Rajasthan Court January 2004 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.
Bharat Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1958; RLW2004(2)Raj1160; 2004(2)WLC380
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal impugns the judgment dated August 29, 2000 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chhabra, District Baran, whereby the appellant was convicted as under:-Under Section 302 IPC Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in defaultto further suffer six months R.I.Under Section. 307 IPC to suffer 10 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/-, in defaultto further suffer six months R.I.Under Section. 309 IPC to suffer six months S.I.The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. In brief the prosecution case is that on November 15, 1997 informant Anil Kumar submitted written report with the Police Station Chhabra stating therein that appellant committed murder of Dinesh by inflicting blows with knife and caused injury on the neck of Raju. Thereafter the appellant caused injuries to himself with scissors and knife. Police Station Chhabra registered a case under Sections 302, 307 and 309 IPC and investigation commenced. Dead body of Dinesh was subjected to autopsy...
Vidhya Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2332; RLW2004(2)Raj1261; 2004(2)WLC691
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant from jail aggrieved from the judgment and order dated 9.10.2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 51/2001 by which he convicted the accused appellant for the offence under Sections 302, 307 and 324 IPC and sentenced her in the following manner:-Name of ac-cused appellantConvictedunder section Sentence awarded tothe accused appellantVidhya Devi302 IPC Life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 2 months RI.307 IPC Seven years RI and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month RI.324 IPC Two years RI and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days RI.All the above substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. It may be stated here that this Court vide order dated 8.12.2003 appointed Shri Pradeep Choudhary, Advocate ...
Jagdish Kanwar and anr. (Smt.) Vs. Ram Gopal Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1616; 2004(2)WLC706
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners-defendants on 6.12.2003 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 16.10.2003 (Annex.5) passed by the learned District Judge, Bikaner in Civil Appeal (Decree) No. 33/2002 by which the appeal of the petitioners-defendants was dismissed as being time barred, be quashed and set aside and the appeal of the petitioner-defendants be allowed and the judgment and decree dated 3.10.2001 (Annex. 1) passed by the learned Civil Judge, Bikaner in original civil suit No. 684/93 by which the suit of the respondent No. 1-plaintiff for possession of the disputed property was decreed, be quashed and set aside.(2). The case of the petitioners-defendants as put forward by them in this writ petition is as follows:-The respondent No. 1-plaintiff Ram Gopal Singh filed a suit for recovery of possession and mea...
Kanti Lal Vs. Legal Representatives of Late Smt. Chand Kumari
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1190; 2004(2)WLC26
Prakash Tatia, J.1. This second appeal by the plaintiff- appellant, is against the judgment and decree dated 5.4.1980 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur whereby the learned Addl. District Judge No. 2 set aside the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1978 passed by the trial court decreeing the suit for eviction against respondent-defendant Smt. Chand Kumari (now deceased), under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act. 1950 (for short the Act of 1950).2. The appellant-landlord-plaintiff filed the present suit for eviction of his respondent-tenant-defendants; Smt. Chand Kumari and her son Narendra Kumar. According to the plaintiff, the suit property described in para No. 1 of the plaint was let out to the defendants and the defendants were paying the rent @ of Rs. 50/- per month. According to plaintiff, the defendants have committed default in payment of rent as they did not pay the rent of the premises to the plaintiff from June, 1968 to April, 1970....
Jaildar @ JalladdIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2574; RLW2004(2)Raj1155; 2004(2)WLC412
K.C. Sharma, J.1. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment and order dated March 31, 1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar thereby convicting the accused appellant for offence under Sections 302 and 394 IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment on first count and life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 9 months' rigorous imprisonment on the second count.2. The facts leading to the present appeal may be summarised as follows:On 12.7.1997 at 11.15 PM, Girraj Prasad (PW2), Assistant Sub Inspector of Police recorded Parcha Bayan, Ex.P.7 of Himma while he was admitted in the Surgical Ward of Govt. Hospital, Alwar. On the basis of this Parcha Bayan, a case for offence under Sections 307, 324 and 392 IPC came to be registered at Police Station Shivaji Park Alwar. After a lapse of s...
Bajrang and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1143; 2004(2)WLC383
S.K. Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal impugns the judgment dated November 11, 1999 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Jhunjhunu whereby the there appellants Bajrang, Ram Kumar and Sri Ram were convicted and sentenced thus:-Under Section 302/149 IPC Each to suffer Imprisonment for life andfine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffersix months Rigorous Imprisonment. Under Section 148 IPC Each to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment fortwo years and fine of Rs. 200/-. in defaultto further suffer two Months RigorousImprisonment. Under Section 325/149 IPC Each to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment forthere years and fine of Rs. 300/- in defaultto further suffer there Months RigorousImprisonment. Under Section 324/149 IPC Each to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment fortwo years and fine of Rs. 200/.- in defaultto further suffer tow months RigorousImprisonment. Under Section 323 IPC Each to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment forsix months.All sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. As per the prosecution versi...
Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1141; 2004(2)WLC714
Mathur, J.1. The instant revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order of the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Court, Chittorgarh framing charge against the petitioner for offence under Section 8/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.2. It appears that on 26.3.2003 on receiving information from informer the Dy. Superintendent of Police, Chittorgarh, arranged a trap on the high way between Ajolia ka Kheda and Rathore Dharamkanta. The Police intercepted a truck bearing No. RJ-19-G- 3459. On search the Police recovered 9.450 Kg. brownsugar. The occupanth of the truck namely Shiv Narain, Bahadur Khan, Ganesh and Shamarath were arrested on the spot.3. During investigation it reveal that the seized brownsugar was to be delivered to Mohd. Fazrin through the petitioner Mohd. Firoz. The Police also collected the evidence to the effect that the cariers of the brownsugar were in contact with the petitioner Mohd. Firoz on mobile. After usual investigation Police laid charge-sheet against Shir ...
Rajendra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2458; RLW2004(2)Raj1113; 2005WLC(Raj)UC349
Sharma, J.1. Appellant Rajendra has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khetri District Jhunjhunu for having committed offence under Section 302 1PC. In that on October 16, 1993 he gave blows with Gandasi on the person of Manju aged 2 years and Aabid 9 years who under the impact of the blows died. The appellant was sentenced to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer three Months Simple Imprisonment.2. From the material on record it is established that the appellant had no motive behind the alleged criminal act and on this strength, a plea of insanity under Section 84 IPC was raised before the learned trial court, which was rejected.3. In the instant appeal also only contention of learned Amicus Curiae is that the appellant by reason of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of knowing the nature of the act therefore, in view of Section 84 IPC, he did not commit any offence.4. The question that requires consideration is whether...
ito Vs. Tolaram Phusaram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: (2004)88TTJ(NULL)1040
ORDERN.K. Saini, A.M.:The appeal filed by the department and the cross-objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 12-9- 1995, for the assessment year 1981-82.2. In the appeal, the only grievance of the department relates to the cancellation of penalty of Rs. 47,100 under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The facts related to this case in brief, are that the assessee purchased a truck on 10-3-1981 and claimed depreciation thereon in the revised return. The assessing officer, however, held that the truck was not used for the business of the assessee during the period and, therefore, he did not allow the claim of the assessee for depreciation. However, in the subsequent year, the claim for depreciation was allowed by the assessing officer. In the meanwhile, the assessing officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act as, according to him, the assessee had made false claim of depreciation on truck which w...
Jaif Ahmed Sheikh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3272; RLW2004(2)Raj1090; 2004(2)WLC662
Mathur, J.1. By way of instant revision under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2000') the petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.9.2003 passed by the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Bhilwara whereby he refused to release the petitioner on bail under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act of 2000.2. The petitioner was arrested on 13.8.2003 having found carrying 1,118 Kg 'Chura of Doda Post' in his own Truck. After usual investigation the Police laid charge-sheet against the petitioner for offence under Section 8/18 of the N.D.P.S. Act. As per the arrest memo the petitioner was 19 years of age on the date of arrest. However, he produced birth certificate disclosing his date of birth as 16.10.1985. On the basis of the certificate it was argued that he was below 18 years of age on the date of the incident and as such he was entitled to be released under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 being a juvenile....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »