Mumbai Aurangabad Court October 2012 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.
Dnyaneshwar Murlidhar Kapile Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-31-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard learned Adv. Mr. N.S. Ghanekar for the petitioner, and learned APP Mr. D.V. Tele for the respondent. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, taken up for final hearing. 3. By the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and also under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner (original accused no.3) prays that the order dated 7-9-2012, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vaijapur, below Exhibit 103 in Sessions Case No.35/2012, rejecting to recall the witness no.1, namely, Suresh Baburao Kolthe, and also rejecting the permission to further cross examine the said witness, be quashed and set aside. 4. The factual matrix which gave rise to the present petition is as follows : (a) Charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner and against seven accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306, 304-B, 323, 504, 506, read with Secti...
Narayan S/O Ramdayal Gattani Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-31-2012
The revision is filed to challenge the judgment and order of J.M.F.C. Aurangabad, delivered in S.C.C. No.1010 of 2007 and the judgment and order of the Sessions Court, Aurangabad delivered in criminal appeal No.254 of 2010. In a complaint filed by the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, respondent No.2 is acquitted. This decision of J.M.F.C. is confirmed in criminal appeal by the Sessions Court. It can be said that the complainant could have filed appeal in this Court under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., but the appeal was filed in the Sessions Court, probably due to confusion, which was there with regard to right of the complainant to challenge the decision of acquittal. Due to amendment to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. which came into force in the year 2009, the right was given to victim to file an appeal against the decision of acquittal in the court, where the appeal lies against the judgment and order of conviction and due to this prov...
Kailash Agencies Private Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2012
Oral Judgment: This Civil Revision Application challenges interim order dated 13th October, 2011, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, granting temporary injunction in favour of the respondent in Suit No.32 of 2011. 2. Admitted facts leading to this litigation are as under :- 3. The land in question is a large plot of land abutting Jalna Road in Aurangabad city. This plot belongs to a Wakf. In 1964, the then Mutawalli of the Wakf executed lease of 99 years in favour of the applicant. In 1995, respondent No.1 Board intervened and got the lease agreement modified. This time they increased the premium as well as rent. Thereafter, respondent No.1 issued notice under section 54 of the Wakf Act, 1995 alleging that the applicant is in wrongful possession of the suit property and should be evicted. The applicant thereafter made an application under section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, challenging such direction issued by respondent No.1's Chief Officer. In ...
Subhash S/O Girdharlal Nawandar Vs. Dinesh S/O Subhash Nawandar
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Judgment : 1] Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 3] This is an application preferred by the applicant (original accused) under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requesting that S.C.C. No. 1487 of 2012, pending before the learned 7th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, be transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Latur. 4] The applicant herein is the father of the respondent. It is the contention of the applicant that R.C.S. No. 61 of 2008 was filed by the elder son of the present applicant for partition and separate possession before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chakur, Distict Latur. Accordingly, the said suit was compromised inter se between the parties, to which present applicant and the respondent were parties. A copy of R.C.S. No. 61 of 2008 and the copy of the compromi...
Subhash S/O Girdharlal Nawandar Vs. Dinesh S/O Subhash Nawandar
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Judgment : 1] Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 3] This is an application preferred by the applicant (original accused) under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requesting that S.C.C. No. 1487 of 2012, pending before the learned 7th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, be transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Latur. 4] The applicant herein is the father of the respondent. It is the contention of the applicant that R.C.S. No. 61 of 2008 was filed by the elder son of the present applicant for partition and separate possession before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chakur, Distict Latur. Accordingly, the said suit was compromised inter se between the parties, to which present applicant and the respondent were parties. A copy of R.C.S. No. 61 of 2008 and the copy of the compromi...
Digambar S/O Pandurang Kadu Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2012
1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 45/2011 which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. The trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant for offences punishable under section 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard. Original record is perused. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows. The complainant Dadasaheb Dukare is the father of the prosecutrix. The accused and complainant are residents of village Satral Tq. Rahuri District Ahmednagar. The house of the accused is situated at the distance of around 250 feet from the house of the complainant. At the relevant time, the accused was aged about 40 years and the prosecutrix was aged about 15 years. The prosecutrix is described as simpleton, little bit mentally retarded but she was studying in 6th standard in a School from Satral. 3. The incident took place on 29/11/2010. The prosecutrix left ...
Godrej Agrovet Ltd. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2012
Oral Order: 1] The petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing and setting aside the proceeding of S.T.C.No.162/08, which is pending in the Court of JMFC Badnapur. The case is filed by respondent no.2, public servant for offences punishable under various Sections of Insecticides Act, 1968 and Rules framed under the Act. Both sides are heard. 2] Copy of the complaint given by public servant shows that on 31/7/02, the Inspector appointed under the Special Act did the inspection of the premises of M/s Rama Sales Corporation, Badnapur. He found that the insecticide Monocrotophos 36% manufactured by Nagarjuna Agrichem Limited, Srikakulam, manufactured in June 2002 having expiry date of November 2003 were kept for sale. He had doubt about the quality of the insecticide and so he took samples of 250 ml. of the insecticide. Three such samples were collected and they were closed and sealed. One of the sample was haded over to...
Nandabai W/O Popatrao Warat Vs. Maruti Gopala Mehetre and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2012
1. The revision is filed against the judgment and order of appeal No.9 of 1991 which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. The judgment and order of J.M.F.C. Ahmednagar delivered in R.C.C. No. 158 of 1988 is modified by the appellate court and the conviction and sentence given to the respondent-accused is converted from the offence punishable under Section 325 of I.P.C. to one punishable under Section 323 of I.P.C. Further the accused is sentenced to pay fine only. This decision is challenged by the original complainant in the present proceeding. Both sides are heard. This Court has perused the original record. 2. Learned advocate for the petitioner made a prayer for converting the present proceeding to criminal appeal. He submitted that in view of the provisions of section 401(5) of Cr.P.C. such conversion is possible. He submitted that by the amendment made to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. the right is given to the victim to file such appeal, and so, such conver...
Godrej Agrovet Ltd. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2012
Oral Order: 1] The petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing and setting aside the proceeding of S.T.C.No.162/08, which is pending in the Court of JMFC Badnapur. The case is filed by respondent no.2, public servant for offences punishable under various Sections of Insecticides Act, 1968 and Rules framed under the Act. Both sides are heard. 2] Copy of the complaint given by public servant shows that on 31/7/02, the Inspector appointed under the Special Act did the inspection of the premises of M/s Rama Sales Corporation, Badnapur. He found that the insecticide Monocrotophos 36% manufactured by Nagarjuna Agrichem Limited, Srikakulam, manufactured in June 2002 having expiry date of November 2003 were kept for sale. He had doubt about the quality of the insecticide and so he took samples of 250 ml. of the insecticide. Three such samples were collected and they were closed and sealed. One of the sample was haded over to...
Digambar S/O Pandurang Kadu Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2012
1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 45/2011 which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. The trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant for offences punishable under section 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard. Original record is perused. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows. The complainant Dadasaheb Dukare is the father of the prosecutrix. The accused and complainant are residents of village Satral Tq. Rahuri District Ahmednagar. The house of the accused is situated at the distance of around 250 feet from the house of the complainant. At the relevant time, the accused was aged about 40 years and the prosecutrix was aged about 15 years. The prosecutrix is described as simpleton, little bit mentally retarded but she was studying in 6th standard in a School from Satral. 3. The incident took place on 29/11/2010. The prosecutrix left ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »