Rajasthan Court September 1986 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.
Kailash Chandra and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-1986
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)147
G.K. Sharma, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment dated 7-8-1984 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, No. 1, Ajmer where by both the appellants have been found guilty 'of the offence under Section 302 and 302/34 IPC. They have been sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo 4 months' imprisonment. Both the apellants were also found guilty under Section 380 IPC and each has been sentenced to 5 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further 4 months' S.I. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. We would like to mention here that the learned Additional Sessions Judge could not distinguish between the offence under Section 302 and 302 read with 34 IPC. It is very unfortunate that the learned Sessions Judge found the appellants guilty of the offence under Section 302 and under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. If there is no direct evidence a...
Pratap and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN698
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This application under Section 482 Cr. PC is filed against the order dated 8th July, 1986 passed in Criminal Revision No. 30 of 1986 by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bharatpur and the order dated 30th June, 1986 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bhartpur in Cr. Case No. 109 of 1986 thereby taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 302, 147, 148 and 149, IPC2. A report was lodged by Badan Singh on 9th September, 1985, which reads as under:Jheku~ th]fuosnu gS fd vkt rkjh[k 9&9&1985 dks 7-30 cts 'kke uckcflag] jkethyky] ljiap ds ;gka ls ?kj tks tk jgk Fkk Arks jkeLo:Ik ds uksgjs ds ikl Nhrjflag] gsew] X;kjlh] izrki] /keZohj] feB~Bu] etjktflag] /keZohj] txnh'k o izdk'k gekjs xkWo ds ftues Nhrjflag us cUnwd] egjktflag ds gkFk es dV~Vk o ckdh;ks ds gkFk ij ykBh] Qjlk] oYyHk Fks rks uckcflag dks X;kjlh] izrki] /kEkZohj] feB~Bu us idM+ fy;k vkSj /kki&eqDdks; ls ekjus yx x;s A Nhrjflag us dgk fd FkIiM+ks ls D;k gksrk gS] NksM+ nks bl lkys d...
Dharmender Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN435
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. On 12-6-1986 an application signed by Shri K.K Nagar, Advocate, Aklera, District Jhalawar, was received by post in respect of one under trial prisoner Dharmender Singh.2. It was mentioned that from 20-12-1985 Dharmender Singh is in judicial lock-up in Aklera in persuance of the order of SD.vl Aklera for proceedings under Section 110 Cr. P.C. He is kept in judicial lock up without a hearing for 30 days vide order dated 19-5-86 when another date was given for 18-6-86. The dates are not fixed within 15 days which is against law.3. Yet another date was given in the order on the pretext that no surety of the petitioner was present. This fact is wrong. The SDM is refusing to accept surety on one ground or the other.4. On 2-6-1986 the surely was present but this time the SDM Aklera was on leave. The Assistant Collector cum Executive Magistrate Shri Umaid Singh Rathore refused to accept the surety of Rs. 2,000/- after verification of the personal bond.5. This letter-cum-a...
Raghubir Singh S/O Prabhu Singh Vs. Smt. Krishna Kumari W/O Raghubir S ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN730
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a husband's application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. against the order of interim maintenance granted by the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 2 (North Kota Rs. 150/- as interm inter-maintenance under Section 125, Cr. P.C.) has been allowed to Smt. Krishna Kumari wife of Raghubir Singh.2. Mr. Mehrish learned Counsel for the husband applicant has vehemently argued that in the application for divorce which was given allegedly jointly Smt. Krishna Kumari has mentioned that husband and wife are living separately as per understanding and they have also distributed the assets.3. The lower courts have taken notice of this argument and mentioned by the order dated 22nd October, 1983 it is obvious that the application dismissed and there was no divorce.4. It is important to mention that the non-applicant Krishna Kumari mentioned that the husband has contracted second marriage and the husband has not denied it specifically. A perusal of the reply shows th...
Bhagwan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)454
Gopal Krishan Sharma, J.1. Prithviraj PW 1 lodged a written report Ex. P 1 at Police Station, Rajakhera on 10-6-1981 at 5 p.m. This report was with regard to an incident alleged to have taken place at 9 a.m. on the same date. He has alleged that he and Dalel Singh along with deceased Jandel Singh were going to village Dabera to attend some marriage function. When they reached the place known as 'Mahadev Badi' after covering a distance of about 2 miles, the appellants along with Atwal, Kamod and Purshottam were sitting at some distance under a tree. Prahalad Singh had 'pachfera', Balveer Singh had 12-bore-gun and Gulab Singh had a gun the others were armed with lathies. All the accused-appellants told Jandel Singh that he will not be escaped today because his father had given shelter to Sobren Singh and his family members. It was also alleged in the report that the person who will help their enemies, will not be rescued. Prahalad fired with 'pachfera' at Jandel Singh, Balveer Singh fire...
Padam Singh Vs. Shobha Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: AIR1988Raj100; 1987(1)WLN99
ORDERK.S. Lodha, J.1. This is a defendant's revision against the order of the learned Addl. District Judge, Rajsamand dated 5-7-86 dismissing his appeal against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Nathdwara dated 12-7-85 by which his defence had been struck off.2. The plaintiff Shobha Lal had filed a suit against Padam Singh for ejectment, inter alia, on the ground of default in payment of rent. The defendant contested the suit and on 5-7-79, the trial court determined the amount of arrears of rent etc. under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') saying that the defendant had to deposit the arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 2425/- within one month from the date of the order. It further observed that this rent had been determined up to 11-7-79. It appears that the tenant deposited the amount in time and also went on depositing the monthly ren t at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month for some time....
Gyarsilal and ors. Vs. Murli
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Raj109; 1987(1)WLN246
ORDERMohini Kapur, J. 1. One Shri Jhabar Mal, instituted a suit for recovery of money against the respondent. Jhabar Mal, died during the pendency of the suit. The petitioners who are the widow, sons and daughter of late Shri Jhabar Mal, moved an application before the trial Court namely Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Neema-ka-Thana, Distt. Sikar, for substitution of their names in place of the deceased plaintiff. Jhabar Mal. The learned Munsiff, disposed of this application by his order dated 2-8-1985, he held that the application for bringing the legal representatives on record had been filed within 90 days of the death of Jhabar Mal but he proceeded to hold that the debt alleged to have been advanced by Jhabar Mal, was not in the capacity of karta of a joint Hindu family but was his personal loan and as such it was necessary that the petitioners should obtain a succession certificate without which they were not entitled to claim the money. The learned Munsiff also held that withou...
Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Western Railway Vs. Smt. Sharda D ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN388
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. The respondent is widow of Radhey Shyam, the employee of the Railway who died in accident on 26-10-1979 while on duty and employment of the Railway. Compensation of Rs. 24,000/- has been allowed to her although the claim was for Rs. 30,000/-.2. The order was passed on 12-11-1981 and the Railway then moved for an application for setting aside the order on the ground that no service was effected on the Railway. This application was dismissed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner on 27-8-1983.3. Mr. Bapna is justified in his submission that law for citizens and all litigants to dispute is alike and the Railway was entitled for an opportunity to contest the case.4. According to the finding of the Workmen Compensation Commissioner on 27-8-1983 he was of the opinion that during the arguments the counsel for the Railway did not assert that signatures on the receipt of the notice by Registered post are not of any of Railway Employee. The exact finding is as under:cgl d...
Lekh Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN774
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. In this group of writ petitions, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners, who are licensees for the exclusive privilege of selling by retail country liquor, have challenged the validity of - (1) Section 42(e)(iii) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, (here in after referred to as 'the Act'); (2) Notification dated 25th May, 1985, amending the Rajasthan Issue and Sale Prices of Country Liquor Rules, 1964 (here in after referred to as 'the Issue Price Rules'); and (3) Conditions Nos. (1)(ga) and 22 (kha) of the Licences issued in their favour.2. In response to the Notification issued by the Excise Commissioner on December 26, 1983 inviting tenders for the grant of licences for the years 1984-85 and 1985-86 to sell, in retail, country liquor at the various shops in Rajasthan, the petitioners submitted their tenders and were granted lincences which are in form C.L (I) G. prescribed by the Excise Commissioner under Rule 93 of the Rajasthan Excise Rul...
Prakash Chand Bhanwar Lal Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN681
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr. PC for quashing the proceedings pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur in Criminal Complaint No. 53 of 1913.2. The brief facts giving rise to this case are that the complainant Income Tax Officer 'B' Ward, Beawar under the directions of the Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur, alleged to have been obtained on 21st March, 1983, submitted a complaint in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Jaipur alleging that the petitioner No. 1 firm, which is having its office in Bijaynagar, district Ajmer was being regularly assessed with Income Tax Officer, Beawar. The return for the assessment year 1978-79 alleged to have been submitted on 20th November, 1979 before the Income Tax Officer, 'A' Ward, Beawar in the status of registered firm declaring total income of Rs. 64,572/-. It was alleged that since declaration in form No. 12 under Sections 184(7) of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »