Orissa Court November 1991 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.
Rabindra Prasad Singh and ors. Vs. Smt. Lila Bala Singh and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-04-1991
Reported in: 73(1992)CLT420; 1992CriLJ1716; II(1992)DMC285
D.P. Mohapata, J.1. The petitioners have filed this application underSection 482, Criminal Procedure Code assailing the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jajpur Road on 21-6-1988 in I.C.C. No 34 of 1988 taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 328 and 494, I.P.C. read with Sections 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and issuing nonbailable warrant against the petitioners for their production in the Court of Session The short question that arises for determination is whether the said order is vitiated due to non-compliance with the provision in Section 202(2) proviso 2. The factual backdrop of the case relevant for the present Purpose may be stated thus :The opp. party No. 1 Smt. Lilibala Singh lodged a comnlaint in Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jajpur Road (J.M.F.C ) on 13th May, 1988 against the petitioners and opp. party No. 2 Rashmirekha Jena. Petitioner No. 2 Basanta Manjari Singh is the wife of petitioner No. 3 Gangadhar Singh who i...
Pramila Patnaik and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-04-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2385; 1992(I)OLR197
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. In this appeal the appellants assail the judgment and order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jajpur in S. T. Mo. 238/54 of 1989 convicting them of the offences punishable under Sections 304B/498A/306, IPC, and sentencing each of them to undergo R. I. for eight years for the offence under Section 304B and awarding no separate sentence for the other two charges. Appellant No. 1 Pramila Patnaik is the mother-in-law of the deceased Keno @ Subasini Mohanty, appellant No. 2 Prabodh Kumar, Patnaik is her husband and appellant No. 3 Subodh Chandra Patnaik @ Subodh Kumar Patnaik is her brother-in-law (younger brother of Prabodh Kumar Patnaik).2. The deceased Subasini had married Probodh on 7-5-1987. Her parents are residents of village Talapada under Dhamnagar Police Station in the district of Balasore. Prabodh's parents reside in village Balarampur under Dharmasala Police Station in the district of Cuttack. The incident giving rise to the criminal case took place on 3-...
Karnam Laxmipati Padmini Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-04-1991
Reported in: 1993CriLJ219; 1992(I)OLR262
D.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. Being unsuccessful in persuading the Courts below to grant her prayer for interim release of the seized timber to hat, the petitioner filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to release the same in her favour. 2. The petitioner Smt. Karnam Laxmipati Padmini claims to be the proprietor of the firm M/s. Lotus Engineering Enterprises at Vishakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh. It is her case that her firm purchased 749.57 cubic feet of timber comprising of 17.21 cubic feet non-sal and 732.36 cubic feet sized teak planks from M/s. Sarala Timbers at Laxmi Sagar in the District of Puri. When the said timber was being loaded in a wagon at Bhubaneswar Station by one Satish Chandra Parija on 5-5-1985 for being transported to Visakhapatnam the Range Officer Bhubaneswar seized the timber since no transit permit could be produced either by the railway staff or by the person who was loading the goods in the wagon authorising transport of the same to Vis...
Rashiklal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-1991
Reported in: (1991)100CTR(Ori)242; [1992]196ITR106(Orissa)
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the assessee. The statement of case on the following question of law has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the commission paid by the assessee-firm to Sri Rashiklal P. Rathor (individual) is allowable under Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a deduction while computing the business income of the assessee ?'2. The assessee is a partnership firm which carries on business in sale and purchase of several commodities as well as of operation of a mining lease. The following are partners of the firm :(a) Popatlal Devram, (b) Jayantilal Jagmal, (c) Pragji Devram, (d) Ratilal Odhavji, (e) Rashiklal P. Rathor. 3. Popatlal is the father of the last mentioned partner Rashiklal. On April 1, 1957, there was an oral partition of the share of Popatlal in the firm amongst Popatlal, his wife...
Krushna Chandra Bisoi Alias Bisoyi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1766
ORDERL. Rath, J.1. The petitioner having been convicted Under Section 307, IPC and sentenced to R.I. for three years for causing multiple stab injuries to P.W. 1 and his appeal against the conviction having failed, has approached this Court in revision.2. The facts in a nutshell, as revealed by the prosecution, are that P.W. 1 had been suspecting illicit affair between Tribeni, the wife of his elder brother Bhuban and the petitioner and that he had also informed the same to his brother but who had not taken any action in the matter. He also got the matter agitated in the village Panchayat but there Bhuban had rather opined as to why his wife was being unnecessarily alleged against. All the same, P.W. 1 was on the look out to catch hold of the petitioner red-handed and on the day of occurrence, 7-8-1983 at about 9-00 p.m. he saw the petitioner in the room of Tribeni. Both P.W. 1 and his brother reside jointly and had three rooms of which one was occupied by Bhuban and another by him and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›