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.
State of Gujarat. Vs. Shah Chandrakant Popatlal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-2011
1. The appellant-State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 16^th April 2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sinor, in Criminal Case No.193 of 1993 for the offences punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondents-accused of the charges levelled against them.2. The short facts of the prosecution case is that the appellant was serving as Food Inspector. On 15^th October 2004, the complainant along with panch witness visited the firm of respondent-accused No.3 where the accused was doing his business. It is the case of the complainant that after giving his identity as Food Inspector, the complainant-Food Inspector purchased 400 gms. of Gay Chhap Brand Singtel from packed tin after paying consideration. It is also the case of the complainant that after following due procedure...
Bharatbhai Tulsidas. Vs. Shrenikbhai Kasturbhai.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-2011
1. The petitioners/original defendants have filed this Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code praying for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order passed by the lower court in PSRP Application No.10 of 1998 dated 19.10.2003 whereby the said application was allowed by the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad and possession warrant was issued to recover the possession of the disputed premises i.e. Otta portion.2. This Civil Revision Application was admitted and rule was issued on 16.12.2003 and ad-interim relief was granted in terms of para 7(b) of the Civil Revision Application.3. At the time of final hearing of this application, Mr. Tejas Satta, learned advocate appearing for the present respondents/ original applicants submitted upon instructions that, at present, no one is using this Otta and it is lying vacant. He has, therefore, submitted that, present Civil Revision Application no longer survives.4. In view of the above statement, this Civil Rev...
State of Gujarat. Vs. Gulammohmmed Rasulbhai Rabdi, Annapurna Restaura ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-2011
1. The appellant-State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 13^th April 2010 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.8, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.11263 of 2007 for the offences punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondent-accused of the charges levelled against him.2. The short facts of the prosecution case is that the complainant-Food Inspector visited the restaurant of the respondent-accused. At that point of time, the respondent-accused was present and doing his business. It is the case of the complainant that he has purchased Panir Tikka Masala as a sample after paying consideration. It is also the case of the complainant that after following due procedure of sealing, the sample was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst, Vadodara. On examination, the Public Analyst f...
Ganeshbhai Bachubhai LathiyA. Vs. Dena Bank and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. The petitioner herein has challenged the order dated 10.05.2007 passed by the Additional District Judge, Bhavnagar in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 51 of 2007 whereby the order dated 28.02.2007 passed by the trial court below Ex. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 1449 of 2006 was quashed and set aside.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent no. 2 is the original borrower, who borrowed a loan up to the tune of Rs. 3,43,95,000/- from respondent no. 1 for the purpose of his business transaction. The petitioner herein is the tenant of the said premises situated at Shop No. 58 which is mortgaged with respondent no. 1. The representatives of the respondent no. 1 approached the petitioner in the year 2006 and hence the petitioner filed a Civil Suit No. 1449 of 2006 in the court of Principal Civil Judge, Bhavnagar for the purpose of protection of his tenancy rights. Ex. 5 was also filed in the said suit for protection of his tenancy rights. The trial court allowed Ex. 5 application. Bein...
Sadath (Hadat) Salubhai Dhanjibhai and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. Rule. Mr. learned APP, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent State.2. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at CR No.I 61/2010 with Vijaynagar Police Station, Dist. Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 436, 504 & 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under section 135 of the Bombay Police Act3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that charge sheet is filed. He further submits that the applicant has roots in the society, will not flee from justice and will cooperate with the investigation as and when called for. It is further submitted that considering the nature of allegations and role attributed to the applicants and other attending circumstances, the applicants may be enlarged on bail.4. Heard learned APP for the respondent State.5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideratio...
Naranbhai Sarmanbhai KatariyA. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. Rule. Mr. learned APP, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent State.2. This successive bail application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at CR No.III 5161/2010 with Sutrapada Police Station, Dist. Junagadh for the offences punishable under Sections 66(B), 65(A)(E), 81, 116(1)(B), 98 & 99 of Bombay Prohibition Act.3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that charge sheet is filed. He further submits that the applicant has roots in the society, will not flee from justice and will cooperate with the investigation as and when called for. It is further submitted that considering the nature of allegations and role attributed to the applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.4. Heard learned APP for the respondent State.5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, ...
Alesya D/O Anatilevna VolkovA. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. Rule. Learned APP, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent State.2. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at CR No.II-176 OF 2010 with Adajan Police Station, Surat, for the offences punishable under Sections 14(1) of Foreigners Ac.3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence under section 14(1) of the Foreigners Act and for other offences she is already enlarged on bail. Besides, she is to receive passport from the Police Station so that she can apply for visa or take appropriate action in accordance with law. Considering the nature of evidence, role attributed to the applicant and punishment prescribed, this application for bail may kindly be considered.4. Heard learned APP for the respondent State who opposed grant of bail looking to the nature and gravity of offence.5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and per...
PravIn @ Bodo Dahyabhai. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. Rule. Mr. LB Dabhi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent State of Gujarat.2. Having regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for hearing today.3. The applicant convict prisoner, who by judgment and order dated 16.4.2008 rendered in Sessions Case No.13 of 2007 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.5, Idar, has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment of life, has filed this application through jail authority, praying to enlarge him on regular bail during pendency and final hearing of the main appeal or in the alternative, praying to pass appropriate order for expeditious hearing of the main appeal.4. We have considered the submissions advanced by Mr. LB Dabhi, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Gujarat. We have also gone through the jail remarks sheet forwarded by the jail authority.5. Upo...
Girishkumar Prabhashankar Trivedi. Vs. Ranchhodbhai Manilal Joshi.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. Heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.2. This revision application is preferred by petitioner under Section 115 of CPC. Civil Suit No.28 of 1992 was preferred by plaintiff under provisions of Bombay Rent Act with a prayer to recover possession of suit properties as well as rent from defendant. 3. The suit has been dismissed on 17^th March, 1999 by Civil Judge (J.D.), Visnagar. Against which, Regular Civil Suit No.72 of 1999 was filed by present petitioner original plaintiff under Section 29 of Bombay Rent Act read with provisions of Section 96 of CPC. This appeal is also decided by 2^nd Additional District and Sessions Judge on 9^th October, 2009 and appeal is dismissed.4. Learned advocate Mr. Sachi Vasavada raised contentions before this Court that it is not necessary to file revision application under Section 29(2) of Bombay Rent Act, because, when single Judge has passed an order in appeal, then, CRA under 115 is maintainable and there is no need to fi...
Rabari Ramabhai Khumabhai. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This is an application by the applicant for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with FIR bearing I.CR No. 27 of 2010 registered with Mehsana City Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 465, 467, 471, 466, 468, 472, 474, 476 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.2. I have heard the learned advocates of both the sides at length and considered the averments made in the application, FIR, role attributed to the applicant as well as the provisions of Sections 465, 467, 471, 466, 468, 472, 474, 476 and 120-B of IPC. In view of the above facts and circumstances and without entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant and it is a fit case to release the applicant on anticipatory bail without recording reasons in detail. Hence, the following order.3. In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with I CR No. 27 of 2010 registered with Mehsana City Police Station for the...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »