Rajasthan Court October 2001 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.
Bhanwar Lala Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-08-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1472
ORDERSunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellant-Bhanwar Lal against the judgment and order dated 30-6-2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Nagpur in Sessions Case No. 47/2001 (47/97) whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge while acquitting the accused-appellant for offence under Sections 307 and 341, I.P.C. convicted him for offence under Sections 326, 324 and 323, I.P.C. and sentenced him as under : Name of Convicted SentenceAccused under AwardedSectionBhanwar Lal 326 IPC 2 years' R.I. anda fine of Rs. 1000 in default to further undergo 3 months' imprisonment.Bhanwar Lal 324 IPC 1 years' R.I. anda fine of Rs. 200 in default to further undergo 1 month's imprisonmentBhanwar Lal 323 IPC 6 months' S.I. anda fine of Rs. 100/-in default to further undergo 15 days' imprisonmentAll the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. It arises in the following circumstances :i) P.W. 1 Bajrang Singh gave Parcha Bayan Ex.-P/l ...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Jora Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN39
Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment and order dated 9.9.87 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 39/85 by which he acquitted the accused respondents for offence under Section 306 I.P.C.2. This appeal arises in the following circumstances:i) On 2.8.83 P.W. 3 Rameshwar lodged a written report Ex.P/5 before DIG, Bikaner stating that her sister Pana wife of accused appellant Jora Ram (hereinafter referred to the deceased) was married with the accused appellant Jora Ram near about 5 to 6 years back and since she did not deliver any child during wedlock of that marriage and she was not beautiful, therefore, the accused respondents used to torture her and beat her. It was further stated that he went to her in-laws place Jadeli where such type of things were told to him by her sister (deceased) and she also told to him that they would kill her. Upon this he made them understand. Thereafter he took the dece...
Surendra Bijawat and 32 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)WLC232; 2002(4)WLN428
Naolekar, J.1. In all these writ petitions the pelitioners, who are Assistant Engineers, Irrigation (Civil) in the Irrigation Department, Government of Rajasthan, have challenged the order dated 29.5.2000 (Annexure-2) passed by respondent No.2 the Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Rajasthan, Jaipur (for short 'the respondent No. 2) whereby the petitioners have been sent on deputation on the post of Child Development Project Officer in the Women & Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur and the order dated 26.5,2000 (Annexure-3) passed by respondent No. 3 Director cum Special Secretary (Admn.) Women and Child Developmenl Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur (for Short 'the respondent No. 3') whereby the petitioners have been appointed in the Women & Child Development Department on deputation in the same pay scale on which they were placed in their parent Department.2. In nutshell the petitioner's case is that- (i) neither the Rajasthan Service of Engineers and Research Officer (Irrigation Br...
R.P. Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ2093; AIR2002Raj104; 2002(2)WLC345; 2002(4)WLN361
Keshote, J. 1. This petition is directed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution and prayed for the following reliefs:-i) to direct the respondents to compensate the sudden and unnatural death of petitioner's wife Shrimati Kamla Sharma by a sum of Rs.3,04,000/-. ii) to direct the respondents that as a logical consequence of enquiry conducted under the orders of respondent No. 2, the functionaries responsible for utter negligence causing death of petitioner's wife be booked for appropriate action. 2. During the course of the arguments learned counsel for the petitioner gives up the prayer No. 2 aforestated and confined the writ petition only to the extent of prayer No. 1.3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner's wife late Smt. Kamla Sharma was admitted in SMS Hospital, Jaipur on 23.2.88 for the operation of the removal of gall stone. She was admitted in 3 AB ward under the supervision of Dr.P.C. Kala. The petitioner's wife was shifted to 6, South Cubical Unit on...
Raja Mohd. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN273
Panwar, J. 1. This petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 24.4.2001 passed by Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer in Criminal Revision No. 13/2000 whereby the revisional court dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 13.8.2000 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pokaran in Criminal Case No. 72/96 whereby the trial Court framed charges for offences under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 120-B IPC against the petitioner. 2. Brief facts, which are relevant for the decision of this petition are that one Anwar Khan lodged a First Information Report (F.I.R.) with Police Station, Pokaran stating therein that he is adopted son of one Najaria. It was alleged that land bearing Khasra No. 609/37 measuring 60 bighas situated in village Khelana was recorded in the name of his father and after the death of his father, the said land is recorded in his name and he is owner and is in cultivatory possession of the said land. It was alleg...
Pappu Singh @ Laxmansingh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC566; 2003(1)WLN656
Garg, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 29.8.2001 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nimbahera in Sessions Case No. 2/99, by which he convicted the accused appellant for the offence Under Sections 307, 324 and 323 IPC and sentenced in the following manner:-Name of accusedappellantConvicted u;/Sec.Sentence awardedPappu Singh @ Laxmansingh307IPCFive years' R1 and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default of payment offine, to further undergo one year SI.324IPCSix months' RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment offine, to further undergo SI for onemonth.323IPCTwo months' R1 and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment offine, to further undergo 15 days SI.All the above substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows:-The case of the prosecution is that on 25.8.98 at about 3,15 AM, PW-1 Nand Singh gave parchabayan (Ex.P...
Bapu Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1322; 2002(5)WLC704
ORDER1. The appellant Bapulal was indicted before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Jhalawar in Sessions case No. 91/94 for having committed murder of his wife Gulab Bai. The learned trial judge vide judgment dated May 29 1995 found him guilty, convicted and sentenced him under Section 302, IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer one year rigorous imprisonment.2. Against this judgment of conviction and sentence that the present action for filing the appeal has been resorted to by the appellant.3. In brief the prosecution case is that Gheesalal (PW 7) father of deceased Gulab Bai instituted oral report on May 26 1994 with the police station Bhalta District Jhalawar with the averments that on being informed by his sister-in-law around 7.00 p.m. that his son in law Bapulal (appellant) gave beating to his daughter with Sariya, he rushed to her house and found her lying dead. Bapulal who was standing by her side armed with Sariya (iron rod...
The Shive Cooperative Housing Society Vs. Shri Chauthmal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-04-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)WLC530; 2002(5)WLN377
Madam, J. 1. This appeal (being directed against the impugned order dt. 19.8.1997 passed by Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City in Misc. Case No. 23/89 declining grant of temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff in his suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell), has come up before this Court for orders on the application dt. 4.12.2000 of the plaintiff appellant moved under Order 22 Rules 4 & 9 r/w Section 151 CPC, which has been filed being time barred with 450 days delay from the date of expiry of the sole respondent Chauthmal who admittedly died on 23.9.1999 as per death certificate Ann.A.2. Facts in details are not stated as this order will dispose of only the applications of the parties. However, the facts in narrow compass are epitomised that the appellant plaintiff, a housing cooperative society is said to have entered into an agreement to buy an agricultural land of khatedar Chauthmal (respondent herein) situated in village Sukhalpura Teh. Sanganer of...
Prem Kumari Vs. Teeja Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-04-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)WLC613; 2002(5)WLN495
Madan, J.1. This revision petition arises out of an order dt. 11.4.2001 of the Addl. DJstl. Judge No. 6, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Suit No. 71/95 whereby an application under Section 151 CPC praying therein for extension of time to lead defendant's evidence was dismissed.2. Admitted facts are that the suit was instituted on 22.8.89 to which written statement was filed by defendant (petitioner) and after framing of the necessary issues the plaintiff's evidence was closed on 11.12.96 and since then the trial of the suit stands' hanged by latitude on the part of the defendant by not leading their evidence by postponing the same for one reason or me other.3. From the material on record, it also stands established that not less than 35 chances were given to the defendants to lead evidence on their behalf inasmuch as, once the (rial Court was directed by this court in one of revisions arising out of the present suit by an order d.t.13.3.92 to expeditiously decide the suit. It was atieast ...
Kamlesh Paharia Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-04-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLC290
Parihar, J.1. A trial for an offence under Section 302 and 302/34 ITC has been pending against the petitioner before the Sessions Judge, Kota. The Sessions Judge, Kota transferred the above case to the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Kota, vide order dated 2.6.2001. After transfer of the sessions case to the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Kota, the petitioner filed an application on 9.7.2001 before the above court for transferring the matter back to the Sessions Court, Kota, where the trial was earlier pending. The application of the petitioner was rejected by the trial court vide order dated 31.7.2001. The present petition for transfer of the case, under Section 407 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for transferring the trial back to the Sessions Court, Kota mainly on the ground that the trial had almost been completed before the Sessions Court, Kota and, at this stage, the transfer of the trial court not be made to the other court.2. Mr. K.K. Sharm...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »