Rajasthan Court August 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.
Gangadhar and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1098; RLW2007(1)Raj341
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Prosecutrix (name withheld by us), a girl of sixteen was gang raped. This was the gravamen of the charge put against the appellants Gangadhar and Sumer Singh, who were put to trial before learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases) Jhunjhunu, and convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated April 30, 2003 as under:Under Section 376(2) IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer rigourous imprisonment for one year.Under Section 363 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act:Each to suffer simple imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer rigourous imprisonment for one year....
R.S.R.T.C. and ors. Vs. Bhanwar Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj728
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. None present on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent in spite of service of notice on him.2. Heard learned Counsel for the defendant-appellants.3. Plaintiff-respondent Bhanwar Lal filed a suit for declaration to declare the order dated 5.3.1982, terminating his services from the post of Driver, the order dated 2.12.1983 of the appellate authority dismissing his appeal against the order dated 5.3.1982, and the order dated 3.7.1985 of the reviewing authority, as illegal, unconstitutional and void, and to decree his suit for reinstatement with all consequential benefits.4. Defendant-appellants filed their written statement wherein, apart from other submissions, they raised an objection to the effect that the plaintiff-respondent is a workman and the present dispute is an industrial dispute, therefore, the civil court has got no jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the civil suit, and only remedy available to the plaintiff is to approach the Labour Court, who h...
Narendra and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj1054
N.N. Mathur, J.1. In these two appeals the appellants viz A/1 Narendra S/o Sita Ram, resident of Hissar(Haryana), A/2 Jogendra @ Bharddin @ Bhar Ahmed S/o Shakhi Mohammed resident of Borang(Mahan), District, Doda (J&K;), A/3 Ajit Singh S/o Shiv Lal, resident of Baliyali, District, Bhiwani(Haryana), A/4 Kaplan Singh S/o Chandu Lal, resident of Samargopalpura, District, Rohtak(Haryana) and A/5 Mukan Lal S/o Bajrang Lal, resident of Anoopshahar, Tehsil, Bhadra, District, Hanumangarh were put to trial on the charge of dacoity along with Asharaf Khan, Rafiq Mohammad, Kan Singh and Ahmed Amir. While the appellants were charged for offence under Section 395 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, the other accused persons since acquitted were charged for offence under Section 395/120-B & 216-A I.P.C. The appellants have been convicted of offence under Section 395 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each; in default of payment to further undergo 3 month...
Mewa Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj123
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged validity of Section 173-A of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act of 1959) and has prayed that the same be declared ultra vires of Articles 19(6) and 300-A of the Constitution of India and Sections 8 and 55(6)(a) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short 'the Act of 1882') and has also prayed for quashment of letter dated 25th September 2002 (Annexure 6) and consequently refund of the amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant thereto with interest @ 24% p. a.2. The case of the petitioner as set up in the memorandum of writ petition is that the petitioner along with his brother Suraj Mal purchased a house situated in Mohalla Hindusingh Kotdi, Sardarpura, Banner for consideration of Rs. 3,00,000/- vide sale deed dated 8-10-1997 from one Shri Bhabhoot Singh s/o Shri Rai Singh and others. Having purchased the said house, the petitioner also took possession of the same. The petitioner the...
Ladi (Smt.) and ors. Vs. Shyojiram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC335
G.S. Sarraf, J.1. The claimant-appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment/award dated 24.5,1996 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur.2. The facts in brief are that when one Harnath was going from his house towards Renwal on 16.10.1993 a truck RJ14 G1103 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 hit him from behind in front of Sanganer Sadar Police Station in consequence of which Harnath died. Respondent No. 2 is the owner and respondent No. 3 is the Insurance Company of the truck RJ14 G1103. After hearing the parties the learned Tribunal by judgment dated 24.5.1996 passed an award of Rs. 1,34,800 in favour of the appellants. Aggrieved by this judgment/award the claimant-appellants have filed this appeal.3. Mr. K.N. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that the learned Tribunal has held the deceased Harnath responsible for contributory negligence and has deducted 20% of the dependen...
Meena Bansal and ors. Vs. Balvendra Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC652
ORDERG.S. Sarraf, J.1. The claimant-appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment/award dated 26.10.1994 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur.2. The brief facts are that a truck DL1G 6425 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 hit Dr. Ramjilal Meena from behind near Dhand at about 8.00 p.m. on 27.11.1991 when the latter was going by motorcycle RPI 1632 from Jaipur to Shyampura. Dr. Ramjilal Meena died due to multiple injuries suffered by him in the accident. After hearing the parties the learned Tribunal by judgment dated 26.10.1994 passed an award of Rs. 5,20,360 in favour of the appellants. Aggrieved by this judgment/award the claimant-appellants have filed this appeal.3. Mr. K.N. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that the learned Tribunal has not taken into consideration future prospects of the deceased while assessing loss of income and a multiplier of 12 has been adopte...
Rsrtc Vs. Smt. Kamla Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3203
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Since all these appeals relate to the compensation awarded to the claimants with respect of casualties caused by an accident occurred on July 24, 1998,I proceed to decide these appeals by a common order.2. Contextual facts depict that on July 24, 1998 at 8.15 AM near village Kohada a bus of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'RSRTC') bearing No. RJ-01/ P-2539 and a jeep bearing No. RJ-26/ P-408 collided as a result of which 14 persons, along with the driver of the jeep, lost their lives. Out of 13 claim petitions filed before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Kekri (Ajmer) (for short 'Tribunal') 12 were decided by common award dated December 7, 2001 One claim petition bearing No. 35/2002 was decided on July 4, 2002. Appeals No. 1911/2002 and 1840/2002 pertains to the award dated July 4, 2002 and in the remaining appeals award dated December 7, 2001 is under challenge. In appeal No. 1991/2002 claimants have prayed to enhance the award.3. Learned T...
Bakemans Ind. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3104
Gopal Krishna Vyas, J.1. By way of filing the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed for quashing of FIR No. 301/2005 filed against them at Police Station, Kotegate, Bikaner.2. As per the facts of the case as have been narrated in the instant petition, it is stated that the petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the manufacturing of biscuits. According to the petitioner firm, due to dispute with State Industrial Corporation of Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as 'SICM' only), SICM put lock on the factory of petitioners in the month of July, 2003. At the time of putting lock on the factory by SICM, manufactured material worth Rs. 2 crores was lying in the factory. It is further stated in the petition that non-petitioner No. 2 - Narendra Sharma was appointed as C&F; agent by the petitioner company in the later half of 2002 and for this purpose he deposited Rs. 7 lacs as security ...
Chandagi Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3276
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. My brothersWho sootheAnd healMy woundsBut I knowOh! I knowBy the timeThe wounds will healTheir pared nailsAgain will grow.Perhaps Bajrang Lal while dying, would have similar thoughts, Bajrang Lal had three real brothers. Greed of agricultural land dragged them to the court of law where they were litigating. Bajrang Lal and Babu Lal were on one side, whereas Chandagi Ram and Mohar Singh stood on the other side. On the allegation of murder of Bajrang Lal charge sheet was filed against Chandagi Ram and Mohar Singh and they were put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Khetri, who vide judgment dated August 16, 2004, convicted and sentenced them as under:Chandagi RamUnder Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months.Mohar Singh:Under Section. 302/34 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for...
Anwar HussaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj12
Jitendra Ray Goyal, J.1. This fourth bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by accused petitioner Anwar Hussain in FIR No. 520/2005 registered at Police Station Vigyan Nagar, Kota for the offence under Sections 382 & 120B IPC and 3/25 of the Arms Act wherein he case is pending trial before the Additional Judicial Magistrate No. 5 (South), Kota in Criminal Case No. 27/2006.2. Heard learned Counsel for accused petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the material produced during the course of arguments.3. The ground raised now by the counsel for accused petitioner is that after framing of the charge on 7.4.2006 the trial of this case has not been completed within the period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking the evidence i.e. 19.4.2006, therefore, the accused petitioner is now entitled to be released on bail by virtue of the provisions of Sub-section 6 of Section 437 Cr.P.C. Reliance has been placed on the decision rendered in the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »