Mumbai Court March 2013 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.
Bhagwan Alias Bapu Narhari Bondre Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) The Appellant who stands convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2000/- in default of which to undergo S.I. for one year, R.I. for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in default of which to undergo S.I. for six months and R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- in default of which to undergo S.I. for three months, by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, by Judgment dated 18.06.2004, in Sessions Case No.507 of 2001, by this Appeal questions the correctness of his conviction and sentence. 2. Facts in brief as are necessary for the decision of this Appeal may briefly be stated thus:- PW-11, P.I. Surendra Deshmukh, who was attached to Police Station Jejuri, District Pune on 21.07.2001, recorded the report of PW-1 Amol in respect of his mother and his brother Abhijit being missing from the house since 16.07.2001. On the same day i.e. ...
Madhukar Ramchandra Keni Appellant Vs. Vasant Jagannath Patil and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. Admit. Counsel for the Respondents waives service. The Appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal, by consent and on the request of learned counsel. 2. A suit was filed in 1993 before this Court on 27 April 1993 by Sitabai Jagannath Patil and Mathurabai Ramchandra Kini seeking, inter alia, declarations in regard to the invalidity of certain Release Deeds dated 25 June 1981 and 16 April 1985 and of a Development Agreement dated 10 April 1985. Possessory and injunctive reliefs were sought in the suit. On 16 December 1993, consent terms were filed in the suit in relation to two properties. The suit was to proceed in respect of other properties. 3. Sitabai, the original First Plaintiff, died on 19 December 1992. Upon her death, Defendant nos.29 and 30 were originally brought on record as her heirs and were arrayed as Plaintiff Nos.1 and 1(a) but they were subsequently transposed as Defendant Nos.29 and 30. The sole surviving Plaintiff Mathurabai died on 1...
Dr. Suresh and Others Vs. Wing Commander Ramesh
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. Awchat, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Ketki Jaltare, learned counsel for the non-applicant. 2. Admitted. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. The applicants are facing trial before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Ramtek for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 465 and 467 of Indian Penal Code along with other connected offences at the instance of the respondent. It is a private complaint case. 4. The respondent had made an application for issuance of summons to the office of Revenue Commissioner for production of the original alleged forged document which is in the custody of the Additional Revenue Commissioner, Nagpur. The said prayer was opposed by the applicants. The learned trial Court granted the prayer and directed issuance of summons for production of document from the office of Revenue Commissioner. 5. The applicants/original accused have challenged the said order in the present application. I...
Sakharam Vs. Bhagirathibai and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard. 2. The writ petitioner, father of the then minor Shivanand, moved application in terms of Section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to learned Judicial Magistrate F.C. for custody of child from respondent no.2 - Shantabai. Learned Judicial Magistrate F.C. directed such custody of child precisely on the ground that respondent no.2 did not object for the same. Matter was carried by respondent no.2 in Criminal Revision No.153 of 2001 and the same was allowed. Consequently, petitioner - father is before this Court. 3. Rule was issued in Writ Petition on 5th December, 2012 with interim relief. 4. There is no quarrel about the status of petitioner to be father of the then minor Shivanand and also that Santoshibai, wife of petitioner, expired in a motor accident. Respondent no.2 Shantabai is sister of mother-in-law of petitioner. In the said motor accident, in fact, Shivanand had also suffered injuries. The right of the petitioner for custody of the child is unbridled...
Mohd. YousufuddIn Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: The Tree Officer, on 21st December, 2002, passed order confiscating truck bearing registration No.MH-26-B-3482 in terms of Section 4 of Maharashtra Felling of Trees (Regulation) Act, 1964, for transporting mango tree stems, weighing around 8 to 9 tons. 2. Rule was issued on 5th April, 2003, interim relief was refused. The truck in question is not with the petitioner. 3. On 15th May, 2001, the truck bearing registration No.MH-26-B-3482 was noticed transporting mango stems. It was intercepted. It was without any permit. The driver of truck informed that he has no valid authorisation issued by competent authority. Resultantly, offence vide Crime No.1 of 2001 dated 15th May, 2001 was registered in terms of Sections 41 and 42 of Indian Forest Act having committed breach of Section 3 thereof. Truck was handed over to Police Patil, Adampur and receipt was obtained. However, after some time, truck was, illegally, removed from the possession of Police Patil, Adampur which was cha...
Niranjansing Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
The appellant questions conviction recorded in Sessions Case No.55/2009 for offense under Section 395 of IPC, directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-; in default, rigorous imprisonment for three months, by order dated 15.9.2011 of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Majalgaon, district Beed. 2. FACTS: (a) In the night of 15.9.2009, PW No.1 Dilip Sable and Dnyanoba Sable were sleeping in the jewellery shop of his uncle, Omkar Jewellers with Babasaheb Arjun Muli, Arjun Laxman Jadhav, Santosh Balasaheb Solunke, Sandip Chaganrao Chalak. As per practice, said Dilip had carried gold ornaments of his shop Kedareshwar Jewellers to the shop of Omkar Jewellers to be safely stacked. At about 4 a.m., Santosh heard rattling noise of disturbance to shutter and, resultantly, they woke up. They were stunned to see five persons, muffled, barged in the shop by curving the shutter. They were armed with knife, iron bars. All of a sudden, those persons start...
Lalit Vs. Vandana and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Dr. Jamal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Satpute, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith by consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the order passed by the Family Court, Nagpur, in Petition No.E-11/2008 rejecting the application of the petitioner for amendment of his reply in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. The petitioner is the respondent before the Family Court in a petition for maintenance filed by his wife. The evidence of the applicant/wife was concluded and thereafter the petitioner made an application for amendment of reply. The learned trial Court rejected the application on the ground that the amendment cannot be carried out in view of the amended provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The apprehension of the petitioner, therefore, is that he will not be able to lead evidence in respect of further developments....
State of Maharashtra Vs. Sadashiv Shankar Mali and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard extensively. Acquittal recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Sessions Case No.122/1996 for offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 143, 147, 452, 504, 506, 332, 395 r/w 149, 323 and 427 of IPC, dated 29.11.2001, is questioned. The appeal was admitted on 1.3.2004. 2. The incident in the school has allegedly taken place on 6.4.1996 when PW 4, the complainant Satav was working as Head Master in the school. Few ladies had allegedly barged, there was altercation. They smeared black colour to the complainant and few had extended fists blows to him. Madan Nimba Choudhari was in another cabin. He was also allegedly thrashed by few of the ladies when male were standing outside the cabin of said Madan. PW 6 -Baburao Wagh refers in his evidence in chief that, he was serving in the institution during the last 35 years. Initially he was junior clerk, later, he was promoted as senior clerk. He states that the incident has taken place on 6.4.1996 at around 10 ...
Mormugao Stevedores' Association and Another Vs. Union of India, throu ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-04-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. By this petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs: (a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a declaration and/or an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of a mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing and ordering the respondents nos. 1 to 3 herein, to forthwith forbear and desist themselves from in any way resiling or acting contrary to or in consistent with the provisions of the statutorily entered Memorandum of Settlement dated 4/2/1998; ( b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or directions commanding the respondents nos.1 and 3 herein to forthwith implement and act in accordance with the Memorandum of Settlement dated 4/2/1998 including and to take steps and issue appropriate orders to give representation to th...
Nafis Taufiq Shaikh Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-2013
AbhayM. Thipsay, J. 1 The appellant was prosecuted on the allegation of having committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The learned 5th Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, after holding a trial found him guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life. Being aggrieved by his conviction and the sentence imposed upon him, the appellant has approached this court by filing the present appeal. 2 The prosecution case before the trial court was as follows: TaufiqShaikh (PW2) was residing with his first wife and children in a village in District Fatehpur, State of Uttar Pradesh. The appellant is the son of Taufiq Shaikh from his first wife. Taufiq then came to reside at Vadgaon, Maval, in Pune District. He then contracted a second marriage with Parveen (the deceased) and started residing with her at Vadgaon, Maval. Parveen had given birth to a son by name Salim from Taufiq. The appell...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »