Rajasthan Court October 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.
Biram Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)484
G.K. Sharma, J.1. SB. Criminal (jail) Appeal No. 253/88 has been preferred from jail and S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 227/88 has been preferred by Biram as representative appeal. Both these appeals arise from the same judgment of the Sessions Judge, therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. On 26-6-1987, Ram Chandra, SHO, Police Station, Raipur received a secret information that three persons are taking opium with them and the details of these persons were also given by the informant. On the basis of this information, the Police-party consisting of Ram Chandra, Station House Officer, one Head Constable and some Constables reached at the spot for which they received the information. They hid themselves behind the trees. After some time they saw two persons coming from the side of Kotri and when they reached near them, they were surrounded. Mangi Lal and Poor Singh also arrived there and in their presence search was taken and both the accused were found in possession of opiu...
Bhanwru and ors. Vs. Manak Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)477
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed against the revisional order of the learned Sessions Judge, Pali dated 19-2-1982 whereby he has set aside the order of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jetaran dated 16-10-1979, by which the learned Magistrate has dropped the proceedings initiated under Section 145 Cr.PC in exercise of his powers under Section 145(5) Cr.PC and remanded the case back to him.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this revision petition briefly stated are that non-petitioner Manak Chand purchased land bearing Khasra No. 897 in village Lambia measuring 75 and 1/2 bighas from the petitioners on the basis of the sale deed. The mutation was recorded in favour of non-petitioner Manakchand. This purchase was made in S.Y. 2013. It is alleged that Manakchand bequeathed 25 bighas of land each in favour of non-petitioners Dharmchand and Prakashchand and the land was mutated in their favour. The remaining 25 and 1/2 bighas...
The Executive Engineer, Link Canal Irrigation Deptt. and anr. Vs. Sara ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1988
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC280
N.C. Kochhar, J.1. The State of Rajasthan bad undertaken the Gang Canal Project and the work of digging up was being got done through contractors.2. Mr. Raghuveer Singh (the deceased) was working in that Project as a tractor driver and during the course of employment died in an accident at the site of the Project. Smt. Sarla Devi (respondent No. 1) moved the learned Commissioner under the Workmen Compensation Act, for grant of compensation, alleging that the deceased was employed with M/s Kashniya Choyal Construction Company, Ratanpura (respondent No. 2), through whom the State was getting the work done at the site. During the trial it was conceded by the State that the work was being got done through the contractor but stated that respondent No. 2 was not the contractor concerned. The learned Commissioner, after recording the evidence, held that the deceased was getting a salary of Rs. 800/- per month and that he was aged about 35 years at the time of his death. The Commissioner held ...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mohinder Kaur and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1988
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC172
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. Brief facts of the case are that on September 2, 1969, Kulwant Singh (deceased) was going on scooter at about 2.30 p.m. from Moti Doongri Road towards Police Memorial in Jaipur City and as soon as he reached near Police Memorial one truck No. R.J.R. 2825 struck the scooter. On account of the accident Kulwant Singh fell down and received serious injuries. Kulwant Singh was admitted in SMS hospital and after remaining there for 26 days he succumbed to the injuries. Smt. Mahendra Kaur w/o Kulwant Singh and 7 daughters filed a claim petition on October 31, 1969 claiming a sum of Rs. 2 22,300/-. It was alleged in the petition that Kulwant Singh was carrying on transport business and was earning Rs. 1,000/- p.m. An amount of Rs. 200 has been spent by Kulwant Singh on himself and the rest used to be spent on the claimants. Shri Kulwant Singh at the time of accident was 45 years old.2 The claim petition was contested by Shri Shaukat-Ali owner of the truck, Amir Shah driver ...
Smt. Ramjot Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1988
Reported in: 1990(50)ELT349(Raj)
K.S. Lodha, J.1. This writ petition in the nature of Habeas Corpus has been filed by Smt. Ramjot, challenging the detention of her son Shri Ghanshyam under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention. of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short COFEPOSA).2. It is alleged in the petition that Shri Ghanshyam was arrested by Shri Ramchandra, Station House Officer, Police Station, Sadar Bazar, Jodhpur on 2-3-1988 and according to the police 3 Gold biscuits bearing foreign marking and two pieces of gold biscuits wrapped in pink paper were recovered from the pants worn by Ghanshyam. It is further alleged that Shri Ramchandra recorded the statement of Ghanshyam on 2-3-1988 and later he was handed over to the Customs Authorities where he was examined on 3-3-1988. Then Shri Ghanshyam was arrested formally on 4-3-1988 and produced before the learned C.J.M. Jaipur on 5-3-1988. He moved an application for bail before the C.J.M., Jaipur, which was rejected on 9-3-1988 thereafter he approac...
Kailash Chand Goyal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)WLN446
Farooq Hasan, J.1. K.C. Goyal (Petitioner), a Diploma Holder in Mechanical Engineer (Year 1965) & then, A.M.I.E. passed on 8th August, 1976, assails, through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the constitutional validity of the Amendments in the Rajasthan Service of Engineering (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1968 (for short, 'the Principal Service Rules') and the Rajasthan Engineering Subordinate Service (Public Health Branch) Rules), 1967, for brevity, 'the Subordinate Engineering Service Rules') made vide notifications dated 30th May, 1977 (Anx.7), 28th July, 1978 (Ann, 8),. 22nd June, 1976 (Ann. 5) and 18th June, 1977 (Anx.6) as violative of & ultra vires Articles 14 and 16(1) of the India.2. the facts, simple enough as they are 'have copiously been averred by the petitioner. Shorn of all unnecessary detail, a broad brush factual backdrop will help delineate the controversy.3. Initially, vide order dated 2nd July, 1965, the petitioner, on his having fo...
Mahaveer Prasad Vs. R.S.E.B. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)254
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This writ petition is directed against the bill Ex. 6 issued on behalf of the Superintending Engineer. No doubt, the petitioner had approached the Superintending Engineer in connection with the order, in pursuance of which bill Ex. 6 has been prepared and a copy of that order has not been supplied to the petitioner as alleged by him, still, in our opinion, the petitioner can prefer an appeal against Ex. 6 under Condition 29(c)(ii) of the RSEB (General Conditions) Supply and Scale of Miscellaneous Charges relating to Supply of Electricity, 1964. The demand has been created on the basis that the Electricity Authorities have found the petitioner's meter tampered with. Till that question is determined, the question of restoration of electricity does not arise.2. With the above observations, this writ petition is hereby dismissed summarily.3. However, it would be open to the petitioner to raise objections in connection with the demand raised by the ...
Kaur Singh Vs. Murti and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)553
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Srikaranpur dated 21-7-1987, where by, the learned Magistrate has held that the petitioner is duty bound to pay the arrears of maintenance to non-petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 from June 1986 to June, 1987.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are: that non-petitioner No. 2 Smt. Murti and non-petitioner No. 3 Mst. Veerpal Kaur are the wife and daughter of petitioner Kaursingh. Non-petitioner No. 2 filed a petition for maintenance against the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.PC on behalf of her self and her daughter. In that petition, a compromise petition was filed by the parties. In the compromise, it was agreed by petitioner Kaursingh that be will pay Rs. 400/- to Smt. Murti and Rs. 100/- to Mst. Veerpal Kaur per month as maintentance. It was averred in that compromise that if at any stage, Mst. Murti starts living with petitioner Kaursingh, her husband she will not be ent...
Udai Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)492
J.R. Chopra, J.1. The petition is directed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh dated 30-5-1988 where by the learned Judge has taken cognizance against the accused-petitioners for the offence under Sections 384 and 347 IPC.2. Facts necesary to be noticed for the disposal of this petition briefly stated are that accused Undailal is a liquor contractor at village Badi in Sub-Division, Nimbaheda, District Chittorgarh. He was having a shop at village. Khara also. On 5-2-1986, a raid was made on his shop in village Khara and the liquor worth Rs. 36,000/- was seized by the Excise Party. The accused-petitioner Udailal and his brother thought this has been because of some information leaked out by complainant Lalchand and his brother Manoharlal. It is alleged that on 5-2-1986, Manoharlal went to village Katadi and from there he was called through one Manmal who is the Munim of accussed Udailal at Nimbaheda. There it is alleged that accused Sushilkumar Manmal and Devendra...
Balkar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)578
Milap Chandra, J.1. These appeals and revision have been filed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated September 14, 1983, conviction and sentencing the accused-appellants as under: Name of the accused ConvictionS. No. appellant under Section Sentences[1] Balkar Singh 302, IPC Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default, three month's S.I. 27, Arms One years R.I and of Act Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo 15 day's S.I.[2] Sardulsingh alias Man Singh -do- -do-2. On August 31, 1982 at 12.05 P.M. Harpal Singh PW 1 lodged FIR Ex. P 1 at the Police Station, Gajsinghpur (Sri Ganganagar) with the allegations, in short, that his uncle Ranveer Singh (PW 4) was allotted a plot measuring 80' x 40' situated at 19-FF by the Sarpanch, Gram Pancbayat, Motasar Kuni at patta (Ex P 9) was issued. The accused Pragat Singh who died during the trial and who was residing in the same Chak used to threaten Ranveer Singh PW 4 that he would not allow him to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »