Rajasthan Court May 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.
Narendra Kumar JaIn Vs. Manzula and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-1993
Reported in: II(1993)DMC185
M.B. Sharma, J.1. This is husband's revision petition arising out of the proceedings under Section 125 Cr. P.C. on the application of non-petitioner Smt. Manzula for grant of maintenance to herself and to her minor children, Ashish and Pratik. The learned Judge, Family Court, under his order dated February 1, 1993 ordered that the petitioner husband of Smt. Manzula and father of Ashish and Pratik non-petitioners, shall pay Rs. 500/-p.m. as maintenance to the non-petitioners up to the date of order and thereafter Rs. 700/- p.m.2. It is well settled that before an order under Section 123(1) Or. P.C. can be made, it is necessary that some pre-conditions must be satisfied arid those conditions are : (i) the wife should be unable to maintain herself; (ii) the husband or father must he having sufficient means but neglects or refuses to maintain the wife or the legitimate or illegitimate children. It will be seen that the allegations levelled by the respondent No. 1 against her husband are th...
Harendra Alias Hari Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ50; 1993(2)WLC78
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. Mr. P. R. Choudhary, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution has failed to file challan within the prescribed period of 90 days, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail automatically. In support of this contention he has placed reliance on Phool Chand v. State of Rajasthan, 1993 Cri LR (Raj) 8 decided on 9-12-1992, Sri Ram v. State of Raj (S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 2023/92) decided on 1-2-93: (1992 Cri LJ 2570), Hira Ram v. State of Raj., 1990 (2) RLR 284 decided on 28-4-89 and Shankerlal v. State (S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 2375/92) decided on 8-2-93.2. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner alleged to have committed offence under the N.D.P.S. Act cannot claim a right to be released on bail Under Section 167(2), Cr.P.C. that too when challan has now been filed. He also submits that a bare perusal of Section 36A of the N.D.P.S. Act shows that this Court has power to grant bail and at t...
Phool Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT(Cri)22; 1993CriLJ3273; 1993(2)WLC464
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. The petitioner by means of this writ petition has prayed that the order dated 2-12-1991 (Annex. 1) issued by the Joint Legal Remembrancer & Director, Litigation Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur appointing Shri Ram Chandra Deopura, Advocate, Rajsamand (respondent No. 2) as Special Public Prosecutor in Sessions Case No. 119/91, State v. Bhanwar Singh and Ors., under Section 302, I.P.C. pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Rajsamand and directing that all the expenses incurred by respondent No. 2 shall be paid by Shri Nand Lal Rawal (respondent No. 3), be quashed and that a further direction be given to proceed de novo in the said Sessions trial with the assistance of an independent Public Prosecutor.2. The petitioner is the son-in-law of one of the accused persons namely Bhanwar Singh, who is facing the aforesaid Sessions trial along with 7 other accused persons. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order/letter dated 2-12-1991 (Annex. 1) on the ground ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›