Rajasthan Court November 2001 Judgments
Khajan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-24-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLC470
Sharma, J.1. The appellant was arraigned before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Deeg, for having committed murder of his own brother Harbans Singh. The learned trial Judge vide judgment dated March 28, 2000, convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to further undergo three months' simple imprisonment.2. The prosecution story is woven like this. Kehar Singh, who is son of the deceased, submitted a written report Ex.P.8, with the Police Station, Sikri, on October 14, 1997, at 7 p.m. with the averments that there was animosity between his father Harbans Singh and his uncle Khajan Singh over a Neem tree. On October 10, 1997, around 6 p.m. when his father was going to Gurudwara for worship, Khajan Singh started abusing him near the house of Santok Singh. Then, with the intention of killing him, Khajan Singh struck the first blow with knife on the right side of the chest, the second blow on the ...
Tag this Judgment!O.P. Khairari Vs. Rajasthan State Co-operative Spinning and Ginning Mi ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-24-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj572; 2002(4)WLC448
Keshote, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. In the reply to the writ petition the respondents have raised a preliminary objection that in the writ petition number of the disputed question of facts are involved and for adjudication thereof the evidence is necessary and this petition is not the appropriate remedy. Second preliminary objection has been raised that this petition has been filed after considerable delay. The Court has also put the learned counsel for the petitioner that in such matters the petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy by way of raising the industrial dispute or raising a dispute Under Section 75 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that in the matter the petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy Under Section 75 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies act but what he contends that this petition has been admitted and is pending for the last more than four years, the petitioner at this sta...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLN628
Sharma, J. 1. Kumari Manju, aged 16 years was committed to Female Surgical Ward at bed No. 31 in Sadar Hospital, Alwar, having 100 burns on her body on October 24, 1994. Ram Kripal Tripathi, Executive Magistrate, P.W.9, reached to the hospital and allegedly recorded the statement of Manju (Ex.P.7) in the presence of four persons viz., Omi, Duli Chand Jatav, Raju Ram and Davendra Kumar. In her statement, Kumari Manju deposed that accused appellants Ratan Lal, Dalu Ram, Hukam Chand and Bheli alias Bhagwan Das, all sons of Tula Ram, took her to the roof of her house around 2 p.m. and after sprinkling kerosene oil on her body set her on fire. She further deposed that she was all alone in her house and because of incident occurred on a previous night, all the four persons put fire on her body. Learned Executive Magistrate put a note on the statement that as both the hands of Manju were badly burnt, therefore, she was not in a position to put her signatures. Rajendra Prasad, I.O. P.W.10, als...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Cit Vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2001
Reported in: (2002)77TTJ(NULL)325
ORDERB.L. Khatri, A.M.This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Udaipur. The revenue agitated on the ground that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in allowing the claim of Rs. 41,95,434 being expenses towards scientific research claimed to be exempt under section 35(2)(ia). The assessee has claimed Rs. 41,95,434 under section 35(2)(ia) of the Act. This claim was in respect of Central Research Development Laboratory, Dewari Branch. The assessee received a total sum of Rs. 101.20 lakhs from the Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Development, Government of India, New Delhi, for setting up the laboratory. The assessee had spent only a part of the grant. The assessing officer held that the assessee had not incurred any expenditure of its own and, therefore, the claim could not be allowed. The assessee had filed xerox copy of the bills for the purchase of X-Ray diffractometer valuing Rs. 33,05,196.20 as also the details of the b...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi Niwas Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2001
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN710
Jagat Singh, J.1. By this revision petition complainant Laxmi Niwas has challenged the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 26.8.1998 passed by Judicial Magistrate (Jr. Dn.), Nagaur who by impugned order has dropped the proceedings against the non-petitioners keeping in view the common cause pronouncement of the Apex Court.2. The submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners are that though in the court below challan was filed by the SHO on 23.4.1990 for offences Under Sections 323, 325 and 341 I.P.C. However, till the impugned order some of the accused persons were not present in the court. On their behalf learned Counsel appeared and prayed for their exemption, the charges could not be framed. The delay so caused was on the part of accused persons and not on the prosecution. Learned Counsel relied upon two pronouncement of our own High Court referred as Mohd. Harun v. Mohd. Khalil and Ors., 1998 (2) RCD, 883 and Subhash Chander v. State of Raj., 1997 Cr. L....
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Poosa Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN372
Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This petition is by Union of India challenging the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 23rd July 1998 allowing the Original Application filed by the respondent No. 1, Poosa Ram. The respondent was subjected to disciplinary enquiry under Railway Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968. The charge levelled against the respondent was that a complaint had been received from on Sh. Sita Ram on 30.3.1990. A trap was laid by CBI Inspector and the respondent was caught red handed accepting a bribe of Rs. 75/-from Sh. Sita Ram and that was recovered from the left side of his trousers' pocket. For the conduct of inquiry into the said charge of the memorandum dated 13 March 1991, one Dr. Atla Mohd was appointed as an Inquiry Officer, who was the then ADMO, Northern Railway Hospital Jodhpur. Said Atta Mohd submitted his inquiry report (Exb.5) dated 10.2.94, holding the incumbent guilty of the charges levelled against him ...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Singh Hada and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1437; RLW2003(3)Raj1918; 2002(1)WLC382
Madam, J. 1. These two criminal appeals have been preferred by Shyam Singh Hada (No. 668/99) and Hariom @ Pappu (No. 749/99) against a judgment dated 11.10.99 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bundi in Sess. Case No. 6/98 convicting & sentencing each of the appellants for offences as under :- u/S. 376(2)(g) IPCLife Imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (in default, I years'further imprisonment)U/S. 302, IPC-do-2. Both the sentences are to run concurrently. 3. The story launching prosecution against the appellant is narrated in brief thus: Nandlal (PW-1) lodged a report (Ex.P1) on 18.9.1996 alleging therein that his wife, Chanda (deceased) was working as peon in Surya Niketan School where she was called by Shyamsingh Hada (appellant) (owner of the School) on Sunday 8.9.96 for preparation of meals for his guests and therefore she went to the school at about 12 noon but she did not return back till night then at about 8 P.M. he sent his son Purshottam & Sobhag to call back Chan...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Relaxo Footwear
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: [2003]259ITR744(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.2. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodh-pur, dated May 31, 2001. The question suggested by the Revenue in this appeal as a substantial question of law involved in this case is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the stock statement submitted to the bank cannot be considered an authentic piece of evidence for making addition and thereby deleting the additions made for undisclosed investment in stock as well as consequential effect of sale ?'3. Having perused the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that no question of law much less a substantial question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal for consideration in this appeal.4. The assessee has shown the closing stock in his books of account for the assessme...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Relaxo Footwear
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: (2002)175CTR(Raj)50
Rajesh Balia, J.Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is directed against the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur dated 31-5-2001 [reported as Relaxo Footwear v. ITO (2001) 23 DTC 369 (Jod-Trib) : (2001) 73 TTJ (Jod-Trib) 712 (Jod-Trib]. The question suggested by the revenue in this appeal as a substantial question of law involved in this case is as under :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified in holding that stock statement submitted to the bank cannot be considered an authentic piece of evidence for making addition and thereby deleting the additions made for undisclosed investment in stock as well as consequential effect of sale ?'2. Having perused the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that no question of law much less substantial question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal for consideration in this appeal.The assessee has shown the closing stock in his bo...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Poonam Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1596
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment and order dated 15-6-88 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur in Sessions Case No. 47/86 by which the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused respondent for offence under Sections 353 and 307, I.P.C.2. This appeal arises in the following circumstances :(i) On 19-3-86 at about 11 a.m. P.W. 1 Jet Singh lodged a written report Ex.P/1 with the Police Station Sardarpura, Jodhpur stating that his duty in the day was in no entry area of Sardarpura and along with him P.W. 2 Narayan Singh constable was also on duty. In Sardarpura area, heavy vehicles were not allowed to enter and, therefore, for that it was no entry area. At about 10.15 a.m. on 19-3-86 when he was standing near C-road, Sardarpura, from the side of C-road, a truck No. RJS 7581 came and P.W.2 Narayan Singh tried to stop that truck and the truck was stopped and driver of the truck was accused respondent and he had no autho...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »