Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1962)3GLR815
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This reference has been made by the Sessions Judge Ahmedabad recommending that that part of the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class Dehgam which required accused No. 1 to furnish an indemnity bond for Rs. 10 0 with one surety in like amount in favour of the complainant be set aside. The complainant filed a complaint against the accused for offences under Sections 427 and 448 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class Dehgam. The case of the complainant was that the field bearing Survey No. 156 was in the possession of the complainant and that the compainant owned all the trees in the field and that the accused had committed criminal trespass on the field and wrongfully cut some of the trees on the field resulting in offences under Sections 427 and 448 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears that prior to the date of the complaint the complainant had filed a suit in the Court o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : I(1998)DMC76; (1997)1GLR504
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Rule. The accused Nos. 1 to 6 in Criminal Case No. 18 of 1996 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate of Court No. 11, Ahmedabad have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the said prosecution. The marriage between the petitioner Upendrasinh. A. Rajput and respondent No. 4 Manishaben took place as per Hindu religious rites on 23.5.1994. Thereafter, she joined the petitioner Upendrasinh Rajput at his house at Baroda and was dwelling with him till August 19, 1994. During this period, she has also conceived a child, but it is her claim that she was treated with cruelty by making dowry demand. Consequently she filed criminal cases bearing Nos. 151 of 1994 & 152 of 1994 for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 406 and 114 and offence punishable under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. and dowry case against her husband and his relatives in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 11, Ahmedabad. In these ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2005CriLJ2957; (2005)1GLR709
J.N. Bhatt, J.Prelude (Focal Point)Let us at the very outset, evidently record, remember, and recollect that ;'A civilisation is judged by the way it treats its criminals.'1. In this group of criminal appeals, specially assigned to the Larger Bench by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, the central theme, the core issue and the main point, in focus, has been, as to whether the trial Court, on being satisfied or in presence of special and adequate reasons peculiar to the accused, to be mentioned in writing, in the judgment of the Court, in finding accused guilty, 'for a first offence' either by evidence or 'by raising the plea of guilty'; is competent to impose for such 'first offence';(i) a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three months and fine of less than Five Hundred Rupees for the offence punishable under the proviso to Sub-clause (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 66 of the 'Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949'. (B. P. Act')?And(ii) a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Oral Judgment: 1.00. Present Revision Application under section 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner - original accused to quash and set aside the impugned Judgement and Order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Mehsana in Criminal Case No. 1098 of 2004 dtd.16/4/2009, by which the petitioner - original accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo further Simple Imprisonment for a period of One Month and further directed the petitioner - original accused to pay Rs.3,50,000/- to the original complainant, towards compensation under section 357(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner herein original accused has also challenged the impugned Judgement and Order passed by the learned appellate ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2012CrLJ355(NOC)
1. The present Special Criminal Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner-Smt Payal Mihirbhai Patel (original accused no. 3 as described in the charge-sheet) to quash and set aside the order dated 14/09/2010 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad below Exh. 2 in Criminal Case No. 147/2010 by which the learned Magistrate has rejected the application submitted by the petitioner to discharge her for the offences alleged arising out of the FIR, being C.R. No. I 1/2010 registered with Mahila Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as the impugned order dated 09/12/2010 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Criminal Revision Application No. 462/2010 by which the learned revisional Court has dismissed the said Revis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2006CriLJ3198; (2006)3GLR1935
J.R. Vora, J.1. At the admission stage, since submissions made at length, the matter was heard finally and learned counsels also agreed for final hearing of the matter.2. Learned advocate Mr. Asin Pandya for the applicants, learned APP Mr. K.C.Shah for the respondent No. 1 ' State of Gujarat and learned advocate Mr. M.A. Bukhari for the respondent No. 2 ' Shri Ismail U. Vohra, were heard at length.3. The present applicants are amongst the accused of Sessions Case No. 199 of 2003 pending before the Court of Sessions i.e. Fast Track Court Judge, at Anand, while respondent No. 1 is the State and the respondent No. 2 herein is the witness of the said trial and filed an application at Ex.245 on 01.03.2005. It was contended by such application that the investigation was biased in favour of the accused and was defective and hence re-investigation was necessary. It was stated that the persons affected in the incident were robbed of their valuables as well as cash amount, but the said muddamal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2002)4GLR3260
S.K. Keshote, J.1. In all these three matters, not only the parties are common but identical order is passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.2, Ahmedabad and therein the facts and questions of law raised are common. In fact, three separate complaints have been filed by the Insurance Inspector, E.S.I. Corporation, Ahmedabad and that is how three separate petitions are there. In view of these facts, these matters are taken up for hearing together and are being decided by this common order. The facts of the case and the grounds of challenge to the order are being taken up from special criminal application No.940/98.2. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with sections 397 and 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner challenges the legality, validity and propriety of the order passed below Ex.2 in Criminal Case No.2611/95 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.2, Ahmedabad dated 9-7-1998. Further prayer has b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2009CriLJ163
ORDERK.A. Puj, J.1. The applicants - original accused have filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing and setting aside the private complaint filed by the opponent No. 2 - original complainant before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad (for short Trial Court') which is registered as Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 and charge-sheet filed on 13.02.1996 and further orders/proceedings of the said Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 pending before the Trial Court.2. This Court has issued rule on 26.11.2002 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly, the nature of the disputes and the age of the petitioner No. 2 who was aged about 83 years and was suffering from paralysis and was totally bed-ridden and at the verge of death, was also dragged into litigation by the complainant, ad-interim relief was granted in terms of paragraph 6 (c) of the petition whereby further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 pend...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1998]92CompCas344(Guj); (1997)3GLR2041
S.D. Pandit, J.Rule. 1. Satishkumar Jayantilal Shah, the original accused in Criminal Case No. 2361 of 1992, on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 9, Ahmedabad, has filed the present petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. The petitioner has been prosecuted by respondent No. 2 for the alleged offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, by alleging that the present petitioner had taken goods worth Rs. 1,43,248.40 from respondent No. 2-company, Unipole Plastics Pvt. Ltd., in the period running between January 10, 1992, and February 8, 1992, and that towards the said dues four cheques bearing Nos. 384226, 384246, 384243 and 384249, dated February 15, 1992, March 15, 1992, March 16, 1992, and March 25, 1992, for the respective amounts of Rs. 46,926.20, Rs. 1,234.90, Rs. 46,920.20 and Rs. 48,168.10 were given and that the said cheques were presented to respondent No. 2's bankers and they were dishonoured by e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2004CriLJ3200
R.P. Dholakia, J. 1. Rule. Learned A.P.P., Mrs.Hansa Punani, waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State in both the petitions. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, both these petitions are taken up for final hearing.2. Both these petitions have been filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the First Information Reports being C.R.No.II-3187 of 2002 lodged with the Danilimda Police Station and C.R.No.I-530 of 2002 lodged with Naroda Police Station and for deleting the name of the petitioner from the respective charge-sheets showing him as an absconding accused mainly on the ground that the only evidence available with the investigating agency is the statement of co-accused and also on the ground that the present petitioner is a social worker who has organized relief camp under the banner of Hajarat Shah-e-Alam Relief Camp at Ahmedabad and who has made grievance against the administration befor...
Tag this Judgment!