Mumbai Nagpur Court May 2016 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.
The State of Maharashtra, through the Station Officer Vs. Santosh
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-19-2016
Oral Judgment: (Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. The State Government has questioned the acquittal of respondent by 1st Adhoc A.S.J. Amravati in Sessions Trial No. 65 of 2003 on 15th September, 2004. As the appeal is more than 5 years' old, it has been listed in Summer Vacation before the Special Bench for final hearing. Counsel appointed for respondent through Legal Aid Sub Committee is not available. Learned APP Smt. Rashi Deshpande for appellant State. The matter was heard on 18th May, 2016 and came to be adjourned to today as part heard. Today we have heard learned APP Smt. Rashi Deshpande further. 2. The story of prosecution is, the family of deceased Babarao and accused/respondent Santosh were having long standing enmity. On 2nd December, 2002, at about 6 p.m., Babarao was proceeding on bicycle from his house towards hutment area. When he reached on tar road, respondent suddenly came there and assaulted him with axe. He fell down from his bicycle. The assault was witnessed by Vasant Deshmuk...
Viransingh @ Simansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-11-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard learned advocate for the respective appellant and learned A.P.P. for the respondent. 2. The appeal was filed by two appellants challenging the judgment passed by Sessions Court convicting the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 399 of the Indian Penal Code and directing the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.Five Hundred and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The Sessions Court convicted the appellant No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.Five Hundred and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. During pendency of the appeal the appellant No.2 died and by the order dated 25th June, 2015 the appeal of the appellant No.2 is disposed as abated. 3. Shri R.H. Raolani, advocate for the appella...
Waman Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-10-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 2. The appellant has challenged the judgment passed by the Sessions Court convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.200/- and in default payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. 3. The case of the prosecution is : The prosecutrix-Anusayabai was working as labour at the relevant time. The construction site being near the house of the accused, on the night of the incident when the prosecutrix was sleeping in Chhapri, the accused committed rape on her under the threat to kill her. According to the prosecutrix, the accused assured to marry her if she became pregnant and because of his assurance she did not disclose about the incident to anybody. The accused repeated the act on 2-3 occasions. On the report of the prosecutrix, the crime was registered, i...
Ramswaroop and Others Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Nagpur an ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-06-2016
P.N. Deshmukh, J. 1. Both these petitions having similar facts can be disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In Writ Petition No. 2423/2003, challenge is to order dated 10/4/2003 passed by respondent whereby petitioners' cases under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) are transferred from Wardha (Maharashtra) to Jodhpur (Rajasthan) while in Writ Petition No. 1455/2004 challenge is to similar orders passed on 15/12/2003 and 28/1/2004 by respondent whereby income tax cases of petitioners therein are transferred from Nagpur (Maharashtra) to Jodhpur (Rajasthan). In Writ Petition No. 2423/2003 by interim order dated 24/6/2003 and in Writ Petition No. 1455/2004 by interim order dated 26/3/2004, the parties were directed to maintain status quo. 3. Following facts would be necessary to reveal the controversy involved in the petitions : Facts in Writ Petition No. 2423/2003 are that petitioner no.1 is the Managing Partner of the firm M/s. Jagdishprasad Ramswaroop (pet...
Sachin Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-06-2016
P.C. 1. Prima facie, we are of the view that invoking the provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MOCA) was not justified in the facts of the case, inasmuch as the dispute appears to be civil in nature. 2. In that view of the matter, issue notice to respondents, returnable after six weeks. 3. Mr V.A. Thakre, learned APP waives service on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3. Hamdast granted for respondent no.4. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP on the question of grant of interim relief. 5. On account of invoking the provisions of MOCA, the applicants have been detained since 24.1.2016. 6. We have already observed that prima facie the provisions of MOCA would not be applicable. However, it appears that the Investigating Officer, for the reasons best known to him, has invoked the provisions of MOCA. On account of invoking the provisions of MOCA, the applicants are behind the bars for a period of almost three months. 7. We would co...
Rahul and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Urba ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-06-2016
1. By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the legality and correctness of the order dated 20.2.2016 passed by the respondent no. 2, the Hon'ble Minister, thereby disqualifying the petitioners under the provisions of Sections 55B and 42 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1965). 2. The petitioners, when the impugned order was passed, were or had been the part of the Municipal Council, Katol, in such capacities as petitioner no. 1 being the President; petitioner no. 2 being the Ex-President and the Councillor and petitioner nos. 3 to 10 being the councillors and petitioner no. 10 being a co-opted councillor. They were disqualified by respondent no.2 for the reason that they were found to have indulged in misconduct and disgraceful conduct. The alleged controversial conduct of the petitioners related to the allotment of some minor works to one contractor, Shri Bambal. 3. Some councillors...
N.J. Nayudu and Company Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation and ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-06-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal filed under Section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short, the said Act) takes exception to the order dated 02.02.2007 passed by the learned Member, Employees State Insurance Court Nagpur, in proceedings under Section 75 of the said Act. By the said order the application under Section 75 of the said Act came to be dismissed and the demand towards contribution made by the respondent has been confirmed. 2. The facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that, the appellant is a registered partnership firm carrying on business of exhibition of films. Four theaters are being run by the appellant in which it had engaged its own employees. The establishment conducted by the appellant is governed by the provisions of the said Act and the coverage is with effect from 27.11.1976. On 15.02.1978 an inspection was carried out by the Inspector of the Corporation. During said inspection the coverage of employees of the cycle stand and canteen in ...
The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer and Others Vs ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-05-2016
B.R. Gavai, J. 1. Since the learned Sessions Judge, Nagpur by judgment and order dated 4.2.2016 in Sessions Trial No. 488/14 has awarded death penalty to the accused Nos. 1 and 2, the reference has been made to this Court for confirmation in Criminal Confirmation Case No. 1/16. 2. Both the accused/appellants have also preferred appeals being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 4.2.2016. Though both the appellants are condemned persons, for the sake of convenience, hereinafter we will be referring to them as accused. 3. The prosecution case in nutshell as could be gathered from the material placed on record is thus: PW. 1 Dr. Mukesh Chandak, the first informant, is a resident of GuruVandana Housing Society, Lakadganj Road, Nagpur. PW.1 Dr. Mukesh Chandak as well as his wife Premal are both Dentists by profession and running a clinic known as Chandak Dental Clinic which is located at Darodkar Square, Central Avenue Road, Nagpur. The couple was blessed wit...
Rattan India Power Limited Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Ch ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-05-2016
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of certiorari and after setting aside adverse orders, a direction to the respondents to apply Irrigation Potential Restoration Charges (hereinafter referred to as IRC), as per Government Resolution dated 21.02.2004 with respect to the water allocated to the petitioner, based on deficit in water for irrigation as per the latest report. The prayers have been amended and a prayer to restrain the respondents from recovering interest as per demand letters dated 17.01.2013 and 04.02.2013 has been added. Hiwever, no arguments are advanced on this interest aspect. 2. It appears that the petition was presented at Bombay as Writ Petition No. 1487 of 2013 and there, on 05.05.2014, this Court noted that ad interim order / arrangement was operating as per statement of respondents made before it on 26.02.2013. On 17.06.2014, the Court noticed that the petiti...
Kailash Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-05-2016
Per Court: 1. The applicant/accused No. 1 has preferred this application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing Criminal Case No. 57/1994, pending on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhandara as well as to set aside the order dt. 26.04.2010 passed in the matter granting permission to complainant to lead secondary evidence. 2. Before appreciating the submissions advanced, it is necessary to consider few facts leading to filing of the present application. The respondent filed criminal complaint for offence u/s 18(a)(i) r/w Section 16(a) and punishable u/s 27(d) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (in short the said Act ) as against nine accused which includes the applicant/accused No. 1 alleging therein that the accused Nos. 1 to 7 are the Directors of M/s. Dujohn Laboratories Ltd., Indore the accused No. 9. Accused No. 8 is the employee of accused No. 9 Company, who works in the capacity as Dy. General Manager. The accused were holding license in Form 28, bearing No. 28689 dt. 22.2.89 valid...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »