Mumbai Court March 2014 Judgments
The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs. Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokad ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Oral Judgment: (V.K. Tahilramani, J.) 1. The Confirmation Case No.6 of 2013 arises out of the Reference made by the learned Special Judge (PCFSO Act) Thane in Special Case No.1 of 2013 for confirmation of the death sentence awarded to the accused Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokade. By judgment and order dated 07.06.2013 in Special Case No.1 of 2013, the learned Special Judge (PCFSO Act) Thane convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to capital punishment of death. By the very same judgment and order, the accused was also convicted under Sections 376, 376(2)(f), 377, 363, 364, 367 and 201 of IPC. The accused was also convicted under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 and Section 5(h),(i),(k),(l) and (m) Pg 2 punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act (in short, 'PCFSO Act'). For the offence under Sections 376, 376(2)(f), 377 of IPC and offence under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 and offence un...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay More @ Viju @ Rahul Shantaram More and Others Vs. the State of M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
1. All these appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 11.4.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sewri, Mumbai thereby convicting all the 7 accused for the offence of dacoity under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code sentencing them to suffer R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.5,000/- each, i/d RI for 9 months each. They were also held guilty for the offence under section 397 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to suffer RI for 7 years each. They were also held guilty for the offence punishable under section 37(i)(a) r/w section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and were sentenced to suffer S.I. for six months each and to pay fine of Rs.100/- each or suffer S.I. for 8 days each. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: The incident of dacoity had taken place in the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Khar branch, S.V. Road, Mumbai on 16.8.2004. The appellants/accused have looted the bank at the point of revolver and knife and have taken cash worth of Rs.2,38,844/- and...
Tag this Judgment!Shrirampur Education Society Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. By order dated 19-09-2001, the petitioner was protected. By order dated 29-11-2001, the petition was admitted and the interim relief granted to the petitioner was continued. 2. I have heard Shri R.N. Dhorde, learned Senior Advocate along with Shri Mobin Shaikh for the petitioner and Shri K.B. Choudhari, for the Provident Fund Authorities respondent Nos. 1 to 5. 3. By an order dated 19-11-1997, the respondent No. 1/Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, (R.P.F.C.), Mumbai, made the petitioner/ society amenable to the jurisdiction of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (E.P.F.M.P. Act) 1952. By the said order the Provident Fund Act was made applicable to the petitioner/society and all its establishments/ Branches/ Departments with effect from 01-08-1982. It is thereafter that the recovery proceedings in accordance with the Act were initiated against the petitioner/society. I do not find it necessary to go into the entire facts set out in this ...
Tag this Judgment!GramIn Vikas Shikshan Sanstha, Through Its Secretary and Another Vs. B ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dt.22.12.2006 passed by the Principal District Judge, Gadchiroli in Regular Civil Appeal No.5 of 2004 whereby the appeal was dismissed. The said appeal arose from the judgment and decree dt.16.3.2004 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.9 of 2000 by Joint Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Gadchiroli whereby the suit was decreed and the defendants were directed to deliver possession of the suit land bearing Survey No.244, area 0.80 hectors situated at village Rangi, Tq. Dhanora, District Gadchiroli. 2. The suit afore-mentioned was instituted seeking the relief of possession, damages as well as inquiry into mesne profit. The plaintiff claimed ownership and possession of the suit property and also relied upon a map filed along with the plaint. The plaintiff had alleged that there was encroachment made by or on behalf of the defendants and the plaintiff came to know about it in the month of May, 1993 and hence, he objected the act of...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra B. Kasare Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Oral Order: Chief Justice) 1. Learned counsel for respondents prayed for adjournment on the ground that learned Addl.Solicitor General has been instructed to appear in this matter. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of defence adopted by respondents, we do not consider it necessary that learned Addl.Solicitor General shall be troubled for a small matter like this. Rule. Returnable forthwith. 2. This is an unfortunate case where the petitioner, working under Assistant Garrison Engineer, Naval Work, Uran, District: Raigad as a Refrigerator Mechanic, suffered a paralytic stroke in the year 2006. The aforesaid stroke rendered him permanently disabled by 50% and to add to his woes the respondents are failing to reimburse his medical bills for small amounts between Rs.2000/and Rs.5000/-. Thus, leading him to knock the doors of this Court for relief. 3. The petitioner was employed in the office of respondent No.6 on 13 December 1982. On 11 July 2006, when ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs. Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokad ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Oral Judgment: (V.K. Tahilramani, J.) 1. The Confirmation Case No.6 of 2013 arises out of the Reference made by the learned Special Judge (PCFSO Act) Thane in Special Case No.1 of 2013 for confirmation of the death sentence awarded to the accused Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokade. By judgment and order dated 07.06.2013 in Special Case No.1 of 2013, the learned Special Judge (PCFSO Act) Thane convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to capital punishment of death. By the very same judgment and order, the accused was also convicted under Sections 376, 376(2)(f), 377, 363, 364, 367 and 201 of IPC. The accused was also convicted under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 and Section 5(h),(i),(k),(l) and (m) Pg 2 punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act (in short, 'PCFSO Act'). For the offence under Sections 376, 376(2)(f), 377 of IPC and offence under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 and offence un...
Tag this Judgment!Farman Imran Shah @ Karu Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
A.S. Gadkari, J. This Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 ('MCOC Act' for brevity) thereby challenging the order passed by the Learned Special Judge, Pune under the MCOC Act, below Exhibit 4 in MCOCA Special Case No.7 of 2012, thereby rejecting his application preferred under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge. The Appellant questions the correctness of the said order dated 4 March 2013 passed below Exhibit 4 in Special case No.7 of 2012. The Appellant has challenged the said order mainly on two grounds i.e. (i) that there is no material at all on record for framing a charge against him and (ii) there is a total non application of mind of the competent authorities while granting prior approval as contemplated under Section 23(1)(a) and sanction as contemplated under Section 23(2) of the MCOC Act. 2. It appears from the record that the complainant Smt. Parvin Anwar Shaikh has lodged ...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh K. Naik and Others Vs. State of Goa Through the Chief Secretary, ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
R.S. Dalvi, J. 1. Heard. Rule. Made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. These are four of the several writ petitions filed in this court challenging orders of cancellation of the appointments of the petitioners to various posts in the Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, State of Goa, the Code of Conduct having come into force in view of the elections. Certain complaints having been received with regard to the appointments in certain specified sectors as having been made despite and after the Code of Conduct having come into force and having been made known to the appointing authority, the State Government instituted an inquiry. The result of the inquiry demonstrated various irregularities and illegalities in the selection process. Hence, the State Government issued orders of cancellation of appointments. Two of the writ petitions challenge such notification and orders and pray for various ancillary reliefs. Two other writ petitions require the issue of appoin...
Tag this Judgment!State, Through Medha Dessai, Drug Inspector Vs. Vinod Sharma and Anoth ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
1. Heard Mr. Lawande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (A.P.P., for short), appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. This appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 28/10/2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa ('Trial Magistrate') in Criminal Case No.91/S/2007/B thereby acquitting the respondents (accused persons) of the offence punishable under Section 27(b)(ii) read with Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ('the Act' for short). 3. The Drugs Inspector, Panaji, Mrs. Medha Dessai had filed a private complaint against both the accused persons for contravention of Section 18(c) punishable under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Act. The case of the complainant was as follows:- The accused no.1 was running the Shop No.4 situated in Calangute Residency at Calangute and accused no.2 was the lessee of the said shop taken from Goa Tourism and Development Corpora...
Tag this Judgment!Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Raghunath Ganpat Sheg ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Oral Judgment: (Common) 1. Heard Shri Wankhede, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Deshpande, the learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 “ employee. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the judgment and order dated 20.01.2004, passed by the Industrial Court at Yavatmal, in Complaint ULP No. 374/1999. The complaint has been allowed and the order of reappointment of the complainant as fresh employee has been set aside and the complainant is directed to be treated as continuous in service. The relief of backwages has been denied. 3] The employee preferred Writ Petition No. 3371/2004 before this court challenging the judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court on 20.01.2004 to the extent it deprived him of backwages. This writ petition was dismissed by the judgment and order dated 24.01.2006. The present writ petition is preferred by the employer challenging the same order passed by the Industrial Court to the extent it sets aside the order of r...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »