Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-05-1995
Reported in : 1995CriLJ3717
A.K. Chakravarty, J.1. This Death Reference No. 2 of 1994 as well as Criminal Appeal No. 173 of 1994 arises out of the orders of convictions and sentence passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raiganj Uttar Dinajpur dated 23-6-94.2. The prosecution case is that one Sishir Sharja lodged a verbal complaint at 10.30 p.m. on 3-7-83 at the Raiganj Police Station to the effect that on date at about 7.30 p.m. he and victim Benu Sarkar were proceeding together towards Benu Sarkar's house. When they had reached the junction of 'Anami Sangha Club' near Mohanbati Bazar, two youths wearing shirts and trousers came along the northern side and moved ahead. After both of them had gone about 20 cubits, they stopped and called 'come here, Benu Da'. After talking for few minutes, Benu said that they will have further talk tomorrow. When Benu Sarkar was coming back one of the two youths had fired. After being hit by such firing Benu Sarkar had fallen down on the road. Then the complainant started r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Sep-12-1995
Reported in : (1996)1MLJ260
Raju, J.1. The above appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge, dated 30.8.1993 in W.P. No. 16175 of 1993, whereunder the learned single Judge has issued directions as hereunder, while finally disposing of the main writ petition, even at the stage of hearing for admission, on hearing the counsel for the 1st respondent herein/writ petitioner:After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the affidavit filed herein, without going into the merits of the case, I think it suffice to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's petition filed under Section 52 of the Act for dispensing with the pre-deposit of the penalty amount, on merits and in accordance with law, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy this order, if the same has not been disposed of already, till such time, the further proceedings before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's Court in S.O.C.C. No. 309 of 1993 shall stand stayed. However, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Dec-07-1995
Reported in : 1996(2)ALT(Cri)357; 1996CriLJ3331
ORDER1. After getting the admission of this revision, assailing the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Kancheepuram, in Cri.M.B. No. 56/95 in C.C. No. 88/93, dated 10-5-1995, in a petition filed under S. 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by and on behalf of the revision petitioner herein, declining to discharge the petitioner, who was the accused subsequently added by filing an amended charge-sheet in the above calendar case before the trial Court, as insisted by the Bar, the revision was heard in full on merits an it is disposed of by passing the following order. 2. The petitioner by name Ramapandian was working as a Sub-Inspector in Baluchettychatram Police Station between 5-9-1990 and 21-11-1991 and during that time the first accused by name one Sivaprakasam was working as a Grade I Police Constable in the same police station. In connection with certain criminal activities committed by the said Grade I Police Constable while he was entrusted with the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-25-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ876
ORDERNure Alam Chowdhary, J.1. This application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the complainant Ashok Kumar Kabra, challenging the order dated 16-3-95, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Howarh in Criminal Misc. Case No. 97 of 1995 allowing the application for anticipatory bail of the opposite party No. 1 Smt. Kamala Devi Shaw and the opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kanika Devi Shaw with conditions mentioned in the order, in connection with Shibpur P. S. Case No. 273 of 1994, under Sections 409/420/120B of the I. P. C. was finally heard by his Lordships the Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. K. Bhattacharyya, by his judgment and order dated 28-6-95 had been pleased to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge with certain directions contained in the order. The opposite parties Kamala Devi Shaw and Kanika Devi Shaw thereafter filed a petition for Special Leave Petition being S. L. P. (Crl) No. 2657 of 1995, in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-13-1995
Reported in : II(1996)DMC469
R.M. Lodha, J.1. By this application filed by applicant Gomaji Ghanshyam Mohadikar under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is prayed that the proceedings initiated by non-applicant No. 1 Yashoda under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Tumsar and registered Misc. Criminal Case No. 75 of 1995 be quashed and set aside. This prayer is made by the applicant on the ground that prior to the initiation of the proceeding under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code, the applicant has already initiated proceedings for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur and the application under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code has been filed by the non-applicant only to harass the applicant.2. The applicant Gomaji Ghanshyam Mohadikar (for short, the 'husband') married the non-applicant No. 1 Yashoda (for short, the 'wife') on 20.6.1991 and the marriage between the parties ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-10-1995
Reported in : 1995CriLJ1509
ORDER1. Heard both sides. 2. The order Impugned is dated 22nd April, 1994 which only allows the application of the respondent-State for permission to record the statement of the prosecutrix Chaitrali under sub-sec. (8) of S. 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The brief facts of the case are as under : 3. On 10th September 1993, the prosecutrix Chaitrali is alleged to have been raped by the petitioner-accused. Chaitrali was admittedly about five years of age at that time. Chaitrali narrated the incident to her mother. The statement of the mother of Chaitrali was recorded. Unfortunately, however, it is stated that because of the incident, Chaitrali's mother suffered a shock and died on 1st January 1994. The petitioner-accused is on bail. 4. The death of the mother of Chaitrali has occurred during the course of the trial. As a result of this unfortunate event, the prosecution thought it fit to now supply to the Court for permission to record the statement of Chaitrali herself. Obvious...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Sep-04-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ1202; 1995(2)WLN623
V.S. Kokje, J.1. Vijay Singh, Bhanwar Singh, Kalyan Singh, Kishan Singh, Khem Singh, Vaje Ram, Anandi Lal and Jalam Singh were prosecuted on charges under Sections 302,302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code for having caused death of Ranjeet Singh, Devi Lal, Kanhaiya Lal. Suresh Chandra, Shanti Lal, Hazari Lal, Arjun Lal, Gulab, Prakash, Chuni Das and Sunder Lal by intentionally dashing a dumper driven by Vijay Singh son of Bhanwar Singh with the Jeep in which the eleven deceased persons were travelling. The motive for the crime was alleged to be enmity between the parties arising but of a property dispute and a Criminal Case going on between the parties.2. Accused Vijay Singh is the son of accused Bhanwar Singh and accused persons Kalyan Singh, Kishan Singh and Khem Singh are the brothers of Bhanwar Singh. 'The trial Court acquitted all the accused persons pf charge under Section 120B I.P.C. Accused Vijay Singh son of Bhanwar Singh was found guilty under Section 302 I.P.C. and accus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-18-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ172
1. Heard Shri A. D. Vyawahare, the learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Shri Vyawahare, the learned counsel for the applicant, submits that there is no evidence of non-applicant No. 1 wife that the applicant husband has neglected to maintain her and the child Devendra and, therefore, the courts below were not justified in awarding the maintenance to the wife and the son. Shri Vyawahare also contends that the amount of maintenance awarded by the courts below to the wife at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month and to the child at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month is excessive and beyond the financial capacity of the applicant and, therefore, the orders passed by courts below deserve to be set aside. 3. There is no dispute that the applicant Tejram (for short 'the husband') married non-applicant No. 1 Sunanda (for short 'the wife') in the year 1985 and out of the wedlock, non-applicant No. 2 Devendra minor son was born. The husband and the wife cohabited for about six years and thereafter the w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-17-1995
Reported in : I(1996)DMC508
S.B. Sakrikar, J.1. This is a revision directed against the order dated 14.12.1992 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas Camp Kannod in Criminal Revision No. 7/90. Thereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge set-aside the order dated 14.12.1989 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Khategaon in Misc. Criminal Case No. 9/89 by which the learned Magistrate found the non-applicant entitled for the recovery of maintenance allowance preceding one year from the date of filing of the application dated 3.3.1989 under Section 125(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The brief facts of the case are that the non-applicant Sitabai filed an application against the present applicant under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for awarding maintenance allowance to herself and also to her minor child. The maintenance claimed by her was Rs. 300/- per month. The said application was opposed by the applicant Premchand. The learned Trial Court by its order dated 1.11.1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-29-1995
Reported in : 1995(0)MPLJ567
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. State has filed .the revision against certain directions issued by the Sessions Judge, Guna in Sessions Trial Case No. 166 of 1991.2. Learned Sessions Judge tried four accused on charges under Sections 302, 302 read with Sections 34, 307 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted first accused under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and imposed sentence of imprisonment for life on him and convicted third accused under Section 323, Indian Penal Code and imposed sentence of simple imprisonment of three months on him. Other accused were acquitted of all charges. Third accused was acquitted of other charges. Learned Sessions Judge further directed -(i) that first accused shall pay compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the 18 year old widow of the victim Kalyan and since recovery may be delayed or may not be possible for the present, the State shall pay this amount to her and recover it from the properties of the first accused;(ii) The State shall also...
Tag this Judgment!