Rajasthan Court August 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.
Sheesh Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj432
Sharma, J.1. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.5.1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar thereby convicting the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.2. The prosecution case, unfolded during trial, was that one Pramila, since deceased was posted as Constable in Police Dines, Sikar during the relevant time. On 14.7.1993, PW-19 Narendra Singh, SHO having received information, Ex.P.10 from S.K. Hospital, Sikar furnished by a lady Constable No. 753, initiated proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. PW-19 Narendra Singh rushed to the Hospital and prepared inquest report Ex.P.6 of the dead body of Pramila.3. Complainant Dharmpal Singh, PW-1, brother of the deceased and Jagmal Singh, PW-10, father of the deceased submitted a written report Ex.P.5 to the SHO, K...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Raj Pal Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ455
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1.This appeal has been filed by State of Rajasthan against the Judgment and order dated 5-2-87 passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh district Churu, in Cr, case No. 228/80 by which accused respondent was acquitted of the offence under Section 4(1)(a) and 4 (2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 29-10-1979 at about 2 P.M. P.W. 1 Nathu Lal, Excise Inspector, along with his parly Kuldan P.W. 2, while going from Rampura then at Kumharon wali Johardi, one person seeing them running away and thereafter that man was apprehended and brought to the place wherefrom he ran away and in that place 28 bottles of illicit liquor were recovered and those were in a drum and when he was asked about his name then he told his name as Raj Pal Singh, accused/Respondent. Farad of seizure was prepared as Ex. P. 1 and sample of that liquor was taken and after Investigation, challan was filed against the accused respondent for the said o...
Pabu Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN517
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. By these four and other bunch of writ petitions, challenging the vires of the certain provisions of the Rajasthan Excise Act, the petitioners in the respective writ petitions have prayed for:(a) appropriate writ, order or direction, incorporation of Section 54(Ka) and Sub-sections (4) to (9) in Section 69 of the Excise Act may be declared ultra vires and be struck down;(b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, amendment in the Excise Act, 1950 by incorporation of Section 9-B, may be declared ultra vires and be struck down;(c) by a further appropriate, writ, order or direction impugned order dated, 16.5.2000, passed by respondent No. 2 may be declared invalid and may be quashed and set aside;(d) Pending decision, if any further order is made or action is taken prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner, the same may also be quashed and set aside.(e) Any other relief may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.(f) Costs be awarded to the petitioners.2....
R.C. Kaushik Vs. Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Vidhyut Bhawan, Vi ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLC441
Verma, J. 1. The petitioner who was initially recruited as Junior Engineer in 1959 in the service of Rajasthan State Electricity Board (now Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited) was promoted as Assistant Engineer in the year 1960, Executive Engineer in the year 1970 and as Superintending Engineer in the year 1979 and is aggrieved against the order dated 24.6.1989 (Annex.10) by which order he was compulsorily retired from service of the said Board. 2. The petitioner is governed under the Regulations of 1962 called Employees (Classification, Control & Appeal) Regulations, 1962 and was charge-sheeted on 11.3.1985 by the Secretary of the Board for the proposed enquiry under Regulation 7 on the statement of charges as Annex.1. 3. During the pendency of the charge-sheet dated 11.3.1985, the petitioner was also issued a separate memorandum dated 25.6.1985 about telegram Annex.2 whereby instructions were issued that the secret letter containing charges was to be issued to the petitioner and, t...
Yasmeen Khanam Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC797
Verma, J. 1. All the petitioners were eligible for appointment on the post of Teacher Gr.III (Urdu) and possessed the minimum qualifications as provided in the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971. They had applied in response to the advertisement dated 9.10.1996 for such appointment relating to the recruitment for the year 1996-97. Even though number of vacancies for General Teachers were also advertised, but 10 vacancies were to be filled up for Urdu Teacher Gr. III. As per annexure attached to the writ petition No. 4778/1998, the select list of Teacher Gr. III was published and pasted on the notice board. 2. All the petitioners were interviewed. A merit list of 35 of Urdu candidates was prepared. The petitioners were within the list of 10 persons put on merit as per Schedule attached to the writ petition. It is the grievance that even though the petitioners were on merit, but except three persons Rubina, Mumtaz Khan and Abida none else have been given appointment even...
Shri Ghanchi Mahasabha, Jodhpur Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN302
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Ghanchi Mahasabha, which is a representative body of Ghanchi Samaj, is registered as a Society under the provisions of Societies Registration Act. It had purchased the land in dispute from the erstwhile Ruler of Marwar, Maharaja Shri Gaj Singh vide sale deed dated 31.8.1964. It is submitted that prior to the aforesaid sale, the petitioner was put in possession of the said land as its tenant since 1958-59. It is a part and parcel of Sardarsamand Estate known as 'Soorwari' and covers that large number of fields and grass-zone in-between the Sardarsamand Estate.2. According to the petitioners, after the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Land-Owners Estates Act, 1964 [for short 'the Act of 1964'] came into force, the estates of such land owners were to vest in the State of Rajasthan with effect from 1st Sept. 1964 the appointed date for acquisition under Section 7 read with Section 9 of the Act, excepting the properties falling under under Section 10 of the Act. ...
Divisional Forest Officer Vs. Raghuvar and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: [2002(93)FLR82]; 2002(1)WLC501
S.K. Keshote, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Department, Bharatpur is challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the award of the Labour Court, Bharatpur dt. 10.7.2000 passed in L.C.R. Case No. 150/92 (Raghuvar v. Divisional Forest Officer, Bharatpur) and prayer has been made for quashing and setting aside the same.3. The facts of the case are that respondent-workman No. 1 has raised an industrial dispute re termination of his services by the petitioner vide its order dt. 24.6.1982.4. This industrial dispute raised by the workman has been referred by the State Govt. for adjudication to the Labour Court Bharatpur, under impuged award dt. 10.7.2000 the Labour Court Bharatpur declared the action of the petitioner to terminate the services of the workman unreasonable and illegal and directions were given for his reinstatement in service with 25% of b...
Vishal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC416; 2002(2)WLN42
Singh, J. 1. This appeal has been filed Under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. by accused appellant Vishal Singh against the judgment dated 25.10.1997 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act Cases, Jodhpur in Sessions case No. 11/97 by which he has been convicted Under Section 302 1PC and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to further undergo two years' simple imprisonment. He has also been convicted under Section 341 IPC and sentenced to one month's simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to further undergo seven days' simple imprisonment. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution story as unfolded in the trial court is that at 8.00 P.M. on 5.12.1996 in the city of Jodhpur PW6 Mukesh with his uncle PW 7 Chetan Prakash as also his father Kaluram (since deceased) went to Railway Stadium on bicycles to bring waste meals discarded by the marriage party for their pigs. At about 10.15 P.M. they were coming back ...
Reva Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj581; 2002(5)WLC352; 2002(2)WLN218
Garg, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant from jail against the judgment and order dated 18.11.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhinmal in Sessions Case No. 90/99 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhinmal convicted the accused appellants for offences under Sections 498A and 306 IPC and sentenced as follows:OffenceSentence awardedU/Sec.498A 1PC2 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default tofurther undergo 3 months' R.I.U/Sec.306 IPC5 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default tofurther undergo 6 months' R.I.Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. That since this appeal was preferred from Jail and nobody was representing the accused appellant, therefore, Legal Aid Committee vide order dated 30.9.2000 appointed Shri B.K. Bhatnagar as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court on behalf of accused appellant.2A. It arises in the following circumstances:(i) That on 16.1.99 at 5.45 p.m. Smt. Chothi w/o Rewa Ram, by caste...
Dungar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ386
Sunil Kumar Garg, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 29-7-87 passed by learned Sessions Judge. >Dungarpur in Sessions Case No. 13/87 by which he convicted the accused appellant Dungar for offence under Section 376, IPC and accused appellants Bhana and Jeeva for offence under Section 366/34, IPC and sentenced them as under : Name of Offence Sentence awarded accusedDungar 376, IPC 7 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further undergo 1 year's R. I.Bhana 366/34, 7 years' R.I. and a IPC fine of Rs. 1000/-in default, to further undergo 1 year's R. I.Jeeva 366/34, 5 years' R.I. and a IPC fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further undergo 1 year's R. I.By the same judgment dated 29-7-87, he acquitted accused Bala and Huka for offence under Section 313, IPC.2. This appeal arises in the following circumstances :(i) On 1-4-86, P.W. 1 Savita (hereinafter referred to as the Prosecutrix) lodged a written report Ex. P...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »