Rajasthan Court January 1987 Judgments
Brij Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN195
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Brij Lal, the appellant before us, was convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 50/- in default of the payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment by the learned Sessions Judge, Churu by his judgment dated December 33, 1981. The accused has come up in appeal and challenges his conviction.2. Succinctly stated, the prosecution case is that the accused was married to Smt. Kamla the deceased victim, nearly three years before October, 1980. He was living in Aassam in connection with the earning of his livelihood. At times, he used to come to his town Taranagar. The parents of the accused, were not happy with Smt. Kamla. On account of their unhappy relations with her, Smt. Kamla lived in her parents house in village Kalbas, but whenever the accused came to Taranagar, she used to come there It is alleged that the accused was also not happy with her. Some where in September, 1980, the accused c...
Tag this Judgment!Miss Alka Agarwal and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1987
Reported in: [1987]66STC204(Raj)
ORDERP.C. Jain, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have questioned the validity of Rule 62-A (introduced by notification dated 31st October, 1986) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1955, framed under Section 26 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the State Act). It raises a short question of law. In order to arrive at a proper determination, it is necessary to consider this question in its proper perspective and, therefore, a broad constellation of facts, in which the question arises, may be briefly stated thus:Petitioner No. 1, Miss Alka Agarwal, is not a dealer under the provisions of the State Act. Petitioner No. 2 is M/s. Lohia Machines Ltd., a private limited company, which is manufacturing scooters in the technical collaboration with the foreign firm, namely, Piaggio & CSPA of Italy. The scooters so manufactured are being sold under the brand names-LML Vespa XE, LML Vespa 150 and LML Vespa 150 NV. M/s. Sanghi Traders and Investments Pvt. Ltd....
Tag this Judgment!Mangilal Vyas Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1188; 1987(1)WLN727; 1989WLN(UC)541
ORDERNaveen Chandra Sharma, J.1. It is the grievance of Mangilal Vyas petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous PetitionsNos. 702 to 709 of 1986 Under Section 482, Cr.P.C. that he is undergoing mental, physical and financial torture for the last 23 years, inasmuch as he has been prosecuted in no less than 11 criminal cases by the Officer-in-charge of the concerned police station, for offences Under Section 408 or 409 IPC, on allegations of misappropriation or embezzlement of amounts which are alleged to have been committed during his short spell of appointment as a Manager of Jhunjhunu Kendriya Sahkari Bank Ltd., Jhunjhunu (hereinafter, for short as 'the Sahkari Bank') from 17th Feb., 1961 to 3rd June, '63', in respect of which on a complaint made to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, an inquiry was ordered by the Registrar Under Section 41 of the Co-operative Societies Act to be held by the Collector, Jhunjhunu, with the assistance of the Special Auditors of Ajmer Zone and Assistant Re...
Tag this Judgment!Viri Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN680
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This is a criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr. P.C. against the judgment of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Deeg, dated 17-12-1983, by which accused appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. Against judgment dated 17-12-1983 of learned Sessions Judge, Deeg.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the sons of deceased Amir Singh had committed murder of Chanku Singh, whose case was pending in the Court. On 23-31983 the date of that case was fixed in the court, therefore, on that day in the morning deceased Amir Singh PW 3 Atma Singh and PW 7 Inderjeet Singh boarded Bus No. RRM 7445 from Kasba Nagar for coming to Deeg. In the same Bus, all the accused persons in that case were also travelling. When the bus reached near village Narayana, accused Viri Singh and Kumari Reshma are alleged to have attacked deceased Amirsingh with swords, due to which be fell down in the bus and accused Chanku, Pyari, Virma and Lax...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal Auto Industries Vs. Commercial Taxes Officer
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN414
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 17th May, 1985, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal Aimer The short question which comes for interpretation is whether interest under Section 11-B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (here in after referred to as the Act) could be levied for the period 1-4-1979 to 31-3-1980, when the delay in depositing the tax is less than 30 days?2. The Assessing Authority directed the petitioner to deposit interest for the aforesaid period by his order dated 23rd May, 1983. The dealer's appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed by order dated 3rd December, 1983. He preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue and a single member accepted his appeal on 3rd February, 1984, and held that the interest was not leviable under Section 11-B of the Act when the delay in deposit was of less than one month. The department preferred a special appeal, which was transferred to the Sales Tax Tribunal on the formatio...
Tag this Judgment!Sahib Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN647
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Hanumangarh dated July 28, 1981 convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased Prithvi Singh was going to village Hadhai. He met the accused there. The accused was indebted to him for Rs. 550/-. The deceased asked the accused to make the payment of the money. Thereupon the accused took out a knife and plunged it to the deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down. He was removed to the hospital. A report of the occurrence was lodged by the deceased in the mid-night on the same day.i.e., 7-7-1980, at the Police Station, Sangariya. The police registered a case under Section 307, I.P.C. and proceeded with investigation. The deceased was removed to the hospital where, despite medical treatment, he passed away on July 10, 1980. The police added Section 302, I.P.C. during...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN649
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal filed by accused Ram Singh against his conviction under Section 302 and 325, I.P.C. by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh vide his judgment dated November 5, 1981.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that accused is a resident of village Surewala and his sister deceased Smt. Pyari is a widow. Smt. Pyari was residing in the village Surewala along with her two daughters PW 2 Miss Panchi and PW 3 Miss Darvesh. On April 11, 1981, at about 12.00 or 1.00 p.m., Smt. Pyari alongwith her two daughters went for bath near the canal. All the three had already taken their bath and were washing their clothes, the accused, armed with a Kripan, came there and told Mst. Pyari that why she has developed illicit relations with undesirable persons. Thereafter he immediately took out the Kripan and attacked Mst. Pyari. He gave several blows with the Kripan on the body of Mst. Pyari, as a result of which she fell down. Thereafter she expired on...
Tag this Judgment!Haneef Khan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN462
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal by the appellants against the judgment dated 21-8-1982 of the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur where by the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur has convicted the accused appellants Haneef Khan, Kherdeen and Momdeen under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two years rigorous imprisonment.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that a First Information Report Ex. P 1 was filed by PW 5 Shekhu Khan at police station Kherapa on 9-8-1981 at 8.30 a.m. It was submitted by him that he along with his father Ali Khan, brother Babukhan PW. 8 and their Hali Rewatiya PW. 7 went along with their sheep for grazing on 8-8-1981 at about 5-6 p.m. When they were grazing their sheep in village Dhanari Kalan, accused Haneef Khan, Kherdeen Momdeen and Kutabiya came there armed with Dhariya and Lathis. They challenged them and ran after him and his father. He ran ...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhdeo Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN545
Gopal Krishna Sharma, J.1. As similar question of law is involved regarding interpretation of Section 125 Clause (3) Cr. PC in both these petitions hence they are disposed by this common order.2. Mst. Chhoti non-petitioner moved an application under Section 125 Cr. PC for granting her maintenance against petitioner Sukhdeo Singh. The trial court granted Rs. 175/- per month as maintenance allowance to Mst. Chhoti. The petitioner did not make the payment of the maintenance allowance from 17-4-1982 to 17-3-1984 and for recovery of that amount Mst. Chhoti moved a application before the lower court. Then another application was moved by Mst. Chhoti alleging that the maintenance allowance from the period 17-3-1984 to 17-3-1986 has not been paid to her by Sukhdeosingh and prayed that this amount be recovered from him and paid to her. Thus there were two applications regarding arrears of maintenance allowance due towards petitioner Sukhdeo Singh. In both these applications Sukhdeo Singh raised...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN747
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. These five writ petitions involve a common question and, therefore, they can conveniently be disposed of by a common order. By these writ petitions the five petitioners have challenged the order of the State Government in the Finance (Excise) Department dated 15-7-1983 by which 16 persons have been declared surplus on account of the fact they by another order of the same date the State Government had abolished 17 costs of Assistant Public Prosecutors of the Excise Department with effect from 10-8-1983.2. The case of the petitioners bereft of all embellishment and unnecessary details is that the petitioners who are included in the 16 persons who have been declared surplus could not have been so declared unless an attempt had been made to absorb them in the Excise Department itself. In order to understand this contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners a few facts relevant for the aforesaid purpose may be stated here. The petitioners are all law gradu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »