Rajasthan Court September 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.
Rajendra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj428; 2002(2)WLN227
Garg, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner against the order dated 17.8.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast track), Nagaur in Sessions case No. 96/2001 whereby the learned AdditionalSessions Judge has framed charges against the accused petitioner for offence under Sections 452, 323, 324, 325, 326 and Section 308 I.P.C.2. It arises in the following circumstances :(i) On 12.2.99 a FIR, being FIR No. 15/99 was lodged by one Parsu Ram with the police Station Mundwa, Distt. Nagaur alleging inter alia that in the evening at about 6 p.m. the accused petitioner entered the house of injured Mega Ram and assaulted him on the ground by which he fell on the ground and became unconscious. He was taken to the hospital.3. The injured Mega Ram was medically examined also and a Medical Board was also constituted for examination of his injuries and after usual investigation the police submitted a challan against the accused petitioner and the learne...
Director, Directorate of Millets Development Vs. Vijay Kumar and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2001
Reported in: [2002(93)FLR875]; (2002)IVLLJ162Raj; 2002WLC(Raj)UC235
S.K. Keshote, J.1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution the petitioner is praying for quashing and setting aside of the award dated March 28, 2000 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jaipur in reference No. L-42012/12/99/IR (DU).2. The facts of the case as to what the petitioner has stated in the petition are that Central Government has made a reference of the industrial dispute under Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(a) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jaipur regarding the removal of the respondent No. 1 workman by the petitioner from the services. The Tribunal on receiving the statement of claim of the respondent No. 1 workman issued notice to the petitioner who filed detailed reply raising therein number of the preliminary objections. The affidavits have been filed by both the patties and cross examinations were made thereon. The Tribunal has ...
Bagda Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1815; 2002(4)WLN350
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1.This revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner against the judgment dated 28.6.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Criminal Appeal No. 55/99 by which he dismissed the appeal of the accused petitioner and confirmed the judgment and order dated 16.6.1999 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalore in Criminal Case No. 187/97 whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted the accused petitioner for the offence under sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A IPC and sentenced in the following manner :-Name of accused petitionerConvictedu/SectionSentenceawardedBagda Ram2791PCSix months SI and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of paymentof fine, to further undergo 15 days' Si.337 IPCSix months' SI and a Tine of Rs.500/-, in default of paymentof fine, to further undergo 15 days' SI.338 IPCOne year SI and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment offine, to further undergo 30 days' SI.304-A IPCOne year SI and a fine of Rs.5000/-...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Veer Bhan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1670; 2002(1)WLC593; 2002(2)WLN179; 2002(4)WLN310
Balia, J. 1. State Government through P.H.E.D. Department is in appeal against the order dated 8.8.2000 allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent Veerbhan Singh wherein he claims that his services may be regularised as Lower Divisional Clerk in office under Rule 25(7) of the Rajasthan Subordinate Officers Ministerial Staff Rules 1957 (hereinafter referred as 'the Rules of 1957') the petition has been allowed by following the earlier decision in Ram Karan v. State (1). 2. The case of the petitioner respondent as emerging from the petition is that he was appointed on 22.11.81 by a verbal order on daily wages and since then he is discharging the duties of the clerk. He holds all the qualifications for being appointed as a Lower Divisional Clerk and at the relevant time he was working as Hindi typist and Lower Divisional Clerk. His claim is that under Rule 25(7) of the Rules of 1957 any person employed on work charged basis in P.H.E.D. and who has put in at least 2 years continuou...
Bhoja Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2001
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN279
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused appellants against the judgment and order dated 13.1.1987 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Churu in Sessions Case No. 37/85 whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Churu while acquitting accused Bajrang Lai for offence Under Section 302 read with Section 114 I.P.C. convicted accused appellants for offence Under Section 304(II) read with Section 34 I.P.C. in place of Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced them as under:Name of Offence Sentencedaccused Under Section awardedBhoja Ram 304 (II) read with 5 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.Sarvan Ram Section 34 I.P.C. 3000/- in default to further undergo 1 year's R.I.2. It is stated here that accused appellant No. 2 Sarvan Ram has died, therefore, his appeal has been dismissed as abated by this Court vide order dated 30.8.2001. Hence, present appeal pertains to appellant No. 1 Bhoja Ram only.3. This appeal arises in the following circumstances:i) On 9.6.1985,...
Cwt Vs. H.H. Rajdadi Smt. Badan Kanwar Medical Trust
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2001
Reported in: (2002)175CTR(Raj)53
By The Court:Heard learned counsel for the applicant. This is an application under section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, for requiring the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur to submit the statement of case and refer the questions of law said to be arising out the Tribunal's order, dated 25-3-1998.The application under section 27(1) moved before the Tribunal has been rejected on the ground that no referable questions of law arise out of its appellant order. The proceedings have been initiated against the respondent H.H. Rajdadi Smt. Badan Kanwar Medical Trust in pursuance of the order under section 25(2) of the Wealth Tax Act passed by the CWT and assessment was made on the trust under section 16(3) by the assessing authority by issuing notice to it through its trustees.On appeal the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) quashed the assessment orders on the ground that trust was not assessable entity under the Wealth Tax Act, against which no proceeding could have been initiated. If a...
Raghuvir Soni Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)WLN655
Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.2. The appellant has sought to challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal sustaining the levy of penalty Under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act of 1961') in respect of additions made in the income of the appellant as a result of cash found in his possession, source of which was not explained to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority.3. The facts relevant for the present purposes, which need to be noticed are That the assessee was found in possession of a sum of Rs. 2,30,000/- during the previous year relevant to assessment year 1990-91 by the Customs Authorities.4. The statement of assessee was recorded by the Customs Authorities on 24.5.89 in which the assessee admitted the said amount to be his own, which he has acquired by indulging in purchase and sale of contraband gold. The said amount was handed over to the Income Tax Authorities Under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act...
MatadIn Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLC462
Verma, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as Carpenter in Public Works Department in December, 1969 on daily wages, and was declared semi permanent w.e.f. 6.12.1971 with the recommendation to place him in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300, but before the action could be taken his service were terminated. The petitioner contested the termination by raising Industrial Dispute and was successfulin getting the award passed in his favour dated 15.2.75, when his termination of service was held to be illegal. The petitioner was allowed on join the duties on 18.2.75 in the office of Asstt. Engineer, Public Works Department (B&R;), City Sub Division, Jaipur. 2. It is the contention of petitioner that he was, though, semi permanent from 6.12.1971, but he was not given the scale of Rs. 130-300, but rather an order was passed for fixing his pay scale as Rs. 100-180 vide annexure-3. The petitioner states that he was declared semi permanent on 6.12.71 and in supersession of earlier order dated 6...
Banshilal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj592; 2002(2)WLN52
Prasad, J. 1. The present appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against his conviction under Section 363 and 376 IPC. The accused has been sentenced as under: -Name of accused appellantsCharges1.Labh SinghSections 8/23 and 29 and2. Major Singh8/21of the NDPS Act3. Mangal Singh4. ArshadSections8/23&29 of the NDPS Aci.5. Harjeet SinghSection8/23and 29 of the NDPS Act.6. Arvinder SinghNDPSAct.by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Jodhpur in Sessions Case No. 8/1996 vide judgment dated 5.3.1997.2. A report was lodged at the Police Out-post, Ratanftda by P.W. Mahendra Gehlot on 11.2.1996 that his nephew Gajendra and niece Ranjana were playing in the Polo Ground. At about 4 p.m. his nephew Gajendra came home and informed him that while Gajendra and Ranjana were playing in the Polo Ground, a man aged about 25 years old came there. His height was 5'3'. He was wearing brown pant, full sleeves white shirt and blue coloured baniyan underneath. He was wearing white Action shoes....
Satya Narayan and ors. Vs. Bihari Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj406; 2002(1)WLN286
Garg, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are Mausa and Mausi of the minor children for which there is a dispute over their custody, against the order dated 27.4.2001 passed by the learned Addl. District Magistrate, Deedwana District Nagaur by which he accepted the application filed by respondent No. 1 Biharlal (grand-father of the minor children) under Section 97 Cr.P.C. and ordered that keeping the custody of Priya and Rakshita with the petitioners is against the law and, therefore, custody of these two minor children be handed over to their grand-father Biharilal (respondent No. 1 as per the wishes of their father.2. It arises in the following circumstances :-There is a dispute over the custody of two minor daughters, namely, Priya and Rakshita and they are daughters of one Mahesh Kumar, who is in jail in connection with murder of his wife, meaning thereby the case of the prosecution is that Mahesh Kumar murdered his wife (mother of the minor children)...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »