Rajasthan Court May 2002 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 Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-09-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN670
Harbans Lal, J.1. This criminal misc. petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 14.8.2001 of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jaitaran passed on an application Under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for the release of the truck in F.I.R. No. 31/2001, Police Station, Raipur.2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that on a complaint filed by petitioner Bhanwar Lal for the offences Under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C., an F.I.R. No. 31/2001 was registered against the accused non-petitioner Arjun Puri. During investigation of the case the truck No. RNQ 4601 which was registered in the name of petitioner was recovered. The petitioner moved an application on 14.3.2001 and the non-petitioner moved an application on 13.3.2001 for the release of the said truck on 'Superdiginama' during the pendency of the case but the learned court below refused the application of petitioner Bhanwar Lal and accepted the application of accused non-petitioner Arjun Puri and ordere...
Anil Bhandari Vs. United India Insurance Company and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj739; 2002(4)WLC630; 2002(4)WLN465
Garg, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 22.10.1991 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to give the benefit of 60% of Rs. 115/- as functional allowance (Rs. 69/-) at the time of fitment onpromotion to the post of Senior Assistant and similar benefit may also be given to him in regular pay scale etc. etc.2. It arises in the following circumstances :The petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant in August, 1977 in the pay scale of Rs. 175-585 and he was posted in Branch Office, Jodhpur and, therefore, on 4.2.1985, he was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant.It was submitted by the petitioner that on account of revision of pay scale made in the year 1985, the pay scale of Rs. 175-585 of Assistant was revised to Rs. 520-30-670-45-850-60-1210-75-1660 and though that revision of pay was made in the year 1985, but it was made appl...
Zakiullah Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj777
Parihar, J. 1. One country made Revolver with one live Cartridges alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner on 16.5.1984. The petitioner was charged for the offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. After trial, the petitioner was convicted for the above offence and was sentenced for one year's rigorous imprisonment with a find of Rs. 500/- vide order dated 16.9.1996 passed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the above order, the petitioner filed an appeal, however, the Appellate Court, while partly allowing the appeal, reduced the sentence to six months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- vide order dated 9.5.2000. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging both the above orders passed by the courts below. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material available on record, the impugned orders as also the original record of the trial Court as summoned by this Court. 3. The incident alle...
National Insurance Company Ltd. and ors. Vs. Mohinder Kumar Bali
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)ILLJ633Raj; RLW2003(2)Raj829; 2002(3)WLC450
Sharma, J. 1. The appellants in the instant Special appeal have assailed the order of the learned Single Judge whereby the charge sheet issued against the respondent by the appellants was quashed. After hearing the submissions in detail we allowed the appeal and passed the following order :'The appeal stands allowed. The impugned order of the learned Single Judge dated November 24, 2001 shall stand set aside. The petitioner-respondent if he so chooses shall be at liberty to file reply to the charge sheet before the concerned authority and the learned authority shall consider the reply without being swayed by the order passed by us, as expeditiously as possible. The reasons shall follow.' 2. The reasons in support of our findings are thus : Briefly stated the facts of this case are that, one Lallu Prasad Gupta applied for loan under 'Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Yojana' from the State of Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Sikandara Branch, District Dausa (in short the 'Bank'). The Bank approved the l...
Vishnu Shanker and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN677
O.P. Bishnoi, J.1. This appeal has been filed by Vishnu Shanker and Jagdish Prasad against a judgment dated 24.7.1998 delivered by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Court, Udaipur, whereby the appellants were acquitted of the charge Under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act and ere convicted Under Section 3(1)(v) of the said Act as well as Under Sections 447 and 427 of the I.P.C.2. So far as the offences Under Sections 447 and 427 are concerned, the complainant Navla and the accused persons on 18.7.2001 entered into a compromise which was filed in this Court and was verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial).Consequently, the two appellants are acquitted of the charges Under Sections 427 and 447 of the I.P.C.3. Now, the conviction Under Section 3(1)(v) of the SC/ST Act remains.4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and have perused the record of the case. I find that...
Kharta Ram Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLN699
N.N. Mathur, J. 1. This special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 3.7.1991 dismissing the writ petition in limine and relegating the petitioner to the remedy of suit being a contractual matter.2. The brief facts giving rise to the instant special appeal are that the respondent Superintending Engineer, Circle-1. P.W.D., Jodhpur invited tenders inter alia for the improvement of horizontal profile, widening and, strengthening to Jodhpur-Pokaran Road Km. 102/0 to 123/0 by tender notice dated 3.6.1989. The petitioner who is registered as 'A' class Contractor, gave tender for the work and quoted his rate at 41.42% above the 'G' Schedule of rates. The tender was opened on 19.7.1989. None of the tender was accepted and 2.11.1989 was fixed for negotiation. During negotiation, the petitioner quoted his rate at 36.99% above the 'G' Schedule rates. However, the rate did not carry through. The petitioner quoted fresh rate at 32% above the 'G' Schedule rates with...
Managing Director, R.S.R.T.C. and ors. Vs. Smt. Dhanni Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj486
Panwar, J.1. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is finally heard at the orders stage on the stay application'.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 6.9.2000 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagaur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation in favour of respondents claimants No. 1 to 6 (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimants') and against the appellant and its driver respondent No. 7.3. Brief facts to the extent they are necessary and relevant for decision of this appeal are that on 29.10.96, deceased Nemichand aged about 29 years was working in his agricultural field. At that relevant time, bus No. RJ 14/P 1811 owned by the appellant Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') driven rashly and negligently by its driver respondent No. 7 Hans Raj went off the road and hit the deceased, who succumbed to the injuries inst...
Nisar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2002
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR696]; RLW2003(2)Raj1080; 2002(3)WLC546
Bansal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated April 21, 1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar whereby the appellant-Nisar has been convicted for offence Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year rigorous imprisonment. He has also been convicted for offence under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on receiving telephonic message on the interviewing night of September 18/19, 1994, PW-14 Samudra Singh, SHO, P.S., Fatehpur reached at the house of the appellant situated in Ward No. 28, Fatehpur and recorded the statement of Ms. Jannat (PW-1) D/o Babu Khan S/o the appellant- Nis...
Shivraj Singh Vs. Municipal Corporation, Through Mayor
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj714
Keshote, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the memo of appeal and the impugned order.2. In this appeal filed under Section 104 r/w Order 43 Rule 1 CPC the challenge has been made to the order dated 27.2.2001 of the Addl. District Judge No. 5, Jaipur City Jaipur in Misc. Case No. 20/2000. Under this order the application filed by the plaintiff appellant under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC came to be rejected. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent has given out that the Corporation has given up its proposal to construct the Sulabh Complex at the disputed place, and it is not going to construct same. This statement of the counsel for the defendant-respondent cannot be doubted. So to this extent the grievance of the plaintiff appellant does not survive. The dispute between the parties is whether the construction of Kiosks which has been made by the defendant respondent is an encroachment and that too to the extent where it has to be ordered to be ...
Narendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ703; RLW2003(2)Raj1098
Sharma, J. 1. The appellant who was the accused on the file of learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Attrocity Cases) Baran bearing Sessions Case No. 86/95, found guilty and convicted and sentenced under Section 302 1PC and 27 of the Arms Act vide judgment dated April 24, 1997 as under.u/S. 302 IPCto undergo imprisonmentfor life and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer six monthsimprisonment.u/S. 27 Arms Actto undergo three yearsimprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer six monthsimprisonment.The sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. In short the prosecution case is that at the Government Hospital Baran a written report (Ex.P.1) was submitted by informant Brij Raj Singh Hada, Advocate (PW.11) at 8.30 p.m. to Hamir Singh SHO P.S. Kotwali Baran (PW.8) on November 30, 1997 with the averments that around 7.30 a.m. on the same day the appellant alongwith Virendra Singh and Laxmi Narain-Advocate came to the house of the informant and Laxmi Narain...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »