Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jun-13-2012
1. The petition is filed for quashing the order of issue process made in S.C.C. No. 5520/2010 by 7th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad. In a private complaint filed by respondent No. 1 for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the order under challenge is made. Both the sides are heard. 2. The order is challenged only on one ground viz. non compliance of the provision of section 202 (1) of Criminal Procedure Code. The J.M.F.C. has issued process after examining the complainant under section 200 of Cr.P.C. and order of issue process is made on the basis of this examination and the relevant documents filed by the complainant. 3. By way of amendment which came into effect from 23.6.2006 underlined portion came to be added in section 202 (1) of Cr.P.C. :- "202. Postponement of issue of process.- (1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jun-13-2012
1. The writ petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India and under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code. Other two proceedings are filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the relief is claimed of quashing criminal proceedings bearing S.T.C.C. Nos. 2189/1997, 1589/98, 2151/98 and 2087/98. These cases are pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhule and the cases are filed against the petitioner for offence punishable under section 66 (1) (b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. Both the sides are heard. 2. On the basis of specific information received against the petitioner raids were effected by Dhule Police Station on many occasions on bicycle shop of the petitioner. On each occasion, the petitioner was found present in the shop and from his possession some pouches of tablets containing Bhang were recovered. In the first raid dated 10.9.1997, such 57 pouches were recovered, in the raid dated 4.9.1998, 70 such pouches were recovered, in the raid date...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jun-28-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. By the present appeal, the appellant has questioned the legality and correctness of his conviction for the offence punishable under section 304 Part I of the I.P. Code for which he is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, with the default stipulation to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month, in Sessions Case No. 101/2010, by judgment and order dated 22nd August, 2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Latur. 2. Such of the facts as are necessary for the just decision of this appeal can be summarized as follows: (a) One Laxmi Balaji Kakde was admitted in the Civil Hospital, Latur on 5th August, 2010. On her admission, she was medically examined, but she was found dead. Around 10 p.m. or so on that day, Dr. Siddiqui, attached to Civil Hospital, Latur passed on the information in writing to the police chowki attached to the Civil Hospital, Latur. ASI Narayan Bhujang Ranzunjare (PW9), who was attached ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-10-2012
Oral Judgment: 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2 This miscellaneous civil application is filed seeking transfer of divorce proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition No.8 of 2011 pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panvel, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad to any competent Court at Aurangabad. 3 Background facts of the case as disclosed in the application are as under: On 1st July, 2009, marriage between the Applicant and Respondent solemnized at Aurangabad. It is the case of the Applicant that, on 19th July, 2009, there was an illegal demand of Rs. 10,00,000/- by the Respondent to the Applicant and her parents for purchasing or expanding his office at Kalamboli. On failure of payment of Rs.10,00,000/-, the Respondent and his parents started harassing the Applicant. It is further case of the Applicant that, on denial by the Applicant of any kind of written consent for divorce, the Applicant was thrown out of her matrimonial ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-10-2012
Oral Judgment: 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2 This miscellaneous civil application is filed seeking transfer of divorce proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition No.8 of 2011 pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panvel, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad to any competent Court at Aurangabad. 3 Background facts of the case as disclosed in the application are as under: On 1st July, 2009, marriage between the Applicant and Respondent solemnized at Aurangabad. It is the case of the Applicant that, on 19th July, 2009, there was an illegal demand of Rs. 10,00,000/- by the Respondent to the Applicant and her parents for purchasing or expanding his office at Kalamboli. On failure of payment of Rs.10,00,000/-, the Respondent and his parents started harassing the Applicant. It is further case of the Applicant that, on denial by the Applicant of any kind of written consent for divorce, the Applicant was thrown out of her matrimonial ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-19-2012
1. The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 164/1999, which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad. The Trial Court has convicted the appellants for offences punishable under sections 457, 394 of Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard. 2. The facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows:- The complainant was living with her husband in a shed situated in village Savargaon, Tahsil Kallam, District Osmanabad. The incident took place on the night between 23rd and 24th of August 1999. Some persons knocked the doors of the house of the complainant Jaishree at about 3.00 a.m. As they were giving threats and they were using force, the door of the shed was opened. Four persons, who had covered their faces by using pieces of clothes or blanket/rugs entered the shed and they robbed gold ornaments and cash amount of the family of the complainant. Force was used by these persons to create terror. Ornaments like Bor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-19-2012
1. The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 164/1999, which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad. The Trial Court has convicted the appellants for offences punishable under sections 457, 394 of Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard. 2. The facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows:- The complainant was living with her husband in a shed situated in village Savargaon, Tahsil Kallam, District Osmanabad. The incident took place on the night between 23rd and 24th of August 1999. Some persons knocked the doors of the house of the complainant Jaishree at about 3.00 a.m. As they were giving threats and they were using force, the door of the shed was opened. Four persons, who had covered their faces by using pieces of clothes or blanket/rugs entered the shed and they robbed gold ornaments and cash amount of the family of the complainant. Force was used by these persons to create terror. Ornaments like Bor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-25-2012
P.C.:- 1. Writ Petition is filed for quashing and setting aside the order made by J.M.F.C. Dondaicha in application no. 192 of 2009. In a private complaint filed by respondent no.2 for offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 407, 408, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, J.M.F.C. has made order under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and the concerned Police Station is directed to make investigation of the matter. Both sides are heard. 2. Present petitioners are said to be borrowers of Dadasaheb Rawal Co-operative Bank Ltd., Dondaicha, Tq. Shindkheda, Dist Dhule. Accused no.2 – Jaideosing Rawal was Chairman of this bank at the relevant time. The complainant, who is share holder of the Bank has made allegations that Swodharak Vidhyarthi Sanstha belongs to the family of accused no.2, Kanhayya Traders, a concerned belongs to a daughter of accused no.2 and Krushiraj Traders belongs to a daughter of accused no.2. It is contended that accused no.2 cons...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-25-2012
P.C.:- 1. Writ Petition is filed for quashing and setting aside the order made by J.M.F.C. Dondaicha in application no. 192 of 2009. In a private complaint filed by respondent no.2 for offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 407, 408, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, J.M.F.C. has made order under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and the concerned Police Station is directed to make investigation of the matter. Both sides are heard. 2. Present petitioners are said to be borrowers of Dadasaheb Rawal Co-operative Bank Ltd., Dondaicha, Tq. Shindkheda, Dist Dhule. Accused no.2 Jaideosing Rawal was Chairman of this bank at the relevant time. The complainant, who is share holder of the Bank has made allegations that Swodharak Vidhyarthi Sanstha belongs to the family of accused no.2, Kanhayya Traders, a concerned belongs to a daughter of accused no.2 and Krushiraj Traders belongs to a daughter of accused no.2. It is contended that accused no.2 conspired w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Jul-26-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed by the appellant/original complainant against the judgment and order of acquittal recorded by learned Joint Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Bhusawal, dated 29th October, 2001, acquitting the respondent/ original accused in Regular Criminal Case No.77/1992, of the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with section 420 of the I.P. Code. 2. I have heard learned counsel Mr. S.P. Brahme for the appellant, followed by the submissions of learned counsel Mr. S.S. Choudhari for the respondent. 3. During the course of submissions across the bar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would urge that an error has been committed by the learned trial court in drawing the conclusion that the cheque issued by the respondent in favour of the appellant was not for discharge of legally enforceable debt and on that account alone, the learned trial court has dismissed the complaint. He would further urge that the learned ...
Tag this Judgment!