Rajasthan Court July 2007 Judgments
Ghanshyam Soni Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4504; RLW2007(4)Raj3124
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. A dispute between the two neighbours, a minor assault, allegedly caused by the petitioner to the complainant, Smt. Bina Devi, has kept this case alive for almost two decades. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.2.90 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, No. 4, Jaipur City, whereby the learned Magistrate had accepted the negative Final Report ('F.R.' for short) and simultaneously directed the statement of the complainant to be recorded under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('the Code' for short).2. The brief facts of the case are that on 14.1.89 Smt. Bina Devi, the non-petitioner No. 2, had lodged a written report at Police Station, Manak Chowk, wherein she claimed that in the morning when she came out of her bathroom, she saw the petitioner trying to take out the door of her house. She immediately told him not to do so. Upon her protest, he entered her house and punched over the nose. She cried out in pain. Upon hearing her cries, her...
Tag this Judgment!Datu Mal and ors. Vs. Seth Madan Gopal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN464
N.K. Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties on the stay application.2. Learned Counsel for the defendant-appellants submits that the appeal has been admitted today and the impugned decree being a decree of eviction, the ex-parte interim stay order dt. 03.12.2001 passed by this Court may be confirmed till the last disposal of this second appeal.3. Learned Counsel for the plaintiff-respondents contended that the First Appellate Court has considered the evidence in detail while deciding Issue Nos. 2 and 3 in favour of the plaintiff-respondents and has rightly recorded a finding that the tenant-appellant has alternative accommodation and he is not residing in the rented premises, in dispute, therefore, rightly decreed the suit for eviction on the ground of availability of alternative accommodation as well as non-user of the rented premises and in view of the fact that he is not residing in the rented premises the interim stay order should be vacated.4. In alternative Mr. M.M...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN392
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. By this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the proceedings, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sri Vijaynagar, in Criminal Case Old No. 125/1994 (New No. 781/1996)(State v. Raj Kumar and Ors.).2. In nut-shell case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 Raj Kumar and non-petitioner No. 2 Vandana Devi got married but on account of misunderstanding, the marriage did not succeed and ultimately divorce has taken place between the parties on 29.05.2007. The parties have reached to a compromise, not to continue any further litigation and wants to live peacefully in future separately.3. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that it is correct that the offences are not compoundable but under the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C for securing ends of justice this Court is fully empowered to quash the proceedings under Sections 498A and 406 IPC and Section 32...
Tag this Judgment!Lrs. of Netram and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN395
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners being aggrieved against the judgment and decree of the Board of Revenue dt. 06.09.1990 have preferred this writ petition.3. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiffs Net Ram and Madan Lal filed suit for declaration and injunction against defendants Chandu and Nanak in the Court of Assistant Collector, Nohar on 20.04.1965. According to the plaintiffs, who are petitioners in this writ petition, a big land of khasra No. 323 is situated in Village Rohi in Tehsil Nohar. On one part of this land which was numbered as 4 Min measuring 25 bighas 12 biswas, the plaintiffs were in cultivatory possession since Samwat Year 2011. Since the land of even said Min 4 of khasra No. 323 itself was big and some other persons were also in possession of the land of Min 4, some wrong entries have been made by the revenue officers in the revenue record. According to the plaintiffs, their cultivation on the land measuring 25 bighas 1...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhu Dayal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN200
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. By this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the proceedings, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Bikaner in C.R Case No. 1201/2000 State v. Prabhu Dayal and Ors.2. In nut-shell case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 Prabhu Dayal and non-petitioner No. 2 Smt. Suman got married, however, the accused petitioner started harassing the non-petitioner, therefore, a complaint under Sections 498A and 406 IPC was registered which was sent for investigation to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have entered into a compromise and in this regard an application was filed before the learned trial Court who by its order dt. 13.04.2007 rejected the said application as the offences are not compoundable.4. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that it is correct that the offences are no...
Tag this Judgment!Manmohan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN578
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. By this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the proceedings, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Udaipur in Case No. 04/2005 (State v. Manmohan Singh and Ors).2. In nut-shell case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 Manmohan Singh and non-petitioner No. 2 Parminder Kaur alias Pammi got married but on account of mis-understanding, the marriage did not succeed and ultimately divorce has taken place between the parties on 27.06.2007. The parties have reached to a compromise, not to continue any further litigation and wants to live peacefully in future separately, therefore, submitted a compromise before the learned trial Court for the offence under Sections 498A and 406 IPC, but the learned trial Court refused to attest the compromise for the reason that the above said offences are not compoundable and rejected the application so moved vide order dt. 02.12....
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj190
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated December 13, 2001 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 (Fast Track) Kota, whereby the appellants, two in number, were convicted and sentenced as under:Om Prakash:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonmentUnder Section 323 IPC:No separate sentence was awarded.Mukut Bihari:Under Section 302/34 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonmentUnder Section 323 IPC:No separate sentence was awarded.2. As per prosecution story it was Ram Ratan (since deceased) and his brother Biram went to Police Station Ayana on July 24, 2001 at 10.05 AM and handed over a written report (Ex.P-1) to Purshottam Head Constable who was Incharge of the Police Station at the relevant time. In the report it was stated that while he was grazing cows, Mukut caught hold of h...
Tag this Judgment!iliyas @ Iliyar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj187
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated October '5r2006 of the learned Sessions Judge Karauli, whereby the appellants, two in number, were convicted and sentenced as under:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer five months rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 392/397 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer two months rigorous imprisonmentUnder Section 460 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 30007-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonmentSubstantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. It is the prosecution case that a written report (Ex.P-6) was lodged by informant Gulab Singh on January 23, 2001 at Police Station Karauli with the averments that in the intervening night of 22 and 23 of January, 2001 at about 2.30 AM certain miscreants trespassed the house of his...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Raj33
ORDERMohammad Rafiq, J.1. The State of Rajasthan has filed this writ petition challenging the judgment dated 4-7-1995 passed by the Board of Revenue and has prayed that the judgment dated 8-11-1994 passed by the Collector, Dausa be restored.2. Factual matrix of the case is that one Shri Bhura, s/o Shri Kishana Meena resident of village Rugli, District Dausa, Khatedar of the lands of Khasra No. 7/1 to 7/24 measuring in all 62 bighas and 5 biswas died. One Raghunath, s/o Ganga Sahai resident of village Hingota claimed that he was in cultivatory possession of the land and therefore the same should be recorded in his name. The Tehsildar dismissed his claim vide order dated 26-12-1961 and simultaneously he also passed an order that since Bhura died without leaving any heir and therefore the case be sent to Additional Collector, Jaipur for taking necessary steps to get the said property declared as escheat. The Additional Collector passed an order on 30-9-1962 to the effect that Bhura died w...
Tag this Judgment!Jaipur Aloo Aratia Sangh Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1133
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Jaipur Aloo Aratia Sangh has filed this writ petition seeking to challenge validity of the notification dated 18.10.2006 and alternatively prayed for quashing the said notification to the extent it de-notified Lal Kothi Mandi Yard and has prayed for a mandamus upon the respondents to continue the same as sub-mandi yard and further alternatively, restraining the respondents from changing the nomenclature of D-block of Mohana Mandi Yard with the direction to the respondents to allot the shops to the members of the petitioner-Sangh as per the agreement in accordance with the originally prepared map.I have heard Shri S.N. Kumawat, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Indrajeet Singh, the learned Counsel for the contesting respondent and Shri S.N. Gupta, the learned Deputy Government Advocate.2. Shri S.N. Kumawat, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially the members of the petitioner-sangh were running their trade from Anaj Mandi situated ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »