Mumbai Aurangabad Court June 2014 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.
Chaya and Others Vs. Suresh and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-27-2014
1) Admit. 2) Notice after admission made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides for final disposal. 3) The appeal is filed against the judgment and award of Claim Petition No.202/2008 which was pending before the Ad-hoc District Judge-2 and Ex-officio Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Latur. In a petition filed by the present appellants under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation in respect of death of husband of appellant No.1, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.7,07,224/-. The appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation. 4) It is the case of the appellants / original claimants that deceased was serving as a labour at Makni Dam in Irrigation Department of the State Government and he was permanent employee. It is contended that on the date of the death he was drawing monthly salary of Rs.8,128/-. It is contended that he was aged about 50 years. It is the case of the claimants that they were all depending on the deceased for their livelihood. Th...
Shivaji Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-26-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Applicant-Shivaji along with his parents and brother were prosecuted and the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vaijapur on 27.8.1996 in Regular Criminal Case No.70 of 1995 found that they were guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and therefore, they all were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and were directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- by each of them, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month each; as also, they all were convicted for offence punishable under Section 323 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- by each of them, in default they were directed to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month each. The appeal was carried by them before the Sessions Judg...
Ramkrushna and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-26-2014
1. By the present Writ Petition, the petitioners are questioning the correctness of the judgment and order, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad in Criminal Revision Application No.66 of 2010, dated 5.10.2011, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad was pleased to dismiss the Revision filed by the present petitioners. The petitioners are also questioning the order, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Osmanabad, dated 4.5.2010 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.83 of 2009, whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Osmanabad was pleased to issue process against the present petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 191, 192, 417, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. According to the petitioners, petitioner no.1 is the Secretary and petitioner no.2 is the Joint Secretary of one Kamaleshwar Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Pimpalgaon (K), District Osmanabad, which is a registered Trust. The said Tr...
Shriram Satwaji Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-26-2014
Oral Judgment: (S.S. Shinde, J.) 1. This Petition is filed praying therein to quash and set aside the First Information Report lodged by the respondent no.3 in C.R. No.85/2003 with Dharmabad Police Station registered under Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code and the proceedings in pursuance of the same. 2. It appears that, this Court on 19th January, 2004 issued Rule and ad-interim relief was granted in terms of prayer clause (C). 3. It is case of the petitioner that, he is well educated and working as a lecturer in Lal Bahadur Shastri Mahavidyalaya, Dharmabad. He is also working as a member of the other Organization. On 20th May, 2003, the news item was published in daily Ekmat with reference to the shifting of liquor shop from Yatala to Dharmabad. The respondent no.3 i.e. original complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner. It was alleged in the said complaint that, prior to one month of appearing of the said news item, the petitioner herein approached to the complainant ...
Sachin @ Satish and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-25-2014
P.R. Bora, J. 1. Applicants have filed the present application for allowing them to compound the offense registered against them vide Crime No.15/2014, at Police Station, Wadvani, district Beed, for the offense under Sections 354-B, 295-A, 34 of IPC, 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as SC and ST Act) and under Sections 3 and 7 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and, consequently, for quashing further investigation in the said crime. Original complainant is applicant no.4 in the present application. 2. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicants. Learned Counsel submitted that with the intervention of elders, the matter between the present applicant Nos.1 to 3 and present applicant no.4 i.e. the original complainant has been settled and that applicant no.4 does not now want to pursue the matter further. Learned Counsel further submitted that applicant no.4, in her statement record...
Motanbai Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-25-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This criminal appeal is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 17/10/2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada in Sessions Case No. 36 of 1999 convicting the appellant therein, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellantaccused is sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for life, and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/, in default to payment of fine, she has to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for one year. The appellantaccused is acquitted of an offence punishable under Section 498(A) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution can be briefly narrated as under :. Deceased Sangitabai was the daughter of PW3 Gambhir Chitte and was given in marriage to original accused No. 2 Ishwar Mahire resident of village Varul, Taluka Shahada, District Nandurbar. After marriage, Sangitabai came to her matrimonial house at Varul and started cohabiting with her husband. Original accused Nos. 1...
Harischandra Bhanudas Lande Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-25-2014
Oral Judgment [1] Present Writ Petition is filed by the husband. According to him, the learned Judicial Magistrate, [F.C.], Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar committed serious mistake in law in granting monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs.200/- in favour of his wife [ Resp.No.2 ] vide Judgment and Order dated 19th December, 1997 passed in Cri.Misc.Appln.No.80/1994 and according to the husband, the learned Revisional Court further erred in confirming the said Judgment and Order, granting maintenance in favour of the wife, by his Judgment and Order dated 24th April, 2001, passed in Cri. Revn. Application No.11/1998. [2] I have heard Mr. L.B. Pallod, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. D.R. Jaybhar, learned counsel appearing for Resp.Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. D.B. Bhange, learned A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra. [3] Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were constrained to institute proceedings U/Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, [F.C.], Sh...
Dada Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-25-2014
Shinde, J. 1. This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30.11.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Sessions Case No.30 of 2011 thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. vide Section 235 of Cr.P.C., and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/, in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant / accused is in Jail from 30.11.2010. 2. The prosecution case as emerges from the record is, as under: The deceased Begambai was married with the accused. She had two sons out of the marriage. Both sons reside separate. Deceased and accused were residing at Sindhkheda. 3. Deceased had earned wages by labour work of plucking cotton. Accused was not doing any work and he was addicted to liquor. On 20.11.2010 at about 8 a.m., accused demanded money to the deceased for consuming liquor. Deceased r...
Narayan Ashok Ragde and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra. Through ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-24-2014
[1] Being dis-satisfied by the Judgment and Order of conviction dated 21st October, 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 2, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.409 Of 2011, the appellants have preferred the present Criminal Appeal. The Court below convicted both the appellants for the offence punishable U/Section 376(g) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [ In short, the I.P.Code ] and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten [10] years and also directed to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- [ Rs.Ten Thousand only] each, and in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment of nine [9] months. They were also convicted for the offence punishable U/Section 366(A) read with 34 of the I.P.Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five [5] years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- [ Rs. Five Thousand only ] each, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six [6] months. The appellants were also convicted for the offence punishable U/Sectio...
Liladhar Latkan Sapkale Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-24-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant, aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on 8th December, 2011, thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/, in default, to suffer further R.I. for two months. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is as under: On 29.06.2010, deceased Suresh Eknath Sapkale returned to his house in the evening after finishing his agricultural work and thereafter he had his food. At about 10.30 p.m. he was lying over a Cot in the courtyard of the house and at that time, accused Liladhar Latkan Sapkale came there in drunken condition and assaulted the deceased with a sickle. He caught hold of the sickle and at that time, his palm also got injured. Pralhad Eknath Sapkale (PW4), Vasudeo Hari Sapkale and wife of deceased PW2 Latabai came there and took the sickle from the hand of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »