Rajasthan Court April 1998 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.
Ramesh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)WLC197; 1998(1)WLN346
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Admit. Learned Public Prosecutor Shri D.S. Rathore accepts notice.2. It is unfortunate that in a most cursory manner the learned Judge has dismissed the application filed by the present appellant-accused under Section 446(3), Cr. P.C. He was sick, therefore, on the date of hearing, he could not remain present. Next day, he did appear before the Court. The learned Judge rejected the application for adjournment made on the ground of sickness, on the ground that there was no evidence regarding the same and passed an order of forfeiting the bonds furnished by him. This is not the way of disposal of cases.3. I am at pains to state that some of the cases have come before this Court arising out of the orders passed by the learned Judge, who is mostly disposing of the cases either on the technical ground like delay, etc. or in such fashion. He is a fairly senior Sessions Judge of the State. It is expected from all that substantial justice should be done by the Court and matt...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Arjun Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2561
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J.1. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor, the learned counsel for the complainant and the learned counsel for the accused Arjun Singh.2. This petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the order dated 2-11-1993 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Pali in Sessions Case No. 36/ 1993, State V Arjun Singh, whereby the accused Arjun was discharge of the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and the case was made over to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali for trial on charges under Sections 326, 324, 323, 447, 435 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code.2A. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that there was sufficient ground to frame a charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and, therefore, the order of discharge is improper and amounts to abuse of the process of the Court and deserves to be set aside. The learned counsel for the complainant has supported the petition and the learned counsel for the ac...
Bhanwarlal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3489
Bhagwati Prasad, J.1. The present appeal was filed by the seven accused persons. Out of these seven accused persons, accused appellant Daya Ram died and therefore his appeal abated. Six accused persons present before the Court who were convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh as follows :-Appellants No. 1 to 5.Each convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 250/- or in default to undergo two months R.I.Also convicted under Section 307 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to undergo one month's R.I.Also convicted under Section 325, read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to one year R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/- or in default to undergo one month's R.I.Also convicted under Section 147, I.P.C. and sentenced to one year's R.I. Appellant No. 7 Mathura was convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of ...
Poonma Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ4377; 1999(2)WLC632; 1998(1)WLN613
B.J. Shethna, J1. Learned counsel Shri Sarswat for the appellant accused initially cited two judgments of this Court reported in Nanhe Khan v. State of Rajasthan 1996 (2) RCD 103 (Raj) and Om Prakash v. State of Rajasthan 1996 (2) RCD 170 (Raj) and submitted that in this case the accused has remained in jail for seven days and the offence under Section 304A IPC is an.old one committed on 22-4-81 i.e. almost 17 years from today, therefore, order of sentence already undergone be passed. When it was pointed out to the learned counsel Shri Sarswat about the latest judgment of this Court in case of Narendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan 1997 (3) WLC 319 wherein this Court took the different view of the matter, Mr. Sarswat prayed for time to cite one Division Bench judgment of this Court. Accordingly, time was granted and the matter was kept in the second sitting after recess. Mr. Sarswat pointed out Division Bench judgment of this Court in case of Mangi Lal v. State of Rajasthan 1988 Cr LR (R...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Heera and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ963; 1999(1)WLC551; 1998(1)WLN641
R.R. Yadav, J.1. In the above 12 appeals common questions of law and facts are involved, hence, all these appeals can be conveniently disposed of by a composite order. S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 414 of 1996 shall be treated as leading case.2. The present bunch of cases arise out of a single accident that occurred on 28.12.1993 by overturning of the insured tractor-trolley bearing registration No. RJ-19-R-2453, which fell into an adjacent pit with the result some of the persons died and some of them were injured.3. It is alleged that those who died and who suffered bodily injuries in the accident, were gratuitous passengers in the trolley and all of them were on a joy ride for darshan to the temple of Parshu Ram Mahadev and while returning from the darshan the ill-fated accident occurred.4. The heirs and legal representatives of deceased persons who are respondents in these appeals, filed claim petitions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1988')....
Kalyan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)WLC559; 1998(1)WLN344
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The appellants-accused have challenged in this appeal the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21.9.1982 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 58/1982 whereby the accused have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 325, 149 and 147, IPC and sentenced to suffer 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- in default to further undergo 1 month's simple imprisonment.2. Learned Counsel Shri N.P. Gupta for the appellants-accused submitted that the learned Sessions Judge committed an error in relying upon the prosecution story and the evidence of the prosecution-witnesses. In all, six witnesses were examined. The defence of the accused was in two folds viz., (i) that deceased Rupi was a witch and she was beaten by the villagers wherein she received 6 injuries, (ii) Ram Lal, son of deceased Rupi misbehaved with the wife of appellant-accused No. 2 Sita Ram for which complaint was also filed, theref...
Bhilwara Spinners Ltd., Bhilwara and anr. Vs. Collector (Stamps) Bhilw ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Raj293; 1999(1)WLC151; 1998(1)WLN631
ORDERP.P. Naolekar, J. 1. M/s. Bhilwara Spinners Ltd. is a public limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and petitioner No. 2 is the President of the petitioner-Company and is its shareholder. M/s. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the RSWM') purchased about 56 acres of land situated in village Bhilwara and village Malan, District Bhilwara from private parties under duly registered sale deed for the purpose of setting up industry for spinning/manufacturing cotton yarn etc. For the purpose of conversion of land for industrial purpose, the RSWM surrendered the land to the State of Rajasthan and thereafter applied for allotment of the said land under the provisions of Rajasthan (Industrial Areas Allotment) Rules, 1959. On or about 22-11 -68, the State of Rajasthan executed a formal lease deed conveying the leasehold rights of the said property to RSWM. The said lease was for a period of 99 years with option ...
Amrit Lal Kumawat and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3032; 1998(3)WLC319; 1998(1)WLN566
ORDERAmaresh Kumar Singh, J1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for non-petitioner No. 2.2. In this petition, the question which arises for determination is, whether the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2 (North), Udaipur was competent to pass orders under Section 451 of the Criminal Procedure Code in respect of immovable property which was in dispute between the,, parties. The facts so far as they are necessary for the disposal of this petition may briefly be stated as below : On 22-1-1997, Prakash Vaishnav submitted a report in writing at the Police Station Dhanmandi, Udaipur in which he stated that his maternal grand-father Shri Raman Lal was in possession of a residential house situated in Nal waya Chowk, Dhanmandi, Udaipur. Shri Raman Lal Acharya expired on 21-1-1997. It was further stated in the report that when the complainant and other relatives were attending to the funeral rites Shri Dev Kishan Kumawat, Shri Hari Singh...
Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3074
ORDERAmaresh ku. Singh, J1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.2. By this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is prayed by the petitioner that the proceedings of the Criminal Original Case No. 197/1977 State v. Om Prakash, pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara, against the petitioner be quashed.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no evidence to prima facie show that the petitioner was in any way involved in or was responsible for the commission of the alleged offences punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and, therefore, the initiation as well as continuance of the proceedings against the petitionier amounts to abuse of the process of the Court.4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this petition.5. According to prosecution, the firm M/s. Bhilwara Trading Co. owns a shop situated in market No. 2, at Bhilwara. On 31...
Rikhab Das Vs. Manak Chand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3075; 1998(3)WLC202
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.2. A perusal of the order dated 1-8-1991 passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Banner shows that on 31-7-1984 a complaint was filed against Rikhab Das alleging the commission of offences under Sections 417, 419, 420, 465 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banner, before whom the above mentioned complaint was filed, forarded the complaint to the Station House Officer of the Police Station Kotwali. Barmer, under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.3. On the basis of the abovementioned complaint tiie police registered the ITR No. 204 of 1984. After investigation a final report was submitted on 4-10-1984. The final report was accepted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 13-10-1984 but the order accepting the final report was passed without issuing notice to the complaint.4. On 70-10-1984 the complainant filed objections against final re...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »