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.
inder Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-09-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)WLC169; 1999(1)WLN543
N.N. Mathur, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 2.6.1999 passed by the respondent State of Rajasthan, whereby the petitioner has been reverted to the post of L.D.C. as his promotion/appointment on the post of Assessor has been found to be illegal by the judgment of this court, rendered in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 3340/95, Inder Singh v. State.2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Lower Division Clerk in the year 1984 in the Municipal Board, Nagaur. He was appointed as an Assessor by the order of the Municipal Board dated 7.8.1995. However, the chairman of the Board by order dated 23rd Sept., 1995 cancelled the said order, as in his opinion, it was not in accordance with the rules. The said decision was challenged by the petitioner by way of a writ petition before this court which was registered as S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 3340/95. In re...
Himmat Singh and anr. Vs. State of Raj.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-04-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)WLC88; 1999(1)WLN656
A.K. Singh, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary. This second application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is filed on behalf of the petitioners. The first bail application No. 150/98 was dismissed on 27.1.1998 so far as the petitioners Himmat Singh and Ranjeet Singh were concerned.2. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that in this case after completion of investigation a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been prepared and filed in the court taking cognizance of the offence. He made available to the court the report prepared by the Station House Officer of the Police Station under Section 173 Cr.P.C. A perusal of the report shows that a challan is intended to be filed against 18 accused persons. So far as the petitioners Himmat Singh and Ranjeet Singh are concerned, it is mentioned in the report that investigation against Himmat Singh and Ajeet Singh will be conducted under ...
Chatra Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-03-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)WLC642; 1999(1)WLN653
A.K. Singh, J.1. Admit.2. Issue notice to the non-petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor is directed to accept the notice. He accepted the notice and the copy of the petition is supplied to him.3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.4. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that this case is squarely covered by the decision given by this court in the case of Bhika Ram v. State of Rajasthan reported in RLW 1998 (1) 448. In the case of Bhika Ram v. State of Raj. (supra) the petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is filed against the order dated 5.10.1993 passed by the Additional Sessions judge, Phalodi whereby he rejected the application dated 21.9.1993 submitted by the accused petitioner under Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The accused petitioner in that case moved an application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge praying that the statements of 32 witnesses who were examined by the Investigating Officer during t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›