications, the same are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are taken from Civil Revision Application No.51 of 2004.3. The petitioner State of Gujarat has filed all these Civil Revision Applications challenging the judgment and order dated 04.04.2003 passed below Exh.1 in Land Reference Darkhast No.10 of 2002 by the learned 2^nd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Junagadh awarding interest on the solatium.4. All these Civil Revision Applications were admitted and rule was issued in each of these matters and interim relief was granted against further proceedings of Execution Petitions.5. The brief facts giving rise to the present Civil Revision Application are that all these Land Reference Cases were decided and as per the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the amounts were deposited and no further appeals were filed. However, on the...
Chanchiben Bhudraji Thakor. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. RULE. Learned APP, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State. The petitioner, by way of this petition, seeks anticipatory bail in connection with the complaint, bearing C.R. No. I-39/10, filed before Bhildi Police Station, District : Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections-363, 366, 376, 506(2)and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a lady. Even as per the allegations made in the complaint, she has no direct role to play. 3. The only role attributed to the petitioner, in the complaint, is that of being present at the scene of incident, when the daughter of the complainant was allegedly taken away, in a vehicle, by the son of the present petitioner.4. I have perused the contents of the complaint, prima facie, considering the role attributed to the petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petit...
Ghanshyamsinh Lakhubha Zala and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. RULE. Learned APP, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.2. The petitioners, by way of this petition, seek anticipatory bail in connection with the complaint, bearing C.R. No. I-66/10, filed before Wankaner City Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections-323, 325, 504, 394 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section-135 of the Bombay Police Act.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the alleged complaint is an offshoot of a land deal, with regard to which certain disputes are going on between the parties. He, further, submitted that, subsequently, on the allegation that one mobile phone was stolen, Section-394 of the Indian Penal Code is also added.4. In addition to the above submission, I have also perused the nature of allegations in the complaint. Taking into account the statement of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that they have no criminal antecedents, it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petit...
Kirit Ramnaji Thakore. Vs. Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd Thro. Ashesh Tha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2011
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant consumer against the interim order passed by the learned Singe Judge on the ground that the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable as appeal lies against the order of the State Consumer Forum before the National Consumer Forum, New Delhi.2. In reply, the learned counsel for the service provider submits that in similar matter one of the consumers moved before the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi. In Revision Petition No.1703 of 2010, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi by order dated 21.05.2010 relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case ofGeneral Manager Telecom vs. M. Krishnan, reported in 2009(8) SCC 481, refused to entertain such revision as, by the Supreme Court judgment it was held that, any dispute between the subscriber and the telegraph authority can be resolved by taking recourse to arbitration proceedings only.3. The questions ...
Ashwinbhai Amarsingh Rana, Thro' Sarojben Ashwinbhai Rana. vs. State o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-2011
1. The applicant convict prisoner, who, vide judgment and order dated 23.11.2007 rendered in Sessions Case No. 51 of 2006 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch, has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life, has filed this application praying for suspension of sentence and and to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of 30 days to enable him to attend his ailing wife who is suffering from abdominal pain and is required an urgent operation which is fixed today, i.e. 23.1.2011.2. We have considered the submissions advanced by Mr. G.P.Baghel, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned APP for the Respondent State of Gujarat and perused the averments made in the application so also the jail remark sheet submitted by learned APP.3. Upon perusal of the jail remark sheet, we have noticed that the applicant has undergone total period of 4 years, 11 months and 9 days of imprisonm...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »