Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-20-1993
Reported in : (1993)2GLR1307
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this revision, under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Code' for short, hereinafter), the petitioner-original complainant has questioned the legality and validity of the order of acquittal, recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), at Bhanvad, in Criminal Case No. 205 of 1981, for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 323, 404 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC for short).2. A short resume of the factual aspect may. shortly, be narrated, at this stage. According to the prosecution case, in the evening, on July 25, 1981, the complainant and his brother had gone to their field. At that time, the opponent No. 1, who is the original accused, had ploughed the road side of the field. Consequently, they had scolded him, which resulted into enragement on the part of the accused and culminated into offences. In that, it was alleged that the accused abused them and committed criminal tresspass in the field and thereafter, inf...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-21-1993
Reported in : II(1994)DMC211; (1994)1GLR427
A.N. Divecha, J.The unfortunate deserted wife has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for brief) as the slice from her bread is sought to be cut away by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Vadodara by his judgment and order passed on 10th July, 1992 in Criminal Revision Application No. 62 of 1992. By the impugned judgment and order the learned Additional Sessions Judge reduced the quantum of maintenance awarded to the present petitioner by the learned Trial Magistrate from Rs. 453/- per month to Rs. 350/- per month practically without assigning any reasons, much less any cogent or convincing reasons in that regard.1. The facts giving rise to this revisional application are not many and not much in dispute. The petitioner was required to file one maintenance application before the appropriate Forum in Vadodara some time in 1989. It came to be registered as Misc. Criminal Application No. 45 of 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-25-1993
Reported in : (1994)2GLR1100
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Petitioner has assailed the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, pertaining to the disposal of the muddamal gold ingot, dated 10-9-1982, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 1981 confirming the judgment and order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Rajkot, dated 31-7-1981, below application Exh. 76 in Criminal Case No. 366 of 1978, by invoking the aids of provisions of Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('Code' for short).2. A resume of the salient facts leading to the birth of the present revision may, shortly, be stated at this juncture.3. Present petitioner is a goldsmith from whose custody the muddamal - 3 ingots of gold and one ingot of silver, small 40 diamonds and 120 white pearls were seized by the police in the course of the investigation, which culminated into a criminal trial, being Criminal Case No. 366 of 1978.4. On 14-12-1977, between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m., at Rajkot, a theft was com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-04-1993
Reported in : (1993)1GLR893
A.N. Divecha, J.1. Can a man in the name of love affair be permitted to elope with a minor girl of nearly 11 1/2 years and claim immunity from the clutches and rigours of the machinery of criminal law This is one of the main questions arising in this petition under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('the Cr. P. C.' for brief).2. The facts giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus : One minor girl named Sharda aged about 11l/2 years was said to have left her parental home under some pretext. The respondent herein was suspected to have enticed her away. The necessary complaint was lodged by the father of the girl charging the respondent herein with the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the I.P.C.' for brief). It appears that the respondent was arrested in connection with the offence registered against him at the instance of the father of the minor girl in question. The respondent herein appears to have moved the le...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-11-1993
Reported in : (1993)1GLR649
A.N. Divecha, J.1. Can the Sessions Judge withdraw a part-heard case from the Additional Sessions Judge in exercise of his purported powers under Section 399 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('the CrP.C.' for brief) In the alternative, can the Sessions Judge withdraw a part-heard case from the Additional Sessions Judge in exercise of his powers under Section 409 thereof These are the main questions that have cropped up in this petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C.2. The petitioner has been facing trial for the offences inter alia punishable under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ('the Act' for brief). It has come to be registered as Sessions Case No. 110 of 1991 in the Sessions Court at Rajkot. It appears that the learned predecessor of the learned present Sessions Judge, by his order passed on 3rd December, 1992 assigned that sessions trial to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, named, Shri V.C. Mandalia, for trial and dis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-12-1993
Reported in : II(1993)DMC171
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The petitioners have moved this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('the Cr. P.C.' for brief) for quashing the criminal complaint inter alia lodged against them by respondent No. 2 herein in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate of Court No. 3 at Ahmedabad charging all the accused including the petitioners named therein as accused Nos. 3 and 4 with the offence punishable under Section 494 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for brief).2. The facts giving rise to this petition are not many and not much in dispute. Respondent No. 2 claims to have married one Mukesh Kumar Chhatrasinh some 7 years ago. According to her, during the subsistence of her marriage with her husband, he contracted a second marriage with one Gitaben Bhallalbhai Barot who is arraigned as accused No. 5 in the complaint. According to respondent No. 2, the other accused including the mother of the husband and the father of accused No. 5 and the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-12-1993
Reported in : (1993)1GLR661
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The petitioners have moved this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('the Cr.P.C' for brief) for quashing the criminal complaint inter alia lodged against them by respondent No. 2 herein in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate of Court No. 3 at Ahmedabad charging all the accused including the petitioners named therein as accused Nos. 3 and 4 with the offence punishable under Section 494 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the I.P.C.' for brief).2. The facts giving rise to this petition are not many and not much in dispute. Respondent No. 2 claims to have married one Mukeshkumar Chhatrasinh some 7 years ago. According to her, during the subsistence of her marriage with her husband, he contracted a second marriage with one Gitaben Bhailalbhai Barot who is arraigned as accused No. 5 in the complaint. According to respondent No. 2, the other accused including the mother of the husband and the father of accused No 5 and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-12-1993
Reported in : (1993)2GLR1351
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this revision, the petitioner, who is the original accused No. 2, has assailed the legality and validity of the order of conviction under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1000 and, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch, on 19-10-1981, in Criminal Case No. 1875 of 1980, which was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 94 of 1981, by the learned Sessions Judge, Bharuch, on 18-lrl983, except reduction of sentence of rigorous imprisonment of six months to one month, by invoking the provisions of Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('Code' for short, hereinafter).2. A resume of the material facts giving rise to the present appeal, may, shortly he stated, at this stage.3. One M/s. Parekh & Parekh Engineering Company' had taken contract of construction of 'E' type quarters and tr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-15-1993
Reported in : (1995)1GLR275
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Since common questions are involved in this group of three matters* they are being disposed of, on joint request, by this common judgment. Initially, a short resume of the material facts giving rise to this group of matters may be narrated.2. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 1985, Ranmal Arjan, alongwith seven other accused persons, came to be tried in the Sessions Case No. 12 of 1983, by the Additional Sessions Judge, at Porbandar, in Junagadh District, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 324, 385 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 25(1) of the Arms Act and also under Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act. In that, the prosecution alleged that, on 17-11-1982, at abour 7-30 p.m. in the area near Sutarwada, in the town of Porbandar, all the accused persons came with arms and assaulted the complainant-Mansukh Jamnadas and his brothers, Dhansukh and Laxmidas. Accused No. 1-appellant herein also opened fir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-17-1993
Reported in : (1993)2GLR1080
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The petitioner has invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of This Court, for questioning the correctness of the award of. maintenance at the rate of Rs. 200 per month made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Amreli on 12th July, 1989 by his judgment and order in Criminal Revision Petition No. 25 of 1987. Thereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge modified the order passed by the learned trail Magistrate awarding maintenance to her at the rate of Rs. 110 per month. According to the petitioner her claim for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 400 per month ought to have been accepted in full.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are not many and not much in dispute. The petitioner herein moved the Court of the Judicial Magistrate (First Class) at Bagasra under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('the Cr. P.C' for brief). It came to be registered as Misc. Criminal Application No. 11 of 1986. She claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 400 per mon...
Tag this Judgment!