Rajasthan Court March 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.
Daya Singh Lahoriya @ Rajeev Sudan @ Vinay Kumar Vs. State of Rajastha ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1976; 2006(4)WLC240
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The matrix of these three appeals is the judgment dated October 2, 2004 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City (for short the 'trial Court').2. The trial Court found that accused Daya Singh (appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 11/2005) was guilty of offences punishable Under Sections 364A, 365, 343/120B and 346/120B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as under:Under Section 364 A IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months.Under Section 365 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months.Under Section 343/120B IPC:To suffer imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer six months imprisonment.Under Section 346/120B IPC:To suffer imprisonment for two years.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.3. The accused S...
Dharampal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1585; 2006(4)WLC386
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. In this appeal the appellants, five in number, have impugned the judgment dated February 27, 2003 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Jhunjhunu whereby the appellants were convicted and sentenced as under: Dharampal:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.Under Section 148 IPC:To suffer simple imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.Ramswaroop, Khushiram, Ramotar @ Ramavtar and Hanuman :Under Section 302/149 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.Under Section 148 IPC:Each to suffer s*imple imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prelude to ...
Shyam Sunder and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1650; 2006(2)WLC655
K.C. Sharma, J.1. Since all the three appeals arise out of the judgment dated 31.5.1984 in one Sessions case No. 25/81 (29/81), they are being decided by this common judgment.2. The appellants were tried for offence under Sections 148, 307/149, 324/149 and 323 IPC and at the conclusion of trial, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentence them in the following manner:Appellants Shyam Sunder @ MunnaUnder Section 307/149Five year's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/- . @ IN = Appellants Surendera @ Pappi, Surendra @ Guddu, Shyam, Anil Kumar and Mahesh Chandra:Under Section 307/149Three years Rigorous' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. , in default thereof, to under to two months rigorous imprisonment.All the appellantsUnder Section 147 IPCOne year's rigorous imprisonment Appellant Shyam Sunder @ MunnaUnder Section 148 IPCTwo years' rigorous imprisonment Appellant Shyam Sunder @ MunnaUnder Section 324 IPCTwo years' rigorous imprisonmentAppellants Surendra @ Pappi, Sh...
Santosh Devi and ors. Vs. Ramesh Kumar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-2006
Reported in: 2007(34)PTC219(Raj)
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. This judgment shall decide the fate of Civil Original Suit No. 21/2004 filed by plaintiff Ramesh Kumar, the respondent No. 1 herein, who had at the first instance approached the District Court, Sri Ganganagar on 06.04.1998, by filing a suit however amended the suit later on, which in due course of time under the orders of this Court transferred to the Court of Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Ganganagar and was decided allowing the prayer of the plaintiff with regard to permanent injunction by giving direction to the effect that defendants themselves or through their agent directly or indirectly shall not trade in the copies, registers and slip pads using 'pooja' name.2. The case of the plaintiff was that he alongwith defendant No. 1 started business in partnership under the name 'Pooja Udyog' in the year 1985 and their firm was manufacturing and dealing in the copies, registers and slip pads etc. but on account of dispute between the partners having been cropped u...
Shyam Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)WLC691
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Character of appellant Poonam as revealed in the instant case reminds us the Bengali word 'HEYALI' which suggests some one who is a puzzle to other being inscrutable and imponderable. A woman with such proclivities is called 'Heyali'. Poonam who got married to Om Prakash (since deceased) made him to weep. With her new tricks she created confusion and started love making with her 'Devar' Shyam Singh (appellant). With the help of Shyam Singh she made a plan to liquidate her husband Om Prakash. She persuaded Om Prakash to take her on scooter to Saiyad Baba's place at village 'Meer ka Basai for changing her Tabiz'. Shyam Singh and Dashrath Singh followed them in a truck. On pursuation of Shyam Singh and Poonam, Om Prakash agreed to come back on the truck. Poonam and OM Prakash got themselves alighted on the truck. Their scooter also got loaded on it. Shyam Singh who was driving the truck got it halted at a lonely place. Shyam Singh and Dashrath Singh then pushed Om ...
Raju Munim Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1452
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Accused appellant Raju Munim @ Rajendra Singh Meena has been convicted and sentenced by the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Jhalawar, vide its judgment and order dated 4.6.2001, in Sessions Case No. 22/2000, under Section 8/21 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 for short, 'the Act', to 12 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's additional rigorous imprisonment.2. Relevant facts, in brief, for disposal of this appeal are that Sub Inspector, Police Station, Bhawanimandi, lodged First Information Report at Police Station Bhawanimandi, on 29.6.2000, wherein it was alleged that he received a secret information from one informer and on that basis he reached at Tagar crossing. He directed Constable Ramesh Chand to bring two independent and respectable inhabitants of the concerned locality to attend and witness the search. He found one person of a description as stated by the informer. On asking, he ...
Madan Bansal Vs. Ramnarayan Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1448; 2006(3)WLC399
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a suitable direction in his favour directing the defendant to pay reasonable amount of mesne profit or compensation for use and occupation of the premises and what should be the reasonable amount of mesne profit or compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case, during the pendency of this second appeal, are the points involved in this application ?3. The landlord-respondent has filed the present application under Section 151 CPC on 17.10.2005 with a prayer that a direction be issued to tenant-appellant to pay the suitable monthly compensation for use and occupation of the rented shop by way of mesne profit/compensation at the rate of Rs. 4000/- per month from the date of filing of the second appeal in this Court i.e., 14.9.2001. He contended that the rented shop is situated at Tonk which was let out to the defendant at the monthly rent of Rs. 100/-and the same rent ...
K.E.C. International Ltd. Vs. the Judge, Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1480; 2006(2)WLC788
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The petitioner preferred a writ petition which was registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4618/99 seeking writ order or direction to quash and set aside the order dated 7.4.97 and 20.5.99 and further prayed that the Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur be directed to examine the application filed by the petitioner company under Section 332b of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on merits in relation to the enquiry on the basis of which the workman was dismissed from service vide order dated 8.4.92.2. The writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 19.8.2002. While dismissing the writ petition, the learned Single Judge observed that the learned Industrial Tribunal in the order dated May 20, 1999 was of the view that the Tribunal had no power to review the earlier order and since the petitioner indirectly sought the review of the order dated April 7, 1997 after an inordinate delay, the application of the petitioner dated January 8, 1999 deserved to be dismissed. As held by ...
Kalyan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1466
Narendra Kumar Jain, J. 1. This appeal, on behalf of accused Kalyan S/o Genda, under Section 374(2), Cr.P.C., is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.5.2001 passed by the Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Cases), Jhalawar, in Sessions Case No. 20/2000, whereby the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 8/18 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act') and sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-; and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's additional rigorous imprisonment. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that PW-4 Narendra Singh Meena, Deputy Superintendent of Police, lodged a First Information Report, on 9.8.2000, at Police Station Ghatoli, District Jhalawar, wherein it was alleged that when he was on patrol duty he saw one person, who, on seeing the police jeep, tried to run away. Thereafter that person was caught hold and it was founded that he was carrying one plastic bag...
Pappu Vs. State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2491; RLW2006(2)Raj1474; 2006(3)WLC609
Narendra Kumar Jain, J. 1. This Jail appeal on behalf of accused appellant Pappu Son of Gulab Chand, is directed against the judgment and order dated 8th August 2002 of the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Chhabra, whereby the accused appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 8/18 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act') to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs, 1,00,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further additional undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment. 2. Brief facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 10.4.1997, PW-8 Jai Narain Sher, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chhabra, lodged First Information Report at Police Station Chhipa Barod, wherein it was alleged that accused Pappu S/o Gulab Chand was accused and arrested in case No. 128/97 under Section 454, 380, IPC, by PW-15 Jai Lai Verma, S.H.O., Police Station Chhipa Barod and when he was in custody he gave an information under Section 27 of the Indian Eviden...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »