Rajasthan Court December 1982 Judgments
The State of Rajasthan Vs. Nawal Kishore and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-14-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)464
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. The respondents were tried for the offence under Section 6 of the Indian Boilers Act, 1923 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh. By the judgment dated December 31, 1976 they were acquitted of the charge. The State of Rajasthan felt aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal and filed this appeal against the judgment after obtaining leave to appeal under Section 378(iii) of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are as under:- On February 7, 1971 Boilor Inspector inspected Birla Cement Works at Chittorgarh. He found one unregistered Loco Boiler working there which amounted the contravention of sec 6 of the Act. Complaint to that effect was filed in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which on transfer reached the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh. The learned Magistrate road ever the substance of the acquisition to the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Dass and ors. Vs. Nathulal Baraya
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Raj222
Kasliwal, J. 1. Learned singleJudge, by order, dated Sept. 24, 1979, has referred this case to a larger Bench. The point on which the case has been referred is whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to Proceedings under Section 13-A of the Rajasthan premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). While referring the above point learned single Judge has sent the entire case for decision by the larger Bench. 2. Before dealing with the legal question raised in this reference, we would mention the facts of the case. The plaintiff-petitioners filed a suit for eviction against the defendant-non-petitioner on the ground of default in the payment of rent from Nov. 12. 1963 to Oct 20, 1964. The defendant deposited rent under Section 13-A of the Act No. 12 of 1965 and as such the said suit was dismissed. According to the plaintiffs the defendant again made defaults in the payment of rent from Nov. 4, 1970 to April 3, 1973 amounting to rupees 367...
Tag this Judgment!Nasir Mohammed Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-08-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)389
K.D. Sharma, C.J.1. This is an appeal filed by Nasir Mohammed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur, dated May 28, 1977 by which the appellant was convicted under Section 363, of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to under-go rigorous imprisonment for I year and pay fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.2. The prosecution case against the appellant was that he took away Mst. Kalpana, a minor girl out of the keeping of her lawful guardian i.e. her father Shri Radhey Shyam with out the latter's consent on 28.12.75 at 8 A.M. from the shop of one Nathu Lal where she was left by her father Radhey Shyam, who had gone to wash his hands and mouth. The girl was taken away by Nasir Mohammed, appellant, on the false pretext that she was called by her father. The appellant left Kalpana in his mother's brother's house in the day and in the evening he took her away to Selana in the State of Madhya Pradesh where Kalpana...
Tag this Judgment!Kamla and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-08-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)397
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dungarpur dated 1-3-1977. By that judgment the learned trial judge convicted the appellant Kamla under rection 147, 325 and 447 IPC and sentenced him to one year's rigorous imprisonment on the first count, one year's rigorous imprisonment on the second count and one month's rigorous imprisonment on the third count. The appellant Hemji was convicted on the offence under Section 148, 324, 325/149 and 447 IPC and sentenced to 1 year's rigorous imprisonment on the first count, six month's rigorous imprisonment on the second count, one year's rigorous imprisonment on the third count. The appellants Roopa and Dhoolia were convicted for the offences under Section 147, 325/149 and 447 IPC and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment on the first two counts each, six months Rule 1 on the third count and one month RI on the fourth count. Appellants Panchya son of Mawa, Panchya son of ...
Tag this Judgment!Kapoora and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-08-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)422
K.D. Sharma, C.J.1. This is an appeal filed by Kapoora and Jepha against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi, dated 6-5-1977 by which Kapoora was convicted under Section 325, of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to under-go rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/ in default of payment of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for I month. Jepha, on the other hand, was convicted under Section 326. I.P.C. and sentenced to under-go rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonmet for a 2 months.2. The incident that led to the prosecution by the 2 appellants and one Ganga wife of Jepha may briefly be narrated as follows. On 9.4,76 at about 8 or 9 A.M. Manchha Ram was coming back to his house after passing the stool. As soon as he came infront of the gate of the house of Gorkha Jogi, he saw both the appellants standing there. At his sight, the appellants crie...
Tag this Judgment!Nanak Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1229
M.L. Shrimal, J.1. A complaint under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was filed against Nanak Ram. On Oct. 17. 1977 the Assistant Public Prosecutor filed an application to implead Jaman Dass and Gurnamal. On the application filed by the Food Inspector, Kota. the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Kota took cognizance against accused Nos. 2 and 3 also. An application was filed before the learned Magistrate on behalf of the accused for quashine the proceedings on the ground that compliance of the provisions of Clause (i) of Rule 9 of -the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') was not made. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate held that the objections raised before him could be decided after recording of the evidence at the time of final arguments of the case and rejected the application. He subsequently framed charge against the accused for selling adulterated 'Kali Mirch'. Being aggri...
Tag this Judgment!Mangturam Vs. Palaram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-03-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)330
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. This writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 7ch August, 1982 passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Nohar in election petition No. 14/82. By the order aforesaid the Munsif allowed the said election petition filed by Palaram, respondent No. 1, set aside the election of the petitioner Mangturam, as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Mahanderpura is Panchayat Samiti, Nohar, District Sri Ganganagar, and declared respondent No 1 as duly elected as Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat.2. The election for the office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Mahanderpura was held on 10th December, 1981. The petitioner and respondent No. 1 were the only two contesting candidates. The total number of votes which were cast in the election were 1862 out of which 110 votes were rejected as invalid. Out of the 1752 valid votes the petitioner received 879 votes whereas respondent No. 1 received 873 votes and the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Shriniwas Vs. Keshri Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-02-1982
Reported in: AIR1984Raj14; 1982()WLN740
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. A short but interesting question as to whether a person receiving no vote at an election should be considered to have obtained the lowest member of votes or not arises in this case.2. The undisputed facts are that for the election to the office of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Nokha four persons were duly nominated as candidates. The voting was completed in three rounds and the votes obtained by each one of the four candidates in the three rounds ware as under :--Ist roundIInd roundIIIrd round1.Kesarichand5582.Shri Niwas7873.Gangadutt32104.Dev Kishan08-('E' stands (or elimination)3. The respondent Kesarichand obtained the highest number of votes in the third round and as such he was declared elected to the office of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Nokha. The case of the petitioner-appellant is that Devkishan having received no vote in the first round, he should not have been considered at all to have been a candidate at the election and Gangadutt should have bee...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Bal Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-02-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)352
1. This appeal Under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance was filed against the judgment dated March 17, 1982 of the learned single Judge of this Court on April 16, 1982. It was not accompanied by the certified copy of (he order appealed against. On June 9, 1982, the office pointed out some defects and one of the defects was that certified copy of the judgment has not been filed. As the defects were not removed by June 10, 1982 and July 20, 1982, it was ordered that this appeal be listed for orders before the Court on August 26, 1982. The three defects have been repeated in the order sheet dated August 26, 1982 inclusive of the one that certified copy of the judgment has not been filed. Two weeks' time was allowed for removing the defects. A prayer was made on that date that filing of the certified copy may be dispensed with and on that an order was made that this would be considered on the next date. Various dat(sic)s were given by the office for removing the defects. When...
Tag this Judgment!Ved Prakash and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-01-1982
Reported in: 1982WLN(UC)345
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated 19-4-1977 by which appellant Ved Prakash was convicted for the offence under Section 379, of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25, Arms Act and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to undergo 2 months rigorous imprisonment on the first count and two years rigorous imprisonment and a line of Rs. 400/-, in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment on the second count. By the same judgment, appellant Prithvi @ Purshtam was held guilty for the offence under Section 411, of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/ in default to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are as under: Dayal Singh was the younger brother of P.W. 5 Jangir Singh. These two brothers were living separate for about 15 years. Thre...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »