Rajasthan Court May 2008 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.
Smt. Kanchan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2571
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Two groups indulged in a free fight resulting in injuries to persons of both groups and death of one. The appellants, three in number, were indicted before the learned Special Judge SC/ST (PA) Cases and Additional Sessions Judge Sawai Madhopur, for having committed murder of Jagdish. Learned Judge vide judgment dated November 25, 2003 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:Narendra:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer imprisonment for five months.Under Section 323/34 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Ramesh:Under Section 302/34 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer imprisonment for five months.Under Section 325 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer imprisonment for one month.Under Section 323 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six mon...
Harbans Singh and anr. and Mohan Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3269
Prakash Tatia, J.D.B. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 131/19821. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants Harbans Singh and Dilavar Singh who have been convicted by the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaur vide judgment and order dated 23.3.1982 passed in Sessions Case No. 1/1980. The appellants Harbans Singh and Dilavar Singh have been convicted under Sections 304/34 IPC and 407, IPC and have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302/34, IPC and fine of Rs. 500/- each, under Section 407, IPC, they have been sentenced to undergo five years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, they are to serve one year's rigorous imprisonment. 2. One of the co-accused Mohan Singh who was khalasi in the truck in question and was with above two accused Harbans Singh and Dilawar Singh, was absconding, therefore, challan was filed only against the two appellants and they faced the trial and have been convicted by the trial court. However,...
Nemi Chand Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj537
Prakash Tatia, J.1. These two appeals, one sent from jail, directly to the High Court and another submitted through counsel. Learned Counsel for the appellant pleaded no instruction in regular appeal-D.B.Criminal Appeal No. 978/02. In both the appeals Amicus Curiae was appointed. The appeals have been preferred by the appellant Nemi Chand against the judgment and order dated 14.8.2002 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Merta in Sessions Case No. 40/2002(23/2001), by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/- has been imposed and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's simple imprisonment. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 28.6.2001, just after mid-night at 2.45 a.m. Shri Jahangir Singh, SHO, Merta City received one information on telephone from Chhagan Lal brother-in-law of appellant-accused that appellant accused Nemi Chand Mal...
The East India Hotels Ltd. Vs. Smt. Mahendra Kumari, Since Deceased Th ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Raj131; RLW2008(3)Raj2345
ORDERJitendra Ray Goyal, J.1. Cross objection under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short the 'Code') has been filed by Shri Jitendra Singh, legal representative of deceased plaintiff-respondent No. 1 Smt. Mahendra Kumari, in first appeal filed by the appellant-defendant No. 2 the East India Hotels Ltd. against the judgment and decree dated 30/11/2005 passed by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Suit No. 243/2003 (Old No. 43/1986) whereby the suit of partition, cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction was partly decreed but the trial court dismissed the plaintiff' suit in so far as she claimed preferential right under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1955. This part of the decree was assailed by the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 by way of filing this cross objection. An application under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also filed for condonation of delay and extension of...
Ashok Nagar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2350
G.S. Sarraf, J.1. The petitioner has filed this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 7.8.2007 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu in criminal case No. 782/2002 whereby learned Magistrate, has held that there is no necessity of pre-charge evidence.2. The facts as described in the petition are that the respondent No. 2 filed a complaint before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. The complaint was sent for investigation to Kotwali, Jhunjhunu under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. After the usual investigation the police submitted a negative FR in the matter. The matter was referred to the police for re-investigation. However, the police again submitted negative FR. The complainant then filed protest petition before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu. On the said protest petition the statements were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and on the basis these statements by order dated 18.9.2002 cognizance was taken agai...
Suresh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2549
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Alone, in silence Sunil had to wend on the thorny path of life. Soon after the marriage her husband Suresh, appellant herein, started harassing her in connection with demand of dowry. When demand was not fulfilled, Sunil was ousted from her Sasural. Even in her parental house her life's race was obstructed and she was throttled to death. Appellant was indicted for having committed murder of Sunil before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, No. 1, Jhunjhunu. Learned Judge vide judgment dated November 25, 2002 convicted and sentenced him as under:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for five months.Under Section 498A IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. It is the prosecution case that on September 18, 1995 informant Bhoma...
Sabir HussaIn Vs. Chauthmal (Deceased) Through His Lrs.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3039
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Suit for eviction of commercial premises was filed by plaintiff-respondent Chauthmal (since deceased and now represented by his legal heirs) on the ground of bonafide necessity, default and nuisance. During the pendency of the suit, the above plaintiff-Chauthmal stood retired from Government service on reaching the age of superannuation. As such, amendment was sought in the plaint seeking eviction also on the ground of his own personal necessity after retirement. The issues were also framed accordingly. The evidence was led and the suit was decreed on the ground of bonafide necessity by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 2.12.2002. The above judgment and decree passed by the trial Court came to be challenged before the lower appellate Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the plaintiff-Chauthmal also died.2. However, the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court was affirmed by the lower appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 31.8.2007. H...
Shiv Narayan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2317
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. In order to extract truth from the lips of dying man, a procedure has been laid down in Rule 6.22 of the Rajasthan Police Rules,1965. But Prahlad Singh ASI of Police Station Mangrol conducted himself in such a manner as if he was above the law. Ignoring the procedure, he himself shouldered the responsibility of recording last statement of Raghunath (deceased) and nabbed the appellants, five in number, who were indicted before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Baran. Learned Judge vide judgment dated September 28, 2002 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:Shiv Narayan, Chaturbhuj, Bhawani Shankar, Janki Lal and Nathu Lal:Under Section 302/149 IPC: Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months. Under Section 447 IPC: Each to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days. Under Se...
Rajendra Singh Bhandari Vs. Harpreet Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2637
Dalip Singh, J.1. This, is a revision petition by the judgment debtor by which the objections filed by the judgment debtor-petitioner were dismissed by the impugned order dated 22.7.2006. The objection which has been raised is that the execution application was filed beyond the period of limitation as prescribed by Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.2. A few salient facts may be taken note of. The plaintiff- respondent filed a suit for recovery of money being Civil Suit No. 29/1990 which came to be decreed ex-parte on 5.10.1991, An application for setting aside the ex-parte decree came to be filed by the defendant on 14.10.1991 under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. in which there was also a prayer that the execution of the decree may be stayed. The aforesaid application was opposed by the plaintiff-decree holder and the learned trial Court by its order dated 10.12.1991 dismissed the said application.3. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties also dismissed the application filed u...
Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and o ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj46
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Limited, a Government of Rajasthan Enterprises, RSMM, for short, against the Railway Administration challenging the vires of Railways (Punitive Charges for Over-riding of Wagons) Rules, 2004 framed under the provisions of Section 73 of the Railways Act, 1989 and framed in supersession of earlier Rules of 1990 prevailing in this regard.2. The petitioner had initially laid a challenge to the provisions of Section 73 of the Railways Act, 1989 also, but that challenge was given up before the Division Bench of this Court on 26.9.1997 and challenge was restricted to the validity of aforesaid Rules of 2004 and thus, the matter was remanded to the Single Judge. However, prior to that, on 6.12.2006, the Division Bench had passed the following Interim order in the matter:Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh BaliaHon'ble Mr. Justice Gopal Krishan VyasMr. M.R. Singhvi, for the appellant.Mr. Kamal Dave, Mr. J.P. J...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »