Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-06-2000
Reported in : AIR2001All63; (2001)1UPLBEC44
A.K. Yog, J.1. All these petitions were clubbed and heard together as jointly agreed by the learned counsels for the parties. Salient facts of the cases are not disputed.2. These petitions have been filed by certain students, registered bonafide students of the University of Allahabad (called the 'University') and its affiliated Colleges (called the 'Colleges') being aggrieved due toinaction of the Respondents in the matters of 'unfair means cases' and failing to discharge their statutory obligation under Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 (called the 'Act, 1973') due to pendency of criminal proceedings under The U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998 (called the 'Act, 1998') and as a consequence thereof these students being prevented from further pursing their respective academic studies.3. These Petitioners are charged of using means while appearing in their respective examination conducted by the University / Colleges. First Information Reports have ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-15-2000
Reported in : 2001CriLJ873
ORDERMaithli Sharan, J.1. This criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure arises out of the judgment passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ashok Nagar District-Guna in Criminal Appeal No. 159/97 dt. 25-6-98, maintaining the order of conviction passed against the petitioner by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ashoknagar DistrictGuna under Section 25 of the Arms Act, and enhancing the sentence of imprisonment from 8 months R.I. to one year R.I.2. The brief facts of the case, lying in a narrow compass, leading to the filing of this petition, are thus; On 5-1-90 the petitioner was arrested under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and during the search being made he was found in possession of a country made gun in two pieces for which he had no licence. The said gun, found to be in working order, was seized by the police and a case for the offence under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 was registered against the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-22-2000
Reported in : AIR2000SC3330; 2000(2)ALD(Cri)760; 2000CriLJ4597; 2000(6)SCALE457; (2000)8SCC547
R.P. Sethi, J.1. The appellants, who are senior officers of the United Bank of India, have been arraigned as accused persons in the charge-sheet submitted by the CBI in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna, for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420 and 120B IPC. They filed a petition under Section 239 of the CrPC praying for being discharged as, according to them, no case was disclosed either in the FIR or in the documents accompanying the final report submitted under Section 173 of the CrPC. The Magistrate, vide his order dated 6-7-1996, rejected the application and directed he presence of the appellants in the court for framing of charges. Feeling aggrieved the appellants moved the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC with prayer for quashing the order of the Magistrate. Their prayer was rejected vide the order impugned hence this appeal. 2. Mr. Altaf Ahmad, the learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the appellants submitted that the av...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-01-2000
Reported in : 2000(1)ALD(Cri)590; [2000]100CompCas729(AP)
ORDERJ. Chelameswar, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.24 of 1999 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Economic Offences at Hyderabad. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in the said C.C., which came to be filed by way of private complaint by the first respondent herein alleging the commission of offences under Sections 60, 63, 68, 68A read with Section 621 of the Companies Act. The first respondent is a share-holder in a company called M/s. SPECTRUM POWER GENERATION LIMITED, Hyderabad which has its registered office at Hyderabad. The petitioners herein are the directors of the said company.2. The allegations of the complaint are that the petitioners floated a Company in United States of America (U.S.A.) - M/s. SPECTRUM TECHNOLOGIES USA INC at New York. In the said company, both the petitioners own 5000 of the shares each. The accused also floated an offshore company called S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Aug-25-2000
Reported in : 2001CriLJ81
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. This writ Appeal is filed against the Order in C.M.P. No. 35930 of 1998 in O.P. No. 12701 of 1998. Fourth respondent in the C.M.P. is the appellant. He is the fourth respondent in the Original Petition also. According to the appellant, he is a tenant of a building called 'Jaya Building,' Main road Kollam. The tenancy was given by one Durairaja Reddiar by executing an agreement of lease dated 6-1-1994. This lease deed enabled him to make alterations in the building. Accordingly, he effected some alterations in the building. When it was found that alterations were effected, the appellant received, from the Kollam Municipality, an order directing him to demolish the structure, which according to the Municipality, is unauthorised.2. Against the order of the Municipality, petitioner approached the Government. The Government issued an Order dated 22-6-1998, which is produced as Ext. P-5 in the Original petition directing the appellant to submit an application through t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-18-2000
Reported in : 2000(5)ALD51; 2000(4)ALT541; 2000CriLJ4058
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. These two Public Interest Litigation cases may conveniently be disposed of by a common order as they involve same questions of fact and law. An advocate, who is the President of A.P. Prison Reforms and Legal Aid Committee, filed WP No.32039 of 1998. He prayed for a direction to the State Government to appoint a High Level Commission headed by a sitting or retired High Court Judge, to visit and inspect all the prisons in the State and submit a report concerning the conditions of prisons and prisoners with suggestions as to remedial measures, and to direct the State Government to provide proper accommodation and sufficient vehicles and female police escort to transport female prisoners for the purpose of production in the trial Courts, and such other related prayers.2. WP No.6919 of 1999 is filed by a Journalist and Social Worker praying for a declaration that the action of the respondents viz., Government of Andhra Pradesh, Director-General of Police, and the Inspe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-01-2000
Reported in : 2000(1)ALD(Cri)512; 2000(3)ALT381; 2000(1)ALT(Cri)412; 2000CriLJ2033; 2000(70)ECC715
B. Sudershan, J.1. The learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, convicted the appellant herein for the offence punishable Under Section 8(b) read with Section 20(i)(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to him to under go rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 (Rs. Three thousand only) in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant challenges the conviction, as well as the sentence imposed on him by the learned Sessions Judge. The Judgment dated: 02-07-1997 in Calendar Case No. 90 of 1995 on the file of the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, is impugned in this criminal appeal.2. It may be necessary to briefly notice the case of the prosecution before adverting to the questions that may arise for consideration in this case. The Station House Officer, Khanapur P.S., in pursuance of the information about the cultivation of raided the land in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-21-2000
Reported in : 2000(118)ELT563(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. This is a reference under Section 82B of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') made by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi that has referred the following questions for the decision of this Court:'(1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal erred in arriving at different findings contrary to the findings of the Allahabad High Court in criminal revision No. 1756/80 ?(2) Whether the Tribunal erred in imposing the penalty under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 in the absence of any gold being seized and on the basis of the accounts only ?'2. We have heard Sri V.K. Goel, learned counsel for the applicant at whose instance this reference has been made and Sri Surya Prakash, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.3. The facts of the case are that on 12-10-1974 the Central Excise Department, Income Tax Department and the local police jointly raided the residential premises of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-17-2000
Reported in : (2000)102BOMLR593
Pratibha Upasani, J.1. This Criminal Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner/original accused, being aggrieved by the order dated 22nd December, 1993, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Criminal Revision Application No. 934 of 1993, whereby, while allowing Criminal Revision Application of the accused and setting aside the order of issuance of process, he directed the said complaint to be sent to the Police for investigation under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and kept the matter for passing necessary orders regarding the same, after getting report from the Police.2. Few facts, which are required to be stated, are as follows:One Mr. Potnis, who is Senior Manager of the Sadashiv Peth Branch of Bank of Baroda, Pune, filed complaint dated nil November, 1993, against the present petitioner/original accused, under Sections 406, 420, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. His case was that, the complainant-Bank under a Credit Card Scheme, popularly known a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-05-2000
Reported in : [2001]104CompCas718(Cal)
1. In spite of notice nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party.2. This revisional application is directed against an order dated 20-12-1999, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South 24 Parganas, Alipore, in Case No. C-502 of 1999 thereby rejecting the application of the present petitioner praying for a direction upon the accused to vacate the bungalow which is the property of the petitioner and which the accused opposite party is illegally and wrongfully withholding after the termination of service.3. The present petitioner filed a petition of complaint against the accused opposite party under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') inthe court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South 24 Parganas, Alipore, on 20-2-1999. The allegation made in the petition of complaint is that Tata Tea Ltd. is a public limited company within the meaning of the Companies Act. The company appointed the accused opposite party as an assistant manager and provided him wi...
Tag this Judgment!