Rajasthan Court February 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.
Ram Dan Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)173
B.R. Arora, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated April 12, 1990, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, in Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 1989, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner.2. Mohan Dan, Bheek Dan, Maal Dan and Lichu Dan, all residents of village Sangar (district Jaisalmer), on June 28,1989, filed the petition under Section 133 Cr.P.C. in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaisalmer. It was alleged in that application that in village Sangar, adjoining to the house of non-petitioner No. 1 Ramdan there is a public Kathadi and also, a public, way about 3.25 feet wideon the back side of this Kathadi and the villagers are using this public way without any interuiption. Non-applicant Ramdan, with the aid of other non-applications, is trying to raise an obstruction on this public way and, therefore, he be restrained from constructing the same and obstructing the public way. In support of ...
Ranjeet Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)106
B.R. Arora, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated December 4, 1989, passed by the Sessions Judge, Udaipur, by which the learned Sessions Judge allowed the revision petition filed by Nawla Ram and others and set aside the order dated October 15, 1987, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mawli.2. Ranjeet Singh Jain, on June 18, 1987, lodged a First Information Report at Police Station, Dabok against Nawla Ram and Udai Lal under Section 394 IPC. The police, after necessary investigation, presented a challan in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Mawli, against accused Nawla Ram under Sections 323 and 324 IPC and submitted the Final Report qua accused Udai Lal. The learned Magistrate, by his order dated October 15, 1987, did not accept the Final Report submitted by the police and took congnizance against both the accused Udai lal and Nawla Ram under Sections 323, 324 and 394 IPC and issued Warrants of Arrest. Dissatisfied with ...
Gopi Ram Mangal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)97
B.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated August 8, 1984, passed by the Special Judge, C.B.I. Cases, Rajasthan, Jaipur, by which the learned Special Judge framed the charges against the petitioner under Section 161 I.P.C. and Sections 5(2) and 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.2. A First Information Report was registered with the Anti Corruption Department against Gopi Ram Mangal, who was posted as Cotton Purchase Officer at Rawatsar, on the allegation that he accepted the bribe of Rs. 1000/- from Hanuman Prasad. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded in the First Information Report, was that on January 20, 1983, three heaps of cotton were brought by Hanuman Prasad for self and out of the three, Gopi Ram, who was working as Cotton Purchase Officer at Rawatsar, purchased two heaps of cotton, whereas the third heap, weighing about 400 Quintals of cotton, was not purchased by the Cotton Corporation of India as it is alleged that the accus...
Lal Ram and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)87
B.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated March 13, 1989, passed by the Sessions Judge, Merta, by which the learned Sessions Judge partly allowed the revision petition filed by the petitioners.2. Prema Ram, on September 6, 1985, lodged a First Information Report at the Police Station, Makrana, against Pancha Ram, Lala Ram, Jodha Ram, Sukh Ram, Mohini, Roopa Ram and Mangi Lal for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 423, 406 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the Final Report in the matter. The learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Makrana, by his order dated October 28, 1985, did not accept the Final Report and took cognizance against the accused under Sections 423 and 120B, IPC and issued process. Dissatisfied with the order dated October 28, 1985, passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Makrana, taking cognizance against the accused, the accused preferred a revisio...
Gopi Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)120
B.R. Arora, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated December 8, 1983, passed by the Special Judge, CBI cases, Rajasthan, Jaipur, by which the learned Special Judge sent the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation for further investigation.2. A First Information Report was registered with the And corruption Department against Gopi Ram Mangal, who was posted as Cotton Purchasing Officer at Rawatsar, on the allegation that he accepted the bribe of Rs. 1000/- from Hanuman Prasad. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded in the First Information Report, Was that on January 20, 1983, three heaps of cotton were brought by Hanuman Prasad for sale and out of the three, Gopi Ram, Who was working as Cotton Purchase Officer at Rawatsar, purchased two heaps of cotton, where as the third heap, weighing about 400 Qnt. of cotton, was not purchased by the Cotton Corporation of India as it is alleged that the accused petition demanded Rs. 10/- per quintal for...
Jitendra Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)108
B.R. Arora, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated April 30, 1990, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bali, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge discharged the accused respondents No. 2 to 6 for the offence under Section 307 IPC and sent the case to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bali, under Section 228 Cr.P.C. to try the accused after framing the charges.2. On June 16, 1989 a case under Sections 147, 323/34 IPC was registered at Police Station, Magartala against Armit Lal, Dinesh Kumar, Babu Lal, Sukan Raj and Phool Chand on the written report submitted by Jitendra Singh. It was alleged in that report by Jitendra Singh that his brother Srawam Singh, when he was returning from his field on a tractor, the accused persons caught hold of him, took him to their house and gave beatings to him with an intention to kill him. He received so many injuries. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the challan against the accused und...
Prabhatiram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN391
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The petitioners are facing trial in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Alwar for the offences under Sections 366, 376 and 392 IPC. The incident is said to be of 20.4.90, while the report of the incident was lodged on 23.4.90 at 12.15 P.M. by Smt. Chiriya who is an elderly woman aged about 35 years or so. In the said report, she implicated the petitioner and two other co-accused persons to have taken her in a jungle and committed rape on her thrice by each of them.2. After registration of the case, the police submitted a charge sheet against the accused persons and now they are facing trial as stated above.3. The petitioners had approached to this Court for grant of bail prior to the present bail application and the said application was dismissed of on 31.8.90 with the following observations:The submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners can be properly appreciated after the statement of Smt. Chiriya is recorded in the trial Court and a full fle...
Rampal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN393
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned P.P. submit that the revision be disposed of at this stage. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that from the findings of the Courts below the offence Under Section 454 IPC is not made out, and for the offence Under Section 380 IPC he should be given the benefit of probation.2. The facts of the case are that a report was lodged on 23.12.1976 by the complainant Jaldhari stating therein that eighteen days prior to the lodging of the report, some persons committed theft of ornaments from his house after breaking the locks. In the report he made accusation against the petitioner as well as one co-accused Mangal.3. After registration of the case, the police did not file any charge sheet against Mangal. However charge sheet was filed against the petitioner in the Court of the learned Magistrate. The petitioner was charged Under Sections 454 and 380 IPC, the learned Trial Court after completion of the tri...
Rampal S/O Chhotkya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN387
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned P.P. submit that the revision by disposed of at this stage. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that from the findings of the Courts below the offence Under Section 454, IPC is not made out, and for the offence Under Section 380, IPC he should be given the benefit of probation.2. The facts of the case arc that a report was lodged on 23.12.1976 by the complainant Jaldhari stating therin that eighteen days prior to the lodging of the report, some persons committed theft of ornaments from his house after breaking the locks. In the report he made accusation against the petitioner, as well as, one co-accused Mangal.3. After registration of the case, the police did not file any charge sheet against Mangal. However charge sheet was filed against the petitioner in the Court of the learned Magistrate. The petitioner was charged Under Sections 454 and 380, IPC. The learned Trial Court after completion of the...
Sanwata Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN439
N.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Merta Dt. 26-6-79 where by he convicted and sentenced the appellant as follows with a direction that all the sentences shall run concurrently:Sanwata Ram: under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to 1 year's R.IRamkaran and under Section 326 read with Sec. 149 IPCsentenced to 3 year'sJeetu Ram Moolaram R.I.Deo Karan: under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to 1 year's R.I.and under Section 307 sentenced to 5 year's R.I. andunder Section 326IPC sentenced to 5 year's R.I.2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that one Tejaram lodged a report with an allegation that in the night intervening 11th and 12th July, 1978 while he and Dala Ram were sleeping in the Gadal. Five accused persons gave beating to Dalaram with axe and Pharsies as a result of which Dala Ram had received injuries. On this police registered a case and started investigation. The injured was medically examined by Dr. Pratap Singh who found fi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »