Rajasthan Court September 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.
Nathmal Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Raj68; 1989(2)WLN476
ORDER1. By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the validity of Section 19 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1983 which makes a provision for vote of no-confidence against Sarpanch and Upsarpanch. Section 19 provides that anyone of the panchas of a Panchayat can move no-confidence motion against Sarpanch or Upsarpanch after giving notice. The vote of no-confidence motion can be passed by 3/4th of the total members of the Panchayat Counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 19 of the Act is violative of principle of democracy, as Sarpanch is elected by consent of the Panchayat Circle, he is not elected by the elected Panchas and so no provision can be enacted for passing of any no-confidence motion against such a person who has been elected by the Panchayat Circle directly. We are unable to agree with the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It cannot be said that the provisions contained in Section 19 is violative of the principles of democracy. I...
Laxmi Kant Sharma and ors. Vs. Geeta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN686
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. The petitioner Laxmi Kant and the non-petitioner are husband and wife and a decree for divorce was passed by the District Judge, Bundi on basis of a compromise arrived at between them. Before looking into this compromise it may be stated that three proceedings were pending between the parties. The husband instituted proceedings Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the court of the District Judge Bundi and the wife had moved an application Under Section 125 Cr. P.C in the court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Tonk Another criminal case was pending against the petitioner husband and others for the offences Under Sections 494 and 494 read with 109 IPC and this was also pending against in the court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Took. Whitehall these three cases were pending, the parties arrived at a compromise in the proceedings Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and this compromise was presented before the District Judge, Bundi on 2nd February,...
Ram Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN514
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. In a criminal case against the petitioner, the prosecution produced certain cassettes by way of evidence. The accused petitioner prayed that duplicate of the cassettes should be supplied to him. The learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jaipur District Jaipur has ordered that it is not possible to prepare duplicates of these cassettes and the learned Counsel for the petitioner can play and hear the cassettes in the court. It has also been observed that if the petitioner wants, he can himself get duplicate cassettes prepared. In other words he can apply and obtain copies of the cassettes but the court is not in a position to supply the same.2. Section 207 Cr PC provides for supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents. This section reads as under:207. Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents : In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused,...
Madan Lal Soni Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN524
Jasraj Chopra, J.1. This petition is directed against the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali dated 13-8-1981 where by the-teamed Magistrate has committed the case for trial to the court of Sessions Judge. Pali as the offences under Sections 18(a)(i)(ii)(iia) (iii) and (vi) read with sec-27(a)(i) and 27(b) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (here in after referred to as 'the Act') are punishable with imprisonment of life where as the offence under Section 18A read with Section 28 of the Act is punishable with one year's rigorous imprisonment.2. The Schedule I appended to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides that the offences punishable with more than 7 years rigorous imprisonment are triable by the Court of sessions and, therefore, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has committed this case for trial to the court of Sessions Judge, Pali.3. It has been contended by Mr. Champawat, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that Section 32 of the Act pr...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bheru Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-1989
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)357
S M Jain, J.1. By the Judgment dt. June 21, 1979, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur, has acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (here in after referred to as the 'Act') This appeal is directed against the said judgment.2. The case is as old as October 2, 1977. It was on this date that Shri Hira Lal, Food Inspector, Udaipur, went to the shop of the accused. Known as `Adarsh Mashala Bhandar, situated in Udaipur, and took sample of 'Haldi, (Turmar c) powder. On chemical analysis, the Public Analyst found it to be adulterated.His findings were:Moisture content 5.68Total Ash 10.52%Ash insoluble in dil HCL 0.88%Total Stach 39.42%Lead Chromate NilAdded colouring matter Nil3. He opined that this sample was adulterated as it did not conform to the prescribed standard of purity prescribed under the Rules framed under the Act.4. The learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to est...
Balram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN678
G.K. Sharma. J.1. This revision petition is preferred against the judgment dt. 29-8-89 passed by the Sessions Judge, Alwar, convicting the petitioner Balram Under Sections 325, 324/34 and 323 IPC and petitioner Manohar Lal Under Section 325/34, 324 and 323 IPC. The petitioners have been sentenced on each count to imprisonment and the fine.2. This incident had taken place on 3rd April, 1979. The Police prosecuted the petitioners in the Court of Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, No.1, Alwar who found them guilty Under Section 325, 324/34, 324, 325/34 and 323 IPC. An appeal was preferred by the petitioners and the learned Sessions Judge vide his judgment dt. 29-8-89 dismissed the appeal and sentenced Balram Under Section 325 IPC to 2 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo six month's R.I. Under Section 324/34 IPC to 1-1/2 year's R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo six months' RI and Under Section 323 IPC one yea...
Narayan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-1989
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)265
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. The petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act (here in after referred as to the 'EC Act`) and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Jhalwar sentenced him to 6 month's RI & a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months This conviction was made on 1st March 1982 and had been confirmed in appeal by the Sessions Judge, Jhalawar in Criminal Appeal No. 25/82 by order dated 6th September, 1986. Against this decision the present revision has been preferred.2. It may be stated that the prosecution of the petitioner was for violating conditions Nos. 5,22 and 17 of the licence granted to him. The substance of the case is that the petitioner distributed sugar twice on certain ration cards Against judgment dated 6-9-1986 passed by Sessions Judge, Jhalawar and made double entries. The register prescribed for making entries was also not maintained in accordance with the d...
Gulam Nabi and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN317
Farooq Hasan, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the order dated 17-1-1989 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jhalawer in Cr. Case No. 9/89 where by the amount of personal bond so also the amount of surety bond of the accused and his surety, have been forfeited holding therein that the appellant who was facing trial under the NDPS Act before the trial Court and was on bail, remained absent on 19-12-1988.2. It has not been disputed that on the day of heating i.e. 19-12-1988, appellant Gulam Nabi sent a telegram of his illness where in it was also prayed that personal appearance of the appellant (Gulam Nabi) be exempted and further it was stated that because of his illness, the appellant (Gulam Nabi) was unable to attend the Court. On 19-12-1988 an application for exemption was also filed by the counsel for the appellant (Gulam Nabi) The learned trial Court forfeited the amount only on the ground that no affidavit was filed before it and apart from that, no medical certificate was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›