Rajasthan Court March 2010 Judgments
Raj Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing impugned judgment dated 26.06.2001, Annex.-8 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in original application No. 25/1999, whereby, the learned Tribunal dismissed the original application filed by the petitioner on the ground of limitation and observed that the original application of the applicant is hopelessly time-barred, therefore, deserves to be dismissed.2. As per brief facts of the case, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Loco Clerk on 11.04.1975 at Loco Shed, Hanumangarh and he was promoted further as per rules on the posts of Fireman-II, Fireman-I, Shunter and Goods Driver. The day on which the petitioner preferred original application before the Tribunal he was holding the post of Goods Driver at Hanumangarh Junction, Northern Railway (Bikaner).3. A charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner for inflicting major penalty and, after inquiry, a penalty of reduction to the lower po...
Tag this Judgment!Chamna @ Samiya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-30-2010
Govind Mathur, J.1. By judgment dated 2.5.2003 learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Bali, convicted the accused appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life term with a fine of Rs. 500/- and further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment in event of failure to pay the fine.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 3.1.2001 PW-6 Sonaram son of Sankla submitted a written report at Police Station Nana stating therein that his younger brother Jalaram was going to Paldi District Sirohi alongwith Dhanna son of Bhuraji and Narsa son of Kana Gameti for availing labour. At about 12:30 PM when they were on way Chamna @ Samiya son of Somaji, who was keeping the enmity with Jala came and demanded money for purchasing liquor. On denial Chamna @ Samiya gave a knife blow on the chest of Jala consequent to which he fall down and died. Chamna @ Samiya ran away in the forest while keeping the knife with hi...
Tag this Judgment!Dunga Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-30-2010
Govind Mathur, J.1. These two appeals are preferred by accused appellants Dungaram son of Pannaji and Ganeshram son of Pannaji against the judgment dated 13.3.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali. By the judgment aforesaid learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted both the accused appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo life term imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/-each. The proceedings against third accused Jhalaram son of Durgaram stood abated because of his death during the course of trial.2. As per prosecution case, on 29.1.1998 at about 07:30 PM, one Bhanwarlal son of Meetharam resident of Kothar, submitted a report at police station Nana with assertion that on the same day at about 06:30 PM his brother Lakhmaram has been killed under a plan. As per the report aforesaid, daughter of complainant named Padma saw her uncle Lakhmaram sitting outside the shop of Mangalji and then an axe blow was giv...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-30-2010
Govind Mathur, J.1. For the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code the appellant is convicted and sentenced for life term with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment in event of default in making payment of fine under the judgment dated 17.4.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Anupgarh.2. As per prosecution, on 21.9.2002 at 10:45 AM a 'rojnamcha' entry was made at Police Station Ramsinghpur, according to that a telephonic information was given by Shri Momanram son of Lekhram that his grand son Mahendra Singh son of Devilal informed him on telephone that he has killed his wife Sunita and son Harbans near Canal at 59 G.B. Rohi on having some utterance on way while coming to Anupgarh from his in-laws house. The dead bodies were lying at Narma fields near canal at 59 G.B. Rohi. On asking, Momanram also provided details relating to parents of Sunita including phone numbers. Momanram also accepted about telepho...
Tag this Judgment!Raju Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-29-2010
Govind Mathur, J.1. By judgment dated 28.6.2003 learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Jodhpur convicted the accused appellant for commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code. For the offences aforesaid the accused was sentenced as under:2. Section 498-A IPC: Three years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/- and further to undergo seven days rigorous imprisonment in event of default in payment of fine;3. Section 307 IPC: Ten years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- and further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment in event of default in payment of fine; and4. Section 302 IPC: Life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2000/- and further to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment in event of default in payment of fine.5. The case of the prosecution is that on 5.10.2002 statements of PW-3 Smt. Champa was recorded at Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur wherein she stated that at about ten years earlier she got marrie...
Tag this Judgment!Tejkaran Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-29-2010
C.M. Totla, J.1. This appeal is directed against appellant's conviction for the offences of Sections 302/34 and 380/34 IPC and respective sentences awarded of life imprisonment with fine Rs. 5,000/- and seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine Rs. 5,000/-.2. Prosecution case as unfolded during investigation and trial is that Shri Rahul S/o. Pradhyuman Kumar PW 4, a nut-bolt trader at Jaipur, used to visit Kankroli and other places in relation to his business, who left Jaipur in evening of 27.1.2000 and reaching Kankroli (Rajnagar), stayed at Paras hotel room No. 5 at first floor, who due to arrive back to Jaipur on 29th, but did not reach so his father Shri Pradhyuman Kumar PW 4 inquired from related merchant and a trader PW 12 that Rahul on phone at about 10.00 a.m. told him of coming in afternoon, but did not and on telephone inquiries from hotel repeated information that room is locked so father being alarmed, did ask his acquaintee Shri Godika Superintendent of Police (Vigilance...
Tag this Judgment!Subhan Khan. Vs. State.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-27-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.2.2005 passed by Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Dholpur in Special Sessions Case No.126/2002 whereby the accused appellant Subhan Khan S/o Harila was convicted of offences under Sections 8/18 & 8/20 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) and sentenced as under: (i) For the offence under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act:Seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.75,000/- and in default thereof further one year's rigorous imprisonment.(ii) For the offence under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act:Seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.75,000/- in default thereof further one year's rigorous imprisonment.Both sentences were to run concurrently.2. The relevant facts of the case are that on 4.7.2002 at about 9.50 am, PW-13 Babulal, Station House Officer, P.S.-Kotwali, Dholpur was informed by an informant that two persons named Subhan Khan, Thekedar and...
Tag this Judgment!Sohan Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
ORDERDinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the orders dated 13.02.1995 and 16.02.1995 whereby the learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act Cases, Hanumangarh proceeded, respectively, to reject the application under Section 258 Cr.P.C. moved by the accused-petitioner and to state the substance of accusation under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act.2. It is contended in this revision petition that under the relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Trade Articles (Licensing & Control) Order, 1980, the powers of search and seizure have been conferred upon the Licensing Authority or the Executive Magistrate or Police Officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or Tehsildar or any Officer not below the rank of Enforcement Inspector; and, in the present case, the proceedings, having allegedly been conducted by the Circle Inspector, who was not empowered to do so, remain entirely illegal and unauthorized. It is submitted that the pro...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Chandra Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.06.1994 as passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Sriganganagar in Criminal Appeal No. 81/1992 whereby the learned Appellate Judge partly allowed the appeal filed by the accused-petitioner against the judgment and order dated 31.08.1991 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar in Criminal Case No. 24/1983; and, while affirming the conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, altered the sentence awarded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to that of rigorous imprisonment for three months with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further simple imprisonment for one month.2. The accusation in this case had been directed against the petitioner Subhash Chandra and one Niranjan Singh, said to be related with the firm Garg Fertilizer Company, Jawahar Market, Sriganganagar. It was alleged that on 19.01.197...
Tag this Judgment!Bhoj Raj Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 01.02.1995, as passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer in Criminal Appeal No. 20/1993 whereby the learned Appellate Judge partly allowed the appeal preferred by the accused-petitioner against the judgment and order dated 27.11.1993, as passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaisalmer in Criminal Case No. 604/1989; and, while maintaining the conviction of the accused petitioner for the offence under Section 411 IPC, reduced the sentence from 1 year's simple imprisonment to that of 6 months' simple imprisonment.2. The accused-petitioner was tried for the offence under Section 379 IPC when charge-sheet was filed after investigation on the FIR lodged by the Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department (Mechanical Division), Jaisalmer on 01 .08.1989 with the allegations that certain parts of the tankers that were in the charge of his Junior Engineer were found stolen. After framing of th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »