Rajasthan Court January 2010 Judgments

Gautam Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this criminal appeal, the accused appellant Gautam S/o Kalu is challenging the judgment dated 30.08.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, SC/ST Cases, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No. 64/1998, whereby the accused appellant was convicted for committing offence under Section 302 IPC and awarded the sentence of Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months simple imprisonment.2. As per the facts of the case, on 27.06.1998, SHO Suhagpura received a report by complainant Gopal, in which it was stated that at about 6 a.m. when he was at his house alongwith his younger brother Bhaira. His brother Bhaira went to the nearby handpump, where accused Gautam S/o Kalu living adjacent to the handpump called him and thereafter accused Gautam and Bheriya went together to Gautam's house. After some time the complainant heard the noise of his brother. At that time he alongwith Mangalia, Mohan ...

Ali Mohd. Abdul Mazid Vs. C.T.O.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: RLW2010(2)Raj1133

Vineet Kothari, J.1. These two revision petitions arise out of the order of Tax Board dated 12.12.2008 allowing the Revenue's Appeals against the order of Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Bikaner dated 28.12.2007.2. The learned Tax Board by the impugned order held against the petitioner assessee that for the work contract executed by him during the year 2003-04 and 2004-05 for the Urban improvement Trust, Bikaner for construction of some buildings in the Engineering College, Bikaner, the assessee was liable to pay the exemption fees in respect of such works contracts @ 1.5% of the gross value of the contract in terms of the Undertaking given by it as per Rule 12 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1995 and the learned Assessing Authority was justified in resorting to Section 30 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 because in the original assessment order framed by the assessing authority, the said assessing authority had ignored such Undertaking given by the assessee and finding it to be f...

Bablu @ Om Prakash and Bhinya Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 2010CriLJ1728,RLW2010(2)Raj1254

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. Both these appeals have been filed by the respective appellant Bablu @ Om Prakash and Bhinya Ram, in which, common judgment dated 22.07.2003 rendered by Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Nagaur in Sessions Case No. 36/2003 is under challenge, whereby, the learned trial Judge has convicted the accused-appellants for offences under Sections 302, 364, 379/34 and 201, I.P.C. and sentenced each of the appellants as under:1. Convicted appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 2 years simple imprisonment.2. Convicted appellant under Section 364, I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 2 years simple imprisonment.3. Convicted appellant under Section 379/34, I.P.C. and sentenced to 3 years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 mo...

Premvada Kachhwaha and ors. Vs. Shankar Lal Devasi

Court: Rajasthan

Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsels.2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23.10.2009 of the learned ADJ, Abu Road, District Sirohi by which the learned appellate court below has rejected the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. of the appellant-defendants Smt. Premvada Kachwaha and Ors.3. Learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. Vijay Bishnoi submitted that the said application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. was filed by the appellant in proceedings under Section 144 C.P.C. seeking restitution of the possession from the plaintiff- respondent, who filed the suit for possession which was earlier decreed by an ex-parte decree but the same was set aside on the application filed by the present appellants and, therefore, the learned court below has erred in relying upon the findings given in such exparte decree treating the status of the present appellant as trespasser.4. Learned Counsel submits that during the pendency of the proceedings under Section 144 C...

State Vs. Balwant Singh and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 2010CriLJ1614

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed by State challenging the judgment dated 11-3-1986 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2 Hanumangarh Camp Suratgarh in Sessions Case No. 57/85 whereby accused Balwant Singh and Richpal Singh alias Jaspal Singh were acquitted from the charges under Sections 326/34, 324/34 and 302/34, IPC and accused Bhagwan Singh alias Bagga Singh was though acquitted from the charge under Section 302/34, IPC while giving benefit of doubt but he was held guilty and convicted for committing offence under Sections 324 and 326, IPC.2. During the pendency of this appeal, accused-respondent No. 3 Bhagwan Singh alias Bagga Singh died on 6-2-1990, therefore, vide order dated 14-12-1999, appeal against him was ordered to be abated.3. According to the brief facts of the case, one Pala Ram S/o Hansraj Nayak filed an FIR at Police Station Hanumangarh Town narrating therein that his father Hansraj (deceased) used to look after the wine shop of liquor...

State of Rajasthan Vs. Gangasahay and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: RLW2010(2)Raj1180

N.K. Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and examined the impugned judgment as well as record of the trial court.2. This appeal on behalf of the State of Rajasthan Under Section 378 Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 11.9.1980 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar, in Sessions Case No. 6/80 whereby the learned trial court acquitted all the nine accused respondents from the charges levelled against them.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that PW 1 Babu Singh lodged a report at Police Station Tehla, District Alwar, on 2.11.79 in respect of alleged murder of Prabhu Singh wherein it was alleged that on 1.11.79 at about 6-7 PM two persons of Prabhu Singh came and informed that dead body of Prabhu Singh is lying in the forest of Kutuka. He went at the spot and there it was told by Moti Singh that at about 6-7 PM, they heard some voice about beating, then he, Hakim Singh and Gulab Singh went there and saw that Prabhu Singh ...

Santosh Vs. Kishan

Court: Rajasthan

Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsels.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.4.2006 of the learned District Judge, Pali by which the application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act was allowed in favour of the respondent-husband Kishan by the learned trial court, however, the said parties did not live in the same matrimonial home despite said decree of the learned court below.3. During the pendency of this appeal, this Court tried for reconciliation between the parties but the reconciliation failed. Therefore, the parties by mutual consent filed the present application i.e. I.A. No. 952/2010 on 20.1.2010 under Section 13B of the Act for seeking divorce by mutual consent in this Court.4. Both the learned Counsels submitted that the parties by mutual consent seek this divorce under the terms of mutual consent. Accordingly, the appellant-wife has returned back the gold ornaments received by her at the time of marriage with respondent-husband and fur...

Suraj Mal Vs. State

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 2010CriLJ1583

ORDERDeo Narayan Thanvi, J.1. This is a revision petition against the judgment of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur dated 6-5-1994 whereby while acquitting the petitioner under Section 326, IPC, convicted him under Section 324, IPC and was released under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.2. Charge against the accused-petitioner was that on 29-5-1998, in the night at 10.30 p.m. accused-petitioner inflicted simple and grievous injuries with sharp edged weapon on the person of Abdul Razak, near Rahul Motors, Chopasni Road, Jodhpur. The report of the incident was lodged by Mohd. Ibrahim. The police investigated the case. Medical examination of the injured was conducted and after investigation, challan was filed under Sections 326 and 324, IPC. The learned Magistrate framed charges against the accused-petitioner accordingly to which he pleaded not guilty. Prosecution examined eight witnesses. Statement of accused was recorded Under Section 313, Cr.P...

Gopal Vs. State

Court: Rajasthan

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this criminal appeal, the accused-appellant is challenging the judgment dated 6.6.94 passed by District $ Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No. 72/92 whereby the accused appellant was convicted for committing offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and passed sentence of life imprisonment to the accused-appellant and imposed fine of Rs. 6,000/- in default to further undergo two years RI.2. As per the brief facts of the case, on 5.7.1992, PW-4 writing to the Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Department, Su- Division Nathdwara that on 'paal' of 'namana' dam, one dead body is lying and blood is coming from his head and face has become black, therefore, he cannot be identified. It appears that somebody has murdered him. Upon the said information given by PW-4 Banshilal to the Assistant Engineer, the same was forwarded to the Police Station Nathwara where the police registered a case under Section 302 I.P.C. vide FIR No. 131/92 at about 2.15 pm which is Ex.P/5.3. ...

Executive Engineer, Bsnl Vs. Cto

Court: Rajasthan

Vineet Kothari, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the B.S.N.L. against the order of the Tax Board dated 4th October, 2002 dismissing its appeals against the imposition of sales tax on the sale in the form of supply of materials to the contractor for execution of work contract awarded by the B.S.N.L. to such contractors.2. Challenging the said levy, various contentions were sought to be raised by the assessee in the present revision petition on the anvil of Section 2(38) defining sale under RST Act and also Article 285 and 286 of the Constitution of India.3. However, this controversy has been put to rest by a recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karya Palak Engineer, C.P. W.D., Bikaner v. Rajasthan Taxation Baord, Ajmer and Ors. AIR 2004 SC 4499 in which discussing the entire case laws on the point, the Apex Court held against the assessee that such supply of material to the contractor amounts to a taxable sale and even the Union of India or any of its...