Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-19-1996
Reported in : 1996CriLJ3225
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Mehsana on 23rd August 1984 in Sessions Case No. 25 of 1984 is under challenge in this appeal at the instance of the prosecution. Thereby the learned trial Judge has acquitted the respondent herein (the original accused) of the charge of commission of the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 of the IPC, 1860 (the IPC for brief).2. The facts giving rise to this appeal move in a narrow compass. It is the case of the prosecution that one girl by the name of Hemlata was taken away by the accused on 12th August 1983 from the lawful guardianship of her grandfather. She was below the age of 18 at the relevant time. She was carried to different places like Himatnagar, Ambaji, Palanpur, Ajmer and Sidhpur. She was subjected to rape in the course of their journey to all these places. It appears that the grandfather of the girl gave his complaint on 13th August 1983 charging t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-19-1996
Reported in : (1996)3GLR514
D.G. Karia, J.1. Rule. Mr. K.P. Raval, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent.2. The petitioner, who is the original accused in Sessions Case No. 114 of 1986 of the Sessions Court, Bharuch, and at present the appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 115 of 1988, pending in this Court, has prayed for necessary permission under Section 320(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to compound the offence, as provided in Section 320(4)(b) of the Code, as the same is in the interest of the parties.3. The petitioner-accused was tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in the aforesaid Sessions Case by the Court of the Addl. Sessions Judge at Bharuch. The prosecution case is that the incident took place on March 17, 1986 between 2-00 to 3-00 p.m. in the sim of village Vedach and in the said incident, the deceased, Jatashankar Ravishankar, was alleged to be given stick blows by the accused. It is the further case of the prosec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-19-1996
Reported in : (1996)2GLR764
R.R. Jain, J.1. A synopsis presented by the Bar Association of Morbi to this High Court has been treated as an application for Criminal Contempt against the respondents as they have made allegations, in judicial proceedings, against the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Morbi and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Malia. 2. On perusal, prima facie, it transpired that respondents attempted to scandalise Court and, therefore, suo motu action had been initiated under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of convenience and brevity).3. In this matter, in all there are 12 respondents. Initially, when the matter was placed for first orders, while admitting notice was also issued against some of the respondents, who, in response thereof, appeared through their respective Advocates and filed affidavit-in-reply.In order to appreciate the nature of allegations made against the judicial officer, it will be worthwhile to have a look at the past litigation whe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-22-1996
Reported in : (1996)2GLR750
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Rule. Mr. J.A. Shelat, learned A.P.P. waives service of Rule. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties.2. Naga Raja and Vikram Raja by this Misc. Criminal Application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, have moved this Court inter alia praying for releasing them on temporary bail for 20 days on the ground of marriage of Savdhiben (daughter of Nagaraja). 3. In support of this application, the petitioners have annexed marriage invitation card, wherein it is stated that the marriage is to take place on Saturday, 27th January, 1996 at Jetpur.4. Now, so far as the question of temporary bail is concerned, this Court (Coram: K.J. Vaidya & M.H. Kadri, JJ.) in Misc. Criminal Application No. 318 of 1996 in Criminal Appeal No. 424 of 1992, decided on 19-1-1996, has already taken a view that ordinarily unless some genuine indispensable ground is made out and that too further if there is no serious antecedents or any other adverse jai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-25-1996
Reported in : (1997)1GLR399
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Rule. Mr. S. T. Mehta, learned A.P.P. waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent. Bhurabhai Giganbhai, claiming himself to be a friend and relative of the convict-prisoner Bhupatbhai Devayatbhai, at present undergoing life imprisonment in the Central Prison, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad, by presenting this application under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, in person, has moved this Court, inter alia praying for getting released the said prisoner on the temporary bail for period of 15 days on the ground of marriage of his daughter and son. In support of this ground the petitioner has also annexed the copy of the Marriage Invitation Card wherein while giving a Schedule of certain sacred ceremonies it has been stated that (i) 'Mandap Muhrat' is on 24-1-1996 at 9-00 a.m., (ii) departure of 'Jan' i.e. 'marriage-party' is in early morning of 25-1-1996 and (iii) the marriage itself is to take place on the same day at 10-00 a.m. This Schedule is for the marri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-30-1996
Reported in : (1996)3GLR693
D.G. Karia, J.1. Chhanabhai Punjabhai Prajapati, the original complainant, who is now no more, being aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated May 19, 1983, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narol, in Criminal Case No. 907 of 1982, had preferred the present Revision Application. By the impugned order of acquittal, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted the respondent-accused for the offence under Sections 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The present Revision Application was filed through Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal, when he was an Advocate.2. On elevation of Mr. Justice Panchal to the Bench, a notice was caused to issue to the petitioner informing him that his Advocate has become the High Court Judge and as such he should appoint another Advocate in the matter or to remain present before the Court, etc. The notice could not be served on the petitioner. It is now reported that the petitioner has died on March 24, 1991. Necessary death certificate i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-12-1996
Reported in : (1996)2GLR554
R.R. Jain, J.1. The appellant/original accused was charged and convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of convenience and brevity and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year.)2. The incident occurred on 8-7-1987 in public place, viz., on the main road, near Jamalpur Pagathia, in the City of Ahmedabad. According to the prosecution, on 7-7-1987 the complainant, P.W. 1, Mr. N.B. Rohit, Superintendent of Customs (Preventive), Customs House, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, received secret information that a youngman, named Intezar Ahmed Sultan Ahmed Shaikh, agreed about 25 to 28 years, is dealing in sale of contraband drugs, that is, Charas, in Jamalpur area and on the next day, that is, on 8-7-1986, is likely to carry between 11-30 A.M. to 12-30 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-19-1996
Reported in : (1997)1GLR462
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, direction and/or order quashing and setting aside the resolution of the first respondent-State Bank of Saurashtra dated June 26, 1995 according sanction to prosecute the petitioner being illegal, ultra vires, unconstitutional and violative of his fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Interim relief is also prayed to stay and suspend the operation and implementation of the above resolution and to direct the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion.2. It is the case of the petitioner that between June 1990 and May 1992, he was working as Chief Manager of the State Bank of Saurashtra-first respondent herein at Fort Branch, Bombay. Pursuant to the instructions received from the Central Office of the State Bank of India, the transactions dealt with by the Funds Management Cell during 1991-92 headed by one Mr. M.S. Shrinivasan were investigated and record...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-20-1996
Reported in : (1997)1GLR92
S.M. Soni, J.1. This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Code' for short). The petitioner is detained in judicial custody on the charge of the offences punishable under Sections 22, 23, 24 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('N.D.P.S. Act' for short) and under Sections 120-B and 120-A of the Indian Penal Code.Heard the learned Advocates.2. Learned Counsel Mr. Mehta appearing for the petitioner has raised a contention that in view of the judgment in the case of State of Punjab v. Balbirsingh : 1994CriLJ3702 , the information received by the officer concerned is not taken down in writing which vitiates the trial. He contended that in the instant case, the gist of the same is only taken down in writing by the officer concerned and not verbatim. He, therefore, contended that the case of the petitioner is fully covered under the judgment of Balbirsingh (supra), which is again confirmed by the Supreme Court in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-22-1996
Reported in : 1996CriLJ3857; 1997(92)ELT37(Guj); (1998)1GLR81
ORDERRule. Mr. Sunil Patel, Addl. Standing Counsel, waives service of rule for Resp. No. 1 and Mr. K. C. Shah, learned A. P. P., waives service of rule for Resp. No. 2. 1. This is an application under Section 439(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('Code' for short) by the petitioner, who is arrested in an offence, being registered as Customs F. No. VIII/10-20/AP/95. On being produced before Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, he was remanded to judicial custody. There also, an application was filed to release him on bail, being Criminal Misc. Application No. 21/95, and the same came to be rejected on 18-12-1995. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 3374/95 before learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Ahmedabad, who also rejected the said application by his judgment and order dated 11-1-1996. Petitioner has now moved this court for releasing him on bail. 2. The petitioner is arrested on the allegation that on his landing at In...
Tag this Judgment!