Rajasthan Court February 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.
Bhawani Singh Vs. Ram Swaroop
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-18-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN661
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. against the order dated 18-6-1986 of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Dholpur in Criminal Appeal No. 43/85.2. Mr. Tyagi has argued that the prosecution under Section 210, I.P.C. is a gross abuse of process of the court because the so called earlier payment was not verified in the court and was wholly based on a concocted false story. In support of his argument he submitted that when the demand for attachment of the crop was made, this plea was not taken in the year 1976 that the payment has already been made.3. Learned Counsel for the non-petitioner submitted that Section 482, Cr. P.C. cannot be invoked and in support of his submission he relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sooraj Devi's case 1981 Cr. LR 174. Head Note B reads as under:The inherent power of the court cannot be exercised for doing that which is specifically prohibited by the Code. The inherent power of the court is not contemplated by the savi...
Bihari Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-18-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)362
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Counsel for the petitioner did not challenge conviction of the petitioner. He however urged that the sentence awarded is severe. The petitioner has been sentenced to nine months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 3/7, Essential Commodities Act. Charge against the petitioner is that he did not sell 11 quintals of Sugar which was supplied to him for distribution. Counsel for the petitioner urged that he was a new man and he has led evidence that sugar was distributed but because of inimical relations number of witnesses have been produced to state that sugar was not distributed. He submitted that in this view of the matter the sentence may be reduced. In may opinion ends of justice would de served if the sentence is reduced to three months rigorous imprisonment and the sentence of fine is enhanced...
Ganga Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-18-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)363
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. Both these appeals arise out of a common order and therefore, they are disposed of by this common order. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh by his order dated 29-4-1976 convicted accused appellants Ganga Ram and Bhajan Singh under Section 302 IPC and accused appellants Boota Ram, Pritam Singh and Chanan Singh under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 100/-and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Accused Bhajan Singh was also convicted under Section 324 IPC and accused Gangaram, Pritam Singh Chanan Singh and Boota Ram were also found guilty under Section 324 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced to 1-1/2 years rigorous imprisonment. All the five accused appellants were also found guilty under Section 148 IPC and they were sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. The learned Additional Sessions Judge further found the accused ...
Gopal Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-17-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN655
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Having heard Mr. Bagdi learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Purohit learned Public Prosecutor, it appears that on 23-9-1986 the directions of the Chief Ministers were conveyed to the Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur for investigation of this case.2. Mr. Purohit after perusal of the police record submits that even now the SI of PS Kumhar is investigating the case This is a very unintelligible shocking administrative lapse in not obeying the directions of the Chief Minister.3. Mr. Purohit assures and undertakes that the Director General of would ensure that the investigation is done by some senior officer from Bharatpur instead of SHO, Kumhar for this offence.4. In para 10 the petitioner has submitted that the Director General of Police has sent an order to the local police not to arrest the Rai Sikha, but I find that there is no such order on the police file.5. On a thoughtful consideration of the entire matter, I feel that non-compliance of the directions...
Hindustan Ciba Geigy Ltd Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1186; 1987(1)WLN492
ORDERM.C. Jain, J.1. This petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed for quashing the proceedings relating to the prosecution of the petitioners for the offence Under Section 13/29 of the Insecticides Act, 1968.2. A complaint was filed against the petitioners by the Inspector Insecticides Sri Ganganagar for the offence Under Section 13/29 of the Insecticides Act, 1968 with the allegations that on 24-9-83 he visited the shop of M/s. Ganga Sahai Badrinath, Ganganagar and a sample of Dye-macron manufactured by the petitioners company was taken and when a bill was obtained it came to the notice that the petitioner company is stocking the insecticides without licence. The representative of the petitioner company Shri R.P. Parashar petitioner No. 4 expressed that the petitioner company has got no licence for stocking the insecticides. The petitioner No. 2 Shri H.P. Panwani is the Chief Executive Officer and petitioner No. 3 Shri R.R. Bhatnagar is the Area Manager of the petitioner compan...
Narayan Puri Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN280
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Narayan Puri, the appellant before us was convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur by his judgment dated July 29, 1976. He has come-up in appeal and challenges his conviction.2. Briefly out-lined, the prosecution case is that Smt. Devi aged about 30/35 years at the relevant time of her murder, was the wife of the accused. The marriage between them had taken place nearly 25 yrs. before the incident. PW 2 Miss Sarla and PW 3 Miss Sushila are their daughters while PW 4 Smt. Bhikhi is the mother of Smt. Devi. The accused has also a son. They were all living together in a room of the house of one Bhanwar Lal Ghanchi situate in Mohallah Ghoron-Ka-Chowk, Jodhpur, which the accused, had taken on rent from PW 12 Bhagwati Prasad in April, 1975. The room is situate on the first floor; Smt. Bhiki was living with the accused as her relations with her husband Moolpuri PW 8 were not happy. Moolpuri was li...
L.D. Sapra and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN725
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. These three Criminal Misc. petitions Nos. 276/86, 236/86 and 337/86 are being decided by one common judgment, as prayed by the learned Counsel, because they are directed against one judgment.2. Learned Counsel Mr. Khandelwal and Mr. Surana submit that all the cases can be categorised in three categories requiring three joint trials; (i) flood cases 10,11 & 12 of 1981 in which Purshottam Tripathi is the accaused; (2) case Nos. 8, and 9 of 1981 in which Purshottam Tripathi is a witness. The third category is for special repairs in which Purshottam Tripathi.is a witness and they are 33 to 45 of 1979 and 7 to 10 of 1980.3. Mr. Purohit, learned P.P. has opposed this prayer. According to him, the sets of accused are different and the charges are also different, as in each case the conspirators are different, though Assistant Engineer maybe Engineer may be common.4. I have given a thoughtful consideration to the entire matter and I am of the view that the scope of Sectio...
Omkar Lal Vs. Rajasthan State Electricity Board
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN742
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. The petitioner Omkar Lal was initially appointed as 'Coolie' in the erstwhile Jodhpur State in the Jodhpur Electrical and Mechanical Department at the Jodhpur Ice Factory in the year 1943. On the integration of the States, the services of the petitioner were taken over by the Industries Department of the pre-organised State of Rajasthan. Later, he was transferred as a mate in the establishment of training under the Industries Department, Jaipur. However, on his representation that as he came from the Electrical and Mechanical Department of the erstwhile Jodhpur State, he should be placed under the Electrical Department i.e. the Electricity Board and not at the disposal of the Industries Department, the Chief Engineer, Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Jaipur wrote to the Superintending Engineer, Jodhpur circle, Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Jodhpur to absorb him as Helper-I in Generation Division and it appears that thereupon he came to be posted in the ...
Ranjit Singh Vs. Manakchand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN862
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. On 24-5-1980, the non-petitioner instituted a suit for eviction from his shop on grounds of default in payment of rent. The defendant was one Pratap Singh, who died during the pendency of the suit on 28-1-1981. The non-petitioner moved an application for bringing on record the legal representatives of deceased Pratap Singh and they were five sons and one widow. On 21-1-1982, the Court passed an order to bring on record only one of the legal-representatives as mentioned in the application and Uttamjeet Singh came to be substituted with the consent of the parties. Thereafter, his written statement was filed and the provisional rent was determined under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 on 21-5-1982. It may be mentioned that the rent determined by the Court was not deposited by Uttamjit Singh.2. On 24-2-1983, the present petitioner Ranjit Singh, who is also a son of Partap Singh moved an application for being made a party ...
Prakash Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)439
Jas Raj Chopra, J.1. The revision petition has been fifed against the judgment of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirohi dated 6-2-1980 whereby the learned Addl Sessions Judge has maintained his conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi Tide his judgment dated 31-12-1976. The learned Judicial Magistrate has sentenced the accused petitioner to two months' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs 200/- under Section 279 IPC and to one and half years' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 304A IPC. Both the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. In default of the payment of the aforesaid amounts of fine the accused petitioner has been ordered to undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment. However, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has reduced his substantive sentence of one and half years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304A, IPC to six months' rigorous imprisonment.2. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »