Rajasthan Court June 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.
Mam Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-27-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)185
P.C. Jain, V.J.1. The case of the petitioner is that he apprehends his arrest in case No. FIR 12/1972 registered under Sections 395 and 397, IPC at the Police Station, Virat Nagar, District Jaipur on 1-4-1982 on the report of Shri Shyam Sunder. It related to the commission of dacoity in the house of Mohan Lal during the night intervening 31st March, and 1st April, 1982. Sessions Case No. 17/84 was registered against the other co-accused Hanuman Sahai and Ratan Lal. In that case, the learned Sessions Judge vide his order dated 19th June, 1986 has acquitted the accused persons, Hanuman Sahai and Ratan Lal. In another case arising out of the same FIR Samsuddin was acquitted.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had no knowledge of such proceedings against him. He being a driver, he has to remain normally out of his village. In view of the circumstances that three accused persons have been acquitted in the case of FIR No. 12/1982 and he has to fac...
Zakir HussaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-25-1988
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)153
R.S. Verma, VJ.1. The petitioner was arrested in Cr. Case No. 31/88 lodged with police station Bhirani for offence under Sections 8/18 of the NDPS Act. It is alleged that about 6 quintals 56 kg, and 500 gms. of poppy husk was recovered from his possession. The petitioner moved a bail application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Noher but failed. Hence he has come to this court.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in SB Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application 689/1986 Sardar Singh and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, 125 bags of opium poppy husk weighing 5652 kgs. were recovered and yet the accused persons were enlarged on bail. In this case about 6 qtls. of the opium poppy husk has been recovered and, therefore, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail particularly when he is no longer required for investigation; there is no allegation that he would temper with the prosecution evidence; there is no allegation that he would abscond.3. I have considered the fa...
Momta Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-16-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)315
Milap Chandra, J.1. It is stated by the learned Counsel for the accused petitioner that the investigation. has not been fair in this case despite moving the several applications to the higher Police Authorities by the Naranram, brothers of the accused petitioner Momtaram. He further contended that due to party politics and enmity, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He justified and contended that no independent evidence so far could be collected against the accused petitioner.2. In reply, it has been contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that Mst. Pankhu has categorically disclosed to her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr. PC that the accused petitioner forcibly took and raped her. He also pointed out the report of the Medical Board wherein it has categorically been stated that Mst. Pankhu was subjected to forcible induction of a hard object in her vagina and possibility of rape could not be ruled out. Lastly he contended that it is further clear from t...
J.P. Singh Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-13-1988
Reported in: [1990]185ITR659(Raj); 1988(2)WLN393
Milap Chandra, J. 1. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment)-II, Jaipur, filed a complaint in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur, under Sections 276C(1) and 277 read with Section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), against the accused-petitioners and their private limited company, Messrs. Registan (P.) Ltd., Jaipur, with the allegations, in short, that in the return of income of the company in respect of the assessment year 1981-82, deductions to the tune of Rs. 1,63,153 and Rs. 4,69,259 were shown as bad debts and commission paid respectively and on an examination of the return and account books, both these amounts were found to have been falsely claimed with a view to evade tax. Accordingly, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Jaipur, added these amounts in the taxable income and assessed the assessee. On appeal by the assessee, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), J...
Manohar Lal Vs. Smt. Rajvirkor and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-13-1988
Reported in: 2(1989)WLN(Rev)408
I.S. Israni, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous appeal has been filed under Order 43 Rule 1(a) C.P.C. against the order dated November 19, 1979, passed by Additional District Judge, Bbaratpur, in suit No. 19/75 by which he ordered for returning the plaint to be presented to proper court.2. It will suffice to state for the purposes of this appeal that plaintiff appellant is owner of a piece of land, bearing Khasra No. 2484, in the abadi area of Bharatpur. The respondents Nos. 1 to 4 after dividing the northern portion of the said land in small residential plots, sold the same to respondents Nos. 5 to 14 and got the sale deeds registered in their names. The plaintiff appellant thereupon filed a suit against the respondents praying that the sale deeds executed by respondents Nos. 1 to 4 in favour of respondents Nos. 5 to 14 be declared null and void against the plaintiff appellant. It was further prayed that the respondents be restained from dispossessing the appellant and they may not further...
Darab Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-08-1988
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN690
Surendra Nath Bhargava, J.1. This criminal appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 16-9-1987 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur, convicting and sentencing the accused appellants as under:Darab SinghLaxman Singh under Sections 302 & 120, IPC -- Life imprisonmentRatan Singh under Section 201, IPC -- 2 years R.LSmt. Suman under Section 120B, IPC -- Life imprisonment2. A written report, (Ex. P 9) was submitted by Gajju at Police Station, Ucchain, on 5-8-1984, stating that an unidentified dead body of a person was lying near the railway track. On the basis of this report, FIR No. 1/84 was registered and proceedings under Section 174, Cr. PC. Lateron, the matter was referred to Police Station Sevar as the place of incident fell within the jurisdiction of that Police Station. Later on, the clothes and the Chappal of the deceased were identified to be that of Ram Khiladi and, therefore, a case under Section 302, IPC was registered vide FIR No. 102/84. The police started invest...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›