Rajasthan Court October 1983 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.
Babulal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-20-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)547
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. Appellant Babulal was tried before the Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur on charges under Sections 307 and 326 IPC. The Addl. Sessions Judge by his judgment dated 30-9-/977 while acquitting the appellant of the offence Under Section 326 IPC convicted him of the offence under Section 307 IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two months.2. The case of the prosecution is that Ghanshyamdas (PW 1) has his shop at Sadar market near clock tower at Jodhpur. On 28th May, 1977 at about 10 p.m. Ram Chandra (PW 6), the brother of Ghanshyamdas was standing in front of the shop and Asharam (PW 3), Mevaram (PW 4), Gaffar (PW 5) and Tajkhan (PW 7) who were employees of Ghanshyamdas were also standing outside the shop and were cutting jokes with each other. At that time the appellant passed by and asked the servants as to why t...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Gurubux Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-20-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)418
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State after obtaining leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is directed against the judgment dated 1-3 1977 passed by the Munsif and First Class, Magistrate, Jaitaran, in criminal original case No. 24 of 1972 In the aforesaid case, the respondent Gurbux Singh was charged with offences under Sections 304A and 279 I.P.C. and Sections 87/112 of and 89/119 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Judicial Magistrate, by her judgment dated 1-3-1977, while acquitting the respondent of the offences under Sections 304A and 279 of the Indian Penal Code, has convicted him of the offences under Section 87/112 and 89/112 of the Motor Vehicles Act and has sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 100/- on each count and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of ten days.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23 8-1971, at 5.00 p.m , the respondent was the driver of truck No. PUL 4265 and he w...
Mst. Hangami Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-1983
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)47
M.C. Jain, J.1. The appellant Mst. Hangami was prosecuted for the offence under Section 302, IPC, for having murdered her husband Heera on the night intervening 1-11-1976 and 2-11 1976 at his house situated at village Gogunda with grinding stone and Halwani. Bhera, the elder brother of the deceased lodged a verbal report (Ex. P/22) at the police station, Gogunda, on the next day, that is, on 2 11-1976 at 12.00 noon to the effect that Heera's mother in law Mst. Kanku and his wife Mst.Hangami came to his house in the night and awoke him up Mst. Kanku told that his brother Heera has died. Thereupon he required as to how died. Then Mst. Kanku asked him to accompany. Thereafter, Bhera along with Narulal vistited the house of Heera, where they found Heera lying dead near the oven bleeding from head & mouth and by the side of his deadbody, broken pieces of the grinding stones were lying Mst. Hangami was asked. Thereupon she stated that her husband himself threw the grinding stone on his head ...
Mela Ram and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Raj116; 1983()WLN507
ORDERK.S. Lodha, J. 1. The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the acquisition proceedings of the land in dispute. The facts giving rise to this writ petition may be summarised as under:--The petitioners are the joint khatedar tenants of the agricultural land comprising of 16 1/4 Killas in Square No. 2 and 10 Killas in Square No. 3. The land was initially purchased by petitioner No. 1 out of the joint family funds of the petitioners and is being used as ioint family property by all the petitioners. It is alleged by the petitioners that on account of some ill-will against the petitioners, who were not co-operating with the authorities in the Nasbandi Operation Programme started in the days of emergency, the authorities wanted to harass the petitioners. With that in view. the local authorities raised a false plea of the requirement of the aforesaid agr cultural land for the so-called public purpose of constructing a bus stand and motor garage with a waiting room etc. an...
Satya NaraIn and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)339
M.C. Jain, J.1. The petitioners Satya Narain, driver, and Gangadhar, cleaner, of the Taxi car No RJZ 5459, have been convicted of the offence Under Section 4/9 of the Opium Act and have been sentenced to ten months, rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,000/-, and, in default of payment of fine to undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment, by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh (Camp Chittorgarh) by his judgment dated 2-9-1978, dismissing the appeal of the petitioners.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17-8-1974 Shri Roshan Lal Sharma, Preventive Inspector, Narcotics Department (PW 5) with his party had, led ambush in the town of Nimbahera, near J.K. Cement Factory. They observed about 8.30, a m , that the Car No. RJZ 5459 was coming from Mandsaur and going towards Chittorgarh. A sig at was given for stopping the car, but the driver of the car Satya Narain instead of stopping the car, drove away the car with a fast speed. Thereupon, the excise party chased that car and over-to...
Sher Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)331
M.C. Jain, J.1. The Additional Sessions Judge No. 1 Hanumangarh, by his judgment dated 26-11-1977 convicted the appellant Shersingh of the offence Under Section 304, part II, IPC and sentenced him to four years' rigorous imprisonment and Dayawati, appellant No. 2, whowas convicted for the offence Under Section 317, IPC, was given the benefit of probation.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 9-9-1974 Mokamsingh (PW 4) who was serving in the Railway as key-man, was coming from Hanumangarh town to the Junction along with the Railway line before the arriva of the 8 'O'clock train. Near the bridge No. 5, Pillar No. 1, he found a shoe case lying inside Aak plant. When he reached near the Aak plant he heard the cries of a child. He opened the shoe case a little, then he found that a child is crying. Bahadur Ram (PW 3) was called and he asked him to remain there so that he may go and inform the Police Within an hour the Police arrived and lifted the shoe case containing the child. The...
Nanda and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)307
M.C. Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Public, Prosecutor for the State.2. Mr. Goel on behalf of the appellant has simply urged that the appellants have been convicted for the offences under Sections 147, 323 I.P.C. and have been sentenced to 1 year's rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 3 months' rigorous imprisoment on each count.3. The occurrence took place as far back as on 26-4-1977. More than 6 years have elapsed. Considering the circumstances of the case and particularly the time which has elapsed, in my opinion, it would be just and proper that the appellants may be instead of being sentenced, released on probation.4. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed while maintaining the convictions of the appellants, instead of sentencing them, it is ordered that the appellants be released on their entering into a bond for a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) with one surety in the like amo...
Devi Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)311
M.C. Jain, J.1. Five accused persons namely, Devi Singh, Laxman Singh, Phakira, Manak Chand and Karni Dan, were tried by the Sessions Judge, Churu, for the offences Under Sections 395, 294 323 and 341, IPC. However, all the accused persons except Devi Singh were acquitted of all the offences. Devi Singh was also acquitted of the offences Under Sections 294 and 395, IPC. He was, however, convicted of the offences Under Sections 323 and 341, IPC. He was sentenced to three months, rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs 31/-, in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period often days for the offence Under Section 23, IPC. and for the offence, Under Section 341, IPC he was sentenced to 15 days, rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs 51/-. in default to further undergo ten days' rigorous imprisonment. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently vide judgment dated 30-9-1977.2. The prosecution case may briefly be stated as follaws: Anil Aira (PW...
Abdul Gaffar Vs. S.T.A.T. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN672
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. As common question are involved in these appeals they were heard together and we consider it proper to dispose them of by a common judgment. Facts first.2. D.B. Civil Special Appeals No. 470/1982 and D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 471/1982 - These two appeals are directed against the order dated May 3, 1982 of the learned single Judge, by which he allowed S.B. Civil Writ Petitions No. 46 of 1982 and 29 of 1982 filed by respondent No. 3.3. There is a route by Vallabhnagar to Bhadesar in Udaipur region. The scope on this route was three permits with two return services. There were two vacancies & as such applications were invited by the Regional Transport Authority, Udaipur ('RTA' hereinafter) for the grant of non-temporary permits. Respondent No. 3, who was petitioner in the writ petitions and the appellant Abdul Gaffar, who was non-petitioner No. 3 in Writ Petitions No. 29/82 and non-petitioner No. 3 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 46 of 1982, submitted the applicat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›