Rajasthan Court September 2002 Judgments
Girdhari Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)WLC122; 2003(2)WLN168
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 14.8.2002 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the conclusion arrived at by the respondent No. 3 (Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Suratgarh) in the meeting held on 3.7.2002 treating the motion of No-Confidence against respondent No. 4 (Hardeo Sahay) as having dropped be declared illegal and it may be declared that the motion of No Confidence against respondent No. 4 (Hardeo Sahay) stood carried out in terms of Rule 3(9) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Motion of No-Confidence against Chairman and Vice-Chairman, Rules, 1974 and the respondent No. 4 (Hardeo Sahay) be ordered to be ousted from the office of Chairperson, Municipal Board. Suratgarh with all consequential direction inter alia holding of fresh election of Chairperson etc. and further it may be declared that the seats of respondents No. 5 (Om Prakash) and resp...
Tag this Judgment!Kum. Kalpana Moyal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLC179; 2003(2)WLN65
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. All the aforementioned three writ petitions are being decided by this common order as in all of them similar and identical questions of law and facts are involved.S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3369/20012. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 17.8.2001 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, Rule 10 of the Rajasthan Educational Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1970') which prescribes minimum age as 24 years for selection to the post of School Lecturers, be declared ultra vires, unreasonable and unconstitutional and be struck down and the respondents be directed to allow the petitioner to participate in the selection process for the post of Lecturer (School), in pursuance of advertisement Annex. 5 dated 8.6.2001, irrespective of her age.3. The case of the petitioner as put forward by her in this writ petition is as follows:Th...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanshyam Alias Ghamlya Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1663; 2002(5)WLC272
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 22-10-1999, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aklera, in Sessions Case No. 154/96, whereby the accused-appellant was convicted and sentenced with 7 years' R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further undergo one months' simple imprisonment, under Section 304-A (wrongly quoted Section) and seven years' R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/- in default one months' simple imprisonment under Section 307, I.P.C. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case in brief is that Parchabayan (Ex. P. 6) of P.W. 5 Daulatram was recorded in S.R.G. Hospital, Jhalawar by P.W. 15 Om Prakash, Head Constable, Police Station, Jhalawar on 19-4-1996 at about 10 p.m. stating therein that on account of marriage of Kashi Ram s/o Ghasi Gujar, at about 11 p.m. on 18-4-1996, a folk dance was being performed. At that time accused Ghanshyam alias Ghamlya, came and all of a sudden inflicted a lathi blow on the head ...
Tag this Judgment!Pratap Alias Ram Pratap Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2421; 2003(1)WLC675
A.C. Goyal, J. 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 20-5-2000 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Behror, district Alwar, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant with seven years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to further undergo three months' imprisonment for an offence under Section 376*, IPC in Sessions Case No. 5/99.2. The prosecution case, in brief is that P.W. 2 Sh. Kanwar Singh submitted a written report Ex. P. 4 at Police Station Madhan, district Alwar at about 8.30 p.m. on 3-12-1998 with the averments that at about 8 p.m. on 2-12-1998 his daughter Ravita P.W. 1 had gone to the house of Sultan Yadav to attend the ceremony of songs. While returning to home at about 11 or 11.30 p.m. the accused-Pratap, son of Sultan Yadav caught hold of his daughter Ravita and took away her inside a thatched roof (Chhapper) and committed rape on her and also threatened her not to disclose this incident to anyone. His daughter, thereaft...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Mamodia Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLN327
Harbans Lal, J.1. This bail application under Section 439, CrPC has been filed on behalf of the petitioner Rajendra Mamodia who is facing trial along with others on the charges for the offences under Sections 120-B, 167 and 409 IPC and Section 5 of the Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923 and under Section 65 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 in Sessions Case No. 9/2002. It is alleged that the petitioner entered into criminal conspiracy with Manish Dhar and Vimal Srivastava and in order to carry out this criminal conspiracy Manish Dhar, Data Entry Operator, who was entrusted with confidential draft budget press notes on 28.3.2001, took out copy of the same from the computer and handed over the same to accused petitioner. Next day co-accused Vimal Srivastava took these papers from the house of the petitioner and handed over the same to one M.L.A. who distributed these papers in assembly during budget speech on 29.3.2001.2. learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that no offe...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mohna Ramakrishanan and anr. Vs. Smt. Yogam Bala Dev Raj and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLN55
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 23.11.1993, by which the learned trial Court has decided the issue of territorial jurisdiction as a preliminary issue and held that the Civil Court at jodhpur has territorial jurisdiction over the matter.2. The facts and circustances giving rise to this case are that the plaintiff/non-petitioners filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 60,200/- against the defendant/petitioners alleging that on 2.6.1982, the defendant-petitioners had borrowed a sum of Rs. 25,000/- from the plaintiff/non-petitioner No. 1 at Ootacamund (Tamil Nadu) to purchase a plot and in this connection, a promissory note was executed by the defendant-petitioners in favour of plaintiff/non-petitioner No. 1 at Ootacamund. Thereafter, for the same loan, an another promissory note was executed by the defendant-petitioners on 1.6.1983. Defendant-petitioners did not pay the amount of loan, therefore, they executed a third promissory note on ...
Tag this Judgment!Amba Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ115
Khem Chand Sharma, J.1. This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16th January, 1998 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court (Communal Riots) and Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk by which he has convicted appellant Amba Lal for offence under Section 302, I. P. C. and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's imprisonment. Under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, the appellant has been sentenced to suffer three years' imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's imprisonment.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 17-4-1996 at 11.30 a.m. Dev Lal P. W. 1 submitted a written report. Ex. P. 1 on the spot to SHO Police Station Dooni, District Tonk alleging therein that in the morning, he left the house for Raj Mahal for some wo...
Tag this Judgment!Kana Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)WLC214; 2001WLC(Raj)UC769; 2002(5)WLN677
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 17.6.2002 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 9.5.2002 (Annex. 3) by which the petitioner was suspended from the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Bajwas by respondent No. 2 (Divisional Commissioner), Ajmer exercising the powers under Section 38(4) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1994) and placing reliance on the circular dated 16.5.2000 (Annex. 4) issued by the respondent No. 1 (the Government of Rajasthan) be quashed and set aside.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under:(i) That the elections for the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Bajwas, Tehsil Parbatsar, Dist. Nagaur were held in the month of February, 2000. In the said elections, the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Bajwas.(ii) That there...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Sunder Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)WLN524
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 16.8.2002 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dtd. 13.8.2002 (Annex. 6) passed by the Additional Secretary (Enquiry), Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur by which the petitioner who is Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jasrasar, Panchayat Samiti, Nokha was suspended under the provisions of Section 38(4) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 on the ground that against the order of acquittal dtd. 25.1.2002 (Annex. 2) passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Bikaner, the State appeal has been admitted by the High Court, and notice dtd. 29.7.2002 (Annex. 4) issued by Additional Secretary (Enquiry), Panchayati Raj Department, Jaipur and Charge-sheet (Annex. 5) issued against the petitioner, be quashed and set aside.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under...
Tag this Judgment!Bija Ram and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Raj79; 2003(2)WLC748
ORDERSunil Kumar Garg, J.1. All the afore-mentioned fifty writ petitions are being decided by this common order as in all of them identical and similar questions of law and facts are involved.S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3484/20022. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 11-9-2002 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 9-1-2001 (Ex. 1) passed by the respondent No. 2 Air Officer Commanding and Estate Officer, Air Force Station, Jodhpur by which he in exercise of the power conferred under the provisions of Section 5 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1971') ordered the petitioner and other persons to vacate the premises in their occupation mentioned in schedule within 15 days of the date of publication of that order and the judgment dated 13-8-2002 (Ex. 2) passed by the learned...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »