Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-11-1993
Reported in : 1993CriLJ3776
ORDERN.L. Tibrewal, J.1. In all these bail applications under Section 439, Cr. P. C., important questions of law of general importance have been raised, which also involve interpretation of Sections 36A and 37 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (In short, The Act' or 'NDPS Act'). The questions may be formulated as under:-1. Whether under the proviso (a) to Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure an accused can claim bail as of right if Charge-sheet is not filed after completion of investigation within 90/60 days?2. If so, whether the right can be claimed even after the filing of charge-sheet?3. Whether provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act override Sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and bail cannot be granted unless conditions contained in clauses (i) & (ii) of Section 37(1)(b) are satisfied ?2. In all the three bail applications the accused persons were arrested under Section 8/18 and 8/19 NDPS Act but Cognizance by t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-21-1993
Reported in : 1993(2)BomCR242
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This Criminal Writ Petition No. 1160 of 1992 came up for hearing before Dhabe, J., and the learned Single Judge vide his judgment dated 30th October 1990 referred the matter to the Division Bench as it involves a rather important issue touching the enforceability of a maintenance order that has been passed prior to the promulgation of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which came into force on 19th May 1986. The learned Single Judge had before him two proceedings, Criminal Revision Application No. 289 of 1989 from Bombay, and the other Criminal Writ Petition No. 1160 of 1988 from Nasik. Both cases concerned divorced Muslim women. In both instances, order for payment of maintenance had been passed in favour of the divorced wife under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the applications relating to enforcement of those orders were pending before the Court in May 1986 when the new Act came into force. Section 7 of the Act requir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-07-1993
Reported in : II(1993)DMC470
A.D. Mane, J.1. These three Criminal Writ Petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure initiated by the wife-petitioner in Writ Petition No. 56 of 1993 against her husband, who is also petitioner in companion Writ Petition Nos. 395 and 396 of 1992.2. There involves a common question of facts and law and, therefore, these petitions can be disposed of by common judgment. The material facts giving rise to these writ petitions may be stated as follows :The petitioner-wife married the respondent-husband on May 5, 1981 according to Hindu rites and customs. She stayed with the respondent-husband till September 9, 1984. She was, however, said to have been driven out of her matrimonial home. She, therefore, filed an application under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure on April 22, 1985 claiming maintenance from the respondent-husband at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month. The acts and accusation of the petitioner-wife against the husband-respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-28-1993
Reported in : 1994(2)BomCR695; 1994CriLJ2393; II(1994)DMC195; 1994(1)MhLj202
ORDER1. This is a petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the orders passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Criminal Revision Applications Nos. 1550/92, 1551/92 and one unregistered Criminal Revision Application dated 10-2-1993. The proceeding raises really a vitally important question of law which pertains to the right of recovery of maintenance allowance by a person who is entitled to maintenance allowance under the provisions of Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by attachment of the salary of the person who is subjected to order of payment of maintenance allowance. 2. Petitioners are the minor sons of respondent No. 1. In Misc. Criminal Application No. 139/98 filed by them under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, they had applied for maintenance allowance from their father, the respondent No. 1. The matter came to be decided on 20-6-1989. The respondent No. 1 had committed defaults in payment of the maintenan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-29-1993
Reported in : (1993)2CALLT310(HC),97CWN1053
A.K. Dutta, J.1. The question emerging for consideration in the instant Revisional Application by the Petitioner Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is whether a police officer can be prosecuted for an alleged offence punishable Under Section 201/218, I.P.C. on the allegation that by fabricating false records/evidence he had started false cases against some offenders in a murder case by showing them arrested in those false cases, when the trial of those offenders in the alleged false and fabricated cases had ended in their conviction. The point may as well be posed somewhat differently as to whether a proceeding can be allowed to continue against a police officer on the allegation that he fabricated false records/ evidence and started false cases against some accused persons with a view to screen them in a murder case when the facts in issue in the alleged false cases had already been determined by a court of competent jurisdiction on trial ending in their convict...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jul-13-1993
Reported in : 78(1994)CLT928; 1993(II)OLR265
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The short question that falls for determination in this case is whether during pendency of a proceeding under the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (for short, 'the Consolidation Act') initiation of a proceeding Under Section 145 o1 the Code of Criminal Procedure was bad.2. The first party in the proceeding Under Section 145, CrPC (Criminal Misc. Case No. 48 of 1991) has filed this revision petition Under Sections 397 and 401, CrPC challenging the order dated 12-11-1991 of the Executive Magistrate, Jajpur dropping the proceeding and leaving it to the parties to agitate the dispute regarding right, title, interest coupled with possession over the disputed land before the proper forum for decision.3. The factual backdrop of the case necessary for appreciation of the point formulated earlier may be stated thus :On perusal of the report of the Officer-in-charge, Jajpur Police Station and on being satisfied that there was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-14-1993
Reported in : 1994CriLJ2026
ORDERK.C. Bhargava, J.1. By means of this revision the revisionists have challenged an order dated 26-8-1993 passed by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Unnao summoning the revisionists under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The facts which are relevant for deciding the present controversy are that one Suryanarain, the father of deceased Rani, lodged a written report on 5-7-1992 with the allegations that his daughter, Rani, was married to Kashi Din about six years back. After some days of the marriage his daughter' complained to him that she is being assaulted and tortured. She is also given mental torture by saying that she has not brought anything from her parents during the marriage. The complainant talked to the in-laws of his daughter but the matter could not be settled. About two months back the mother-in-law and sister-in-law (Nanand) of his daughter came and took away his daughter after getting the Bida done. On 5-7-1992 at about 8 a.m. Prem Narain, brother-in-law (D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-29-1993
Reported in : 1994(2)BomCR518
N.P. Chapalgaonker, J. 1. This is an application by the complainant in a Criminal Case challenging the order passed in appeal by the convicted person in which the order of the disposal of the property passed by the learned trial Judge was varied. Bhikaji s/o. Tukaram Darade - applicant had filed a report with the Police that electric motor pump owned by him and fixed in a well situated in Survey No. 26 at village Limbala, Taluka : Jintoor, was stolen. Police investigated the complaint and filed a charge-sheet against Nago, Sahebrao, Damodhar and Rama. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jintoor, who tried this Criminal Case No. 37 of 1984 was pleased to convict accused No. 2 and sentenced him to suffer Simple Imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default, to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 60 days. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 were acquitted. The learned Magistrate was further pleased to order that the electric motor which was already handed over...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-22-1993
Reported in : [1993]203ITR282(Ker)
L. Manoharan, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to quash annexure-I complaint in C. C. No. 84 of 1990 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam. The first petitioner is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), the second petitioner is the managing director, the third petitioner is one of the directors and the fourth petitioner is the general manager of the first petitioner-company. For the assessment year 1986-87, the first petitioner-company filed a return after deducting certain claims under the Act. Two such claims were depreciation and investment allowance under Sections 32 and 32A of the Act in respect of two items of machinery. These two machines were purchased on March 5, 1986, and March 8, 1986, respectively. If the said machines were put to use duringthe accounting period, the two claims could be entertained. The assessing authority conducted enquiries and found that the machine...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-17-1993
Reported in : 1994(0)MPLJ569
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J.1. Heard on admission.2. By the impugned order dated 30-6-1993 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge,. Guna, the prosecution application to summon Narmadeshwar Sharma, a clerk in the Office of District Excise Officer, Guna, was allowed under Section 311, Criminal Procedure Code, holding that recording of the evidence of that witness was essential in the ends of justice. In the impugned order it was also observed that as per order of the Court passed in that Criminal case on 18-5-1993, the District Excise Officer, Guna be also summoned to give evidence. The grievance of the petitioner, who is accused in that criminal case under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is that the abovesaid witnesses were not shown in the list of prosecution witnesses in the complaint filed by the Excise Department and examination of the said witnesses would result in filling in of the lacunae of the prosecution case.3. There is nothing illegal or ...
Tag this Judgment!