Rajasthan Court January 2006 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.
Mukut and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2576; 2006(2)WLC132
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants, four in number, along with co-accused Banshi Lal, Kanya Bai and Kastrui Bai were indicted before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Chhabra District Baran in Sessions Case No. 242/1992. Learned Judge vide Judgment dated November 5, 1999 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:Mukut and Laxmi Chandra:Under Section 302 IPC:Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-. in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 147 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer one month rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 323/149 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer one month rigorous imprisonment.Babu Lal and Ram Karan:Under Section 302/149 IPC:Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 147 I...
State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Jangir Kaur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Raj195
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 100, C.P.C. by the defendants against judgments and decrees passed consecutively by two Courts below. The learned Court of Munsif vide its judgment and decree dated 8-1-1988 in Civil Suit No. 14/1987 has directed the defendants to supply 4 times water to the garden of plaintiff-respondent at Sri Karanpur for irrigation and the learned first appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsif, Sri Karanpur vide its judgment and decree dated 20-11 -1991 in Civil Appeal No. 2/1988 - State and Ors. v. Jangir Kaur.2. Brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed in the Court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sri Karanpur by Jangir Kaur, the widow of Late Dayal Singh, stating therein that in Killa Nos. 1 to 5 of Murabba No. 24, Chak No. 20-F there lies land of her husband who was expired, which has been entered in her name. It was further stated that the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 issued i...
Kasim Beg @ anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2837; 2006(2)WLC1
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The alleged murder of Shakir @ Guddu, in the dead of the night, the discovery of his dead body in a Nala (culvert) the next morning, the testimony of a chance witness and splattering of circumstantial evidence led to the conviction of the appellants, Kasim Beg, (appellant No. 1, for short), Nafeesa Bano, (appellant No. 2, for short) and Ballu Khan (appellant No. 3, for short) for offences under Sections 302, 201 IPC. Vide judgment dated 2.8.2004, the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Kola, convicted the appellants for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default thereof, to further undergo two months' S.I. He also convicted them for offence under Section 201 IPC and sentenced them to five years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default thereof, to undergo one month's S.I. Hence, these appeals before us. As both the appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment, th...
Ramdayal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2632; 2006(2)WLC322
Khem Chand Sharma, J.1. The above titled appeal by 4 appellants, namely Ramdayal, Ram Singh, Dalu @ Dalchand and Bhag Chand arises out of the judgment and order dated 3.9.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Laxman-garh, Alwar whereby the learned Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellants in the following manner:Under Section 302/34 IPCTo undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a Fine of Rs. 10000/-.Under Section 323/34 IPCTo undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with a Tine of Rs. 2500/-each.Under Section 341 IPCTo undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. On 19.4.99 at 8.00 AM, Ram Dayal S/o Banshi Lal lodged a written report, Ex. P. 19 at Police Station, Kathumar, alleging therein that at 7.00 AM he left his house for collecting gunny bags from Chunnilal Punjabi of Indira Colony. When he reached near the house of Hareti Jatav, accused Ramdayal, Dalu, Bhag Chand and Ram Singh met him. Dal Chand and Bhag Chand had Farsas in their hands, while Ram Sin...
Panchu Ram and ors. Vs. Mangi Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: I(2006)ACC582; 2007ACJ1151
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The claimants-appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation against the judgment/ award dated 23.10.1997 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, District Jaipur, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 262 of 1994, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,54,000 in favour of the claimants-appellants in respect of deceased Arjun Lal, aged about 18 years.3. Learned Counsel for the claimants-appellants contended that although the deceased was bachelor and was 18 years of age, but the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,54,000 awarded by the Tribunal is a meagre amount and it should be enhanced. He also placed reliance on Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Laxman Iyer : AIR2003SC4182 and Manju Devi v. Musafir Paswan 2005 ACJ 99 (SC), in support of his contention.4. I have considered the submission of the learned Counsel for the parties and examined th...
Budh Prakash Saini Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC27
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 29.8.2005 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar on his application whereby the application for premature release of the F.D. has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has failed to place any proof of the loan taken by him which is required to be repaid.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case are that Tarachand, the brother of the petitioner filed a claim petition against respondent Nos. 1 to 8 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar for grant of compensation on account of the injury sustained by him in the accident. In the said claim petition an award was passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on 25.9.2003 to the tune of Rs. 2,49,400 with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition. As per the direction of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, FDR was made for a period of 5 years in the name of the injured brother with th...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Larli Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: I(2006)ACC699
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. These four appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, are directed against the common judgment/award dated 9.5.1991 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Neem-ka-Thana (Sikar), whereby the amount of compensation has been awarded in favour of the claimant respondents.3. Mr. Tyagi, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company only contended that the liability of the Insurance Company to indemnify the liability of the insured, in respect of passengers was limited up to Rs. 15,000, whereas the learned Tribunal has committed an illegality in holding the liability of the Insurance Company as unlimited, therefore, the judgment of the Tribunal be set aside and their liability may be restricted up to Rs. 15,000.4. Learned Counsel for the claimant-respondents contended that the learned Tribunal has discussed the evidence available on record, in detail and rightly held that the liability of the Insurance Compa...
Fateh Lal Vs. Smt. Tulsi Bai and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1032
H.R. Panwar, J.1. This criminal revision petition under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code' hereinafter) is directed against the order dated 30.6.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Udaipur (for short 'the Revisional Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Revision Petition No. 19/2001, whereby the revision petition filed by non-petitioners No. 1 to 3 against the order dated 23.3.2001 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mawli (for short, 'the Trial Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Case No. 378/1999 was allowed and the order of the Trial Court taking cognizance for the offences under Sections 420, 120-B, IPC was set aside and the non-petitioners were discharged of these offence Aggrieved by the order impugned, the petitioner- complainant has filed the instant revision petition.2. 1 have heard learned Counsel for the partie Perused the orders of the Trial Court as well as of the revisional Court.3. It is contended by the ...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Rajendra Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1361; RLW2006(2)Raj1228
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. This case reveals a shameless incident that occurred sometime on October 30, 2003 in which the alleged sexual assault and murder is said to have been committed by the appellant herein, with victim Priyanka, a girl of the tender age of about 7 years, who fell a prey to his lust. Learned Judge, Special Court Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Kota relying on the circumstantial evidence convicted the appellant vide judgment dated September 28, 2005 for the offences under Sections 302, 376 and 201, IPC and having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case found it to be rarest of rare cases and, therefore, sentenced him thus:Under Section 302, IPC :Sentence of death and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer one month imprisonment. Under Section 376, IPC :To suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment. Under Section 201, IPC :To suffer rigorous impriso...
Sultan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj885; 2006(4)WLC764
H.R. Panwar, J.1. Notice was served on the respondent No. 2 on 26.5.2005 and 27.5.2005, power was filed on behalf of the respondent No. 2 by Mr. Dhirendra Singh and, thereafter the matter was adjourned on four occasions. Today, Mr. Dhirendra Singh Rathore submits that he has no instruction to plead and argue the case for respondent No. 2.2. This criminal revision under Section 307/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code' hereinafter) is directed against the order dated 22.2.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bali, District Pali (for short, 'the Revisional Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Revision No. 37/1999, whereby the revision petition filed by the respondent No. 2 against the order dated 29.6.1999 passed by the Assistant Collector-cum-Executive Magistrate, Desuri(for short, 'the Executive Magistrate' hereinafter), was set aside and the proceedings initiated by the Executive Magistrate against the respondent No. 2 under Section 145 and 146 of the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »