Rajasthan Court March 1978 Judgments
Ramsingh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-15-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)90
R.L. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner Ram Singh has preferred this revision through Jail. He was convicted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and under Rule 3 read with Rule 6 of the Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950 He has been sentenced or the first count to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 50 in default of the payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 15 days, On the second count has been sentenced to three months rigorous imprisonment. The substantial sentences on both the counts were made to run concurrently. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge. Balotra against his aforesaid conviction and sentence. The learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 25 October, 1977 rejected the appeal. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence passed against him, the petitioner has come in revision before this court.2. The case of the prosecution, briefly stated, is that ...
Tag this Judgment!Guman Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-15-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)50
R.L. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner Guman Singh has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings rending against him in Criminal Original Case No. 1724/1975 under Section 54(a) of the Rajasthan Excise Act in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur.2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to this petition may be stated as under; Suhhaugani and party of Jodhpur are the licence-holder for selling liquor. Ratan Singh is the authorised employee to act on behalf of the lincesee for taking delivery of liquor form the Mandore Distillary. He has been so recognized by the Excise Department. The present petitioner was an employee of one Tulchiram, an owner of Truck No. RSQ 5363 and was working as driver of the truck. On behalf of Subhangni and party, Ratan Singh took delivery of 6000 bottles of liquor from the Government Dostillary Mander. This party engaged the truck of Tulchiram on hire to transport that liquor, from Mandor Disilary to their G...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhulal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-14-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)130
R.L. Gupta, J.1. A complaint was filed by Motilal non-petitioner No. 2 against petitioners & some five other persons for the offence under Sections 447, 324 and 147 IPC in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Chhoti Sadri. The complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. The complainant preferred a revision against that order of dismissal of complaint before the Sessions Judge. Pratapgarh The learned Sessions Judge partly accepted the revision observing that prima facie a case under Section 323 and 324 IPC was made out against the petitioner. He directed the Magistrate to proceed further in the matter keeping in view the observations made by him, vide his order dated 30-7-1977. It is against this order that the petitioners have come before this Court.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the complainant.3. The contention on behalf of the petitioners that the revision Bled by the complainant before the Sessions J...
Tag this Judgment!Ramavtar Gupta Vs. Manak Raj and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-13-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Raj186; 1978(11)WLN173
ORDERP.D. Kudal, J.1. This revision petition under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. is directed against the order of the learned Additional Civil Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 2nd July, 1977, whereby the application dated 2nd March, 1977 seeking amendment of the plaint was rejected. It was alleged in the plaint that the suit premises were constructed in the month of April, 1971 and that in view of the then existing law the provisions of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) did not apply to the premises which were constructed after 1st June, 1951 for a period of seven years from the date of completion. This provision contained in Section 2(e) of the Act was deleted by the Ordinance dated 29th Sept. 1975. This ordinance was thereafter replaced by an Act. The contention of the plaintiff is that in view of this legislative change it has become necessary to amend the plaint to bring it in conformity to the requirements of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Pukh Raj Vs. Gram Panchayat Sanchore
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)55
M.L. Joshi, Actg. C.J.1. These two revision application's arise out of the same suit and as most of the facts in them are common, they are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The revision applications arise out of a suit for permanent injunction filed by the plaintiff petitioner against the defendant-non-petitioner, restraining the defendant from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff in respect of certain piece of land. According to the plaintiff the land in question was purchased by his father on 27th of April, 1887 and since then he and his father have been in continuous possession of it as owner. In the written, statement the defendant took the plea that the land in dispute on which his cabin exists is on a khalsa land belonging to the Gram Panchayat Various other pleas were taken by the defendant in his written statement with treed not be mentioned here. The trial court after framing the issues posted the cost for evidence of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's statemen...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh S/O Ganpat Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)114
P.D. Kudal, J.1. This is an application under Section 431 Cr.P.C. praying for issue of a direction that in the event of arrest, the accused applicant may be enlarged on bail.2. The facts of the case, in brief, which re relevant for the disposal of this application are that on 6.2.1978, a first information repost was lodged stating that when the election for the Sarpanch, Panch and Ward Panchs of the Gram Panchayat, Nibhers, were being held, about 60 or 70 persons, who are aslleged to be supporting the candidature of one Ganpatlal, entered the polling booth No. (sic). Where election party No. 237 was working attacked them. It was further contended that the applicant Ram Singh Gujar, took away 49 ballot papers pertaining to the election of the Sarpanch and 123 ballot papers regarding the election of the Ward Panchas and the election lists and ran away in a truck. It was further alleged that Ganpat assaulted the polling officer and tried to take away the boallot-boxes contatining the poll...
Tag this Judgment!Tulsi Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)538
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This appeal by Tulsi Ram through the Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur is directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, dated 25th January, 1973 convicting the appellant under Section 302, IPH and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay of fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.2. The incident that led to the arrest and prosecution of the appellant may be described in brief as follows: In the evening of 12-9 1972 Tulsi Ram appellant visited the house of Kishna deceased for the purposes of taking him to his house for drinking liquor together. Kishan's wife Mst. Dhanni Bai asked the appellant not to take her husband to his house as she did not like that her husband should take in wine along with the appellant The appellant there upon promised Dhanni Bai that he would send her husband back after a short while. The appellant then went away with the dece...
Tag this Judgment!Jai NaraIn Vs. Panna Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)39
R.L. Gupta, J.1. The miscellaneous second appeal has been preferred, by the defendant Jai Narain against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Merta, dated 9/12/1976.2. The plaintiff-respondent Pannalal filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Nagaur for eviction and arrears of rent regarding the suit shop described in the plaint-inter alia on the ground, of reasonable and bonafide necessity iv, well, as on the ground of subletting and defaults in the payment of rent. The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Nagaur, by his judgment and decree dated 19/9/1973, so far the prayer, of ejectment was concerned; both the grounds i.e. of subletting and bonafide and reasonable necessity were not accepted aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Nagaur, the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Merta. While the appeal, was pending before the District Judge, an amendment was made in Section 14 of the Rajasthan Premise...
Tag this Judgment!Kartar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)68
M.L. Jain, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Gangapur City dated June 30, 1977. The appellants were convicted and sentenced by him as fallows:(1) Under Section 395 IPC to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and a fineof Rs. 500/- each, in default thereof to rigorousimprisonment for six months.(2) under Section 323 IPC to rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fineof Rs. 250/- each, in default thereof to undergorigorous imprisonment for 2 months.The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.2. The case against the accused-appellants is that they, along with Hari Singh & 4 others, committed house trespass by night in the house of Pooran Lal Gera, A.S.M. Gangapur City, on the night intervening December 14 and 15, 1974. They inflicted injuries on him, on his wife and his sister-in-law, and carried away their wrist watches and an amount of Rs. 50/. They removed a box also, but left it along with its c...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Deo Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)92
P.D. Kundal, J.1. This is an application under, Section 438 Cr.P.C for issue of a direction that in the event of arrest, the accused-applicant Ram Deo may be enlarged on bail, against whom a case under, Section 450/467 IPC is under investigation.2. It has been contended on behalf of the accused-applicant that on 15-1-1977, a sale deed for a sura of Rs. 1,500/- was executed by Ramdhan in favour of the applicant with respect to Khasra No. 276/2, measuring 2 Bighas situate in village Naya Gaon, tehsil Gangapur City. It was further contended that on 16-6-1977, Ramdhan moved an application before the Tefrsildar, Gangapur, that he had paid Rs. 500/- to the accused Ramdeo add has got the tend bearing Khasra No. 276/- retransferred his name and also got a separate deed executed in his favour. Ramdhan ten filed a civil suit against the petitioner applicant Ramdev in the court of Munsif, Gangapur on 2-11-1977 and prayed that the sale-deed alleged to have been effected in his favour. Ramdhan them...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »