Rajasthan Court January 1985 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.
Brij Mohan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN47
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 5th Oct. 1978, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Baran, confirming the conviction and the sentence of the petitioner for the offence under Section 408 IPC.2. The petitioner was prosecuted for the offence Under Section 408, IPC, on the written report dated 11th Aug. 1968. lodged by the Manager, Nagrik Sehkari Bank, Baran. It was alleged therein that the petitioner was posted as Manager in that bank and that, during the period from 1st Nov., 1965 to 27th June, 1966, the petitioner misappropriated some amount of the bank, and misused it. It was also alleged that one Mst. Sharbati Devi opened a fixed-deposit account of Rs. 2000/- on 1st Nov. 1965. The petitioner did not prepare the voucher and no entry was made in the cash-book and the day-book. Then, on 27th June, 1966 one Babulal deposited a sum of Rs. 5000/- in his Fixed-Deposit a/c No. 68, though Receipt No. 100 dated 27th June, 1966. But, the petit...
Bhanwar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN289
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. Notice of this revision petition has been given to the learned PP. With the consent of the learned PP this revision petition is disposed of at the admission stage.2. The petitioners are being tried for the offence Under Section 326 and 323, IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk. The case was fixed for final arguments on 17-12-1984. On that date, Bhanwar Singh who is a Government Servant and was deputed in the election duty for parliamentary constituency could not attend the Court and his counsel requested the learned Sessions Judge to adjourn the case. He also requested that his client Bhanwar Singh wanted to engage some lawyer from Jaipur, who could not come on that day, so the case be adjourned to any other date. The learned Sessions Judge did not agree with the request of the counsel for the petitioner Bhanwar Singh, and he after hearing the learned PP decided the case on that very day. Against the judgment, the present revision petition has been preferre...
Prahlad Kumar Vs. University of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN679
Surekdra Nath Bhargava, J.1. This is a special appeal against the judgment of learned Single Judge dismissing the writ, petition of the petitioner.2. The petitioner passed the B.Com. Examination in the year 1981 and secured 43.5% marks. Thereafter the petitioner applied for the admission in LL.B. (First Year Course) in Government College, Karauli. He was given admission by the Government College, Karauli. He attended the classes and appeared in the LLB. First Year) Examination held in July 1982, as a regular student. The result of the LL.B. (1st year) Examination was declared in the month of January 1983 but the result of the petitioner was with-held. The petitioner obtained advance copy of his mark-sheet of LL.B (First year) Examination and found that he had failed in the said examination. Therefore he decided to appear in the LL.B. (1st year) examination for the year 1983 as an ex-student and submitted an application form for the same examination. For the first time by letter dated 2...
Bhanwar Singh and Sundra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN612
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. Notice of this revision petition has been given to the learned Public Prosecutor. With the consent of the learned Public Prosecutor this revision petition is disposed of at the admission stage.2. The petitioners are being tried for the offence Under Section 326 & 323, IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk. The case was fixed for final arguments on 17-12-84. On that date, Bhanwar Singh who is a Government Servant and was deputed in the election duty for parliamentary constituency could not attend the Court and his counsel requested the learned Sessions Judge to adjourn the case. He also requested that his client Bhanwar Singh wanted so engage some lawyer from Jaipur, who could not come on that day, so the case be adjourned to any other date. The learned Sessions Judge did not agree with the request of the counsel for the petitioner Bhanwar Singh and he after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor decided the case on that very day. Against that judgment, the pr...
Dayanand and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)81
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. This appeal by seven accused persons is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, dated November 30, 1979 convicting and sentencing them as under:(a) All the seven under Section 302/149 IPC, to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 100/- each, and in default of payment of fine to further suffer two month's rigorous imprisonment;(b) All the seven under Section 325/149, IPC to two year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- each and in default of payment of fine to two months' imprisonment(c) All the accused under Section 324 read with Section 149 IPC to three months imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/- each and in default of payment of, fine to further suffer one month's imprisonment;(d) all the accused under Section 323/149, IPC to one month's imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/- and in default of payment of fine to further suffer one month's imprisonment;(e) all the accused under Section 447 IPC to one month's imprisonment (R.I.);...
Samander Singh S/O Ranjeet Singh and 2 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)637
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, Actg. C.J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on merits. There is no case for interference by this Court with the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jalore. The revision petition is dismissed. However, the lime allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore for submitting the personal bonds and surety bonds, for releasing the petitioners on probation, is extended by one month....
Kamlesh Kumar Vs. Prahlad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN422
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Since these two appeals under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 are directed against one and the same award of the Claims Tribunal, Udaipur dated January 21, 1978, they were, heard together and are decided by a single judgment. By the award aforesaid, the Tribunal dismissed the claims of the appellants. One of the appeals has been filed by the injured while the other has been filed by the legal representatives of the deceased-victim.2. Recapitulated briefly, the relevant facts giving rise to these appeals are that the appellant Govindsingh and his brother-in-law (sister's husband) Purshottam Lal were going on a scooter from Udaipur to Nathdwara on June 15, 1975. Govindsingh was driving the scooter while Purshottam Lal was sitting on the pillion. When the scooter reached near Mazera bus stand where there is a sharp steep curve, the R.S.R.T.C. bus R.S.M. 7465 came with a terrific speed from the opposite direction. Seeing the bus, Govindsingh took the s...
Battda Ponappa Apachu Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN342
Gopal Krishna Sharma, J.1. This petition Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. is directed against the order dated 29th Oct. 1983, passed by the CJM, Kota, granting the application of the prosecution filed Under Section 311, Cr. P.C. by the order aforesaid, the court granted permission to the prosecution to examine further witnesses.2. Briefly narrated the facts of the case are that the Senior Inspector, Factories and Boilers, Kota, inspected M/s Shriram Rayons, Kota, on 3rd and 4th March, 1976. After inspection, he prepared a report Ex. P. 8. The inspector, in his statement, has admitted that the report prepared by him is Ex. P. 8. There is no other report on the record of the case. So, Ex. P. 8 is the only report of inspection by the Senior on 3rd & 4th March 1976. After the said inspection, a complaint was filed by the Senior Inspector in the court of CJM, Kota, against the petitioner. Along with that complaint, a list of witnesses as required by Section 204(ii), Cr. P.C., was also filed. Acc...
Dr. V.S. Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)1
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. Petitioner Dr. V.S. Choudhary has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on February 25, 1983 praying that State of Rajasthan (non-petitioner No. 1) may be restrained from giving appointment to Amar Singh, Senior Demonstrator in Bio-Chemistry, R.N.T. Medical College Udaipur (non-petitioner No. 3) to the post of Lecturer in Bio-Chemistry for accommodating him (non-petitioner No. 3). Certain other reliefs were also sought by the petitioner.2. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short 'the Commission'), Ajmer has been impleaded as non-petitioner No. 2.3. The petitioner passed his Post-graduate degree of M.D. in Bio-Chemistry which he obtained from the Faculty of Medicine University of Rajasthan. He entered his services in the Government of Rajasthan as Senior Demonstrator of Physiology on 17-1-1974. That appointment was temporary and was given to him on being selected by the Central Selection Committee, At the time of his appointment, ...
Mohan Lal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)251
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, Acting C.J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the validity of the provisions of Section 7-A of the Rajasthan Land Reforms (Acquisition of Land Owners' Estate) Act, 1964 as introduced by the Amendment Act No. 15 of 1975. The validity of the provisions of Section 7-A has already been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in State of Rajasthan and Ors. v. Smt. Gayatri Devi and Ors. 0043/1980 . Moreover, the Rajasthan Land Reforms (Acquisition of Land Owners' Estate) Act (Act No. 11 of 1964) has been included in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution and the validity of the provisions of the aforesaid Act including Section 7-A, there of which was introduced by amendment with retrospective effect, is no longer open to challenge. The petitioner came forward on the basis of a sale alleged to have been made by the former Ruler of Jodhpur in favour of the petitioner in the month of August, 1964 prior to the date of vesting, namely, September 1, 1964, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »