Rajasthan Court November 1989 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.
Makhan Lal Chaubdar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-24-1989
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)27
N.C. Sharma J.1. This is a writ petition by Makhanlal Chaubdar Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the transfer order dated August, 25 1989 (Annexure-5) on the ground that he has been made victim or recurring transfers in as much as within a period of one year he has been transferred 5 times.2. The petitioner is holding the post of Accountant under the Director, Treasury and Accounts, Rajasthan Jaipur. Prior to August 2nd, 1988, the petitioner was working as Accountant in the office of District Education Officer, Jhunjhunu. By order Annexure-1 dated 2nd August, 1988, he was transferred on deputation with District Rural Development Agency, Jhunjhunu. Annexure-2 goes to show that the petitioner did not join the office of District Rural Development Agency, Jhunjhunu and on 26-10-1988 he was posted in the office of the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Jhunjhunu. There also the petitioner did not join and on 7th November, 1988 by Annexure-3 he was transferred as Accou...
Baldeo Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-24-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN347
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. This revision was admitted on a limited question as to whether the benefit of the probation should be extended to the accused-petitioner under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1938. The undisputed facts are that 50 bottles of illicit liquor was found in possession of the accused on 4-8-1981. He was convicted by the trial court under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. The accused went in appeal which was heard and decided by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar. He partly allowed the appeal, maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence from two years to six months. The accused has approached this Court.2. It was argued by Mr. Garg for the offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 was repelled on 11-8-1981. He has relied upon several decisions of his Court in which the benefit of probation was extended to the accused found guilty of offence Under...
Ram NaraIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-24-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN288
R.S. Verma, J.1. Appellants Ram Narain, Bhadar Ram, Sheopat Ram and Hukma Ram have been convicted and sentenced by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, as noted below vide his judgment dated 6-4-83.(1) Ram Narain (i) Under Section 302, IPC imprisonment for life and Rs. 100/-fine and in default one month's rigorous imprisonment;(ii) Under Section 447, IPC, rigorous imprisonment for threemonths;(iii) Under Section 323 read with Section 34, IPC, rigorousimprisonment for three months;(iv) Under Section 27, Arms Act, Two year's rigorousimprisonment.2. (i) Bhadar Ram (i) Under Section 302 read with 34, IPC Imprisonment for (ii) Sheopat Ram life and fine of Rs 100/and in default one months(iii) Hukma Ram rigorous imprisonment;(ii) Under Section 447, IPC, Rigorous imprisonment forthree months;(iii) Under Section 323, IPC, Rigorous imprisonment for three months;All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved they have come in appeal.2. Briefly stated, the ...
Dau Dayal S/O Jag Mohan Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2321; 1990(1)WLN515
I.S. Israni, J.1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374, Cr. P.C. against the judgment dated June 22, 1982 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City in Session's case No. 48/1981 whereby the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 326 I.P.C. and sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine the appellant has to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. He was also convicted under Section 324, IPC and sentenced to 3 months simple imprisonment. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. It will suffice to state for the purposes of this appeal that at about 6-7 p.m. in Hindaun on 6-8-1980 an incident took place regarding which report Ex. P. 1 was lodged at about 7.25 p.m. It is alleged that complainant Puranmal was beaten and injured by accused-appellant along with two other persons in which the appellant injured Puranmal with 'gupti'. The appellant caused three injuries with 'gupti' to ...
Man Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN507
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The accused petitioner is aggrieved against the judgment dated 4th May 1988 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharatpur by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal of the accused petitioner and the case was remanded back to the learned Magistrate for fresh trial in accordance with law.2. It may be stated that the petitioner is not aggrieved against the conclusion of the learned Magistrate that the trial of the offence being summary trial, the learned Magistrate could not have acted on the evidence recorded by the other Magistrate as provisions of Section 326 Cr. PC are not applicable. The only grievance of the accused petitioner is that it is the case of the year 1976 and the petitioner is a petty milk vendor and, thereafter a period of 12 years the learned Sessions Judge should not have remanded the case for retrial. Under the first proviso to Section 16A in case of any conviction in summary trial it shall be lawful to award a sentence o...
Sukh Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN590
I.S. Israni, J.1. This criminal appeal has been filed Under Section 374 Cr. PC against the judgment and order dated June 15, 1982 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Alwar in Sessions Case No. 18-A/82 by which the accused-appellant was convicted Under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and also to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of the fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for period of 3 months. He was also convicted Under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. It will suffice for the purpose of this appeal to state that on February 2, 1982 at about 6.45 p.m. PW 1 Smt. Gafooran wife of Shri Samme, resident of village Bandipura District Alwar lodged a written report, Ex. P 1 to the effect that on the same day at about 1 00 p.m. she was going with her mother-in-law Smt. Bassi PW 4 to take grass from the field. Her mother-in-law was engag...
Zamil Mohammed Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN630
N.C. Sharma, J.1. This is a writ petition by Zamil Mohammed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a declaration that the verbal termination of his employment as Ward-boy with effect from January 25, 1989 made by respondent No. 2 may be quashed and respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioner in the cadre of Ward-boy (Class-IV) on regular post and in regular pay scale as admissible to the regularly appointed Class-IV employee with all consequential benefits According to the petitioner he was appointed as Class-IV employee as Ward-boy with effected from March 1, 1988 in Mahila Chikitsalaya, Sanganeri Gate, Jaipur and was continously working as such. How ever, without any case of justification his services were terminated by verbal orders with effect from January 25, 1989. It is the case of the petitioner that Mahila Chikitsalaya is an 'industry' and the petitioner was a workman Consequently, according to him, there has been violation of Section 25F of the Indu...
Rajendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN283
A.K. Mathur, J.1. This jail appeal is directed against the judgment dated 6-9-1982 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused appellant Rajendra Singh under Section 302, 1PC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of fine to further undergo 3 month's rigorous imprisonment.2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 7-9-1981 at about 5 p.m. PW 1 Jai Ram Singh was sitting at his tea stall which is near the Nathawala Bus Stand. Deceased Tara Singh came at the tea stall of Jai Ram Singh and sat on a Bench while waiting for boarding a bus for Ganganagar. In the mean while Surjeet Singh PW 2, Malkiyatsingh PW 3 and Balwinder Singh also came there and ordered for tea. Jairam Singh started preparing tea. At that time accused appellant Rajendra Singh came from east side and went towards went. After about 4-5 minutes he returned back and stood at Jai Ram Singh's hotel a...
Kalu Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN353
G.K. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 14th April, 1982 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kota, by which, the appellant has been found guilty of offence under Section 148, IPC and sentenced to 6 months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further under go 1 month's rigorous imprisonment; under Section 332, IPC to 6 month's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default of payment fine to further undergo 1 month's rigorous imprisonment; under Sections 323/149 and 323/149, IPC, to 6 months's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default thereof, to further undergo 1 month's rigorous imprisonment on both the counts. And, all the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently,2. On 22nd Dec , 1980, at about 5 PM, one Raj Vallabh submitted a written report at PS Chechet, alleging that be and Nandlal Forest-Guard were on patrolling duty in the jungle of village Khani, in the nigh...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Jeo Raj and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Raj90; 1989(2)WLN550
Milap Chandra, J.1. These appeals are against similar awards passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated August 11, 1980 under Section 26, Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be called as 'the Rajasthan Act'). The first five appeals have been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the claimants impleading the Urban Improvement Trust (now Municipal Council), Sri Ganganagar as pro forma respondent. The last appeal has been filed by the claimant for the enhancement of the amount of compensation and grant of solatium and interest. The facts of the cases are similar. They may be summarised thus.2. With a view to remove residential difficulties of the inhabitants of Sri Ganganagar; adjoining agricultural fields of Chak No. 2e, 3e and 6e were acquired by the State of Rajasthan. The Land Acquisition Officer, Sri Ganganagar calculated compensation @ Rs. 4,775/- per bigha by its award dated October 15, 1976. Aggrieved with his awards, claimants moved applications un...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »