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.
Davi Vs. Purshottam
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN196
B.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous criminal revision is directed against the order dated May 2, 1989, passed by the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act cum Additional Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, in criminal revision petition No. 51 of 1988, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge ordered for the payment of the amount of the maintenance from the date of the order.2. Smt. Davi filed an application Under Section 125 Cr. P.C. against the non-petitioner Purshottam in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jodhpur, for grant of maintenance to her three children. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 4 Jodhpur, by his order dated October 13, 1987, awarded the maintenance of Rs. 300/- per month to the three children of Smt. Davi. and directed their father Purshottam to pay the amount of maintenance from the date of application. Dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 4 Jodhpur, Purshottam filed a ...
Nathu and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN223
B.R. Arora, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the judgment dated April 10, 1990 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pali, in Sessions Case No. 20 of 1987, by which the appellants were convicted under Section 376, I.P.C. and were awarded the sentence of imprisonment for seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- each, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.2. Appeal No. 253 of 1990 is represented appeal preferred by the appellants through their counsel while S.B. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 184 of 1990 was preferred by the appellants through the jail. As both these appeals arise out of the same judgment, I, therefore, propose to decide both these appeals by this common judgment.3. The incident which led to the prosecution of the present accused-appellants took-place on March 1, 1987 on the barran land situated in the hillocks of Bhanwariya Patan at about 2.30 p.m. According to the prosecution, the accused-appellants committed rape...
Mohammed Hanif Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN201
B.R. Arora, J.1. This criminal revision petition is directed against the judgment dated March 19, 1987, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge granted the benefit of probation to the accused-respondent No. 2, Mohammed Rashid.2. Accused Mohammed Rashid was tried by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for offence Under Sections 452 and 324, I.P.C. The incident, which led to the-prosecution of the accused Mohammed Rashid, took place on June 25, 1980, when, according to the prosecution, Mohammed Hanif alongwith his wife had gone for the condolences to his uncle and there a quarrel ensued between Mohammed Rashid and Mohammed Hanif. Mohammed Hanif returned to his house and when he was talking with his wife, in the meanwhile the accused came there and knocked at the door. Mohammed Hanif opened the door and as soon as he opened the door, the accused Mohammed Rashid threw chillies-powder in his eyes and, also, inflicted injury to...
immamuddIn and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN234
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is direced against the judgment dated March 30,1989, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant Under Section 304 Part, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment.2. The appellants Immamuddin and Aziz Khan alongwith Hakim Khan, Allahabachay and Hanif were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, for offences Under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149, I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge, after trial, acquitted Hakim, Allahabachy and Hanif for all the offences, with which they were tried, but convicted the present appellants Immamuddin and Aziz Khan for the offence Under Section 304 Part I, I.P.C. and sentenced each of the appellants to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.200/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' rigorous...
immamuddIn and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN397
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated March 30, 1989, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted (he appellant Under Section 304, Part-I, IPC and sentenced each of them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment.2. The appellants Immamuddin and Aziz Khan alongwith Hakim Khan, Allahabachay and Hanif were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, for offences under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149, IPC. The learned Sessions Judge, after trial, acquitted Hakim, Allahabachay and Hanif for all the offences, with which they were tried, but convicted the present appellants Immamuddin and Aziz Khan for the offence Under Section 304, Part I, IPC and sentenced each of the appellants to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' rigorou...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunita and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ245
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. National Insurance Company Limited, Panch Batti, M.I. Road, Jaipur, has filed this appeal against the award dated 21.5.1985 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur in Claim Case No. 119 of 1980 (Sunita v. Harilal).2. Respondent No. 1, the claimant, filed a claim petition for Rs. 5,35,000/- against the appellant, along with respondent Nos. 2 and 3, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur on the ground that on 7.4.1980 at about 2 p.m. in village Moja Lakher, the driver of truck No. RSR 4741, while driving the said truck rashly and negligently, dashed the claimant, respondent No. 1, opposite the Sheetla Mata Temple, which caused serious injuries to her in both the legs. As a result of the injuries her left leg had to be amputated and the right leg became useless due to this accident. In her claim petition, she gave the details as to how Rs. 5,35,000/- were to be made out.3. The claim petition was contested by the appellant, National Insurance ...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Evan Lodricks and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1991ACJ1085
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. This appeal (Appeal No. 99 of 1986, connected with Appeal No. 101 of 1986) arises from the award given on 24.1.1986 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, in Motor Accident Case Nos. 374 and 375 of 1983.2. On 7.11.1983 one Christopher Lodricks was going on his scooter from Ajmeri Gate to Sawai Man Singh Hospital. Yvonne (Evan) Lodricks was the pillion rider on the aforesaid scooter. The claimants alleged that when they reached at the tiraha of Ashok Marg, near Maharani College, Jaipur, a car bearing number RST 549 came from the opposite direction and collided with the scooter; as a result of the accident Christopher died at the spot, whereas the pillion rider sustained injuries.3. Claiming that the car, driven by Om Prakash, was being driven rashly and negligently, which struck the scooterist on the wrong side, Yvonne (Evan) Lodricks and Christeen Lodricks (claimants-respondents in Appeal No. 99 of 1986) filed a claim petition to recover compensation in a ...
Manphool Ram Chamar Vs. the Stale of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN209
B.R. Arora, J.1. This application Under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail has been preferred against the order dated August 31, 1990, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar, by which the learned Sessions Judge granted bail to Laxman Singh and Tara Ram.2. Accused Laxman Singh and Tara Ram are facing trial for the offence Under Section 302/34. I.P.C. in connection with F.I.R. No. 26 of 1990, registered at Police Station, Chunawad, district Sri Ganganagar. The case of the prosecution as unfolded in the First Information Report filed on January 5, 1990 is that on that day, at about 12.30 p.m., the petitioners gave beating to the complainant Het Ram by Gandasi and caused injury to him, due to which he succumbed to the injuries. After their arrest, the accused-non petitioners Laxman Singh and Tara Ram moved an application for the grant of bail and the learned Sessions Judge, by his order dated August 31, 1990, allowed the application and ordered for the release of the non...
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN198
B.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated March 13, 1989, passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Suratgarh, framing the charge Under Section 406, I.P.C. against the petitioner.2. Gopi Ram, complainant, filed a complaint Under Section 420, I.P.C. against the petitioner Kanhaiya Lal, alleging therein that one truck, bearing No. RJF 3659 was the joint property of Kanhaiya Lal and one Hanuman Prasad and on June 12, 1979, the complainant made a contribution of Rs. 12,636/-and became the owner of 1/3 share in the truck. On June 13, 1980, accused Kanhaiya Lal took Rs. 20,000/- form the complainant and executed a pronote in his favour. At that time, it was, also, agreed that till the accused makes the payment of this amount, be will, not take the share in the income of the truck. It was further agreed that till the accused makes the payment of the amount of Rs. 20,000/-, he will have no right to sell the truck. An endorsement to this e...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bharta Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)3
1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Members of the Rajasthan Civil Services Tribunal dated 29.4.85 which has been filed on 23.8.86 i.e. after the expiry of about one year and four months. Mr. Kumbhat has raised a preliminary objection and has submitted that the writ petition is highly belated. There are two Govt. circulars, first bearing No. F.17(6)DOP/A-H/85 dated 3.1.87 of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms where in it has been ordered that instructions have been issued from time to time to the effect that the decision of the Tribunal should be implemented or a writ petition filed against such judgment within a period of three months. Mr. Kumbhat has also drawn our attention to another circular of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms bearing No. F.17(6) DOP/A-II/85 dated 4th Nov., 1985 where in Para 3 of the instructions it has been observed that three months period is considered to be reasonable time for impleme...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »