Rajasthan Court April 2007 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.
Ranjeet Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3110
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 24.6.2005 passed by the District Collector, Jaipur, the aforesaid two writ petitions have been filed by petitioner Ranjeet Singh questioning non-renewal of his arms licence. In the first Writ Petition No. 3513/2004, challenge has been made to the letter dated 22.4.2004 by which the authorised arms dealer, M/s Jindal and Company, Panch Batti, M.I. Road, Jaipur, with whom the petitioner had deposited his licensed arm viz. one 12 Bore DBBL Gun No. 75623 and 32 Bore Revolver No. B-1872 at the time of election, was directed not to return these weapons to the petitioner without prior permission of the Police Station, Mahesh Nagar. Under challenge in the second Writ Petition No.5635/2005 however is the order of the District Collector dated 24.6 2005 whereby he cancelled the licence of the petitioner with regard to the aforesaid two weapons and ordered their forfeiture. Since in both the writ petitions, dispute pertains to the same per...
Raju Shikari and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj537
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the Judgment dated December 11, 2003 of Sessions Judge Jaipur District Jaipur whereby two appellants Raju Shikari and Bheem Singh were convicted and sentenced as Under:Raju Shikari:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 324 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 447 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.Under Section 323, 34 IPCTo suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.Bheem Singh:Under Section 302/34 IPCTo suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 324/34 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 324/34 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 447 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.Under Section 323/34 IPC:To suffer ...
Raju Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2476
Guman Singh, J.1. Raju, the appellant herein was put to trial before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Ajmer, in Sessions Case No. 76/2001. The learned trial Judge vide his judgment dated 26.3.2003, convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also imposed fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three month's simple imprisonment.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 28.6.2000, a written report was lodged at Police Station, Civil Lines, Ajmer, by the complainant Shri Nand Lal, s/o Lal Chand (elder brother) stating therein that on 28.6.2000 in the morning he was sleeping out side his house situated at Ghunghra Ghati, Ajmer. He got up on hearing the voice of his son Raju who was uttering that he had killed Latesh, the handicapped sister of Nandlal. He saw that the clothes of his son were stained with blood and he was coming out of the room of Banshi Lal. Nandlal th...
Ram Kishore @ Kishore and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2624
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. In this appeal the appellants, six in number, have impugned the judgment dated August 27, 2002 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Bandikui District Dausa whereby the appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:Ram Kishore @ Kishore, Kishan Lai, Rarriji Lai, Jagdish and Ramni - was:Under Section 302, 149 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month.Under Section 148 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month.Under Section 323 IPC:Each to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs. 100-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for five days.Ganga Sahai:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month.Under Section 148 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment f...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Waman Narayan Gheeya and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3614; RLW2008(2)Raj1084
ORDERGopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. This revision petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 21-4-2005 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Sirohi in Sessions case No. 112/2000 whereby, while discharging the accused non-petitioners from offence under Section 413, IPC the trial Court framed charge for offences under Sections 457, 380, 411 and 120B, IPC against the accused non-petitioners. The State has preferred this revision petition challenging the aforesaid order dated 21 4-2005 to the extent the trial Court has discharged the non-petitioners from the offence under Section 413, IPC.2. It is submitted by the learned Addl. Advocate General, appearing for the petitioner-State, that on 20-10-2002, complainant Purushottam Das submitted a written report to the S.H.O., Police Station Mandar that he had been performing worship in Warmeshwar Mahadev temple. On 20-10-2002, at about 7 a.m., he came to the temple and saw that the door of the temple was displaced an...
Ummed Singh Sushila Vs. Ramesh Kumar Malpani
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3093
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 27.9.2000 passed by the learned trial Court rejecting the application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. filed by the present petitioner on the ground that the application for eviction filed before the Rent Tribunal under the provisions of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (henceforth to be referred to as 'the Act', for short) was not maintainable.3. Mr. Anil Upman, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, while arguing this case drew the attention of the Court towards Section 3(viii) of the Act, which is reproduced below for ready reference:1. Chapters II and III not to apply to certain premises ana tenancies -Nothing contained in Chapter II and III of this Act shall apply-(i) ...(ii) ...(iii) ...(iv) ...(v) ...(vi) ...(vii) ...(viii) to any premises belonging to such religious, charitable or educational trust or class of such as may be specified by the State Government by ...
Manoj Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: I(2008)DMC147
Dalip Singh, J.1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners along with an application for earlier listing of the case on the ground that the matter has been compromised between the parties and in that behalf a copy of the compromise application (Annexure 1) dated 9.6.2004 which was filed before the learned trial Court has been filed before the Court.2. In the said compromise application (Annexure 1) dated 9.6.2004, the fact of compromise has been admitted by the parties and according to which the husband and the wife namely Manoj Kumar, the petitioner No. 1 and Smt. Naresh, the petitioner No. 3 have resolved their disputes on account of which they have submitted an application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and have obtained a decree for dissolution of marriage dated 17.5.2006. It has been mentioned in the said application that wife Smt. Naresh has taken possession of all her Stridhan and nothing remains to be recovered from the petitioner-husband. It has also been m...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ramila Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2686
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act') has been preferred by the insurer of the vehicle involved in accident against the award dated 21.7.2006 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udaipur in Claim Case No. 14 of 2002 questioning the quantum of loss assessed by the Tribunal in the sum of Rs. 14,62,000 on account of accidental death of Ganesh Sharma, about 40 years of age, husband of the respondent No. 1, father of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and son of the respondent No. 4.2. This appeal was taken up for consideration on 11.1.2007 and learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that though this appeal has been submitted questioning only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal as being highly excessive and exorbitant; but having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the subject-matter of this appeal, apart from the amount of Rs. 25,000 as required by Section 173 of the Act, the appellant of...
Shyam Sundar and anr. Vs. Mahesh Prasad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN573
R.C. Gandhi, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the award dt. 07.08.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawer in Claim Petition No. 73/1996 whereby a sum of Rs. 2,15,000/- has been paid as compensation on account of death of a boy of fourteen and a half years, in a road accident.2. The deceased Mithlesh, on 02.10.1995 at 7.30 a.m. near Gadhi Thoriyan Milk Dairy Booth was travelling in Jeep No. RJ. 14-1C-0867 being driven by its driver rashly and negligently. The driver of the Jeep started overtaking the Truck being plied parallel to the Jeep. On seeing another Truck coming from the opposite direction, the Jeep driver got perplexed and lost control over the vehicle, as a result of which the Jeep collided with the Truck nothing from the opposite direction causing serious injuries to Mithlesh Kumar and other passengers whereas Kusum died on the spot.3. The injured Mithlesh Kumar was taken to the Beawar Hospital from where he was referred to Jaipur Hospital through ...
Shrawan Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2117
Prem Shanker Asopa, J. 1. By the aforesaid writ petitions, the petitioners, who are daily wager employee working since more than two decade, are seeking appropriate writ order or direction for regular pay scale of Class-lV and further prayed for other benefits of the regular service. The said prayer also amounts to regularisation in service.2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners have been employed on daily wages almost 20 years back and on filing the writ petition, they have been allowed minimum of the pay scale in the year 1990. From the year 1990, they are working in the minimum pay scale.3. The respondents have stated that the petitioners have not been regularly appointed and their appointment is irregular, therefore, they are not entitled for the benefits of the services.4. Submission of counsel for the petitioners is that the Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court in para 15 & 53 of the judgment delivered in State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi : (2006)II...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »