Rajasthan Court March 2000 Judgments
Ratan Singh and ors. Vs. ChaIn Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2736; 2000(3)WLC142
ORDERMohd. Yamin, J.1. These two Misc. Petitions are to be decided together by this single order as they relate to the same proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Balesar in Cr. Complaint Case No. 22/87.2. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 678/94 is a petition which challenges the order of learned Magistrate dated 17-9-1994 by which he allowed the proceedings to continue though the complainant had expired; and Cr. Misc. Petition No. 80/95 is directed against the order dated 3-12-1992 by which the Magistrate had taken cognizance though an application was filed by the accused petitioners that Chain Singh complainant had expired as long back as in the year 1987 and the case could not proceed and his son could not have been impleaded as a party but proceeded with the case.3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners accused persons as well as learned counsel for the complainant.4. Briefly stated, Chain Singh filed a complaint against the accused petitioners alleging th...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Mahaveer Chand JaIn and Company
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: [2000]120STC212(Raj)
ORDERRajesh Balia, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the record.2. This revision is directed against the order dated August 31, 1998 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, in Appeal No. 405/97/Jodhpur whereby the Rajasthan Tax Board has set aside the orders dated June 17, 1995 and December 10, 1996 passed by the assessing officer as also of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals).3. The case of the Revenue is that the assessing officer has inspected the vehicle in question at Jhalamand check-post on June 17, 1995 and found that vehicle was carrying 250 bags of 'Binola'. Accompanied documents consisted of delivery note including declaration in form S.T. 18A which contained all the details about the quantity and other particulars about the consignment. However the user date of form S.T. 18A had expired after January, 1995 inasmuch as Rules prescribe that such forms issued by the concerned officer can be used for a period of two years from the date of issue. The date o...
Tag this Judgment!Sohanlal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)WLN151
S.C. Mital, J.1. This petition is under Section 482 Cr. P.C. preferred by petitioner-accused Sohanlal in Cr. Case No. 412/89 under Section 7 read with 16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short 'P.F.A. Act') pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sojat City for quashing the proceedings on the ground of delay in trial.2. The brief facts leading to this petition are that a charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner on 13.9.1989 to stand trial for the offence under Section 7 read with 16 P.F.A. Act. The petitioner appeared in the court on 24.2.1990 and filed an application on 4.4.1990 to send the second sample for chemical examination by Central Food Laboratory, but the sample was not received by the court for more than three years i.e. from 30.5.1990 to 22.11.1993. Ultimately, the sample was sent to Central Food Laboratory on 25.11.1993. The chemical report was received on 11.3.1994. The case was fixed for pre-charge evidence but the witnesses w...
Tag this Judgment!Vikram Singh and ors. Vs. Sub-divisional Magistrate and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ5093
ORDERMohd. Yamin, J. 1. This Cr. Misc. Petition has been directed to quash the proceedings pending before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajgarh District Churu under Section 145 Cr.P.C. as well as the order dated 4-6-1987 passed by learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajgarh.2. The facts of the case are that Vikram Singh, Smt. Jyoti and Smt. Beena are the grandchildren and legal heirs of Smt. Govind Kanwar who was recorded Khatedar tenant of 80 bighas 11 biswas of agricultural land which included khasra Nos. 446, 497 to 499, 542 to 544, 297 and 324 measuring 40 bighas 18 biswas in village Nesal and Khasra Nos. 679, 687, 719 to 721 and 727 measuring 39 bighas 13 biswas in village Nanda Ka Bas in Patwar Circle Nesal, Tehsil Rajgarh District Churu. The land is situated thus at two different places. Smt. Govind Kanwar died on 28-12-1971. Thereafter these petitioners were recorded as khatedar tenants of the said land and they still continue as recorded khatedar tenants of the said land and they ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Ratan Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3583; 2000(3)WLC90
Mohd. Yamin, J.1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by State against the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar dated 24-8-1990 by which Ratan Singh, Amarjeet Singh, Deepa and Mahendra Kaur were acquitted from the charges of Sections 304/34 and 323/34, I.P.C.2. Briefly stated, First Information Report was lodged on 7-6-1988 at police station Raisinghnagar by Baljinder Singh to the effect that on 6-6-1988 at about 9.00 p.m. when he was taking his dinner and his mother Smt. Swaran Kaur was cooking meals and his father was taking rest, Ratan Singh came in presence of Smt. Ragi and Rajvinder. Ratan Singh was the uncle of complainant and was residing nearby. Smt. Mahendra Kaur, Amarjeet and Deepa had also come along with Ratan Singh. They started hurling abuses and asked as to why did they vote in favour of Hardev Singh to make him a Sarpanch. The Baljinder Singh's father replied that votes were cost according to their own will. Then all the f...
Tag this Judgment!Kishan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3408; 2000(2)WLN498
ORDERS.C. Mital, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has arisen out of the proceedings of the Cr. Case No. 305/1987 (State v. Kishan and another) pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sojat whereby the petitioner has prayed for the quashment of the proceedings under Section 7 read with 16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (in short 'the P.F.A. Act').2. The brief facts are that a sample of 'Namkeen' was taken from the petitioner on 19-5-87 and a charge sheet was submitted on 13-7-87 against the petitioner and Smt. Shiva Bai. Orders were passed to issue summons to procure the attendance of the petitioner. The process continued to be issued up to 26-7-89 for about two years. The petitioner appeared on 28-7-89 and filed an application for sending the sample to F.S.L. Thereafter, the summons were issued to procure the attendance of Smt. Shiva Bai. Summons were not issued or served up to 22-5-93. It was reported on the summons on 29-7-93 that Smt. Shiva B...
Tag this Judgment!Gurcharan Singh and anr. Vs. Divisional Commissioner Bikaner and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: 2000WLC(Raj)UC417; 2000(2)WLN368
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The petitioners have challenged in this petition the impugned order dated 31.1.1991, (Annex. 2) passed by the Collector, Sriganganagar exercising his powers as a Chief Settlement Commissioner under Section 24 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (for short the 'Act'), whereby, he allowed the revision petition filed by the private respondent No. 3 and set aside the sanads No. 10346 dated 19.4; 1974 and 10700 dated 21.5.1975 and remanded the matter to the authority for fresh decision after extending an opportunity of hearing to all the parties. They have also challenged the order at Annex.'3 dated 7.11.1996 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner, who has dismissed their revision petition filed against the impugned order at Annex. 2.2. The impugned order at Annex. 2 is a remand order, whereby, the parties were given opportunity to lead their evidence and to prove their respective cases in their favour. Under the circumstances, whe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›