Rajasthan Court January 2004 Judgments
Narendrapal Kotadia and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1836
N.N. Mathur, J.1. By way of these two petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioners seek direction to quash the order dated 20th October, 2001 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dungarpur taking cognizance against them for offence under Section 420, 468 & 471 I.P.C. At the relevant time the first petitioner Narendrapal Kotadia was posted as Executive Engineer, National High Way, Udaipur, second petitioner Pradeep Kumar Assistant Engineer and third petitioner Ashok Kumar as a J.En. In another petition Gumani Ram, Vinod Kumar and Mahendra Kumar are the persons belonging to M/s. G.R. Agarwal.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that one Krishan Kumar Gupta a Contractor filed a complaint in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dungarpur on 2.5.2000 stating inter alia that in April, 1998 the Additional Chief Engineer P.W.D., National High Way No. 8 invited tenders for constructions of the road. The tender of M/s. G.R. Agarwa...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Cit Vs. Brandari Marble (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: (2004)88TTJ(NULL)605
ORDERN.K. Sarini, A.M.This is an appeal by the department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 25-11-1994. The only ground raised in this appeal reads as under :'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in deleting, without any reasonable basis, the addition of Rs. 5,38,860 made by the assessing officer on account of undervaluation of the closing stock and suppressed sales of marble blocks.'2. The assessing officer discussed this issue at page No. 2 of the assessment order dated 31-12-1998. During the assessment proceedings the assessing officer noticed that the assessee did not maintain day-to-day mines production account and the stock register for raw material and finished goods was also not maintained, therefore, in the absence of the stock register the genuineness and correctness of the trading results could not be verified. The assessing officer worked out the average price of the marble blocks and while doing...
Tag this Judgment!Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Col. Sumant Mehta and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1405; 2004(2)WLC419
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Petitioner C.B.I., in the instant revision petition seeks to quash the order dated October 23, 2002 of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate SPE Cases, Rajasthan Jaipur (for short the 'ACJM') whereby order of taking cognizance dated September 25, 2001 was recalled and the accused respondents were discharged of the offences under Sections 120B read with 379, 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC.2. Contexual facts depict that learned ACJM took cognizance of the offences under Sections 120B read with 379, 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC against accused respondent Amul Kumar Mehta in his presence on September 25, 2001, by a speaking order. On October 5, 2001 accused respondent Sumant Mehta was sent to judicial custody and the ACJM took cognizance of the aforesaid offences against Sumant Mehta. Therefore the accused respondents moved an application on September 6, 2002 under Sections 3, 5 and 6 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (for short 'Delhi Act') praying therein...
Tag this Judgment!indra Chandra Tiwari Vs. the Election Commission of India
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1302; 2004(2)WLC378
Anil Dev Singh, C.J.1. By this petition the petitioner seeks a direction to the effect that booth-wise counting of votes be declared to be illegal on the ground that it does not lead to free and fair polls. According to the petitioner, who appears in person the ballot papers from the polling booths should be brought to one place and then all of them should be mixed together before counting the same so that the trend of voting at a particular polling booth is not disclosed. ,2. As per para 7 of the reply of the Election Commission of India, the Election Commission decided to use electronic voting machines (for short E.V.M.) in all the Assembly Constituencies in the State of Rajasthan and in the three other States, which went to poll on 1.12.2003. It is also pointed out that in the State of Mizoram in the poll, which was held on 20.11.2003, E.V.Ms. were used.3. In para 12 of the reply it is stated that during general erections for the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly in 1998, E.V.Ms. were ...
Tag this Judgment!Residents of Sanjay Nagar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Raj116; RLW2003(3)Raj1394; 2004(2)WLC391
K.S. Rathore, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to close down the slaughter houses illegally operating in Sanjay Nagar. Besides the petitioners also seek a direction to the State Pollution Control Board to take steps to prevent creation of pollution generated by functioning of the slaughter houses in the area in question.2. The petitioners claim to be residents of Sanjay Nagar, Bhatta Basti, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur; According to the petition unauthorised and illegal slaughter houses have been set up by anti-social elements and as a result of the illegal slaughtering of animals pollution is being caused and strong stench emanates from the area.3. The respondents namely the State Pollution Control Board, Municipal Council and Superintendent of Police have filed replies. According to the reply of the respondent No. 1, State of Rajasthan and respondent No. 3, Superintendent of Police, Jaipur, it is admitted that illegal slaughter of animals is tak...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Kanwar (Smt.) and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: II(2004)DMC133; RLW2004(3)Raj1631; 2004(2)WLC390
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Matrimonial dispute that resulted into a criminal case under Sections 498A, 494 and 120B IPC, has been ultimately settled amicably and the complainant wife did not want to continue with the criminal case. But Section 320 Cr.P.C. came in the way and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Fetehpur Shekhawati District Sikar vide order dated November 27, 2003 declined to recognise the settlement.(2). It is well settled that while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it is the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. In B.S. Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. (1), their Lordships of Supreme Court indicated thus:- (Para 14)'There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or t...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Mohan Sharma (Dr.) Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1621; 2004(2)WLC9
Ashok Parihar, J.1. The petitioner, on recommendations of the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC), was appointed on the post of Lecturer in the speciality of Neurology vide order dated 7.1.1991. On recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), the petitioner was further promoted to the post of Reader (Neurology) vide order dated 7.3.1995. Respondent No. 2 (Dr. Ashok Pangariya) on the other hand, entered the services as Lecturer in General Medicine on recommendations of the RPSC vide order dated 13.2.1979. The respondent No. 2 (Dr. Ashok Pangariya) was further promoted to the post of Reader in General Medicine against the quota of 1988-89 vide order dated 5.6.1989 and to the post of Professor in General Medicine against the quota of 1994-95 vide order dated 24.1.1995 as per recommendations of the DPC.(2). Though certain Super Specialities in the field of Medicine had been created way back in the year 1984-85, however, as per the policy decision of the State Gover...
Tag this Judgment!Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1632; 2004(2)WLC377
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') has been filed by the petitioners on January 17, 2001 for quashing the order dated May 1, 1997 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Sawai Madhopur whereby the cognizance under Section 29(1)(a) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 was taken against the petitioners.(2). I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced before me and scanned the case law placed for my perusal.(3). A petition praying for the exercising of inherent powers is never barred by limitation and Article 131 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to such petition. But in my opinion the petitioner cannot be permitted to invoke inherent powers at his own sweet will. Where the petitioner does not approach under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at the earliest possible opportunity, the High Court may decline to exercise inherent powers.(4). A close look at the record of the Court below demonstrates tha...
Tag this Judgment!Maya Devi (Smt.) Vs. Judge, Mact and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: III(2004)ACC826; 2006ACJ715; RLW2004(4)Raj2499; 2004(3)WLC440
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. The petitioner-Smt. Maya Devi has filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk for determining the amount of compensation on account of the death of her husband Shri Ramesh Chandra Gupta who is stated to have died in a motor accident which was caused by a vehicle owned by the respondent-Union of India. The claim was resisted by the respondent-Union of India on the ground that the facturn of accident in which the petitioner's husband is alleged to have died is a forged and fabricated claim. However, the claim petition has been entertained by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk in which the witnesses have been examined and the matter is still pending for final argument. An application on behalf of the petitioner during pendency of this proceedings was filed with a prayer that two witnesses who are eye-witnesses to the factum of accident be allowed to be examined in support of the claim of the petitioner but the same has been rejected ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Idresh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-19-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1724; RLW2004(2)Raj1300; 2004(2)WLC375
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal has been filed by appellant Mohd. Idresh questioning the correctness of the judgment dated February 4, 1999 of learned Additional Sessions Judge. No. 1, Kota in Sessions Case No. 75/96 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to further suffer one year's simple imprisonment.2. In brief the prosecution case is that on receiving telephonic message that at 'Bhattji Ghat Patanpol' incident of inflicting knife occurred, Sawant Singh, SHO of Police Station Kaithunipol, Kota entered the said information in 'Roznamcha' and immediately rushed to M.B.S. Hospital where written report Ex.P5 was submitted to him with the averments that appellant inflicted injury with dagger on the left side of back of Iqbal (now deceased) as a result of which he fell down and also sustained injuries by fall. Motive behind the incident was that father of the appellant was tenant ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »