Mumbai Aurangabad Court July 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.
Popat and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
1. The Appeals arise out of Judgment of conviction passed against the Appellants-accused (hereafter referred as accused- with numbers as given to them in the trial Court and mentioned above in the cause title) by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, in Sessions Case No.76 of 1999, on 18th January 2000. The 13 accused were convicted for offence under Section 365 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.). Additionally accused No.13 was convicted for offence under Section 368 of I.P.C. However, trial Court passed order of acquittal of accused Nos. 1 to 13 of offence punishable under Section 363, 364-A read with 34 of I.P.C. For offence under Section 365 of I.P.C. the sentence imposed was of simple imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.1500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year. For offence under Section 368 of I.P.C., sentence imposed was simple imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.1500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for ...
Dhananjay Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Order: 1. Heard both sides. 2. In both the present applications, the applicants, who were arrested in Crime No.9/2014, registered with Patoda Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under section 302, 201 read with section 34 of the I.P. Code and under section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, out of which now the Sessions Case No.71/2014 is pending on the file of Sessions Judge, Beed, are seeking their release on bail. 3. The submissions of both sides and the record would show that on 15th January, 2014, deceased Shrimant Subhash Pawar has died in the Primary Health Centre at Patoda. The statements of the Medical Officer as well as compounder would show that some unknown persons had brought him there with information that they themselves had beaten him as he had attempted to commit the theft in the Ginning and Pressing Mill of the father of the present applicant Vijaysing @ Bala Ramkrushna Bangar i.e. the appli...
Rafiq and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
Shinde, J. 1. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that on 20th August, 2005, there was quarrel between the petitioners and one Chhotu Hasan Gowli and another person by name Shaikh Kasam Hasan Gowli near Mamaji Talkies in Bhusawal. The petitioners went to Police Station for lodging complaint against the said persons. However, the Police did not register the case. It is submitted that on 23rd August, 2005, the respondents No.3 took the petitioners to the Police Station and made them to sit for 4 hours without informing them anything as to why they were brought to the police station. Later on, the respondent No.3 asked the petitioners to pay Rs.10,000/- stating that he would not register any case against Ganga Kanhaiya and Burhan Buddu but, would initiate proceedings under Section 107 of Cr.P.C., and would set them free. It is further submitted that the arrest of the petitioners on 23rd August, 2005 was without following the procedure. It is further submitted that ...
Devakibai Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
Oral Judgment: (S.S. Shinde, J.) 1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicants and learned APP for State. 2. Since all these criminal applications raise a common question of law, they are being disposed of by this common Judgment and Order. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicants, inviting our attention to ground No.3, raised in the application, submits that in the light of provisions contained in Section 142 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (for short, the MRTP Act), no prosecution can be instituted without obtaining prior sanction from the competent authority. In support of this contention, learned Counsel invited our attention to the judgment of this court in the matter of Mahesh Shivram Puthran Vs. Commissioner of Police, Thane and Ors. reported in 2011(3) Mh.L.J. (Cri.) 383 and submits that in the instant cases since no previous sanction was obtained before initiation of the subject prosecution, all these criminal applications deserve to be allowed. 4....
Kalawatibai Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and award of M.A.C.P. No.583 of 2006, delivered by M.A.C.T. Nanded. Both sides are heard. 2. The Claims Tribunal has exonerated the Insurance company by holding that a private jeep was used for carrying goods, as transport vehicle and there has been breach of condition of policy. Only the owner of the vehicle has challenged the decision, as she is made liable to pay the compensation and Insurance company is not directed to indemnify the owner. 3. It is the case of the claimants that deceased Vijay was working as driver with respondent No.1. The accident took place on 17.6.2006. It is contended that deceased was driving tempo trax jeep bearing No.MH-38-918 and on that day he was discharging the duties as driver of respondent No.1. The vehicle left the road and gave a dash to a road side tree. The claim was made under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act 1988. 4. The Insurance Company took the defence that there was beach of condition of policy....
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sarjubai and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1. The appeal is filed by the Insurance Company of truck against the judgment and award of claim petition No.51 of 1990, which was pending before the Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad. The Tribunal has directed the Insurance company, present appellant to pay compensation jointly and severally with the owner. It is the case of the Insurance Company that it is not liable to pay anything in view of the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act and the terms of condition of the policy. Both sides are heard. 2. Accident took place on 20.9.1989. The deceased Ramgopal was travelling in the tempo and there was collision between the tempo and one a truck. Ramgopal Loya died on the spot in the accident. The claim was made by widow and issues of Ramgopal and also by other relatives. 3. It is the case of the claimants that deceased was travelling in the tempo. There is no specific contention with regard to the capacity in which the deceased was present in the tempo. 4. Respondent No.7, New India Assurance Compan...
Dhanraj and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1. The appellants (son and mother) are original accused Nos.2 and 3. They were tried along with original accused No.1 Raosaheb Ghadge, (the father of accused No.2 and husband of accused No.3), and accused No.4 Anita and accused No.5 Baban @ Saprasen, (the daughter and other son of original accused No.1 Raosaheb respectively). The victim of the incident was Mangal (hereinafter referred as victim), the wife of accused Dhanraj. 2. The five accused were tried in Sessions Case No.30/1993 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short). The other accused got acquitted of the offence while present appellants- the accused No.2 and accused No.3 were convicted for offence punishable under Section 304-B of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years. They were convicted also for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC, but no separate sentence was imposed. Thus, the present appeal. 3. T...
Fazal Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. By this Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner takes exception to the detention order bearing No.2013/MPDA/DET-1/CB-09 dated 26.08.2013 issued under Section 3(1) of Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 by the Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad. The petitioner has raised several grounds for seeking quashing of the detention order, however, in our opinion, it is not necessary to advert to all the grounds taken in the Petition except ground No.b, which reads as under:- b. It ought to be held that, on 26th August, 2013 petitioner was already in judicial custody, as he made an accuse by an authority in C.R. No. I-34/2013. It is, therefore, unwarranted and unjustified to pass an order of detention while a person is in custody. This shows non-application of mind of the detaining authority. The petitioner says that there were no compelling reasons to pass the...
Nanasaheb Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and award of claim petition No.47 of 2007, which was pending before the Claims Tribunal, Beed. The Tribunal has exonerated the Insurance Company and only on that point the decision is challenged by the original respondent No.1, owner. Heard learned counsels for the appellant, owner and Insurance Company. Learned counsel for claimants was also heard. 2. The accident took place on 5.2.2007 at about 2.00 p.m. on Padalsingi-Pathardi Road, within the jurisdiction of Chaklamba police station. Deceased was present in the minidoor bearing No.MH-23-4386. It is the case of the claimants that deceased Suresh was present in the aforesaid vehicle with his goods, as owner of goods. According to them, goods were gunny bags and wooden stumps (balli). It is contended that due to rash and negligent driving of the mini-door by its driver, respondent No.1, the vehicle turned turtle. Suresh died on the spot in the accident. Claim was made by widow aged about 29 y...
Rajaram Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the Judgment and order passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar dated 3rd February, 1999 in Cri. Revn. Appln.No. 415/1994, the petitioner has filed present Writ Petition. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge was pleased to partly allowed the Cri.Application and awarded monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs.150/- to Respondent No.2, from the date of the Application. 2. This matter is pending for its final disposal since the year 2001. I have heard Mr. S.L. Bhapkar,learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.S. Shinde, learned A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra. Though Respondent No.2 was served long back, his counsel chose not to remain present in the court, when the matter was taken up for its final hearing today. 3. On 29th August, 1992 Ahilyabai filed an application U/Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Ahmednagar. Said application was registered as Cri.M.A.No....
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »