Rajasthan Court September 1990 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.
Bakhtawar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN325
Y.R. Meena, J.1. This petition is directed against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand dated 2.3.81 by which accused Bakhtawar Singh was convicted Under Section 4/9 of Opium Act and sentenced to undergo two months' simple imprisonment.2. The prosecution case is that on 16.12.74 Inspector Nandlal was going to Chittorgarh to prevent smuggling. Abut 36 kilometres from Kelwa he checked Bus No. RRM 259 and found accused petitioner at seat No. 5 in the bus. Accused was in possession of a bag which contained 3 kg. 250 grms opium in polethene bags. He also found 2 kgs 200 grins opium tied on the chest of the accused, The opium was seized. Four packets of samples were obtained from seized material and sent for chemical examination. The accused petitioner was arrested on the spot and was taken to the police station, Rajnagar along with opium. A case Under Section 4 read with Section 9 of the Opium Act was registered. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand charged the accused ...
Kalu and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN322
Y.R. Meena, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh dated 3.3.1981. The learned Sessions Judge has sustained the sentences awarded to Kalu, Veeram and Bhagji by learned Judicial Magistrate, Kapasin Under Section 4/9 of the Indian Opium Act.2. Prosecution case is that on 3.6.73 Ajij Mohd., I.O. then Incharge of the Police Station, Rashmi on information through Mukhbir, arranged for raid and proceeded towards the way to village Murili for Nakabandi to apprehend the culprits. At about 3 p.m., it is said that from the side of Lasadia Khurd five persons came and when they were surrounded, three out of five namely, Kalu, Veeram, and Bhagji were apprehended. The other two ran away. The persons apprehended were having some bundles and potliyas. The other two who ran away were also having potaliyas but escaped after throwing their potaliyas on the spot. The substance containing in the bundles and potaliyas was 82 Kgs. 650 grms. Accused ...
Malkiyat Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN327
Y.R. Meena, J.1. This revision petition Under Section 401, Cr. P.C. is directed against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has sustained the conviction of accused Malkiyat Singh Under Section 54(a), (c) and (d) of Excise Act and sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.2. Learned Counsel for the accused-petitioner, before me, Mr. Vyas has not pressed the revision petition on merits. He submits only that benefit of Section 360, Cr. P.C. should be given to the accused as he is below 21 years of age and was never convicted previously. For that he relied on 1978 Rajasthan Criminal Cases 224 and 1981 Rajasthan Criminal Cases 308.3. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Singhvi has not seriously objected in case the benefit of Section 360 of Cr. P.C. is given to the accused petitioner.4. When learned Counsel for the acc...
Smt. Kishni Devi Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: AIR1992Raj24; 1990(2)WLN102; 1990WLN(UC)351
ORDERMilap Chandra, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for directing the Sub-Registrar, Jodhpur (respondent No. 2) to register the sale-deed dated May 15, 1987 (Annexure-2). The facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition may be summarised thus.2. The vendors Parasmal and Sardarmal' Kankaria, Queens Park, Calcutta agreed to : sell their small piece of land measuring 57 sq. meters situated near Isolation Hospital, Jodhpur for Rs. 500/- to the petitioner. On May 15, 1987 the holder of their general Power of Attorney, Rajesh Lodha, executed the sale-deed Annexure-2 on requisite stamps in favour of the petitioner. On July 14, 1987, he presented it before the Sub-Registrar, Jodhpur for its registration and deposited the requisite registration charges through the receipt Annexure-1. The Sub-Registrar summoned the executant (Rajesh Lodha) for September 15, 1987, he appeared before him and admitted the execution of the sale-deed Annexure 2. The Sub-Registrar completed all the form...
Phula Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-07-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN208
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. The appellant has been convicted for the offence Under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. SCO/-. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered undergo RI for three months. He has also convicted for the offence Under Section 449, IPC and sentenced to six months RI Both sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Against this conviction and sentence be has preferred this appeal.2. The facts of the case may be mentioned briefly because there is no much dispute about the same. The deceased in this case is Bhanwar Lal and he has three other brothers. The accused and the deceased and his brothers bad some money transactions and the dispute arose because accused-appellant demanded some money, which was not given to him. At 6.00 a.m. on May 12, 1983, the accused went to the house of the deceased Bhanwar Lal and while he was lying on the cot he inflicted injuries by knife. The brother of the deceased P.W. 5 Macgilal, lodged a ...
Shri Jai Prakash Vs. Khimaraj and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Raj136; 1990WLN(UC)326
ORDERJasraj Chopra, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Desuri dated 20-8-1988 whereby the learned Munsif has rejected the application filed under Section 151, CPC.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this revision petition briefly stated are : that the non-petitioner-decree holder Khimraj obtained a decree for arrears of rent and ejectment against the non-petitioner No. 2 judgment debtor Smt. Shanti Devi on 1-6-1979, which was later on con-firmed in appeal on 23-2-1983. Thereafter, the decree-holder Khimraj filed an execution application for execution of his decree and on that application, warrant of possession was issued by the Executing Court. Since the petitioner was in possession of the disputed property, he obstructed the execution of the decree. A note to this effect was made on the warrant of possession by the Sale Amin that the petitioner was obstructing the execution of the decree and ...
Azizulla Khan and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Raj101; 1991(1)WLC132
ORDERM.R. Calla, J.1. The following cases involving common and identical questions with regard to pre-election matters in relation to the Municipal Boards and Municipal council were heard together and the same are being decide d by this common judgment. The details of the cases are as under:--S. No.No. of casesTitle of casesDate of presentationlMunicipal Board/ Council1.SBCWP No. 3286/90Azizulla Khan v. State & Ors.31-7-90Tonk 2.No. 3428/90Sabir Ahmed Qureshi v. State & Ors.10-8-90Jaipur3.No. 3424/90Anil Shah v. State & Ors.10-8-90Jaipur4.No. 3473/90Ram Narain v. State16-8-90Kota5.No. 3448/90Abdul Zaleel v. State16-8-90Kola6.No. 3431/90Kamal Kumar v. State of Raj & Ors.13-8-90Kota7.No. 3372/90Nathu Lal v. State & Ors.4-8-90Chhabra (Kota)8.No. 3452/90Dharamveer Agrawal v. State16-8-90Alwar9.No. 3432/90Chandra Kant13-8-90BharatpurSharma v. State10.No. 3445/90Dalu Ram v. State & Ors.13-8-90Pilani (Khunjhunu)11.No. 3449/90Rafiq Mohd v. State &Ors.16-8-90Sunel; (Distt. Jhalawar)12.No. 3441/...
Gordhan Dass Vs. Smt. Ram Janki
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)233
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. This is a tenant's revision preferred against the judgment and order passed by the Munsif Ajmer City (West) Ajmer, rejecting his application dated 15-4-1989 for recalling the order dated 15-10-1985 whereby the defence of the Defendant-Petitioner was struck off.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for eviction against the petitioner on the ground of default wherein provisional determination-of rent was made on 19-3-1984. The defendant-petitioner did not deposit the rent within the stipulated time prescribed by Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Thereupon, the plaintiff respondent moved an application Under Section 13(5) of the Act. The rent was not deposited and consequently, defence was struck off on 15-10-1985. The order striking out the defence became final.3. On 15-4-1989, the defendant-petitioner moved an application for recalling the order aforesaid by which the defence had be...
Pal Bus Service Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1990
Reported in: AIR1992Raj108; 1991(2)WLC540; 1990WLN(UC)377
A.K. Mathur, J. 1. This legislation has a chequered history and this is third round. On two previous occasions the similar provisions had come up for interpretation before this Court and now this is third time it is coming over again.2. This order will dispose of all the writ petitions mentioned in the Schedule appended to this order.3. In order to appreciate the controversy and points involved in these writ petitions the facts of Pal Bus Service v. State of Rajasthan. (D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 982/1989) are taken into consideration for the convenient disposal of all these writ petitions mentioned in the Schedule appended to this order.4. The petitioner is an existing operator of the route Suratgarh to Hanumangarh via Manakthedi, Jakhadawali, Kalibanga etc. which was formerly 83 Kms. in length and thereafter due to certain extension it became 95 Kms. in lenghth, During the year 1973-74 the aforesaid route Suratgarh to Hanumangarh had scope of 6:4 and in pursuance thereof 6 permits...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›