Rajasthan Court February 2006 Judgments
Surindra Nath Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2716; RLW2006(3)Raj1809
Vineet Kothari, J.1. These three petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seek to challenge the order dated 17.11.2005 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur City, Jaipur sending the three cases for further investigation to C.I.D. (CB), Jaipur under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C.2. The facts of Criminal Misc. Petition No. 62/2006 are taken as leading case. The F.I.R. No. 385/2004 on 13.10.2004 in the aforesaid case was filed by one Mahesh Kumar Choudhary alleging the offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and also Sections 63, 64 and 67 of the Copyright Act against the accused petitioners. The complaint in the aforesaid FIR was; that the complainant Mahesh Kumar Choudhary being partner of M/s. Saraswati Export, Jaipur had entered into some business agreement with the Firm of accused persons Mr. Surindra Nath Kapoor and Mr. Vikram Kapoor partners of M/s. S.N. Kapoor Export, Jaipur who were engaged in the business of export of carpets. The said agreement ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Shaitan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1778; 2006(2)WLC562
K.C. Sharma, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. To decide the reference, it would be appropriate to first refer to the factual matrix which have been rise to the reference for answer of this Court.2. On 14.8.2001 Indra Singh Head Constable of P.S. Nasirabad telephonically furnished information given by Ramdhan S/o Ghisa at Police Station Sarwad, to the effect that his father Ghisa who had sustained knife injury has succumbed to the injuries on the way while he was being taken to the Hospital. Having received the information, the SHO along with police personnels reached the Hospital at Nasirabad, where Ramdhan submitted a written report alleging therein that on 14.8.2001 at about 12 noon he was going from Nasirabad to his village on a motor cycle. At the crossing known as '12-meel choraha' Ratan, Jiwan, Hanshraj who were taking his father in tractor, made him to stop and informed that accused Amra, Shaitan, Badri and Rameshwar have belaboured Ghisa and Rameshwar has struck knif...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Niwas and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1912; 2006(3)WLC675
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Ram Niwas, Ravindra and Rajesh, the appellants herein, along with four co-accused Madan Lal, Sita Ram, Mahendra and Kishore were tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Sikar Camp Srimadhopur in Sessions case No. 24/2001 (Old No. 19/98). Learned Judge vide judgment dated July 22, 2002 while acquitted co-accused persons, convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:Ram Niwas:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.Ravindra and Rajesh:Under Section 302/34 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.Unser Section 324 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.Under Section 323 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.Against the finding of acquittal the State of Rajasthan pref...
Tag this Judgment!Champa Lal Vs. Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1545; 2006(3)WLC80
S.N. Jha, C.J.1. This special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.7.2005 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5774/2003 allowing the writ petition of respondent No. 3 Suresh Nath (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent').2. The respondent had filed the writ petition for quashing the order of the Appellate Committee of the Jodhpur Municipal Corporation (in short, the Corporation). Brief facts of the case are that the respondent filed an application in the Corporation seeking permission to open a gate on the land in front of the house of the appellant which had allegedly been closed by the appellant by putting stones on one end to prevent the neighbours from dumping garbage on it. The Building Committee of the Corporation allowed the application vide resolution dated 6.6.1998 and the respondent was permitted to erect the gate. The appellant filed appeal before the Appellate Committee of the Corporation. Challenging the jurisdiction of the Appellate Co...
Tag this Judgment!Sukh Chand and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1725; 2006(2)WLC664
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. Sukh Chand and Mangi Lal, the appellants herein, were tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Bandikui District Dausa in Sessions case No. 37/2001. Learned Judge vide judgment dated December 19, 2002 convicted and sentenced them as under:Sukh Chand: Under Section . 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Mangi Lal: Under Section . 302/34 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months. Under Section . 323 IPC:To suffer simple imprisonment for one year.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. It is the prosecution case that in the intervening night of June 27 and 28, 1999 around 2 AM While Ghamandi (since deceased) and his family members were sleeping in the open chowk of their house, appellants Sukh Chand and Mangi Lal came over there. Sukh Chand dealt w...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1588; 2006(3)WLC686
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.6.2005 passed by the Judge Special Court (Sati Nivaran), Rajasthan, Jaipur and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby he has framed the charge for offence under Section 306 IPC against the petitioner.2. The brief facts of the case are that one Krishan Kumar committed suicide on 23.5.2004. About his death, his father, Lallu Lal Sain submitted a report to the police. On the basis of said report, a Inquest Report bearing No. 9/2004 was chalked out. Fifteen days later during the course of inquiry, the police allegedly recovered a suicide note left by the. deceased. According to the said suicide note, the deceased had borrowed Rs. 40,000/- from the petitioner but was unable to pay the same. In order to repay the said loan, he had further borrowed money from one Surendra Kurriar Choudhary. However he was also unable to pay the said loan to Surendra Kumar Choudhary. Caught in a debt trap, the deceased decided t...
Tag this Judgment!Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1738; 2006(2)WLC699
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Applicant was the appellant in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 569/2001 which was partly allowed on July 18, 2005 and the applicant was convicted and sentenced under Section 304 Part I IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 8 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Now the applicant has prayed to issue direction under Section 428 Cr.P.C. for setting off the period for which he was in detention during investigation and as under trial prisoner.2. It appears from the record that the applicant remained in police custody from March 19, 1999 till March 20, 1999 and in judicial custody from March 20, 1999 till the date of judgment of the Trial Court i.e. July 24, 2001, but since this period was not incorporated in the warrant of commitment, benefit of set off was not given to him.3. The reasons behind the enactment of Section 428 Cr.P.C. were the distressing facts noticed by the Joint Select Committee about...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Prasad Jangid and anr. Vs. the Presiding Officer, Central Gove ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1742; 2006(3)WLC648
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.7.2001 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur by which having held the enquiry to be unfair and in violation of the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal has granted permission to the respondent Bank for submitting additional evidence for proving the charges against the concerned workman as also the order by which the application for review of the order dated 30.7.2001 has also been rejected.2. Heavy reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. Lakshmidevamma (Smt.) and Anr. : (2001)IILLJ199SC . It has been submitted that in view of majority judgment the permission should have been sought by the employer at the very initial stage i.e. at the time of filing of the written statement and no such permission could be granted at any later stage.3. After hearing counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the mate...
Tag this Judgment!Phool Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2167; 2005(2)WLC676
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The appellants have challenged the judgment dated 17.9.2003 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 4, Jhalawar Camp Akiera whereby he has convicted and sentenced the appellants for offences Under Sections 148, 323/149, 324/149 and 302/149 IPC. For offence Under Section 148 IPC, he has sentenced1 them to one year rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 200/- each and to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment in default thereof. For offence Under Section 323/149 IPC, he has sentenced them to six months rigorous imprisonment each. For offence Under Section 324/149 IPC. he has sentenced them to one year rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 200/- each and to further undergo a period of three months of rigorous imprisonment in default thereof. Lastly, for offence Under Section 302/149 IPC, he has sentenced them to life imprisonment each and imposed a fine of Rs. 500/- each and to further undergo six months of ri...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Shanti @ Lalli and ors. Vs. SatyanaraIn and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: II(2006)ACC326
G.R. Sarraf, J.1. The claimant-appellants have submitted this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment/award dated 30.1.1996 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur.2. The facts in brief are that on 1.6.92, the deceased Lallu Ram @ Lallu Lal was going by jeep No. RJ-14-6962 along with two others from Jaipur. When the aforementioned jeep reached near village Nawalpura on National Highway No. 8, a bus No. RNP-1768 of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, driven rashly and negligently by its driver collided with the jeep resulting in the death of Lallu Ram @ Lallu Lal and two others and several other persons sustained injuries. The Tribunal after hearing the parties, passed an award of Rs. 1,83,000 in favour of the claimant-appellants. Aggrieved by this judgment/award, the claimant-appellants have filed this appeal.3. Mr. R.S. Rathor the learned Counsel for the claimant-appellants has assailed the finding of the learned Tribunal ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »