Rajasthan Court January 1995 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.
Man Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2050; 1995(1)WLC713
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 1-5-1993 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Cases, Dungarpur, whereby he convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 354, IPC and sentenced him to undergo six month's simple imprisonment.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that on 25-4-1990, when prosecutrix P.W. 2 Kumari Kalawati D/o Ram Charan, H.C., S.P. Office, Dungarpur was returning from the house of her mother's sister (Mausi), her neighbours Raju Dhobi and Ajay took her in a hut and committed rape with her. Thereafter they took her in an abandoned house situated in the Housing Board Colony, Dungarpur, where she was kept till 27th April, 1990, and repeatedly committed rape with her. On 27-4-1990, P.W, 1 Ram Charan, Head Constable, while searching her daughter in the Housing Board Colony, heard her screams. At that time he was accompanied by Laxman Katara, Jivat Ram and ...
Kishan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3947
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the order dt. 4-2-94, whereby the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases (Sessions Judge),Jaisalmer ordered for framing charge against the accused petitioner for the offence Under Section 29 read with Sections 21 and 22, NDPS Act, 1985 (in short, 'the Act').2. Briefly the relevant facts for disposal of this revision petition are that on receiving a credible information that Charas/ heroin will be brought from some area falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station Sam and that the same will be transported to Jodhpur, the police party laid 'Nakabandi' near village Shipla in the night of 30th July, 1987. At about 11.15 p.m., one Jonga Jeep was sighted, which was coming from a kachha route. That jeep was stopped, wherein co-accused Tannerao Singh along with some other person was sitting; that Jonga Jeep was driven away towards Jaisalmer. Thereafter at about 11.25 p.m., another Jonga Jeep came through Kachha route, which di...
Keshu Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ740; 1995(3)WLC232; 1995(1)WLN261
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J.1. The instant petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed against the order dated 31-10-92 passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate (East), Bhilwara in Cr. Misc. Case No. 63/ 92 by Keshu Lal on the ground, inter alia, that petitioner Keshu Lal, Smt. Surji and Smt. Lali were apprehended by the Kotwali Police Station, Bhilwara under Section 109 Cr.P.C. and about 37 articles and 5 articles of silver, full details of which are disclosed in the impugned order, were seized by the police officer under Section 102 Cr.P.C. suspecting it to be stolen property.2. It is undisputed before me that the proceedings under Section 109 Cr.P.C. had been terminated under Sub-section (6) of Section 116 Cr.P.C. on the expiry of six months of such detention. Certified copy of the order passed by the learned Executive Magistrate terminating the proceedings under Section 109 Cr.P.C. dated 27-5-92 is on record.3. After termination of the proceedings under Section 109 Cr.P.C...
Madan Lal and ors. Vs. Chief Engineer, Public Health and Engineering D ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)WLC130; 1995(1)WLN400
N.C. Kochhar, J.1. Since the facts of this writ petition filed on 15.11.1988 and the facts of SB Civil Writ Petition No. 1384 of 1989 'Vijay Kumar v. Chief Engineer, Public Health & Engineering Department & Others' (the other writ petition) filed on 12.12.1988 are same and the reply has been filed in this writ petition, both these writ petitions are being disposed of together by mentioning the facts of this writ petition only.2. The case set up by the petitioners is that on the requisition having been received from the respondent No. 3- Superintending Engineer, PHED vide letter dated 11.6.84 (Annx.1), the Employment Exchange, Bharatpur had forwarded the names of 52 persons from genera] category and 20 persons from reserved category for making appointments on 4 posts of Store Munshies and the candidates so forwarded were interviewed by a selection committee on 10.7.1984 and the petitioners were declared successful for being appointed on the posts of Store Munshies, but, to their, surpri...
Ram Ratan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)WLC718; 1995(2)WLN401
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Heard Perused the case diary.2. Petitioner, who is running M/s Agarwal Misthan Bhandar, Bikaner was found in possession of 100. Litres of blue dyed kerosene oil released under the Public Distribution System by the Government, which he was using for commercial purposes in preparing the sweets, on 15-12-94, the premises of the petitioner were searched and checked by the Enforcement Officer of the Supplies Department. Petitioner himself has given in uniting that he used kerosene Oil in his furnances for preparing sweets. Section 3 of the Kerosene (Restriction on Use and fixation of Ceiling Price) Order, 1993 puts a restriction on the use of Kerosene supplied under the Public Distribution System and specifically lays down that no person shall use kerosene supplied under the P.D.S. forany purpose other than cooking and illumination.3. Under these circumstances, It is not at all a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Therefore, this petition stands on dismissed....
L.R. Bairwa Vs. the High Court of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)WLN364
M.P. Singh, J.1. The petitioner is a Judicial Officer. He has filed this petition with a prayer for quashing the order of punishment dated 11th December, 1990, imposing a penalty of reduction in rank, i.e., reversion from the post of the Additional Sessions Judge to the post of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.2. The petitioner, who was appointed as a Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, in due course was promoted to the post of Additional District & Sessions Judge on 21st October, 1987.3. In that capacity, he passed judicial orders in a civil suit for redemption of a mortgage. After issuance of the summons, on 23rd May, 1988, the defendant had put in appearance on 24th May, 1988.4. He filed a written-statement, admitting the plaintiffs claim. 26th of May, 1988 was fixed in the case. In view of admission made by the defendant, there was no further controversy to be decided by the petitioner. No issue was framed, and the suit was decreed in terms of the defendants admission on the same day.5. The...
Govind NaraIn Sharma Vs. Rajasthan High Court of Judicature and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)WLC186; 1995(1)WLN367
M.P. Singh, J.1. The petitioner was a member of the Rajasthan Judicial Service. He sought voluntary retirement on 18th of September, 1992. He filed the present writ petition for quashing the order dated 21st of December, 1984 which, according to him, was a reversion order.2. The petitioner joined the Rajasthan Judicial service on 18th of September, 1967 as Munsif Magistrate. He was promoted as Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 30th of November, 1976.3. He was given an officiating appointment as Additional District Judge on 3rd April, 1981 against a temporary vacant post. This appointment was made under Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1969 which runs as follows:22. Temporary or officiating Appointment: On the occurrence of temporary or permanent vacancies the Court shall recommend to the Governor the names of the candidates from amongst the persons who are eligible for appointment to the service by promotion under clause (i) of rule 8 for...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Tara Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: II(1995)ACC250; 1995(1)WLC755
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Two contentions are raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company. First, that the vehicle was not insured at the time of the actual accident. He submitted that the cover note shows that the period was commencing from 1.00 p.m. of 31.3.1992 and actual incident took place at about 12.30 p.m. on that day. This point was not specifically argued before the learned Tribunal. Learned Counsel has shown a copy of the cover note from his record. Original one is not produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, carbon copy cannot be looked into. Apart from that the copy of the cover note shows that the period of insurance commenced from 1.00 p.m. of 31.3.1992 which ends on 30.3.1993 at midnight hours. It is not in dispute that the insurance was taken for one year. Therefore, the Insurance Company cannot plead that it starts from 1.00 p.m. on 31.3.1992 and if it ends at 12.00 midnight of 31.3.1993 then it starts from 12 midnight of 31.3.1992 and not from 1.00 p.m...
iqbal and ors. Vs. HakimuddIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-17-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Raj123
ORDERP.P. Naolekar, J.1. The decision in this revision shall also decide S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 699/87 'Shri Abdeali Chanchuliwala Bohra v. Shri Harimuddin', S. B. Civil Revision Petition No. 700/87 'Shri Imran Hussain v. Shri Hakmuddin and S. B. Civil Revision Petition No. 701/87 'Shri Mohammed Hussain v. Shri Hakuimuddin'. In all these revisions, a common question of law and fact is involved.2. Brief facts necessary for deciding the question involved in the case are that the plaintiffs-respondents are Dawoodi Bohras belonging to the Dawoodi Bohra Community, which is a religious denomination and whose spritual leader and the religious head is the Dai-Ul-Mutlaq.3. The plaintiffs have filed a suit claiming the relief:--(a) That the defendants by themselves, their servants and agents or any person styling himself as Bohra Youth Association or any member thereof be restrained by permanent injunction from preventing the plaintiffs and other Dawoodi Bohras owing allegiance to thei...
Tej Shankar Vs. the Government of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-17-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)WLC604; 1995(1)WLN575
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. This writ petition, which has been filed claiming pension by the petitioner, is being resisted on behalf of the State Government of Rajasthan by adopting hypertechnical plea which is evident from the facts which are enumerated as follows:2. The petitioner was initially appointed on 15/8/1963 on the post of Electrician in the Sangeet Natak Academy of Rajasthan and continued there upto 24/10/1972. Thereafter from 25/10/1972 to June, 1975, the petitioner had worked in the Rajasthan Laiit Kala Academy since the Sangeet Natak Academy got merged in Laiit Kala Academy, it appears that in the year 1975, the petitioner started working in the Ravindra Manch, which is also a body financed by the State Government, on a consolidated salary of Rs. 220/- per month. Subsequently, this Ravindra Manch also was taken over by the State Government in July, 1975 and the employees working therein were treated as employees of the Education Department. The plea of the petitioner, therefo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »