Rajasthan Court June 1999 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.
Bhima and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4041
Mohd. Yamin, J.1. This is an appeal by appellants Bhima and Ganesh against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand dated 30-9-1983 by which he convicted them for offence under Section 366, IPC and sentenced each one of them to two years' rigorous imprisonment and also imposed fine of Rs. 100/- and in default they were ordered to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment.2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 29-11-1980 at about 10.00 p.m. Nauja reported to Station House Officer, Delwara that his daughter Narki aged about eight years along with Heeri and Bhuri had gone to Nami Beeda in order to collect fodder. Bheema had accompanied them. In the evening they were returning and when they reached near Bheru Ghati a jeep came from behind. Some persons came out of the jeep. They threw the head load of Narki and took away Narki in that jeep. Bhuri and Heeri made hue and cry but it was of no effect. The complainant had doubt that Vasia had abducted her...
Asu and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ207
Mohd. Yamin, J. 1. Appellant Asu has been convicted for offence under Section 304, Part-I, IPC and sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment while appellant Hari Singh was convicted under Section 324, IPC and awarded sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment by learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No. 16/83 decided on 30-7-1983. Both of them have assailed their conviction and sentence by this appeal.2. Briefly stated, fields of the appellants are situated on the eastern side of road leading from Malwara to Raniwara. Field of deceased Tara was situated on the western side of road. A well was situated in the field of Tara. The adjacent field belonged to Mohabbat Singh which was let out to Tara. A well of Mohabbat Singh was also situated on the eastern side of the road where one of his fields was situated which was in possession of Mesa, Asu and Dungara to whom it was let out. There situa...
Bakhtawar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-29-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4271
ORDERMohd. Yamin, J.1. Appellant-Bakhtawar Singh was convicted under Section 307, IPC and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh vide his judgment dated 29-9-1983. He has assailed his conviction and sentence passed against him in this appeal.2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 3-3-1982 at 10.30 a.m. Brij Singh came to police station Suratgarh and orally reported that at 8.30 a.m. he was coming to bus stand of Sangita. Surayan Singh and Birbal Singh met him on the way. All of them started towards bus station. When they were coming from the side of Diggi to bus stand, he saw Bakhtawar Singh and the brother-in-law of Preetam Singh coming running towards them. They had 12 bore guns in their hands. They exhorted indicating towards Surayan Singh that enemy had come and should not go back alive. Thereupon Bakhtawar Singh f...
Kishori Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-29-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)WLN703
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. Head.2. Rajendra and Jagedev, the co-accused in the case, who are alleged to be the beneficiary of the Bonds received by them on getting themselves operated in the Scheme enforced by the Family Planning Deptt. to control the population of the country, were admitted to bail vide order of this Court dated 8.9.1998 in S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail App No. 4292/98. The applicant is stated to be in Government Service and as such to have motivated persons for getting themselves operated. Such motivation is further stated to have been made by the applicant on the basis of public documents, prepared by the Patwaris/Gram Sevaks or other officers, working with or for the Medical Department.3. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case it is directed that, in the event of his arrest, applicant(s) Kishori Lal S/o Sh. Ram Karan, accused in F.I.R. No. 218/1998, P/S. Behror (Alwar), shall be released on bail on his furnishing two sureties in the amount of Rs. 5,000/- each with persona...
Yusuf Khan Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)WLC763; 1999(1)WLN573
B.J. Shethna, J.1. This is IVth successive bail application moved by the accused, who is alleged to be one of the dangerous members of Babbar Khalsa international Commando Force, which is actively working against our Nation since long and presently they are actively participating at 'Kargil' and other parts of Kashmir.2. Though, the accused petitioner is facing the charge for the offence under Section 384 I.P.C., which is punishable with imprisonment of three years with fine or both, (still it is non-bailable) read with Section 120B I.P.C. the allegations levelled against the petitioner are of such a serious nature which compelled this Court to refuse bail to the petitioner in his three previous bail applications.3. The prosecution case is required to be stated in brief, which is as under --The prosecution case is that one letter was delivered by Shri Manga to Gurdit Singh, former Sarpanch of 3 'Y' in which it was stated that the persons belonging to Babbar Khalsa International Command...
Girdhari Lal Vs. Smt. Kanta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)WLC367; 1999(1)WLN577
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The defendant-appellant seeks to challenge the judgment and decree dated 23.11.1998 of learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Sikar whereby the Civil Regular First Appeal preferred by defendant-appellant was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 10.10.1994 of learned Additional Civil Judge (Lower Division) No. 1, Sikar passed in a suit for eviction was confirmed.2. The parties shall be referred hereinafter in the manner as they were arrayed in the suit.3. The brief resume of the case is that the plaintiff instituted a suit for ejectment in respect of the tenanted shop fully described in para No. 1 of the plaint on the ground of default in making payment of rent, subletting, reasonable and boanfide necessity and material alteration. The defendant in the written statement denied the allegations. On the basis of the pleadings of parties as many as nine issues were framed. The plaintiff examined 9 witnesses, whereas six witnesses were examined by the defenda...
Valing and anr. Vs. Bor and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)WLC229; 1999(1)WLN657
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The petitioners are sons of late Vaktaq have challenged in this petition the allotment order dated 6th Sept. 1994 (Annex.-7) passed by the Collector, Banswara allotting the land in question to the respondent No. 5 for the purpose of starting Upper Primary School.2. The challenge to this allotment order was made before the Revenue Appellate Authority, but it was dismissed by an order dated 5.8.1989 (Annex.-8). It was further challenged before the Board of Revenue but the same was also dismissed on 16.4.1999 (Annexure/9). The allotment order as well as the orders passed by the RAA and the Board of Revenue at Annexures/8 & 9 respectively have been challenged in this petition by the present petitioners.3. The challenge is based on mainly two grounds. Mr. Shisodia Senior Advocate for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the petitioners have developed cultivated land in question since years together, therefore they were entitled for regularisation of the land. He submi...
Chander Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-23-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Raj349; 1999(3)WLC563; 1999(1)WLN564
ORDERB.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing of charges dated 16-4-99 (Annex. 1) and suspension order dated 16-4-99 (Annex. 5) relating to tile petitioner, aduly elected Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case arc that petitioner was elected as a Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Tinwari, district Jodhpur in January, 1995. Petitioner received the charge-sheet dated 16-4-99 and the suspension order of the same date contained in Annexures 1 and 5 respectively on certain charges of irregularities/illegalities and petitioner was called upon to submit his reply on or before 30-4-99 as to why inquiry be not conducted against him in terms of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules 1996). In response to the said notice, instead of submitting a reply, petitioner demanded the statement of allegations asserting that the same had not been supplied to him along w...
Jagdish Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)WLC480; 1999(1)WLN550
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant special appeal has been filed under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, against the judgment and order dated 24-5-1999, by which the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner against the impugned transfer order dated 3-5-1999 has been rejected by the learned Single Judge.2. Appellant-petitioner, a Upper Division Clerk working in the Office of Executive Engineer, Jalore, was transferred vide order dated 7-4-1999 in place of respondent No. 4 Mr. Om Prakash Prajapat, Upper Division Clerk under the Additional Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, Jodhpur. The said order dated 7-4-1999 was cancelled vide impugned order dated 3-5-1999 on the representation of respondent No. 4 to the Competent Authority ventilating his grievances regarding posting. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant-petitioner preferred the writ petition making allegations that the impugned transfer order dated 3-5-1999 had been passed in order to accommodate ...
Mohammed Yunus Vs. Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Raj334; 1999(3)WLC645; 1999(1)WLN552
Chauhan, J. 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 18 of the RajasthanHigh Court Ordinance, against the judgment/ order dated 19-5-99 passed by the learned single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1484/1999, by which the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner has been dismissed.2. The facts involved in this case are not in dispute. Respondent No. 1 granted a licence in favour of the respondent No. 3 Damami Sabha, Motilal Boarding House, Jodhpur, on certain terms and conditions vide order dated 18-5-1968 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition)in respect of the land measuring 2599 square yards for constructing a boarding house for the students belonging to Damami community near Perli Semetry, Masuriya, Jodhpur, Respondent No. 3 inducted the appellant-petitioner as a sub-tenant on a part of the land measuring 30' x 10' in the year 1991 on a monthly rent of Rs. 1400/- and the appellant-petitioner raised certain constructions on the said land and after obtaining licence f...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »