Kolkata Court May 2010 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.
Tarit Baran Chaudhury Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2010
S.P. Talukdar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17th March, 1988 passed by the learned Judge, Second Special Court, Calcutta in Special Case No. 1 of 1977. The learned Court convicted the present appellant under Section 120B/420/465 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 50, 000/- in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year for the offence under Section 120B/420 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under Section 465 of I.P.C. He was further sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50, 000/- in default, to suffer imprisonment for one year for his conviction under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act II of 1947...
Jaydeb Sau @ Shaw and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2010
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The victim was married to Joydeb Sau @ Shaw at an early age. From the evidence it would appear that she was a minor when she was married. She was not so expert in the household work which annoyed her in-laws, particularly her Mother-in-law who constantly tortured her from the day one. Such torture was not only mental but also physical. Her father-in-law Paresh Shaw and her husband must have a tacit approval to such torture. However, we do not find any definite evidence as against those two male accused save and except the contemporaneous complaint lodged by Putul's parents before the Panchayat earlier. Putul once tried to commit suicide by taking poison on 8th Chaitra, 1394 when she was admitted to hospital. After recovery she was again sent to her in-law's place after a village compromise had at the Manik Bazar Gram Panchayat Office in presence of both parties. The compromise was reduced to writing as asserted by Putul's maternal uncle. Despite such compromi...
Yusuf Warsi Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-2010
Kalidas Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 9th Fast Track Court, in Sessions Trial No. 1(8) of 2002 arising out of Sessions Case No. 78 of 2002 sentencing the appellant to suffer R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer S.I. for six months.2. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that one Md. Akbar lodged complaint alleging that on 12.11.2001 at about 7.30 P.M. Bachcha Raju, Ullu Raju and Kamal, the known miscreants came to his house and started abusing in the name of his younger brother Md. Asgar @ Bablu and demanded money from them. At that time all the brothers of the informant were present in their house. The accused persons asked Md. Asgar @ Bablu to step down and thereafter they went down stairs. The informant and his brothers also went down stairs and thereafter they saw that the accused persons were beating a neighbouring boy named Bombaiya. When the in...
Sri Nripati Bhusan Sengupta Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-2010
JUSTICE SADHAN KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) 1. Originally Writ Petition no. 8970 of 2009 was filed by the petitioner before the Honble High Court at Calcutta. However, since the coming into operation of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, said writ petition was transferred to this Bench for disposal and same has been renumbered as T A No.7 of 2010. 2 Case of the petitioner is that he joined the Indian Air Force and was enrolled on 10th July 1953 for a period of nine year regular service and six year reserve service. After completion of the nine year regular service, the petitioner was transferred to reserve service with effect from 9th July 1962 and a certificate of transfer to that effect was issued by the authority. During the Chinese Aggression in 1962 the petitioner was re-called since he was liable to render service until completion of the reserve period of six years. Accordingly, the petitioner joined the regular service and performed his duty for a period of 332 days. On 6th June 1...
Asim Majumdar Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-2010
JUSTICE SADHAN KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) 1. Originally Writ Petition no. 897l of 2009 was filed by the petitioner before the Honble High Court at Calcutta. However, since the coming into operation of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, said writ petition was transferred to this Bench for disposal and same has been renumbered as T A No.13 of 2010. 2. Case of the petitioner is that he joined the Indian Air Force and was enrolled on 31st December 1952 for a period of nine year regular service and six year reserve service. After completion of the nine year regular service, the petitioner was transferred to reserve service with effect from 31st December 1961 and a certificate of transfer to that effect was issued by the authority. During the Chinese Aggression in 1962 the petitioner was re-called since he was liable to render service until completion of the reserve period of six years. Accordingly, the petitioner joined the regular service and performed his duty for a period of one year and...
Babu Majhi @ Bag Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2010
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The incident occurred in 1992. The accused were charged under Section 148 as well as Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused pleaded not guilty and faced trial. Ultimately, the learned Judge upon appreciation of evidence, held the accused Babu Majhi and Banchar Bag guilty of the charges and the accused Bulu Mallick, Kartick Bag and Murari Bag were acquitted. The judgment was delivered on August 14, 2000. Since then both the accused were in custody.2. The appeals have now come up for hearing.3. Upon hearing Mr. Milan Mukherjee, learned Counsel, appearing for the appellants and Mr. Ranjit Kumar Ghosal, learned Counsel, appearing for the prosecution we find that the norms and procedure particularly laid down in Section 313 the Criminal Procedure Code were not adhered to.4. Mr. Mukherjee draws our attention to the recording of the examination under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the accused Babu Majhi wherein we find ...
indranil Das Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2010
Dipankar Datta, J.1. The petitioner offered his candidature for being appointed as LPG Distributor at Bankra, District Howrah in pursuance of an advertisement dated 16.9.2007 issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (hereafter the Corporation). Although he was awaiting a call to attend interview in pursuance of his application, he received no intimation. Coming to learn that the selection process had been finalised without considering his candidature and without calling upon him to participate in the selection process, he addressed a representation dated 22.12.2009 to the Senior Manager of the Corporation. According to him, the advertisement itself provided scope for redress of grievance by addressing representation to the Corporation. The representation was not considered; on the contrary, the Corporation was contemplating issuance of letter of intent in favour of the selected candidate. It is at this stage that the petitioner had the occasion to approach this Court with his first wr...
Tarun Kumar Mitra Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2010
Dipankar Datta, J.1. The petitioner, an octogenarian, allegedly, has been forced to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court feeling highly aggrieved and thoroughly frustrated by physical and mental torture inflicted on him by the respondents 5 and 6, his son and daughter-in-law respectively. He has claimed the following relief:a) A Writ of and/or Writs in the nature of Mandamus commanding the concerned Respondent their agents and/or successor-in-office to allow the Petitioner to enjoy and use his all the properties including his flat at P-247, C.I.T. Road, P.S. Phoolbagan, Calcutta - 700 054 (2nd and 3rd floor) with Garage and Servant's quarters in the ground floor after recovery of the possession of the said flat from the unauthorised occupation of Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 and their associates forthwith;b) A Writ of and/or Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the concerned Police Respondent Authorities to see that the Petitioners peaceful living is not disturbed in any way by a...
Prestige Ice Creams Private Limited and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2010
I.P. Mukerji, J.1. The writ petitioner company (hereafter described as 'the writ petitioner') manufactures and sells the well known brand of ice cream 'Rollick'. It has its factory in Village and Post Office - Jaladhulagiri, Dhulagarh, within the jurisdiction of the Howrah Zilla Regulated Market Committee.2. The Act which requires consideration in this writ application is the West Bengal Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1972. Section 2(h) defines 'market area' as follows:2(h). 'market area' means any area declared to be a market area under Section 3;3. Section 13 inter alia enacts that no person shall sell or purchase any agricultural produce or be engaged in processing of any agricultural produce in that market area without a licence issued by the market committee.4. Now according to the respondent Howarh Zilla Regulated Market Committee the writ petitioner carries on the business of purchasing goods or processing within the designated market area. It 'deals' with 'Ski...
Smt. Malati Sarkar Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2010
ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE J.: Several grounds were taken in memorandum of appeal. Mr. Ashoke De, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant however raised the plea of insufficient notice being his sole contention before us. In Hassan-II Gram Panchayat in the District of Birbhum, Malati Sarkar, the appellant, above named was elected as Pradhan by the members of the said Gram Panchayat being nine in numbers. Out of nine members five members lost confidence on Malati and asked her to convene a meeting of the Gram Panchayat where they would intend to express their no confidence on her. The said notice dated March 3, 2010 appearing at page 41 was duly signed by five members being respondent no.7 to 11 above named. The other three members being respondent no.4, 5 and 6 however continued to repose confidence on Malati. The division of the Gram Panchayat, after such notice thus became four in favour of Malati including herself and five against her. Malati did not convene the meeting. The r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »