Court : Uttaranchal
..... they shall be taken into custody to serve out the aforesaid sentence. ..... i do not find any force in the argument of learned counsel for the revisionists as the offence has been successfully proved against the revisionists beyond reasonable doubt and six months r.i. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
1. this appeal, preferred by the appellant u/s 374(2) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as cr.p.c.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.08.1998 passed by the special judge/additional sessions judge, nainital in s.t. no.26 of 1997, state v. thakri, thereby convicting and sentencing the appellant/accused u/s 307 of the indian penal code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as i.p.c.) for five years' r.i.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.3. in brief, the prosecution case is that complainant jagdish (p.w.3) lodged an fir on 22.9.1996 stating therein that on that day at about 7:30 pm, he along with his brother lakhan was sitting in his grocery shop and electric light was there and at that time, the appellant-accused along with one person came being armed with country made pistols and fired upon lakhan which hit on his mouth and stomach. on the noise raised by the complainant, several persons came over there on which the accused ran away and this incident was witnessed by charan singh and phool singh. after admitting his brother in the hospital, the complainant pw3 jagdish came and lodged the report i.e. ex.ka-1. on the basis of this fir, chik fir was prepared by h.m. ramesh singh, i.e. ex.ka.2. the necessary entry was also made in the g.d., the carbon copy of which is ex.ka-3. investigation of this case was entrusted to p.w.7 s.i. mehboob ali. injured lakhan was medically .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
..... but, it is now well settled that as per section 25 of the indian evidence act, 1872, the statement recorded in the police custody is not admissible to be read into evidence as per law and as such their conviction recorded by the trial court is not justified.e. ..... the two accused were caught at about 8 pm by using necessary force, who disclosed their names ranjeet @ raja and raju @ kallu. ..... here, i do not find any force in this argument for the reason that on 10.6.2006, si abdul kalam (pw1) along with si d.r. ..... that the names of these appellants sarvar khan and akram khan have come into light on the basis of evidence of accused ranjeet singh and raju @ kallu, which were recorded in the police custody. ..... i find force in this argument due to the following reasons: -a. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
..... on being suspicious, the said persons was asked to stop but he started running, however he was caught at 8:50 pm by using necessary force towards thakurdwara road. ..... i do not find any force in this argument because on 3.9.1990, s.o. ..... on being suspicious, the said person was asked to stop but he started running, however he was caught at 8:50 pm by using necessary force towards thakurdwara road. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
1. heard mr. m.k. ray, advocate for the applicant and mr. amit bhatt, addl. ga for the state. 2. learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on 29.3.2010 at 7:10 pm, a first information report was lodged against the applicant tej pal and co-accused jamuna prasad, bhup ram and hori lal with the allegations that they have caused injuries to khirendra, karanpal and kanta prasad with knife. this fir was registered at p.s. devarniya but as the matter was related to p.s. kichcha, therefore, it was transferred to p.s. kiccha and registered as fir no.65 of 2010 under sections 147/148/149/308/324/323 of ipc. he further submitted that there is a cross version also in which the fir was lodged by jamuna prasad at police station kichcha on 30.3.2010 at 9:10 am against karan pal, khilendra, virendra and kanta prasad with the allegations that on 29.3.2010 karanpal, khirendra, virendra and kanta prasad caused injuries to prempal, pintu and bhupal. he further submitted that these are the cross cases and the injuries are on both the parties i.e. on the side of complainant and accused persons and at this stage it cannot be ascertained that which of the party is the aggressor. it is further submitted that the co-accused jamuna prasad, bhup ram and hori lal have already been granted bail by learned sessions judge, udham singh nagarand the present applicant is also entitled for bail on the basis of parity. 3. after considering all the facts and circumstances; on hearing learned counsel for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
..... the well-recognised examples of non-arbitrable disputes are: (i) disputes relating to rights and liabilities which give rise to or arise out of criminal offences; (ii) matrimonial disputes relating to divorce, judicial separation, restitution of conjugal rights, child custody; (iii) guardianship matters; (iv) insolvency and winding-up matters; (v) testamentary matters (grant of probate, letters of administration and succession certificate); and (vi) eviction or tenancy matters governed by special statutes where the tenant enjoys statutory protection against ..... it is well settled that even if an agreement ceases to exist, the arbitration clause remains in force and any dispute pertaining to the agreement ought to be resolved according to the conditions mentioned in the arbitration clause. ..... 1 and 2) has submitted that even if an agreement ceases to exist, the arbitration clause remains in force and any dispute pertaining to the agreement ought to be resolved as per arbitration clause. ..... by giving to the proprietor one months notice in writing but the said agreement did not give any such right to the landlady to terminate the lease during the period the lease agreement had been in force. ..... [air 2008 supreme court, 357], relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent nos. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
..... seriousness of injury depends upon the force with which blow of lathi is inflicted on victim. ..... state, air 1977 sc 45. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
..... brother of the deceased enquired about the consent letter which was obtained by force from his father and that was how seven days delay in lodging fir was explained. ..... for the foregoing reasons as discussed above, the appeal has no force and the same is liable to be dismissed. ..... his father was forced to put his signatures on a compromise letter. ..... his father was forced to put his signatures on some papers under compulsion. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
..... learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the petitioners case has to be considered in terms of clause 14 of the new scheme which came into force on and from 4th august, 2005 as it was pending case on the date of commencement of new case. ..... for sake of convenience, clause 14 of the new scheme is set out as follows: date of effect of the scheme and disposal of pending application: the scheme will come into force with effect from the date it is approved by the executive committee of the central board. ..... factually on the date of making application, the scheme providing for employment was in force but unfortunately under clause 14 of the said new scheme this has been given retrospective effect. ..... the mere fact that an application was made when the scheme was in force, will not by itself create a right in favour of the applicant. ..... an appointment under the scheme can be made only if the scheme is in force and not after it is abolished/withdrawn. ..... the bank should have automatically dealt with the matter, the moment the new scheme came into force. ..... i am of the view that fresh application under the new scheme is required when no such application was made prior to new scheme came into force. ..... when application was made for compassionate appointment, scheme for compassionate appointment was in force. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
(1) this appeal, preferred under section 374 of code of criminal procedure, 1973, (for short cr.p.c), is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.02.2001, passed by learned iiird additional sessions judge, hardwar, in sessions trial no. 73 of 1996, whereby said court has convicted the accused/appellant mukesh under section 307 of i.p.c, and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and directed to pay fine of ` 1000/-. (2) heard learned amicus curiae for the appellant, and learned a.g.a, for the state, and perused the lower court record. (3) prosecution story, in brief, is that on 24.07.1995, at about 7.00 am pw2 govind mohan was going to open his tea stall kiosk in mohalla ratan ka purva within the limits of kotwali roorkee, when accused mukesh came there, and gave a knife blow on his chest. pw1 ranno devi, who was also present at the place of incident immediately took her injured son to hospital for medical aid. thereafter pw1 ranno devi went to police station roorkee and lodged first information report (ex-a1) at about 5.10 pm. she alleged that since the injured had made report to the police against the accused mukesh (who used to molest the girls) he (accused) attempted to kill the injured (pw2 govind mohan). on the basis of the first information report, crime no. 148 of 1995, was registered against the accused mukesh in respect of offences punishable under section 307, 504 and 506 of i.p.c. crime was investigated by sub inspector manju .....
Tag this Judgment!