Rajasthan Court April 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.
Daula Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-14-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)WLC361; 1995(2)WLN15
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 14.5.87 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Churu, in Sessions Case No. 3/85, convicting the appellants under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 250/- In default, two months rigorous imprisonment.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as under: at about 11.30 A.M. on 21st October, 84 a First Information Report was lodged by one Beeru Ram (PW/3) that on 20th October 84, at about 7.00 in the evening, Ramji Lal, his sons Bhanwra and Raju returned home from the field. At that time accused Daula Ram and his wife Bado were standing in the front Yard 'guwarh' with sticks in their hand. As soon as Ramji Lal and Bhanwra entered, they started beating them. Raju younger son of Ramji Lal ran inside the house. Ramji Lal was then felled to the ground and was beaten up. Then shanker, S/O Daula came and gave a stick blow on the head of Bhanwra. All the thre...
Angrej Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-14-1995
Reported in: 1994(1)WLC123; 1995(1)WLN371
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 26.4.91, Anx.3 to the writ petition, passed by the Addl. Chief Engineer, Irrigation, North Zone, Hanumangarh Junction on the. ground interalia that without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners the order passed by the Superintending Engineer dated 3.4.91, Anx. 2 to the writ petition, has been set aside.2. According to the petitioners, the impugned order Anx.3 passed by respondent No. 1 is against the principle of natural justice and fair play. As a mater of fact, without giving an opportunity of hearing the respondent No. 1 has no jurisdiction to set aside the order passed by Superintending Engineer dated 3.4.91 Anx. 2 and further has no authority to remand the case back to Superintending Engineer without giving an opportunity heard to the petitioners.3. Although this case is not posted for final disposal but with the consent of the parties this case if finally...
Ukarda and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ4074; 1995(3)WLC84
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore, dated 14-5-1985 in Sessions Case No. 71/83, convicting the accused appellants Ukarda and Jawana for imprisonment for life under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 323 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also convicting accused appellant Narsa under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him ot rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years.2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 12-11-1983, in the afternoon, deceased Prabhu allegedly went to the field of Ukarda, one of the accused appellants, where he is said to have been assaulted by the accused appellants, which resulted in his death.3. The prosecution has examined 13 witnesses in support of its case of murder of Prabhu Lal by the accused with the common object of so killing him. Reappreciation of this evidence is necessary as the same was urged by the learned counsel for the appellant, who ...
Bhaga Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3354; 1996(1)WLC604
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. This is an appeal by the accused who has been convicted for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in sessions trial No. 12/88 by the Sessions Judge, Pali on 30th September, 1991.2. The prosecution story in brief is that a first information report was lodged at 4 a.m. on 27th September, 1987 by one Pema Ram that in the night of 26th September, 1987 between 12.30 and 1 a.m., I was called by Basti Ram and Puka Ram saying that the accused is beating Andi, wife of Bhaga Ram present accused in the house of Audi's father, who is also the father of the reporting witneSection It was then reported that the complainant ran away along with Basti Ram and Puka Ram to the house of their father, when they saw that accused Bhaga Ram was assaulting Andi with an axe, on seeing the witnesses, the accused ran away. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses to prove the prosecution case whereas one witness was examined by the accused in support of his claim of innocence.3. I...
Jeeva and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3300; 1995(3)WLC89
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. These appeal s are directed against the judgment dt. 1 -7-87 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in sessions case No. 26/ 86 convicting appellant Kana under Sec. 302 I.P.C. and appellants Jeeva and Kaloo under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life.2. The story of the prosecution stated in brief is that at about 7.30 in the evening of 24-3-86, the deceased Nathu was going for work with a cycle and a bed, when in the way, he was assaulted by the accused persons and some others, as a result of which, he was seriously injured and admitted to the hospital where he died on 29-3-86. The accused persons were, therefore, prosecuted for murdering said Nathu. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses in favour of its case and the accused examined 2 witnesses in his defence.3. PW. 1 is the Medical Jurist at the General Hospital, Dungarpur who examined Nathu on 24-3- 86 at 9.10 in the evening. He has depo...
Kheta Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3302; 1996(1)WLC373; 1995(2)WLN60
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi, in Sessions Trial No. 13/86 on 18th July, 1987, convicting the accused appellant Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default, rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. The prosecution story, stated in brief, is that on 4-1-86, one Bholiya, an employee of Welcome Factory was coming home from his factory in the evening, after finishing his shift duty. When he was pasing by the field of Kala, accused Kheta came from behind and hit the deceased on the head by axe. The incident was witnessed by Hariya, PW/1 ' who lodged the F.I.R., in pursuance of which investigation was conducted and the accused was prosecuted for an offence Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses to prove the prosecution case. On appreciation of this evidence, t...
Brij Mohan and 10 ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)WLC30; 1995(2)WLN131
B.R. Arora, J.1. These Special Appeals are directed against the judgment dated 20-3-95, passed by the learned Single Judge, by which the writ petitions, filed by the petitioner-appellants, were dismissed and the appellants were directed to surrender before the Designated Court, Ajmer, on or before 28-3-95. Since all theses appeals arise out of the same judgment and involve identical controversies, we, therefore, think it proper to decide all these Special Appeals by this common judgment.2. F.I.R. No. 77/93 Under Section 3/25 of the Indian Arms Act was registered against one Poonam Chand Bishnoi at Police Station, Bajju (District Bikaner). During the investigation in this F.I.R., two bages full of arms and ammunition were recovered from the Dhani of Poonam Chand Bishnoi. On interrogation, it was revealed that Poonam Chand Bishnoi was engaged in the activities of smuggling arms and ammunitions from Pakistan through the border district of Bikaner in the State of Rajasthan and was supplyin...
Banney Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)WLC547; 1995(2)WLN54
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23rd February '87, passed by the learned Sessions judge, Balotra, in Sessions Case No. 13/86, by which the accused Banney Singh has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/-. In default simple imprisonment for one month. The accused, in pursuance to this conviction, is in Jail.2. This appeal came up for hearing on 23rd March 95. On that day, the Lawyers had decided to abstain from work as a mark of protest in relation to a judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India, suspending the license to practice of Shri V.C. Mishra, Chairman, Bar Council of India. As in our opinion, such abstaining from work is un-necessary, we took up consideration of this appeal on merits. We have pursued the judgment passed by the Court below. We have carefully scrutinized the evidence on record and as will be seen from the discussion herei...
Bhaga Ram Vs. State of Raj.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)WLN57
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. This is an appeal by the accused who has been convicted for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in sessions trial No. 12/88 by the Sessions Judge, Pali on 30th September, 1991.2. The prosecution story in brief is that a first information report was lodged at 4 a.m. on 27th September, 1987 by one Pema Ram that in the night of 26th September, 1987 between 12.30 and 1 am., I was called by Basti Ram and Puka Ram saying that the accused is beating Andi, wife of Bhaga Ram present accused in the house of Andi's father, who is also the father of the reporting witness. It was then reported that the complainant ran away along with Basti Ram and Puka Ram to the house of their father, when they saw that accused Bhaga Ram was assaulting Andi with an axe, on seeing the witnesses, the accused ran away. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses to prove the prosecution case whereas one witness was examined by the accused in support of his claim of innocence.3. In ord...
Om Prakash and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: 1996WLC(Raj)UC136; 1995(2)WLN67
J.R. Chopra, J.1. These 22 writ petitions raise almost common questions of law and facts and, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.2. Briefly stated, the facts of these writ petitions are: that in these writ petitions, the petitioners have mostly challenged the charge sheets that have been served on them for their different acts of misconduct and in most of these wit petitions, the enquiries are pending. In D.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 3574 of 1991, V.K. Choturvedi v. Union of India and Ors. the petitioner has been reverted to the rank of Sub Inspector for a period of two years vide order Annexure A/6. In D.B.Civil writ petitions No. 6599 of 1991, S.C.Kataria v. U.O.I. and Ors. and 3674 of 1992, Inder Raj Singh v. U.O.I. and Ors. the petitioners have been punished with stoppage of two grade increments with cumulative effect. In D.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 4595 of 1991, Om Prakash v. U.O.I. and Ors. the enquiry report was supplied to the petitio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »