Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1982CriLJ2341
ORDERGuman Mal Lodha, J.1. In this application, under Section 482, Cr. P.C. against the order dated the 7th June, 1979 of Sessions Judge, Bikaner in Sessions case No. 50/76, Hukamaram Umaram & Ramuram, the applicants, contend that the impugned order by which 'hey have been called upon to face the trial and cognizance has been taken against them under Section 319, Cr.. P.C. should be quashed, as it was done on the basis of police statements and no evidence has been recorded by the Sessions Judge.2. Dr. Bhandawat, the learned Public Prosecutor could not dispute the facts as alleged by the petitioners but he submitted that a Sessions Judge was competent to take cognizance on the basis of the police statements recorded under Section 319, Cr. P.C. as per the decision of this Court in Ajayab Singh v. State of Rajasthan 1978 Raj LW 9.3. It is not in dispute that application dated the 14th May, 1979 was moved by the Asslt. Public Prosecutor before the Sessions Court for taking cognizance again...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1989WLN(UC)33
I.S. Israni, J.1. Heard, both the parties. The petitioner is alleged to have committed offence under Sections 147, 452 & 323, IPC. This application is under Section 438, Cr.P.C. It is given out by Shri Balwada, learned Counsel for the petitioner that the incident has been wrongly given out in the FIR and in fact Mst. Tulsi fell-down on the stones and had some simple injuries. It is also given out that both the parties are close relatives but several revenue suits are pending between them.2. Shri Srimal, learned Additional Government Advocate, opposes the bail application.3. In the fact and circumstances of the case, I, consider it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.4. The SHO/AO/IO, Police Station, Raghunath Garh, District Sikar, is directed that in the even of arrest of the petitioners Ganga Ram, Debu, Karna, Govinda, Dhanna in the FIR No. 92/89 they be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with Against or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1985(2)WLN19
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. This is a bail application on behalf of Johny Wilson, who is standing trial for offence Under Section 376/511 IPC in the Court of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. I, Jodhpur. He was on bail granted to him on 27-8-83. There after he absented himself on 14-2-84. The bail bonds were, therefore, forfeited. He surrendered before the court on 2-1-85 and again applied for bail. That application was rejected by the trial court and his application for bail was also thereafter rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur. The courts below found that earlier to 27-8-83 also the petitioner had remained absent from 24-8-77 to 4-8-83 and this time also he had absented himself for almost a year and the proceedings had been held up.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that since the petitioner had already been granted bail the forfeiture of the bonds does not amount to the cancellation of the bail already granted to him and the petitioner was entitled to be r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1949CriLJ634
ORDERRamabhadran, J.C.1. This criminal revision petition arises under the following circumstances:2. Yarindmal, the petitioner before me, filed S, complaint under Sections 312, 506, 323 and 161, Penal Code, against Radha Krishna, Jagdish and Gulzari. Accused l is a Sub-Inspector of Police, while the other two accused are constables. The complaint was to the effect that on 13th June 1948, the acoused arrested the petitioner, handcuffed him, took him to the Kotwali and illegally detained there for two hours. He was eventually released on bail after payment of Es. 60 as bribe to the police officers.3. The complaint was instituted in the Court of the Additional City Magistrate (Mr. Badlani) who referred the case to the District Magistrate in accordance with para. d88, Police Regulations, The case was transferred to the City Magistrate 'for trial' by the District Magistrate. Summonses were issued to the accused by the City Magistrate and they appeared in his Court on 2ith July 1948. Meanwhi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj16
1. These are three connected appeals, NOS. 1.3 of 1949, and all of them will be disposed of by this judgment. Balia, Moolia and Ramla have been convicted and sentenced under Section 302, Penal Code, to rigorous imprisonment for life each for causing the death of Lalia, and under Section 894, Penal Code to 7 years rigorous imprisonment each for robbing him of his money and ornaments. Both the sentences have been made to run concurrently. The three appeals referred to above have been filed by them.2. Lalia deceased, a young man of 94 years of age, was resident of Mirpur in Bind and came to Aimer in search of a match for himself. He was wearing a few silver ornaments and had RS. 500 with him, He knew Balia of Gola in Ajmer Merwara and therefore visited him. Balia brought him to Sumel in Marwar and they stayed with Ramla for 5 or 6 days. Moolia who cultivates a bera in this village also joined them and the deceased is alleged to have eaten 'Makkias' from his field a day before the occurren...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj8
ORDERVerma, C.J.1. I have before me a recommendation by the District Magistrate of Nagaur that an order passed by a Magistrate of Parbatsar on 25th October 1943 be set aside.2. Kama, Sukha and Jetha filed an application under Section 147, Criminal P. C., in the Court of the Magistrate in question on 18 th September 1948 and alleged that they had a right of way across the field of Bhanwar Singh and Bhopal Singh, that the latter were interfering with their eight and that this dispute was likely to cause a breach of the peace. Bhanwar Singh and Bhopal Singh appeared before the Court in obedience to the process issued by it and submitted that there was a foot path across their field which could be used by Rama Sukha and Jetha, but that the latter wanted to take their carts across the field and this they were not entitled to do. Daring the pendency of these proceedings; Rama, Sukha and Jetha presented an application praying that an ad interim order be issued enabling them to carry their man...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj5
1. This is an appeal by the accused Mt. Nojali, wife of Durga Jat against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge convicting and sentencing her under Section 302, M. P. C. to rigorous imprisonment for life for causing the death of Idan, sou of Karnia, Jat, a lad of 8 years of age, on the morning of 6th May 1939.2. The houses of Karnia and Mt. Nojali are situate doge to each other and it appears that the deceased Idan used to go to the house of Mt. Nojali to play with her son Kana who was of the same age. The prosecution story is that on the morning of 6th May 1948 at about 8 O clock, Idan went to Nojali'a house but never came back. In the evening when Karnia, father of the deceased, came home, the latter a mother informed him that Idan was not present. Karnia went to the Kot and informed the Hawaldar P. W. 2 Sbankerlal of this fact. Shankerlal accompanied by P. W. 4 Kalyansingh, P. W. 6 Rambuxsingh, P. W. 7 Bhuria and two other persona came to Nojali's house and inquired from her wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1951Raj135
ORDERKaul, J.1. This is a revn. directed against an order of the learned Ses. J. Churu, confirming, in appeal, the convictions of the appcts. under Section 325, I.P.C. by the Munsif-Mag. Sardarsbahi. The Mag. had convicted thirteen accused persons, including the appcts. of an offence under Section 147, I.P.C. for rioting, sentencing each to 3 months R. I. On appeal the learned Ses. J. upheld the convictions of the present appcts. only under Section 325, I.P.C. while acquitting them as well as the remaining accused persons of the offence under Section 147, B. P.C. He, however, reduced the sentences of Hir Singh & Jasia accused persons from rigorous imprisonment to simple in view of their old ago.2. The case started on a report, made at Thana Sujangath, on 30 8-47 at 4 P. M. by Ganesha Brahmin & Sukharam Jat of Malusar alleging that, on the preceding night fifteen persons (named in the report), who were armed with guns & lathies broke into the house of Ganesha informant & after one of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj51
ORDERTrilochan Datt, J.1. These are two revision applications, No. 2029 of 1949, preferred by Alla Noor Khan accused and no. 201 of 1940 by Nazir Ali Khan accused, against the order dated 18-6-49 of the Magistrate, 1st Class, Chhabra, committing the accused to Sessions under section 120(b), 420, 409 & 109, Penal Code, Both the accused have prayed in their respective applications for quashing the committal order. These revisions have arisen out of the same case and they are disposed of by one single judgment.2. Nasir Ali khan accused was a Tehsildar in Tonk State, while Alla Noor Khan was a Patwari. At the time of the commission of the offence, Nasir Ali khan was acting as Nazim, Chhabra. Both the applicants were challaned under Sections 409 & 467, Penal Code, along with five others Abdul Majid Khan, Naimulla Khan, Muqrab Rehman Khan, Mohammed Shafi and Mohammed Amin, Abdul Majid Khan was a Nazim in the State and he was discharged by the Committing Magistrate. Naimulla Khan, Muqrab Rehm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj10
1. These are two appeals by the accused Baga Bharti, one filed by him from jail and the other through his learned counsel Mr. Indernath Modi, and this judgment will dispose of both of them as they arise out of the same incident and the same judgment of the learned Sessions Judge. Baga Bharti was challaned under Section 302, Penal Code but the committing Magistrate recommended his discharge under that section and charged him under Section 304 (2), The learned Sessions Judge tried him under that section for causing the death of Heersingh and convicted and sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment. Two other persons were also tried by the learned Sessions Judge, namely, Parmanand Bharti under Section 323, Penal Code and Ganpat Bharti under Section 339, Penal Code, but both of them have been acquitted and in this appeal, we are not concerned with them.2. This case hails from the heart of the city of Jodhpur. The parties are close neighbours and have their houses situate almost opp...
Tag this Judgment!