Rajasthan Court July 2005 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.
Naseeb Khan and anr. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC843; RLW2005(4)Raj2373
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. These two appeals have been filed on behalf of claimant-appellants for enhancement of amount of compensation against the judgment/award dated 13.9.1994 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur in MACT Cases Nos. 517/92 & 516/92.2. Both the appeals are against the same judgment and both relate to the same accident, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.3. Claim Petition No. 517/92, was filed by the parents of deceased Akaram and Claim Petition No. 516/92 was filed by injured Shabir before the Tribunal. In the claim petitions, it was pleaded that the deceased Akaram and injured Shabir were returning to their home on two-wheeler. They were coming slowly but their two-wheeler was hit by a Jeep belonging to non- applicant No. 2 Raghuveer Singh which was insured with the non- applicant No. 1 New India Assurance Company Ltd., Nehru Place, Jaipur. The deceased Akaram died and injured Shabir became unconscious. The injured ...
Narendra Kumar @ NagIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2580; 2005(4)WLC337
V.K. Bali, J. 1. In this appeal, that has been filed by Narendra Kumar @ Nagin who was tried with his co-accused Shankarlal & Rajesh, since acquitted, two fold contentions that have been raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant are that no reliance can at all be placed upon the alleged eye- witnesses and therefore, Narendra Kumar @ Nagin like his co- accused named above ought to have been acquitted. If however, this Court might find statements made by eye-witnesses to be inspiring confidence then Narendra Kumar @ Nagin could at the most be convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC.2. With a view to appreciate the contention of the learned Counsel as noted above it will be necessary to take into consideration back drop of the events leading to death of... murder Narendra Kumar @ Nagin, after trial was held guilty for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Life as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further...
Mahesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD(Cri)52; III(2006)BC260; RLW2005(4)Raj2479; 2005WLC(Raj)UC690
Harbans Lal, J.1. This bail application Under Section 438, Cr.P.C., has been filed for release of petitioner-Mahesh Kumar Sharma on bail for transit period. He has been summoned through arrest warrant in a case for offence Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to appear in Court. He has been declined bail by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 1, Jaipur District, Jaipur vide order dated 28.4.2005.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a handicapped person who could not appear in the concerned Court of Tamil Nadu in compliance of the summons issued to him due to his economic and family problem; as a result of which, non-bailable warrant has been issued against him. The offence is bailable one and is triable by a Magistrate of 1st Class. In this connection, he has placed reliance on the case of Chandan Mal J. Jain v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. reported in 2001(1) RCrD 504 (Raj.), wherein it has been held by thi...
Babu Lal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-01-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(3)Raj2207; 2005(4)WLC229
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:- '(i) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the trial and proceedings of the Trial Court, discharging the petitioner on or alternatively to release the petitioner on bail under the provisions of law.(ii) Any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the humble petitioner. Thus render justice.' 3. The petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Sections 8/21 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is behind the bars for last about 14 months and only statements of two prosecution witnesses have been recorded so far. Therefore, trial against the petitioner itself may be quashed and he should be released forthwith. 5. The learned counsel for the petit...
Nizam and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-01-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj69; 2005(4)WLC587
Shiv Kumar Sharma J.1. Two accused appellants namely Nizam a Shafique have been held guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 302 & 201 IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Dholpur in Sessions Case No. 213/2001 and each of the accused appellants has been sentenced as under:--Under Section 302 IPC :--Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, six months imprisonment.Under Section 201 IPC :--Two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, one month imprisonment.The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. A written report (Ex.P1) was submitted by informant Shahjad (PW4) at Police Station Maniya, District Dholpur on 26.1.2001 at 4 pm with the averments that one Koke Singh (PW13) came to him with the oral information that at about 3 PM he (PW13) went to his (informant) agricultural field to have the fodder (Karab) he saw one dead body lying under the fodder (Karab) whose neck and penis ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›