Guwahati Court November 2006 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.
Jagadish Medhi Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-24-2006
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. The sole appellant Sri Jagadish Medhi stands convicted under Section 307, I.P.C. vide judgment and order dated 30-9-2004 passed by Smt. M. Choudhury, the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati in Sessions Case No. 17(K)/2000. By the impugned judgment the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R. I. for 5 (five) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default sentenced for another 2 (two) months R. I. Simultaneously the appellant has also been convicted under Section 447, I.P.C. and further one month R. I. has been awarded.2. Aggrieved with the conviction and sentence the accused has preferred this appeal. I have heard Mr. C. R. Dey, learned Sr. counsel for the appellant. I have also heard Mr. B.S. Sinha, learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State. I have also gone through the impugned judgment and evidence of witnesses.3. As could be gathered from the record the incident took place in the early morning of 18-1-1995. At the relevant time, the ...
Kelhousatuo Angami Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-24-2006
M.B.K. Singh, J.1. Heard Mr. A. Zho, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. C.T. Zamir, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 4 and Ms. Lucy, learned Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1, 2 and 3 (State respondents).The petitioner is aggrieved by the order being No. ED/TPT/C/47/91-92 dated 19.3.05 issued by the Additional Director, Directorate of School Education Nagaland, Kohima by which the private respondent, who, according to the petitioner was junior to him at the relevant time, was promoted to the post of Head Driver w.e.f. 1st March, 2005 in the establishment of the said Directorate. He is also aggrieved by the tentative seniority list dated 29.7.05, which, according to him, was prepared illegally showing the private respondent No. 4 as the senior-most Driver amongst the Drivers attached under the establishment of the said Directorate. This writ petition has been filed praying, mainly, for quashing the above-said promot...
Biplab Kanti Pal Etc. Etc. Vs. State Bank of India and Etc.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-24-2006
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Since both the Civil Revision Petitions have raised questions of law, which are closely inter-connected, both these revision petitions, on the request made by the learned Counsel for the parties, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. The facts giving rise to present revision petition may, in brief, be set out as under:(i) In Civil Revision Petition No. 11/2005, having obtained a decree, when the opposite party herein, which is a bank, put, as a decree holder, the said decree into execution, Execution (M) Case No. 8/2004 arose, in the said execution proceeding, an application was made, under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the petitioner herein, who la the Judgment-debtor, objecting to the execution of the decree on the ground that on coming into force of the Tripura Public Demand Recovery Act, 2000 (in short, the said Act), the decree has been rendered inexecutable, for the jurisdiction of the Civil Cour...
Kushal Sarmah Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-24-2006
B.K. Sharma, J.1. All the writ petitions pertaining to appointment and regularization of Junior Inspectors/Auditors of the Cooperative Societies have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. As will be noticed hereinafter, the matter makes shocking revealations of flouting the rules of recruitment Government guidelines, orders passed by this Court and eventually even the cabinet decision.2. I have heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. N. Dutta, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. J. Roy, learned Counsel for the private respondents. I have also heard Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned State counsel representing the Officials of the Cooperative Societies and also Ms. R. Chokraborty, learned State counsel for the other official respondents.3. While in the first two writ petitions, namely W.P.(C) No. 1672/06 and W.P.(C) No. 2843/06, the challenge made is against regularization of service of the private respondents and for...
V.K. Mathew Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-24-2006
U.B. Saha, J.1. Heard Mr. Kh. Binoykumar, learned Counsel assisted by Miss Rosylyn, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Kumar, learned Addl. CGSC for the respondents.2. Pleaded cases of the parties, deserved to be considered at the outset, are as under. Writ petitioner, who is presently working as Administrative Officer in the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Administration) in the Central Reserve Police Force, Group Centre at Langjing (Imphal) and also presently, permanently settled at Bangalore in the State of Karnataka, being aggrieved by the order of Signal dated 05.04.2006 (Annexure-A/6 to the writ petition) wherein and whereunder choice posting of petitioner was cancelled and he is transferred from the present place of posting i.e. office of the DIG, Imphal to Group Centre, Nagpur, Western Sector, filed this writ petition on the grounds that the said Signal is contrary to the provisions of guidelines issued by the Director General, CRPF through its sta...
Md. Taher Ali Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-23-2006
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. The appellant-Taher Ali has been convicted under Sections 448 and 376 of the I.P.C. vide judgment and order dated 31-12-2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Bongaigaon in Sessions Case No. 27(B)/2003. By the impugned judgment, the learned Sessions Judge has sentenced the appellant to undergo R.I. for 7 (seven) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for his conviction under Section 376, I.P.C. and one month R.I. has been awarded under Section 448, I.P.C. Two months further R.I. has been awarded for non-payment of fine. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. Being aggrieved with the conviction and sentence the accused has preferred this appeal.2. I have heard Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned Counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. B. S. Sinha, learned Addl. P.P., Assam. I have also gone through the impugned judgment and have also perused the relevant records.3. Shorn of the details, the prosecution case is that both the app...
Benulal Debnath and anr. Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-23-2006
T. Vaiphei, J.1. Two appellants in this criminal appeal are challenging the judgment-dated 10.9.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Belonia, South Tripura in Sessions Trial No. 13 (ST/D) of 1998 convicting them under Section 201 IPC and sentencing the appellant No. 1 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months, and also sentencing the appellant No. 2 to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. I have heard Mr. A.C. Bhowmik, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. A. Ghosh, learned P.P. In-charge for the respondents.Both the appellant were charged under Section 302/201 IPC. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Jyoti Rani Debnath aged about 32 years was given in marriage with the appellant No. 1 and from their marriage, two daughters and one son were born to them. Two years before the death of the decease...
Yumpi Padu Vs. Firoj Ahmed
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-23-2006
I.A. Ansari, J.1. By making this application, under Section 482 read with Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner herein, who is an accused in CR Case No. 6241C/2005, has sought for setting aside the order, dated 1.10.2005, passed therein, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, taking cognizance of offences under Sections 447, 427,341,379 and 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC against the present petitioner and some others and also directing issuance of summons to them.2. I have heard Mr. S Ali, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. A Sattar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant-opposite party.3. The law with regard to quashing of criminal complaint is no longer res integra. A catena of judicial decisions have settled the position of law on this aspect of the matter. I may refer to the case of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab : 1960CriLJ1239 , wherein the question, which arose for consideration was whether a first information repo...
Goalpara Roller Flour Mill Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-23-2006
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The material facts, which are not in dispute and which have given rise to the present writ petition, may, in brief, be set out as follows:The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and procures wheat from the Food Corporation of India ('the FCI') for public distribution under the Public Distribution System and also for open sale. Under the Public Distribution System, the Central government allots wheat to different State governments and the State Governments, in turn, allot quota of wheat to various roller flour mills and other agencies in the State/After receiving necessary order of allotment, the petitioner company, as an allottee under the State government, purchases the allotted quota of wheat from the FCI. Upon purchasing wheat from the FCI, the petitioner company produces wheat products, such as, atta, flour, sujee, bram, etc. By virtue of the release orders, dated 23.1.2002 and 28.1.2002, the petitioner company purchased 4,000 quin...
Manik Majumder Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-23-2006
1. The present Writ Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 6.3.2000 of learned Single Judge of this High Court passed in Writ petition No. 31 of 2000, whereby, the writ petition was dismissed summarily at the admission stage.2. In the impugned order dated 6.3.2000 learned Single Judge has observed that a sum of Rs. 27,850 was allocated to the writ petitioner for execution of certain work and on the allegation of non-execution of work a regular disciplinary proceeding was conducted against him in which he was found guilty, therefore, the above amount of Rs. 27.850 was directed to be recovered from the writ petitioner as he has already availed the opportunity of filing the appeal before the competent authority. In these circumstances, no indulgence was made by the learned Single Judge of this court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and writ petition was accordingly dismissed summarily.3. The facts necessary for adjudication of the present W...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »