Rajasthan Court February 1994 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.
Pratap Singh Vs. Panchayat Samiti
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ206Raj; 1994(2)WLC609; 1994(1)WLN235
Rajesh Balia, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on November 27, 1965 as a Mistry for maintaining the pump-sets and for driving the tractor. He was later on appointed as tractor driver one month after. He was retrenched by order dated March 26, 1977. The said order was held to be invalid by the award, annexure 5 of the Lower Court, Udaipur, dated March 15, 1979 inter-alia on the ground that retrenchment was effected without following the mandate of Chapter V B of the Industrial Disputes Act. A writ petition against that order was also dismissed by this Court and the petitioner was reinstated with all consequential benefits. Thereafter, vide impugned order dated September 8, 1982, the petitioner was again retrenched by giving him notice of termination of his services forthwith. The termination order was enclosed with a cheque for the three months wages. It is this order dated September 8, 1982 which was challenged before this Court in this petition inter- alia on the ground that the retr...
Basant Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ2137; 1994(2)WLC250; 1994(1)WLN92
ORDERR.S. Verma, J.1. This revision petition by Basant Raj has been filed against the order of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sumerpur dated 11-2-1992 in Criminal Original Case No. 208/91, State v. Basant Raj. whereby learned Magistrate has framed charges for offences under Sections 20/27 of the Arms Act and Rule 62 of the Arms Rules read with Section 30 of the Arms Act.2. Briefly, stated the prosecution case is that on 2-5-1991 at 2.15 a.m. petitioner Basant Raj was found in a drunken condition by the Head-constable Bhabhoot Singh Acting SHO, Sanderao at a place known as Kanpura Choraha. The petitioner was arrested for offence under Section 510, I.P.C. by Bhabhoot Singh. Petitioner was searched by Bhabhoot Singh and upon search of the right pocket of the pant was found a 32 Bore revolver made in England of make Webley scot limited No. 85844 with 6 cartridges. The petitioner was found to carry this revolver without there being a licence on the person of the petition...
Nar Singh Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(1)WLN64
R.S. Verma, J.1. Shri S.M. Singhvi is present in Court and he is directed to accept notice. He accepts notice.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties finally at the admission stage itself.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as under: An F.I.R. No. 377 dated 6.10.86 was registered at Police Station, Nagaur at the instance of Akshay Jain, Branch Manager of United Commercial Bank, Khivsar Branch. The allegation was that on 3.10.86 Rs. 1,75,000/- were sent to Nagaur Branch along with Nathu Lal Verma and Ram Chander. When the amount was deposited at Nagaur it was found to be short by Rs. 20,000/-. Upon this report investigation was commenced. During investigation it was found that Nathu Lal Verma and Ram Chander had kept the boxin the cabin of Narshing Lal in Nagaur. This Narsingh Lal opened the box containing the cash and enevtually aforesaid shortage was found. Consequently, the police filed challan against petitioner Narsingh Lal and submitted a report for release of Nathu Lal V...
Khajan Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(1)WLN279
R.S. Verma, J.1. Mr. K.L. Thakur is present in Court. He is directed to accept notice. He accepts notice.2. The matter is being heard at the admission stage for final disposal, looking to the very short point involved.3. It appears that Maruti Car No. DBB 1821 was seized by officials of the Police Station, Arnod in a criminal case, being a material exhibit. The car was registered in the name of Bhagwanti Devi, who is mother of Krishna Kumar and Khajan Chand. Krishna Kumar and Khajan Chand moved an application for interim custody of the car during pendency of the criminal trial in the case State v. Parampal Singh. In the application, it was stated that Bhagwanti Devi was mother of petitioner and their father Teja Ram had already expired. There is no other owner of the car and the petitioners are the sole owners and, therefore, the car may be given to them on 'supurdgi'. Learned District & Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioners as also the Public...
Hari Prasad S/O Shri Teja Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(1)WLN535
R.S. Verma, J.1. Mr. Thakur is directed to accept notice. He accepts notice.2. The matter is being heard at the admission stage for final disposal, looking to the very short point involved.3. The facts giving rise to this petition lie in a narrow compass. Heera Ram lodged an FIR with Police Station Jaswantgarh on 27.7.89 to the effect that on 26.7.89 he was sleeping in room of his house. His son and her wife were sleeping outside the room. Accused-petitioners Hari Prasad, Dale Ram and Sohan Ram and others armed with various weapons entered his house and gave beating to the inmates of the house who sustained certain injuries.4. The police after due investigation gave a Final Report and the matter was placed before Munsif & Judl. Magistrate, Ladnu. After hearing the complainant, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of offences Under Section 447 and 323, IPC against the three accused petitioners, Hari Prasad, Dale Ram and Sohan Ram. Aggrieved by this order, petitioners filed a revision ...
Hari Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(2)WLN179
M.R. Calla, J.1. This Criminal Appeal Under Section 374(2) Cr. P.C. is directed against the conviction and sentence awarded to the seven accused-appellants by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deeg in Sessions case No. 7/92 (43/91, 37/84) passed on 27th August, 1992. The accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:(i)Accused appellant Hari Singh was convicted and sentenced for offence Under Section 302 IPC to life Imprisonment, fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine he shall have further to undergo for 6 months S.I. For offence Under Section 148 IPC to 6 months R.I. fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine 1 month S.I. For offence Under Section 447 IPC to 3 months R.I. fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine 1 month S.I. For offence Under Section 324/149 IPC to 6 months RI, fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine 2 months S.I. For offence Under Section 323/149 IPC to 1 month R.I. For offence Under Section 325/149 ...
Sadiq Ali Vs. Sagarmal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-08-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Raj203; 1994(1)WLC519; 1994(1)WLN148
O.P. Jain, J. 1. This is a second appeal under Section 100, C.P.C. and is directed against the judgment of Dist. Judge, Pratap-garh dated 28th August, 1980.2. The brief facts of the case are that a shop situated in the main market of Pratap-garh town was let out by the plaintiff to the defendant on 29th May, 1968. The plaintiff filed a suit for ejectment of the defendant mainly on the ground that the defendant himself is the owner of a shop and had obtained a decree against his tenant Bhagwan Dass. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to get vacant possession of his own shop.3. The defendant admitted the tenancy and also admitted the fact that he has obtained vacant possession of his shop from Bhagwan Dass. The defendant however contested the suit on the ground that the plaintiff has no bona fide personal necessity of the suit shop. After recording the evidence produced by the parties, the learned Munsif dismissed the suit on 28-10-1978. Plaintiff Sadiq Ali filed an appeal before Dist....
Jai NaraIn and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-08-1994
Reported in: [1994]207ITR632(Raj); 1994(1)WLC510
Y.R. Meena, J. 1. These three miscellaneous petitions are directed against the order of the Special Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur, dated August 17, 1991, whereby the charges have been framed against the petitioners for the offence under Section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Since a common question is involved in all these three petitions, for the sake of convenience, I dispose of them by this common order.2. The accused petitioners are partners of Messrs. Champalal Jainarain firm. A partnership deed was executed consisting of four partners, three major and one minor. The partners are Jainarain, Purshottam, Ram Kishore and Jugal Kishore. The allegation was levelled against Champalal also, who happened to be the father of Jainarain, Purshottam and Ram Kishore. Champalal has expired during the pendency of the proceedings. The partnership deed has shown four partners but profit of the firm in these years have been divided among five partners and later on it was correct...
Sharda Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-08-1994
Reported in: 1994(2)WLC47; 1994(1)WLN96
R.S. Verma, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties finally at the admission stage itself.2. Devendra Kumar lodged a criminal complaint in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh on 7.12.1993 with the averments that the petitioner's father Ramlal had a brother Jaymal Ram. Sharda Devi is daughter of aforesaid Jaymal Ram. Jaymal Ram was in indigent circumstances and hence Ramlal got Sharda Devi educated at various institutions. Because of indigence of Jaymal Ram. Ramlal got Sharda Devi married. Ramlal died on 18.11.91. Sharda Devi and her other closed relatives, taking advantage of the fact that Sharda Devi was got educated by Ramlal and her marriage was also got performed by Ramlal laid a claim that Sharda Devi was daughter or Ramlal and on this basis got a fraudulent mutation entered with a view to deprive the real heirs of Ramlal from his agricultural land. The details of the fraudulent act have been detailed in the complaint.3. The learned Magistrate instead of t...
Ranchhod Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-1994
Reported in: 1994(1)WLN221
R.S. Verma, J. 1. It is a matter of great regret that even though the incident pertains to the year 1988, the trial has not proceeded with sufficient despatch, out of 23 witnesses, only three witnesses have been examined so far. Learned trial judge is directed to take up the case with all expeditious and complete the trial within a period of four months from the date he receives, copy of this order. The learned P.P. of the Court below shall be under an obligation to secure the presence of the prosecution witnesses on the date/dates to be fixed by the trial court and the trial court shall not adjourn the case except for strong and compelling reasons. If trial is not completed within the aforesaid period petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 10,000/. and a surety bond in a like sum to the satisfaction of learned trial court for appearance in his court on date/dates to be fixed by him. Application for bail is disposed off accordingly....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »