Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995(3)WLC30; 1995(2)WLN131
B.R. Arora, J.1. These Special Appeals are directed against the judgment dated 20-3-95, passed by the learned Single Judge, by which the writ petitions, filed by the petitioner-appellants, were dismissed and the appellants were directed to surrender before the Designated Court, Ajmer, on or before 28-3-95. Since all theses appeals arise out of the same judgment and involve identical controversies, we, therefore, think it proper to decide all these Special Appeals by this common judgment.2. F.I.R. No. 77/93 Under Section 3/25 of the Indian Arms Act was registered against one Poonam Chand Bishnoi at Police Station, Bajju (District Bikaner). During the investigation in this F.I.R., two bages full of arms and ammunition were recovered from the Dhani of Poonam Chand Bishnoi. On interrogation, it was revealed that Poonam Chand Bishnoi was engaged in the activities of smuggling arms and ammunitions from Pakistan through the border district of Bikaner in the State of Rajasthan and was supplyin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1996WLC(Raj)UC640; 1995(1)WLN295
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 2.6,87, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellants for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each and in default of payment of fine further to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 201/34 I.P.C. Both the sentences were ordered to non concurrently.2. The appellants were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 201 I.P.C. The case of the prosecution is that deceased Smt. Shakuntla the sister of Babu Ram was married...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1996Raj196; 1995(2)WLC748
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J. 1. A learned single Judge of this Court vide order dated 8-8-1991 directed this petition to be listed for final disposal at order stage on 10-9-1991. This is how this case is posted before me for final disposal at order stage,2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the demand of Rs. 15,827.73 raised by the notice Anx. 13 to the writ petition on the ground inter alia that the orders dated 28-7-1983 and 9-9-1983 are illegal.3. According to the petitioner, aforesaid orders fixing the various prices are also beyond the statutory powers of the State Government. According to the petitioner the State Government is entitled only to fix the sale price and no other, amount can be statutorily fixed under the inherent power under Clause 10 of the Cement Control Order or any other power which may be exercised by the State Government in that behalf.4. According to the averments made in writ petition, Sub-clause (2) of Clause 10 of the Cement Control ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995(3)WLC321; 1995(1)WLN451
N.K. Jain, J.1. Since all the writ petitions are arising out of the same matter and the petitioners have claimed almost same relief, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2884 of 1994:Briefly stated the facts of the case as alleged by the petitioner are that during the search of premises of one Poonam Chand Vishnoi, Mr. Chain Singh Rajpurohit, State House Officer Police Station Bajju District Bikaner recovered some arms from his possession. It is alleged that the accused Poonam chand Vishnoi during the Course of interrogation admitted that he was involved in the smuggling of arms and ammunition from Pakistan and he had sold some arms and ammunitions to the persons. In pursuance of the information given by Poonam Chand Vishnoi, an FIR (Annex. 1) dt. 28.9.93 was chalked out and a case under Sections 3 & 5 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the TADA') read with Sections 3/25 of the Indian ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995(1)WLN531
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. These miscellaneous petitions filed under section 482 Cr.PC have been preferred against the order dated 18.1.95 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Sri Ganganagar, whereby he allowed the application dt. 29.10.94 submitted by the Public Prosecutor Under Section 193/190 Cr.PC in Special Criminal Case No. 4/94 and took cognizance for the offence punishable Under Section 29 of the NDPS Act (Jn short, 'the Act') against the petitioners.2. Since both these petitions arise out of the same order, those are being disposed off by this common order.3. Now a brief resume of the case. It appears that on 12.11.93 at 12.30 PM. Shri Jagdish Singh, S.I. Incharge, P.S., Sadul Shahar, received a source Information that one Maruti car No. CHB 6112, on which Balwantram Bajigar was the driver and wherein five gunny bags of Illicit poppy husk were stored, was lying in a depression behind the Govt. Secondary School and that near the said car, there was no person. Jagdish...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1995(71)FLR551]; (1995)IILLJ1064Raj; 1995(2)WLC1; 1995(1)WLN300
Anshuman Singh. J. 1. Learned Single Judge at the time of admission of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3011/90 Gopi Lal Teli v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., after hearing the counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground of alternative remedy, referred the following question for determination by a Larger Bench of more than three Judges: 'Whether a writ petition for violation of the provisions of Chapter V-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or violation of the principles of natural justice, should be directly entertained as a matter of course, ignoring the statutory remedy provided by that Act? On the reference made by the learned Single Judge, Hon'ble the Chief Justice Constituted Larger Bench consisting of five senior Judges of this court and in pursuance of the said order, the question referred by the learned Single Judge came up for consideration before us. 2. Before we proceed to conside...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1996(1)WLC383; 1995(1)WLN258
N.K. Jain, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondent No. 1 to release the truck No. 4589 alongwith the goods therein, namely 150 tins of Mohak Brand Ghee (15 Kg. each) and 90 cartoons (62 No. of 1 Kg. and 36 Nos. of 1/2 Kg.). It has been prayed that the impugned notice under section 12A Dated 12.10.1994 may also be quashed. It has also been prayed that the impugned seizure memo Annex. 1 may be quashed and further the respondent No. 1 be restrained from passing any penalty order under section 22(A)(7) of the Act.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case as alleged by the petitioner are that the petitioner is duly registered under the provisions of Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and is being regularly assessed under the Sales Tax before the C.T.O. Sumerpur. It is alleged that he purchased the goods from registered dealer Hanuman Traders vide Bill No. 22 dated 10.10.1994 (Anx.3) and while in the way near Banad the respondents intercepted and seized...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1995Raj180
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J.1. The petitioner-Corporation calls in question assessment and imposition of tax amounting to Rs. 22,248/- by the Assistant Collector, Land and Building Tax Department, Sri Ganganagar under Section 6 Of the Rajasthan Lands & Buildings Tax Act, 1964 in respect of the land and Building situated in District Sri Ganganagar.2. The factual matrix of the present writpetition lies in short compass. It is alleged inthe writ petition by the petitioner thatAssistant Collector, Land and Building TaxDepartment, Sri Ganganagar (respondentNo. 2) issued a notice under the provision ofthe Rajasthan lands and Buildings Tax Act,1964 (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act ofl1964) to the properties of the petitionersituated in Sri Ganganagar. The petitioner-Corporation did not file any return butappeared before respondent No. 2 in responseto the notice issued by him and urged beforehim that the land or building of the petitioner-Corporation cannot be assessed under the Actof 1964. Respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995(1)WLN563
M.P. Singh, J.1. The petitioner is seeking admission in Engineering Degree Course on the basis of Pre-Engineering Test, 1994 through this writ petition.The Coordinator Pre-Engineering Test, 199 Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udalpur, (respondent No. 2) issued a notification which was published in the Rajasthan Patrika dated 6th August, 1994, for admission in Engineering Degree Course. It was a combined test for as many as 35 Institutes in Rajasthan. The name of Birla Institute of Technology & Science, Pilani, Rajasthan, (respondent No. 4) was also included in the said list.2. The petitioner appeared in the Test. He secured 672 marks out of 900. The merit list was notified. In general category, merit position No. 1 to 762 and in the reserve list merit position Nos. 763 to 912 were notified. The petitioner's merit position was 1006. The candidates whose names appeared in the merit list upto 762 were called for interview on different dates and given admissions. There was no question of co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995CriLJ1720; 1995(2)WLC570
R.R. Yadav, J.1. By this Habeas Corpus Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner detenu Noor Mohammed Wali Bhai Tajwala calls in question his detention order dated 16-9-93 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the COFEPOSA ACT').2. Facts relating to the detention of the petitioner as given in the grounds of detention accompanying the impugned detention order dated 16-9-93 (Annx. 1) are as under:-(i) In pursuance of prior information, the police and Customs Officers of Pali held a joint Naka-bandi on the intervening night of 26/27th September, 1992onPali-SumerpurRoadnearRiver'Bandi'. During this Naka-bandi, they intercepted one Maruti Van No. GJ. 1K -1744 and during the search of the said van on the spot, it was noticed that under the rear side of back seat of the Van 8 Jute bags (Neolies) were foun...
Tag this Judgment!