Rajasthan Court October 1987 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.
Bhanwar Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN1
D.L. Mehta, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dated 10th April, 1982 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar, in Criminal Appeal No. 78 of 1980, upholding the conviction and sentence passed by Shri Jaspal Singh, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sikar dated 8-9-1982 in Criminal Case No. 43 of 1978 as under:Under Section 420, IPC 1-1/2 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5,00/-;Under Section 467, IPC 2 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-;Under Section 468, IPC 1-1/2 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,500/-.2. In default of payment of fine on each count the accused was directed to undergo further R.I. for 3 months. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.3. Prosecution story unfolded during the trial is one that Bholu Ram was Jagirdar. He died sometime in the year 1965. It is further alleged that Hari Prasad son of Bholu Ram prayed to the authorities for the payment of Jagir Bonds amounting to Rs. 2,850/-.4. Hari Prasad made in inquiry and he w...
Ganesh Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)554
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. By the judgment dated October 13, 1978 the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh has convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:(1)Ganesh Lal Under Section 304,Part-I 7 years RI a fine Rs. 200/-, in(2)Mohan Lal IPC default of payment of fine onemonth's further RI;Under Section 325/34, IPC three years' RI and a fine ofRs. 200/-in default of paymentof fine to one month's furtherRI.Under Section 325/34,IPC three years' RI and fine of200/- in default of payment offine to one month's further RI.(3)Bhawan Lal Under Section 304,Part-I 7 years RI and a fine of Rs.IPC 200/-, in default of payment offine one month's further RI;Under Section 325/34, IPC Three years' RI and a fine ofRs. 200/-, in default ofpayment of fine to one month'sfurther RI;All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case in brief was that there was a dispute between the accused and deceased Motilal relating to the marriage of Laxmi, daughter of Motilal. The accused Mohanlal ha...
Rajak Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)552
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. The appellant stands convicted and sentenced by the judgment dated the 19th October, 1978, for the offence under Section 304, Part-II, IPC to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to six month's further rigorous imprisonment.2. The case relates to the incident which took place on June 5, 1978 in the noon in the field of Asu Beba in village Sinod. The prosecution case is that the accused beat his wife Mst. Harku with a 'Kamdi' (a thin stick) and caused 14 injuries on various parts of the body, as a result of which she died the same day in the night. The First Information Report of the occurrence was lodged by one Baldev Ram the next day at 10.30 a.m. at Police Station, Khinwsar, on which a case under Section 302 IPC was registered and investigation started. During investigation the accused was arrested. The postmortem examination of the dead body of Mst. Harku was conducted by Dr. Ram Ratan on June 7, 1978. He fou...
Hardayal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)754
Dinkar Lal Mehta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the order dated 8-2-1983 passed by Shri R. H. Ajwani Sessions Judge, Sikar, in Criminal Revision Petition No. 48/82 by which he set aside the order dated 8-3-1982 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur in Criminal case Hardayal v. Babulal and Ors.2. Learned Judicial Magistrate vide his order dated 8th March, 1982 took cognizance against the accused Babu Lal and others. He directed that the summons be issued. Revision petition was preferred against the said order which was accepted by the learned Sessions Judge.3. Mr. Surendra Singh Sunda appearing on behalf of the present petitioner submits that a cross case is pending and the judgment will adversely affect their client. He further submits that the learned District Judge has acted without jurisdiction in discussing the evidence. He submits that the jurisdiction of the learned Sessions Judge was only to find out whether there is a prima facie case or not....
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bhera
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)11
S.S. Byas, J.1. This is the State's appeal against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur dated June 7, 1977 by which he acquitted the accused-respondent Bhera of the offence under Section 307, IPC.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that at about 10 p.m. on 28th April, 1975, PW 2 Hurma and PW 4 Uda, who were first cousins were going to their house situated in Alsigarh, Police Station Nai, District Udaipur. When they happened to pass outside the house of the accused, his son Mathu for-bade them from going on that way. The accused Bhera also came there and did not allow them to proceed further. Hurma and Uda asserted their right to use that way The accused had a double barrel muzzle loading country-made gun with him. He fired two shots in quick succession. One shot hit Hurma and other shot hit Uda. Hurma fell down and became unconscious. PW 1 Kamia went to police station, Nai and verbally lodged report (Ex. P 1) of the occurrence at about 9 00 am. on 29th April, 1975....
Mani Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN8
K.S. Lodha, J.1. Appellant Mani Ram has been convicted under Sections 392 and 323, IPC and sentenced to 7 years' riguorous imprisonment and a fine a Rs. 2,000/- under the first count; and three months' simple imprisonment under the second count by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh, by his judgment dated October 7, 1985. He has filed this appeal through jail.2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, is that on July 24, 1984 at about 4.00 p,m. accused-appellant Mani Ram, along with Madanlal and Ram Swaroop came to the house of Mani Ram, husband of Smt. Ankauri. They enquired about Mani Ram and were told by Mst. Ankauri that he had gone to Jodhpur in connection with some hearing Thereupon, accused Mani Ram told Mst. Ankauri to prepare food for one person. Mst. Ankauri went inside the house and started preparing the food and the accused persons kept sitting outside the house. After sometime, Mst. Ankauri's son Ranveer came out with the food; whereupon, Mani Ram told Ramswa...
Prabhu Dayal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN339
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. It is contended by Mr. Dhankar that a report regarding the same incident had been lodged by accused party earlier in point of time vide FIR No. 75/87. It is submitted that the complainant party & Mangal & those injuries are much serious and dangerous to life in comparison to the injuries alleged to have been inflicted by the members of accused party. Mr. Dhankar showed the injury report of the petitioners and other members of the accused party. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to release the accused petitioners Prabhu Dayal s/o Suwa and Suwa Lal s/o Kana on bail, provided each one of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 3000/- together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur for their appearance before the trial court as and when t...
Ukarda Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)13
S.S. Byas, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore dated January 31, 1983 convicting the accused Ukarda under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment.2. At about 10.30 a.m. on May 23, 1982, PW 1 Ratna Rebari of village Wadal appeared at Police Station, Raniwara District Jalore and verbally lodged report Ex. P 1 which was taken down in the Rojnamcha. It was stated therein that his sister Shrangi was married with the accused seven/eight years ago. She was living with the accused in village Paal situate a couple of kilometres away from his village. The accused was not sending his sister to her parentss' house. It was further stated that the accused's father Manra (PW 11) came to his house at sun-rise time and told him and his mother that Shrangi had expired on account of some ailment in her stomach. He and his...
Smt. Gaindi Devi Vs. Secretary, Community Development and Panchayat De ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: 1988(2)WLN193
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Whether we are entering twenty first century via seventeenth century? Whether this shameful stigma of exploitation of a woman employee by payment of Re. 1/- per day as salary and wages in 1987 when the real worth of Re. 1/- is 10 paise only may be less, deserves a shameful mention for beating all record of human exploitation in Giunea's World Book of Records? These are the pivotal questions in this lady peon's tragic tale of woe, suffering, miseries and nerve breaking, society rocking, heart rending, justice shocking long drawn fight of more than three decades for getting the minimum wages and the salary statutorily fixed in the pay scales and the revised pay scales from time to time for a peon. Gendi Devi's case of social economic exploitation is only one out of thousands and lacs who suffer unnoticed and can never enter the doors of Courts of Justice and thereby suffer injustice unlimited.2. At the very outset of hearing when Mr. Paras Kuhad learned Counsel for ...
Jag Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)93
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel for the complainant. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioners that there is no injury which may be considered as dangerous to life. It is further submitted that a cross case of the same incident has been lodged by the petitioners and 5 persons out of the accused party have suffered injury by sharp edged weapons and blunt weapons on vital part. It has been further submitted that cases under Section 107 Cr.PC are pending in the criminal court and civil suits between the parties are also pending. Learned Public Prosecutor was unable to show any injury which may have been described by the Doctor as dangerous to life. Learned Counsel for the complainant on the other hand has submitted that the petitioner Raghuveer has caused grievous injury by sharp edged weapon to Basanta.2. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and looking into the facts and circumst...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »