Rajasthan Court July 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.
Lahari Bai Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ682; I(1996)DMC312
B.S. Shethna, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. This is the third bail application filed by petitioner Smt. Lahari Bai, who is aged about 75 years and mother-in-law of deceased Narayani, who is alleged to have committed suicide because of the mental and physical harassment meted out to her by her husband Kishanlal and her mother-in-law, Smt. Lahari Bai, the present petitioner.3. Earlier bail application of the petitioner came to be rejected by this Court. Last bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 3rd Feb., 1995. Against this order dated 3rd Feb., 1995, an S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 1382/95 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which was rejected on 17.4.1995 with the clarification that, 'if and when a fresh bail application is filed, after the framing of the charge, the Trial Court shall decide that application on its own merits uninfluenced by the observations made in the last paragraph of the impugned order passed by the High Court'. Accordingl...
Rajendra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ340
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. This jail appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 9-1-95 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Hanumangarh whereby he convicted the appellant for the offences Under Sections 457 and 324 IPC and sentenced him to R. I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to further undergo R. I. for fifteen days on each count and further directed that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.2. Briefly the relevant facts for disposal of this appeal are that on the night intervening 29th Feb. and 1st March, 1992, PW 1 Smt. Guddi aged about 28 years was sleeping in her parents' house. Her niece PW 2 Kumari India aged about 13 years was also sleeping in the same room. It is alleged that at about 10-11 PM, Smt. Guddi was awakened and found that her cousin, appellant Rajendra, who had a knife in his hand, entered into her room, switched off the light and with an intention to commit rape with her, fell over her. She raised alarm and Indra was a...
Kasam Dalvi Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Raj64
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J.1. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking a relief to quash the impugned order dated 7-5-1991, Anx. 9 to the writ petition, passed by the Collector, Jaisalmer.2. The brief facts which are necessary to be noticed for effective decision pf the instant Writ petition, are that the petitioner was allotted a piece of land measuring 100' x 400' in Khasra No. 413-414/982 in Town Jaisalmer Tehsil and District Jaisalmer by Collector, Jaisalmer under his order dated 25-11-1983, Anx. 1 to the writ petition, to set up on the said plot of land a Electrical Equipments Manufacturing Industry within a period of two years from the date of taking over possession of the land in question. It is alleged by the petitioner that petitioner was given possession on 11-5-1984 but admittedly no Electrical Equipment has been set up even after interval of more than 11 years. According to the terms and conditions of Anx. 1 to the writ petition the petitioner was required to depo...
Munna Muni Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ831
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J. 1. Mr. Khan has submitted that as many as 11 (eleven) co-accused persons of the alleged incident faced trial in Sessions Case No. 7/ 91 and that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur by his judgment dated 30-5-92 has acquitted them for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 436 read with 149 and 336, IPC. He has further submitted that the petitioner did not know about this case and that now the police wants to arrest him.2. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this bail petition and submitted that the petitioner after the incident which took place on 26-10-90 absconded and as such a challan was also filed against him under Section 299, Cr.P.C. According to him, serious allegations are being levelled against the petitioner and therefore, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail.3. I have considered the rival submissions. In my considered opinion, the acquittal of co-accused persons in a separate trial does not entitle an a...
Ram NaraIn Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-04-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Raj92; 1996WLC(Raj)UC449
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a relief to quash the impugned order dated 21-9-85 Annex. 5 to the writ petition passed by the respondent No. 1 on the ground inter alia that before passing the impugned order no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner and secondly the judgment passed by the Board of Revenue Annex. 1 after dismissal of writ petition by this Court has attained finality on all those points decidedtherein which cannot be permitted to benullified or made inoperative by the impugned order. 2. The brief facts necessary to be noticed for disposal of the ipresent writ petition are that the father of non-petitioner No. 2 Harbhaj was allotted disputed land by the Assistant Commissioner for Colonisation, Hanumangarh being a landless person. A complaint was mads against him wherein it was stated that he had obtained allotment of the land in question by making concealments. 3. After enquiry, the complaint was fou...
Prem Singh Vs. Madhu Bala
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1995
Reported in: II(1995)DMC603; 1996WLC(Raj)UC309
R.R. Yadav, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the order of Judge, Family Court, Jodhpur dated 31.5.1995 in Case No. 75/94 Madhu Bala v. Prem Singh, where the proceedings under Section 125, Cr.P.C. has been decided by way of compromise.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged before me that the factum of compromise recorded in the impugned judgment of the Family Court is incorrect.3. The aforesaid argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is not acceptable to me for the reason that the Court of law is expected to accept the statement of a Judge recorded in his judgment. This Court cannot afford to allow the statement of a Judge to be contradicted by the statement at the Bar or by affidavit or by any other evidence adduced by litigant public.4. In my humble opinion, if the Family Court Judge has recorded in his judgment that a compromise was entered into between the parties and reconciliation took place regarding amount of maintenance between th...
Satnam Moga and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2591; I(1996)DMC359; 1996(1)WLC274
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by Satnam Moga and Kishore Singh against the order of learned ACJM, Sriganganagar dated 31.3.1995 whereby the petitioners alongwith two others were charged for offences under Sections 406 and 498A I.P.C. in respect of FIR No. 432/92 registered at P.S. Kotwali, Sriganganagar.2. The present petitioners have come up before this Court against framing of charges by the learned ACJM, Sriganganagar on the ground inter-alia that framing of charge against the petitioners amounts abuse of the process of the Court within the meaning of Section 482 Cr.P.C.3. The main thrust of the argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioners before me is that the learned Magistrate has no authority in law to frame charge against the petitioners under Section 240 Cr.P.C. as according to him there is no material on record regarding performance of 'Saptapadi'.4. In support of his aforesaid contention the learned Counsel for the peti...
Beni Dan Vs. Laxmichand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1191; 1996WLC(Raj)UC479
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. This petition filed under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been directed against the judgment dated 18-1-1995 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, whereby he allowed the appeal filed by non-petitioner Laxmi Chand, set aside the order dated 1-12-1994 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaisalmer and directed that Truck No. RJ-15 G 0093 be taken from the possession of petitioner Benidan and his driver Inder Singh and the same be handed over to non-petitioner Laxmichand.2. Stated in succinct, the necessary facts for disposal of this petition are that on 22-6-93 the S. H. C., Police Station, Jaisalmer checked truck No. RJ 15 G 0093, which was being driven by Inder Singh, the driver of petitioner Beni Dan. The said driver did not possess the registration certificate, insurance certificate, and any other documents pertaining to the said truck. The S. H. O. seized the said truck under section 207, Motor Vehicles Act. On 23-6-94, he submitted a cri...
Deep Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ54; 1996(1)WLC572
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 16-7-94 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases cum Addl. Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, whereby he convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 8/20(b)(i) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, in short, 'the Act' and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years a fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. In nutshell, the relevant facts are that on 11-1-1992 at 1.45 pm, PW 6 Balwant Rai, SHO, PS, Sujangarh, while he was on patrolling duty in Naya Bazar, Sujangarh, received a source information to the effect that appellant Deep Chand Bajaj had 'Ganja' in his possession, which he wanted to sell and that he had just then gone towards the Railway Station through the southern street having a plastic bag. The said S.H.O. recorded the source information vide memo Ex. P.9. Two motbirs namely PW 1 Ram Singh and PW 2 Hari Ram were intimated ...
Daleep Singh Vs. Smt. Magan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ190; 1996WLC(Raj)UC393
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 1-6-1991 passed by the learned MJM, Sardar Shahar, whereby he took cognizance for the offence under Section 354, IPC against the petitioner. .2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this revision petition lie in a narrow compass and can be recapitulated like this. It appears that on 26-6-87, the respondent filed a criminal complaint in the court of MJM, Sardar Shahar for the offences under Section 376/511, 323, 354 and 509, IPC against the petitioner alleging that she was working as a Class IV employee in Seth Budhmal Dugar Govt. College, Sardar Shahar, wherein the petitioner was posted as Principal that on 10-1-87 at about 9.15 a.m., when she went inside the office of the' petitioner and was cleaning the tiolet attached to his office, the petitioner came inside the toilet, bowed down over her back, caught hold of her breast and attempted to commit rape with her and that thereupon she raised...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »