Rajasthan Court April 1996 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.
Bhanwarsingh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-18-1996
Reported in: 1996CriLJ3086; 1996(2)WLC745; 1996(1)WLN170
P.C. Jain, J.1. The petitioner Bhanwarsingh was convicted under Section 8 read with Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short 'the NDPS Act') by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajsamand by his judgment dated 19-2-1996 and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three years.2. Aggrieved by the above judgment, the petitioner has filed S B. Criminal Appeal No. 160 of 1996 and also submitted an application under Section 389 Cr. P. C. for suspension of the execution of the above sentence.3. The learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the application for suspension of execution of the sentence on the ground that Section 32A of the Act starts with the non-obstante clause 'Notwithstanding' and it places a complete embargo on the powers of the High Court to suspend the sentence passed against any person under the provisions of the NDPS Act. ...
Deepak Kumar Khivsara Vs. Oil Indian Limited and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-17-1996
Reported in: 1996(1)WLN450
M.G. Mukherji, J.1. The present special appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 30th October, 1995 passed by a learned Single Judge of Our Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3310/90, whereby the learned Single Judge holding inter-alia that the writ petitioner-appellant has got alternative efficacious remedy before the Labour Court, apparently following a Full Bench decision of five learned Judges of this Court in Gopi Lal Teli v. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. reported in 1995 (1) W.L.C.1. : 1995 (1) W.L.N. 300, dismissed the writ application only on the ground of alternative remedy/being available to the writ petitioner-appellant.2. We have perused the said Full Bench judgment of this Court minutely. The Full Bench took into consideration the fact that in very many judgments, the Supreme Court itself held that alternative remedy is no bar for entertainment of the writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and there may be cases in which this Court ...
Deepak Kumar Khivsara Vs. Oil India Limited and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-17-1996
Reported in: 1996(1)WLN249
M.G. Mukherji, Actg. C.J.1. The present special appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 30th October, 1995 passed by a learned Single Judge of our Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3310/90, whereby the learned Single Judge holding inter-alia that the writ petitioner-appellant has got alternative efficacious remedy before the Labour Court, apparently following a Full Bench decision of five learned Judges of this Court in Gopi Lal Teli v. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. reported in 1995 (1) W.L.C. 1 : 1995 (1) W.L.N. 300, dismissed the Writ application only on the ground of alternative remedy being available to the writ petitioner-appellant.2. We have perused the said Full Bench judgment of this Court minutely. The Full Bench took into consideration the fact that in very many judgments, the Supreme Court itself held that alternative remedy is no bar for entertainment of the writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and there may be cases in which this...
Khyala Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ567
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Appellant Khyala Meena was tried for offence under Section 302, IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa for committing murder of Ramkishor alias Kishore. The learned trial Judge vide his judgment dated 16-9-81 convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302, IPC, and sentenced him to life imprisonment.2. Briefly, the prosecution case was that appellant Khyala and deceased Ramkishore were partners. They used to cultivate jointly. They also used to sleep together in their Khaliyan situated in the outskirts of village Nihalpura. On the night intervening 8th and 9th April, 1979 till, about 11 p.m. the deceased was sitting on the shop of Mangilal (not produced in witness box). Thereafter he was seen going towards his 'Khaliyan' PW2 Indraj and others heard voices of the appellant and deceased, who were having conversation with each other from their Khaliyan. Next day morning at 5 a.m. PW5 Jhandu Meena found the dead body of the deceased in a cattle pond annexe...
Kedar Sharma and ors. Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)WLC360; 1996(2)WLN28
V.K. Singhal, J.1. All the writ petitions mentioned in the Schedule annexed hereto are disposed of by this common order sinced the validity of Rule 6-C of the Rajasthan Service of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1968 (for short the Rules of 1968) and Rule 7-C of the Rajasthan Service of Engineers and Research Officers (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1954 has been challenged.2. Under the proviso to Rules, the direct recruitment has been shown as direct recruitment in the ratio of 50% and by promotion in the ratio of 50%. There is a proviso under Rule 7(1)-C that if the Government is satisfied in consultation with the Rajasthan Public Service Commission that the suitable persons are not available for appointment by either method of recruitment in a particular year, appointment by the other method in relaxation of the prescribed proportion may be made in the same manner as specified in these rules. It is an admitted position that no advertisement was issued for direct ...
Radhey Shyam Vs. S.T.A.T. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-1996
Reported in: 1996(1)WLN395
Anshuman Singh, J.1. The facts giving rise to this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India lie in a narrow compass.2. The petitioner was holding non-temporary stage Carriage Permit No.3325 under which he was plying Bus No. RJV-1501 of 1965 model. The said permit was valid upto 30.10.93. He submitted an application for renewal of the aforesaid permit, on 24.9.93 within the period prescribed under Section 81 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') before the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur. The application made by the petitioner was allowed by the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur, but while .allowing the application for renewal condition No. 3 was imposed to the effect that the petitioner would replace his vehicle by a prescribed model vehicle by 31.3.94, failing which the grant, of renewal would stand automatically revoked. The petitioner feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order of the RTA, Jaipur preferred an appeal before th...
Ram Swaroop Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)WLC346; 1996(1)WLN397
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The petitioner workman has challenged in this petition the impugned award dated June 14, 1983 (Annex. 1) passed by the Labour Court and the order of removal dated March 27, 1979 (Annex. 2).2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Labour Court failed to appreciate the fact that the domestic inquiry was not properly held against the petitioner. It may be stated that how the domestic inquiry was not properly conducted, has not been made clear. This grievance was not made even before the Labour Court on behalf of the petitioner workman. The contention before the Labour Court was that the allegations made against the petitioner were totally baseless and on such allegations the petitioner was punished.3. The learned counsel then contended that the impugned order of the disciplinary authority at Annexure-2 as well as the order passed in departmental appeal and the award of the Labour Court are non-speaking orders and, therefore, they are required to be s...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Vinod Malhotra
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1488; 1996(1)WLN669
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The sole appellant was tried, convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Alwar in Sessions Case No. 128/93 (Old No. 42/92). The proceedings of the case has been submitted before this Court for confirmation of death sentence as required under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thus, we have before us the appeals of the appellant and the reference for confirmation of capital punishment.2. At this stage, it would be appropriate to take stock of the prosecution case as unfolded by it for seeking conviction of the appellant. The story of the case relates to brutal murder of four persons closely related to the appellant. The deceased are appellant's wife Smt. Kiran, his two months old daughter, father-in-law Shri Ram Prakash Verma and uncle-in-law Banarsi Das. The appellant was married to Smt. Kiran on March 11, 1988 and from their wed-lock they had two...
Ruldu Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-11-1996
Reported in: 1996CriLJ3176; 1996(2)WLC684; 1996(1)WLN132
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J.1. This is third bail application moved on behalf of applicant Ruldu Singh. His first bail application was rejected by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 11-7-95 with a direction to the learned trial Judge to expedite the disposal of the case.2. Second bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 8-11-95 on a positive suggestion to the effect that alomost all the prosecution witnesses have already been examined long back by the learned trial court, therefore, the trial itself is likely to be disposed of in a shortest possible time. The aforesaid suggestion was accepted by the learned counsel for the applicant and he did not press his second bail application which was rejected on the aforesaid date as not pressed.3. The accused applicant, who is languishing in jail for more than 34 months; questions delaying tactics being adopted in disposal of his trial by moving this third bail application.4. In support of third bail application the learned c...
Bhupendra Singh Vs. Executive Engineer, Gang Canal, North Division and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-11-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)WLN101
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7.5.86 passed by the learned Single Judge, by which the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant and directed the State Government to dispose of the petitioner's application, if any pending, within the period of two months and till the period of two months, the status quo, as it existed that day, shall be maintained.2 Appellant-Petitioner being an unemployed Graduate, in order to establish a fish-breeding farm as a small scale industry, moved an application before the Divisional Irrigation Officer, Gang Canal, North Division, Sri Ganganagar, for sanction of water supply for this purpose and submitted the detailed plan for the establishment of the fish-breeding farm in his land bearing Square No. 20 Kila No. 3 of Chak2-g-I at Sri Ganganagar. The application filed by the petitioner-appellant was allowed by the Divisional Irrigation Officer and vide order dated 18.6.80 he was aske...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »