Mumbai Nagpur 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.
Punjab Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The appellant has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Washim for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and he is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. The appellant was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Sessions Trial No.72/1995 and the judgment was delivered on 27-1-1999. 2. Learned Counsel Shri A.D. Girdekar is heard on behalf of the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri A.K. Bangadkar is heard on behalf of the respondent/State. The case of the respondent before the trial Court was that the complainant Ramnath Totla and the appellant were residents of one and the same village and their fields were adjacent to each other. The complainant on 27-11-1994 along with his labours Narendra, Sulochana and Kisan had gone to his field. At about 2-00 p.m. he heard noise by the side o...
Vijay Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur. He has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the former offence and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- for the latter offence. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. The case of the prosecution before the trial Court was that the deceased Meena was married to the appellant about 6 to 7 years prior to the date of incident. For a few initial years the marriage was peaceful and later on the appellant allegedly started demanding money. It is alleged that the appellant was given Rs.18,000/- by mother of the deceased and one Mangalsutra was also given to the deceased by her mother. 3. The incident in question had occurred on 04-5-1996 at about 3-00 a.m. at the house of the deceased and the appellant. The d...
Babulal and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and they are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. 2. The appellants were charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the learned trial Judge found them guilty of the offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Anil Mardikar has submitted that the appellants do not agitate all the points raised by them in appeal. It is submitted that since the description of the weapon, which caused fracture to P.W.1 and the fracture of skull bone of outer table of parietal temporal region of P.W.2 has not come on record, it was not correct on the part of the learned trial Judge to record conviction un...
Prakash Gopalrao Pohare and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Appellant Nos.1 to 6 were accused in Sessions Trial No.33/1997 decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola on 24-8-1998. All the appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 332 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Nos.1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9 have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of fifteen days each for the offences punishable under Sections 143 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 332 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Nos.3, 4, and 5 were released on execution of bail bonds under the Probation of Offenders Act. 2. I have heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Anil Mardikar for the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mrs. Rashi Deshpande for the respondent/State. I have gone through the evidence of witnesses, particularly the evidence of P.W.4-Sukhdeo Sonar, who was...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhaskar and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This is an appeal against acquittal filed by the State against the judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad on 18th May, 2012 in Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2008 acquitting the respondents of the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The said appeal arose out of the judgment and order passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pusad in Regular Criminal Case No.100 of 1998. 2. Respondent Nos.1 to 9 were convicted by the learned trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 149 and 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. They had been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment of six months for the former offence and one month for the later offence. The respondent challenged the judgment and order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class in appeal before the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court by its impugned judgment and order allowed the appeal partly and convicted resp...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Jayshri and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18/8/2012 passed in Claim Petition No.25 of 2006 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-2, Nagpur. 2. The facts of the case may be stated in brief as under.: Respondent No.1 and respondents No.2 and 3 are respectively the wife and parents of the deceased Pramod Gadbail and respondents Nos.4 and 5 are respectively owner and the driver of the offending vehicle Scorpio make bearing registration No.MH-31 BB 5489, which was insured with the appellant at the time of the accident. On the fateful day i.e. on 10/12/2005 the said Scorpio vehicle gave dash to the cycle of deceased Pramod as a result of which, deceased Pramod suffered injuries to which he later on succumbed in the hospital. According to respondents No.1 to 3, the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the said vehicle and, therefore, they filed claim petition against respondents No.4 and 5 and also against the appellant claiming compensation from them. ...
Baba Narayan Chambare Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. None for the appellants. The appellants are in custody since the date of conviction. This Court, therefore, appoints learned counsel Mr. T.U. Tathod to appear on behalf of the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos.436/2012 and 437/2012. 2. The appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 363 read with Section 34, 506-II read with Section 34 and 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Complainant Smt. Nita Wasudeo Meshram aged about 40 years is resident of village Ghorad in Kalmeshwar tahsil of Nagpur district. Appellant in Criminal Appeal No.436 of 2013 is resident of village Ghorad and appellant in Criminal Appeal No.437 of 2012 is resident of Kalmeshwar. The complainant was working in the Company known as 'Issab India Limited' situated at M.I.D.C., Kalmeshwar. She had three children. A son aged about 18 years and daughters aged about 16 and 14 years, respectively. The incident had occurred on 23rd February, 2009. The complainant was returning...
Gangabisan Mayaramji Paliwal Vs. Sindi Vividha Karyakari Sahakari Soci ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-28-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Mr. Deopujari, Advocate holding for Mr. Paliwal, learned counsel for the appellants, makes a request for adjournment of the matter on the ground that Advocate Paiwal is unable to attend the court today. In view of the peculiar facts of the case, request for adjournment is rejected. 2. After having heard Mr. Gode, learned counsel for respondent no.8, following substantial question of law arises for my determination. (i) Whether the courts below committed error in law in not following the mandate of Order 7 Rule 10 of the CPC having concurrently held that the civil Court did not have jurisdiction to try the suit namely; Reg. C. S. No.176/1974 and that the Cooperative Court has? Answer: Yes 3. It is not in dispute that the appellant filed Reg. C. S. No.239/1992 claiming certain reliefs against respondent no.1 and the purchaser of his property that was sold in auction for non payment of dues. The appellant was a member of the cooperative society. The courts below, therefo...
Vinayak and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Appellant No.1 Vinayak Mahadeorao Bhoyar has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7 and appellant No.2 Chirkut Chaituji Dhurve has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity). 2. Appellant No.1 Vinayak Bhoyar was working as Forest Guard and appellant No.2 is his friend. Complainant Ishwar Pawar was resident of village Takali. He was allegedly involved in storing teak wood logs. It is alleged that appellant No.1 had demanded Rs.100/- from said Ishwar Pawar for not prosecuting him. It is alleged that the said amount of Rs.100/- was demanded on 20th March, 1991. After 2-3 days, the complainant was called by appellant No.1 at the house of Sudhakar Bandbail and had again demanded the amount in presence of Sudhakar Bandbail. The complainant did not want to pay the amount and therefore, he lodged report with Anti Corruption Bureau. The trap was laid ...
Mahendra Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant and the victim were found at the house of the victim (P.W.2) by father of P.W.2. The appellant escaped by removing tin sheet of roof. Father of P.W.2 reported the matter to police stating inter alia that he had seen a thief coming out of roof of his house. The incident had occurred at village Satefal. The father of victim had gone to Hinganghat and he returned at about 12-00. On his return, as stated, he had seen the appellant running away from the roof of his house. On arrival of police, the victim was found unconscious. She was taken to police station and her statement was recorded. Her statement revealed that the appellant had committed rape on her. She was sent for medical examination. The appellant was arrested and he was also sent for medical examination. Clothes of the victim and the appellant were seized by the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »