Rajasthan Court January 1993 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.
Parbat Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)38
Milap Chandra Jain, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore dated December 17, 1992 by which he has dismissed the application of the Public Prosecutor moved under Section 311, Cr.P.C. for the examination of the investigating officer Karan Raj in sessions case No. 63/91-State v. Jalam Singh and Ors. Under Section 302, 307, 325 and 323, I.P.C. The facts of the case giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus.2. For the first time, summons were issued to the investigating officer Karari Raj for May 27, 1992. Thereafter, 6.6.92, 20.6.92, 15.7.92, 5.8.92, 19.8.92, 2.9.92, 14.9.92, 29.9.92, 13.10.92, 30.10.92, 11.11.92, 18.11.92 and 26.11.92 were fixed in the case for his evidence. When he was not produced on November 26, 1992, the prosecution evidence was closed. Thereafter, an application under Section 311, Cr.P.C. was moved by the learned Public Prosecutor stating that Karan Raj could not be produced earlier as he ...
Jai Singh and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Raj177; 1993CriLJ2705; 1993(2)WLC1
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. This Full Bench has been constituted to decide whether the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (No. 33 of 1989) (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') is ultra vires the Constitution of India.2. For dealing with the arguments raised before us, it will be useful to refer the legislative history as well as the various sections of the Act.3. Before the present Act was passed, the Parliament had passed an Act known as The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955' to prescribe punishment for the (preaching and practice of 'Untouchability') for the enforcement of any disability arising there from and for matters connected therewith.4. The Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Bill of the aforesaid Act was that the Bill before the Act was passed had been prepared in pursuance of Article 17 of the Constitution, by which untouchability was abolished and its practice in any form was forbidden.5. The Hindus, who inform the m...
Municipal Council, Bhilwara Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Raj142; 1993(1)WLC723
N.K. Jain, JJ. 1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the Judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court dated Nov. 21, 1980 whereby the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioner-appellant.2. However, while interpreting the two Notifications dated May 31, 1966 and July 12, 1966 issued by the Govt. of Rajasthan, the learned single Judge has observed:'Having regard to the context of the two notifications and having regard to the accepted construction which has been placed on the two notifications, I am of the opinion that the notifications should be so construed so as to extend the exemptions to all the items mentioned therein. This may be done either by treating the word 'raw' as surplusage in the opening part or by treating that the 'raw materials' have been defined so as to cover all the items in all the Sub-heads of the two notifications. The power of granting as well defin...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Habib Khan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ328Raj; 1993(2)WLC202
Jain, J.1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 has been fifed against the order of learned Single Judge of this Court dated January 17, 1992 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed and the order dated September 26, 1989 passed by the Labour Court (Tribunal), Udaipur has been upheld.2. Briefly stated the facts of this case which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that the respondent No. 1 was working as a driver with the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred as the Corporation). The respondent No. 1 while on duty on April 25, 1984, as driver of Bus No. 6024 demanded Rs. 10/- from the conductor Nathu Singh and on refusal he abused and gave beating to him due to which Nathu Singh sustained simple and grievous injuries. The respondent No.l was medically examined and found in an intoxicated condition. Thereafter he was charge-sheeted and after due enquiry the Enquiry Officer found h...
Foja Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2657; 1993WLN(UC)47
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated May 30, 1985, passed by the Sessions Judge, Jalore, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused appellant Foja Ram for the offences under Sections 302 and 324, I.P.C.2. The incident which led to the prosecution of the appellant took place on October 23, 1983, at about 7.30 a.m. in the house of the accused in village Samrau where the accused appellant murdered his wife Smt. Sunder Kaur. The report of the incident was lodged at Police Station, Sanchore, by PW 4 Harsan - the Sarpanch of the village - at about 9.30 a.m. The case of the prosecution is that accused and the deceased used to quarrel with each other on flimsy grounds. The quarrel took place in the night of October 23, 1983, and in the morning, the accused took up a Farshi and inflicted injury on the head of Sunder Kaur by asking that she administered poison to him in the night. The handle of the Farshi broke and thereafter the accuse...
Shiker Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ760
ORDERY.R. Meena, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Merta, whereby, he has confirmed the conviction under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act but reduced the sentence to rising of the Court with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-.2. The facts necessary to be noticed in short are that the petitioner applied for grant of licence for sale of food-grain on 25-10-76. The licence was granted on 15-11-76. Inspection was conducted at the business premises on 9-11-76 and it is found that petitioner was selling foodgrains (wheat etc.) without licence. Petitioner submitted that he has applied for licence in October and the licence was ready in the office but pending only for the signature of the concerned officer, on 9-11-76. When the licence was complete and there is no hitch in issuing the licence to the petitioner, he started the business in anticipation, therefore, no offence has been committed by him. The trial Court convicted him for the offence ...
Rajasthan Public Service Commission and ors. Vs. Meetha Nath @ Meethes ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)33
N.K. Jain, J.1. This special appeal Under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the order dt. 2.12.1992 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court whereby he has allowed the writ petition filed by the petitioner-respondent No. 1.2. The facts of this case which are necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this special briefly stated are that the appellant Rajasthan Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred as the Commission) issued an advertisement for five posts of Public Relation Officer vide advertisement No. 5/90-91 dt. 5.11.1990 (Ex. 2). The last date of submitting application form was fixed as 2.12.1990, The petitioner-respondent No. 1 applied for the post of P.R.O. and in the column of experience, he has stated that he had five years experience of working with the news-paper the Dainik Jaltey Deep and four years experience of working with the Rajasthan Sahityik Tremasik. After scrutiny, the non-petitioner appellant found that the pe...
Udai Lal Alias Uda Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-25-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ509; 1993WLN(UC)44
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated April 10, 1985, passed by the Sessions Judge, Udaipur, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offences under Sections 302 and 394, I.P.C.2. The incident, which led to the prosecution of the appellant, took place on 11-1-83, in the jungle of Mathora, where Pratapi w/o Heera was murdered. The case of the prosecution is that in the morning of 11-1-83, Smt. Pratapi along with PW 1 Maggu had gone to jungle for collecting the wood. In the jungle, when Pratapi and PW 1 Maggu were collecting the wood, the accused came there and asked her not to cut the green wood. Sometime thereafter the accused again came and caught-hold of Smt. Pratapi by hands. PW 1 Maggu afraid of this, went to the village and informed the villagers. The incident took place at about 10.00 a.m. The written report of this incident was lodged at Police Station, Gordhan Vilas, at about 6.00 p.m. on the same day by one...
Neem Dan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)43
M. Kapur, J.1. This petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section 145 of the Customs Act. In brief, the facts are that from one truck No. G.J. 7T-7115 about 94 kg. silver was recovered when it was proceeding from Barmer to Palanpur (Gujarat). The driver of the truck was Nimbaram and Anr. person Bukharam was also sitting in it. These persons were arrested and in their statements they stated that the silver was sent by one Surajdan and Bhimaram and the present petitioner Nimbaram had assisted in loading the silver in the truck.2. It has been contended that Nimbaram and Bhukaram who were in the truck when the silver was recovered, have been released on bail by the Sessions Judge and Reliance has been placed on 1991 (R.C.C.) 282.3. Learned Counsel for the customs Department has contested this application and contended that this petitioner in his statement stated that earlier also he had worked for carrying of gold and silver from one place to another. Reliance has been placed on...
Gursharan Kaur Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2076
ORDERMilap Chandra, J.1. This petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr. P.C. against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar, dated 2nd January, 1993 by which he refused permission under Section 320, Cr. P.C. for compounding offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A, IPC. The facts of the case may be summarised thus:--2. FIR No. 91/92 was registered at the police station, Matili Rathan (Sri Ganganagar) under Sections 406 and 498A, IPC. at the instance of the petitioner against her husband Baldeo Singh. After necessary investigation, the Police filed challan against her husband Baldeo Singh, father-in-law and mother-in-law under Sections 406 and 498A, IPC in the Court of Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar. An application under Section 320, Cr. P.C. was moved by the complainant Gurucharankaur for the grant of permission to compound the said offences. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application and refused the permission as the o...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »