Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
By this criminal misc petition, a prayer is made for quashing of FIR No.99/2004 registered with Police Station Patan, Sikar for offence under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that allegations in the FIR are for creation of fraudulent will and its registration to get the land of the deceased. The will was subject matter of suit filed by the petitioner and has been decreed. Therein, will is held to be genuine. In view of the finding of the civil court, impugned FIR deserves to be quashed. It is in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sardool Singh and anr versus Smt Nasib Kaur , 1987(Supp) SCC 146. Therein, while validity of will was sub judice in a suit, criminal case for the same allegation was not allowed to proceed. In the instant case, petition stands on better footing because not only the civil case was instituted but it has already been decreed in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel has further ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1965Raj196; 1965CriLJ677
B.P. Beri, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 417 of the Criminal P. C. against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the First Class Magistrate, Nasirabad on 18th June, 1983 in a case of rash driving and causing hurt thereby. 2. Facts leading up to the present appeal are these : On 2nd May, 1982 at about 8 in the morning accused Pukhraj, respondent before me, is said to have been driving his car bearing No. MSW 105 which collided with a truck bearing No. RJZ 209 and thereby caused hurt to the occupants of his own car, namely, his wife, his son and his daughter. For that reason a report was presented against the respondent in the Court of the Munsiff Magistrate First Class, Nasirabad, who framed a charge on 2-1-1963 against the respondent under Section 338, Penal Code (causing grievous hurt by an act endangering life or personal safety of others) read with Section 279, Penal Code (rash driving on a public way). The case was then adjourned to 12th March, 1983, but no prosecut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1979WLN(UC)191
M.C. Jain, J.1. The applicant Dhan Raj by the application under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, seeks to quash the proceedings under Section 488 Criminal Procedure Code (old) initiated by the respondent Smt. Kishni Devi by he; application dated 8.7. 1963 for maintenance of herself and her two children.2. The facts which are relevant for the decision of this application may be briefly stated as under: On presentation of the application Under Section 488 Criminal Procedure Code (old) notice was ordered to be issued to the present applicant Dhan Raj On 17 10-1968, the non-applicant Smt. Kishni Devi and her counsel Shri Hulash Mal Chopra were not present so the application was dismissed in default. By that date notice was not served on the present applicant. On the next day i.e. on 18-10-1968 an application for restoration was filed by Shri Hulash Mal Chopra stating that he was under the impression that there is no case mentioned in his diary of 17. 10 68 so he could not present himse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1975CriLJ1981; 1975()WLN179
Kalyan Dutta, J.1. By his order dated 4-6-1974, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner, released Bhanwaru Khan, Mohammad, Alfu, Ganni and Bhanwaru son of Rahaman, non-petitioners on bail upon each of them furnishing a personal bond in the amount of Rs. 10,000/-, together with two sureties for Rs. 5000/-, each. Aggrieved by the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the State of Rajasthan moved the Sessions Judge, Bikaner, for cancellation of bail granted to the non-petitioners. The learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, rejected the application for cancellation of bail by his order dated 17-9-1974. Hence, the State has come up to this Court by way of an application under Sub-section (2) of Section 439 of the new Criminal Procedure Code for a direction that the non-petitioners, who have been released op bail, be arrested and committed to custody.2. I have carefully gone through the record and heard the arguments advanced by Shri G. A. Khan for the State of Rajasthan and Mr. V. S. Dave, learn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1975CriLJ1984; 1975()WLN132
ORDERKalyan Dutta, J.1. Khinvdan alias Khiny Singh has applied for bail under Section 439(1) of the new Criminal Procedure Code.2. The Prosecution case against him is that he committed the murder of his wife Kalyan Kanwar alias Nen Kanwar by strangulating her while she was sleeping in a room of his house in the night between 16th and 17th November. 1974. His bail application was rejected by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Desuri, on 24th February, 1975 and thereafter by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali, on 17th March, 1975,3. The petitioner was arrested by the local police on 2-12-1974. Thereafter he was kept in detention by a series of orders of remand obtained by the investigating agency from the learned Judicial Magistrate during the course of investigation. The investigation, however, could not be completed within a total period of 60 days from the date of the arrest of the petitioner. The learned Magistrate did not release the petitioner on bail even after the expiry ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1999CriLJ2796
ORDERA.S. Godara, J.1. All these petitions involve common questions of law and facts and besides the litigating parties are same, therefore, as per the convenience the same are proposed to be decided by this common order.2. In S. B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 322/ 97, the accused-petitioner issued a cheque in favour of complainant-non-petitioner for a sum of Rs. 7,000/- on 5-2-92 and, on presentation for encashment and clearance in his own account by the non-petitioner, the same was on account of insufficiency of fund in the account of the drawer-accused, dishonored and returned as such.3. As regards S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 323/97, succinctly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition arc that the complainant, presently, non-petitioner No. 2 in this petition, filed a criminal complaint under Section 38 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in the Court of Addl. Chief Judl. Magistrate, Sriganganagar alleging therein that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1976WLN234
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This is an application in revision filed by the State of of Rajasthan against an order of the Special Judge for Anti-Corruption Department cases, Rajasthan, Jaipur, dated 25th September, 1975, by which ornaments, cash and silver utensils seized upon search from the house of Ram Narayan Upadhya non-petitioners, were ordered to be delivered to a superddar of the status of a person paying income-tax on a nearly income of Rs. 40,000/-, provided such Superddar gave an undertiking that he would keep ornaments, cash and utensils intact and would not in any manner dispose them of.2. The short facts giving rise to this revision-petition may be narrated as follows.3. A complaint was received against Ramnarayan Upadhaya, Enforcement Officer, Bikaner, that he, by corrupt or illegal means or otherwise, abasing his position as a public servant, obtained for himself valuable things or pecuniary advantage and that be was in possession of pecuniary sources or property disproportionate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1977CriLJ563; 1976(9)WLN445
ORDERKalyan Dutta, J.1. This is an application-in-revision by Mansukh Ram against the judgment of the Session Judge, Jhunjhunu, dated 3rd September, 1975, whereby the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jhunjhunu, dated 9th June, 1975, declaring that he had no jurisdiction to continue the proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C after passing an order of attachment under Section 146(1), Criminal P.C. on. the ground of emergency, was set aside and the case was sent back to him for inquiry into the actual possession over the land in dispute on the basis of documentary and other evidence that may be adduced by the parties.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this revision-petition may be briefly stated as under:3. On 20th July, 1974, Mansukh Ram son of Nopa Rain Jat resident of village Nanag lodged a written report with the Station House Officer, Jhunjhunu. It was stated in the report that Ganesha Ram wanted to dispossess Nopa Ram from agricultural land bearing Khasra Nos. 3 and 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1989]179ITR67(Raj); 1987(2)WLN336
I.S. Israni, J. 1. This is an application under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, for grant of anticipatory bail in Criminal Case No. 340 of 1986, pending trial in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur City, Jaipur, under Section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. A complaint under Sections 276C, 276CC and 277 of the Act was filed in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), JaipurCity, Jaipur, by the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle-II, against the petitioner. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, under his order, took cognizance of the offence and directed issuance of a non-bailable warrant so as to effect attendance of the petitioner to face trial. Apprehending his arrest, a petition was moved in the court of the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, which was rejected by order dated December 8, 1986.3. Mr. Jagdeep Dhanker, learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
D.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 177/2012. Lalit Shanker Vs. Smt. Sunder Bai // 1 // 19 D.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 177/2012. Lalit Shanker Vs. Smt. Sunder Bai .. Date of Order ::11. h September 2013. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA Mr. Prabhat Ojha, for the petitioner. Mr. Anuj Sahlot, for the non-petitioner. BY THE COURT: (per Dinesh Maheshwari, J.) Preliminary This criminal revision petition, directed against the order dated 20.01.2012, as passed by the Family Court, Udaipur on an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code/Cr.P.C.), was filed by the petitioner, and was dealt with by the office, as a matter to be laid before a Single Judge of this Court. However, this petition has been placed before the Division Bench in view of an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 17.07.2013 holding that this matter is required to be registered as DB Petition for Family Courts and Matr...
Tag this Judgment!