Rajasthan Court January 1991 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.
Pyar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN119
1. Accused petitioners Pyar Singh and Mahendra Singh were ordered to be released on bail vide order dated 10th Dec.1990 and it was directed that they shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties in the amount of Rs. 5,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Bharatpur. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Bharatpur has refused to verify the personal bonds and the sureties bonds and the accused petitioners has not been released on bail till date. It is submitted that since the case was decided by the Additional Sessions Judge No.1 Bharatpur the order of this Court has not been honoured by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Bharatpur. We intend to make it absolutely clear that whenever an order is passed and the name of the authority is mentioned, it is the boundened duty of the authority to honour the order of this court and ...
Dinesh Chandra Joshi Vs. Ishaq Mohammed and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN205
B.R. Arora, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated May 23, 1988, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mawli, refusing to take cognizance against the respondents No. 1 to 3.2. The petitioner, on January 21, 1988, filed a complaint in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mawli, against Ishaq Mohammed Under Section 379, I.P.C. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate sent this complaint Under Section 156 Cr.P.C. to the Station House Officer, Fatehnagar for further investigation. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the challan against Ishaq Mohammed, and Hasan Khan for the offence Under Section 379, I.P.C. After going through the papers on record collected by the police during investigation, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate came to the conclusion that the matter in the present case is only of a civil nature and he, therefor, refused to take cognizance against the respondents Ishaq Mohammed an...
Dr. Pradeep Jain. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN583
N.C. Sharma, J.1. This is a writ petition by Dr. Pradeep Jain, Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a direction to the State of Rajasthan, to make promotion to the post of Reader, Dental(Orthodontia), after considering the petitioner for the said post and to promote the petitioner to that post.2. The petitioner passed the examination of Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) in the year 1982, from the University of Lucknow; and thereafter, he passed the examination of Master of Dental Suregery (Orthodontia) from the same University, in the year 1985. The petitioner was recruited to the post of Lecturer in Dentistry (Orthodontia) through the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC); and was by an order of the Government of Rajasthan in Medical & Health Department, dated Apr. 2, 86 (Ann. 2), appointed on the said post. The petitioner was confirmed as Lecturer in Dentistry (Orthodontia) by order of the Government dated May 15,'88 (Ann. 3). The present writ petition was ...
Saddiq and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)549
Mohini Kapur, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the three accused appellants, namely, Saddiq, Ayub and Nasru, who have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1, Alwar, by his judgment dated 23rd Dec. 1987 for the offence under Section 302 IPC. They were tried for the offences under Sections 148, 307, 379, 302, 302/149 IPC and 3/25 of the Arms Act. The accused appellants were acquitted for the offences under Sections 148, 307, 379 IPC and Sections 3/25 of the Arms Act. Along with the appellants five other persons were also tried for all the offences but as the case against them was not proved they were acquitted.2. The appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each and against this they have preferred this appeal.3. The manner in which the incident took place may be looked into. It may be stated that three persons died as a result of g...
Ram Chandra Vs. Tulsi Bai and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-02-1991
Reported in: II(1992)DMC364
K. Bhatnagar, J.1. On the application of Smt. Tulsi Devi respondent under Section 125, Cr.P.C, claiming maintenance for herself, her son Jaisingh and daughter Sunita, the Family Court, Jodhpur, by order dated 19.6.89, allowed the application and ordered for payment of Rs. 200/-per month to Smt. Tulsi Devi, Rs. 150/- per month to her daughter Sunita and the same amount to her son Jaisingh from the date of the application i.e. 2.6.86, by the appellant Ramchandra. The appellant has not made payment to Smt. Tulsi Devi as per order of the Court, therefore, Smt. Tulsi Devi filed an application under Section 125(3), Cr.P.C. on 24.5.1990 in the Family Court, Jodhpur. The learned Judge, on the same date, passed an order for issuance of warrant of attachment for the sum of Rs. 21,900/- against the appellant Ramchandra. Feeling aggrieved with the order, the appellant Ram Chandra preferred this appeal.2. The grievance of the appellant is that under the provision of Section 125(3), Cr.P.C., the Cou...