Rajasthan Court January 1988 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.
Khetia and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)196
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1. The only ground prevailed with me to partly allow this revision is that there is contravention of mandatory provisions of Section 361, Cr.PC. That section provides that if the case of the accused is such which could be dealt with either under Section 360 Cr.PC or Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (for short, the Act) and is not so dealt with, the court shall record special reasons in its judgment. So far as merits of the case are concerned, theft took place on July 26, 1976 in the house of Kanhaya Lal and the accused-petitioner was arrested on 29th July, 1976 and gave information under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and stolen property was recovered. Under Section 114 Illustration (g) of the Evidence Act the court can presume that the person in possession of the stolen property is either thief or recipient of the stolen property if the possession of the same is not accounted for satisfactorily.2. The property had been recovered from each of...
Nanua Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ279
ORDERM.B. Sharma, J.1. In assailing the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deeg, Mr. Dhankhar, learned Counsel for the accused petitioner, has raised three-fold contentions. The first is that there is no evidence as to where the sample remained for a period of 30 days, therefore, the possibility of sample being tampered with cannot be excluded. The second submission of Mr. Dhankhar is that the independent witnesses did not support the case of prosecution and, therefore, a finding should not have been recorded that 140 bottles of illicit liquor were recovered from the possession of accused. The last submission of the learned Counsel is that an offence under Section 54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act (for short 'the Act') is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three years and, therefore is such which could have been dealt with under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act, 1958') and in view of the mandate of the legislature contain...
Laxmi Devi Vs. Meena Mishra
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)157
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. At this stage it is to be decided whether the delay in preferring this appeal can be condoned and whether the appellant has been able to make out sufficient cause for condoning the delay. A decree for specific performance of contract was passed against the appellant on 18-12-1986 by the Addl. District Judge No. 1 Bharatpur, by which the defendant respondent was to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,000/- within one month, upon which the plaintiff-appeilant was to execute a registered sale-deed. It was also ordered that in case the defendant appellant failed to execute a sale deed the plaintiff respondent could apply before the Court who would execute the same on behalf of the defendant. This appeal was preferred on 13-11-1987. The appellant applied for a copy of judgment and decree on 9-10-1987 and the same was delivered to him on 14-10-1987.2. The learned Counsel for the appellant has in support of this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, contended that it was u...
Budda Ram Vs. Smt. Dudi Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)99
K. Bhatnagar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award by the Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sri Ganganagar granted on 11-9-1984.2. On 20-2-1980 deceased Narayan Ram along with his maternal uncle Bishna Ram and one Manshram was going from Chak 47 F to Mukan. At about 12 all the three reached near Roopnagar. A jeep DHA 6851 said to be belonging to appellant Budda Ram and driven by him knocked Bishna Ram resulting in his fall. Bishna Ram sustained chest injury The jeep then knocked Narayan Ram. Narayan Ram met instantaneous death on account of the accident. Budda Ram, the jeep Driver, ran away from there along with the jeep towards Mukan. Bishna Ram went to the Police Station Karanpur and lodged the report. Murlidhar, SHO of Police Station, Karanpur, went to the site and conducted necessary investigation. On the same day he went to the house of Budda Ram and recovered jeep DHA 6251 from his house.3. Bishna Ram filed a claim for Rs. 8,500/- and the mother, wife and children...
Keshar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)42
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. This petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed with a request that the time for submission of personal bond given by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar, in his order dated 1-9-1987 be further extended.2. Mr. Shrimal learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the learned Sessions Judge had granted one month's time to furnish the bonds and the said time has already expired and this court under Section 482 Cr.PC cannot extend the period granted by the learned Sessions Judge. It has been further submitted that no appeal has been filed against the judgment of Sessions Judge and as such the direction given by the Sessions Judge has become final. It has also been argued that the petitioner has not surrendered before this court and as such his request for extension of time cannot be considered.3. Mr. Dhankar learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is an illiterate per...
Brijesh Kumar Vs. Hira Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1988
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN330
Milap Chandra, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the Additional Munsif No. 1, Bhilwara, dated 14-12-1987, by which lie rejected the application of the petitioner, moved under Section 151, CPC for not dispossessing him from the disputed shop, in execution of the warrant issued under Order 21, Rule 35, CPC on the execution application of the decree-holder-non-petitioner No. 1 against the judgment-debtor-non-petitioner No. 2. The fact of the case giving rise to this revision may be summarised thus.2. The decree-holder-non-petitioner No. 1 Hira Lal obtained a decree for ejectment of the judgment-debter-non-petitioner No. 2, Bardi Shanker. The judgment-debtor, unsuccessfully took the matter upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The decree-holder Hiralal applied for the execution of his decree. The petitioner disclosed to the sale Ameen when he went to execute the warrant and to deliver the pessession of the disputed shop to the decree-holder Hiralal that he has been ...
Natha Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)48
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. The petitioner Natha Singh has filed this petition under Section 407(1), Cr.PC for transfer in Criminal Case No. 80/87 State v. Natha Singh from the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sikar to any other Court at Jaipur.2. The petitioner has alleged that a complaint was filed against him and his son Jagdish Singh by one Dalip Singh in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sikar. The complaint was filed for offences under Sections 420 and 406, IPC. In the complaint it was alleged that Dalip Singh had gone to Delhi with his passport as he wanted to go in search of job in Arab countries. It was alleged that in Delhi he met the accused persons, who assured him that arrangement shall be made for his travel to Arab countries. It was further alleged that the accused persons asked Dalip Singh that if more persons desire to travel Arab countries, the interview of those persons can be taken in the village itself and Rs. 17,000/- shall be charged from each candidate. It was further alle...
Shri Kishan Vs. Rampal Ram Chandra and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1988
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN333
K S. Lodha, J1. This is a debtor's appeal against the order of the learned District Judge, Merta, dated 1-9-1979 refusing to extend the time for making an application for discharge and annulling the order of adjudication. The appellant Shri Kishan had applied under Section 10 of the Provincial Insolvency Act on 25-9-1973 and an adjudication order was passed on 25-1-1975 giving six months time to the debtor-appellant to apply for discharge. This time was expired on 25-7-1975, but no application for discharge was filed by that date. However, an application for discharge was filed on 3-10-1975 along with a prayer for condoning the delay. The grounds set-forth for condoning the delay were that there had been floods on account of heavy rains and thereafter, the petitioner was down with fever and, therefore, he could not come to the court within time to apply for discharge. It appears that this application did not receive the attention of the court till 1-9-1979, although it appears to have ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›