Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1956Raj153
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an application by Allahnoor under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ, direction or order to the District Magistrate of Chittorgarh, and arises in the following circumstances:2. The applicant is a person carrying on trade and business of manufacturing file-works, and sale or gun-powder at Nimbahera. In that connection, he applied to the District Magistrate of Chittorgarh for a no-objection certificate under Rule 85(3) of the Explosives Rules as he desired to obtain a license for 200 pounds of gun-powder from the Chief Inspector of Explosives. The District Magistrate, however, rejected the application without even looking at the site where the applicant proposed to carry on the business, and gave, no reasons to the applicant for such rejection.The applicant, therefore, has come up to this Court and his contention is that he is being deprived of his occupation, and thus his fundamental right granted under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution has been violat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1967Raj190; 1967CriLJ1053
ORDERB.P. Beri, J. 1. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directed against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Pali, dated 6th July, 1966, who maintained the conviction and sentence of the applicants under Sections 295 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The circumstances leading up to the present application for revision briefly stated are these: On 7th April, 1964 some ladies of Jetaran went for worship to the temple of Mataji outside Mertji Darwaja near Jagannathji-ki-Bavri, Jetaran. To their suprise they did not find the idols in the temple and even the Chabutra on which the idols stood and the steps leading to the Chabutra were found damaged. On 8th April, 1964 some Hindu residents of Jetaran made a report to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jetaran that in the said temple there were idols of Seetlamataji, Achparaji, Bodarji and others and these idols were removed dishonestly from the Chabutra by some Musalmans which has occasioned an injury t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1971WLN23
Kan Singh, J.1. Accused Mangal Singh and Sahab Singh were convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge No. 1, Dholpur of offences under Sections 326 and 326 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code respectively Each one of them was awarded a sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 250/-; in default six months' further rigorous imprisonment. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge further ordered that at amount of Rs. 250/- out of the fine, if realised, shall be paid to injured Gordhana. The accused lodged an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge Bharatpur which was transferred to the learned Additional Sessions Judge Dholpur who had dismissed it and maintained the conviction and the sentence awarded to the accused petitioners. They have come up to this Cour in revision.2. There was bad blood between P.W. 1 Gordhana and the two accused on account of a dispute about an agricultural land. Mangal Singh was the son aged about 14 years at the time and Sahab Singh was his...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1974WLN839
1. The petitioners in these two writ petitions complain that their liberty has been infringed on account of their unlawful detention under the provisions of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). We shall examine the validity and legality of their detention in the light of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 22 of the Constitution of India and the procedural safeguards provided under the Act.2 As the case of both the petitioners is common and the grounds of their detention are identical, it would be proper to dispese of both the petitions by a common order. We will, however, mention the facts with reference to the writ petition No. 2223 of 1974.3. The facts are brief and simple The two petitioners namely, Bhagwan Das, and Nathmal, are brothers and ate partners carrying on their partnership business at Sikar under the name and style of M/s Ramesh Kumar Bhagwan Das. They deal in general merchandise and according to them, they carried on thei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1975Raj134; 1974(7)WLN965
Kan Singh, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act', by a wife against whom the learned District Judge has passed a decree for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Act.2. The parties, who were. Hindus, were married according to Hindu rites on 4-5-65 (Baisakh Sudi 3, Samvat year 2022) at Jodh-pur. The husband averred that after the marriage was celebrated the wife did not live with him. He made several attempts to induce his in-laws to scad his wife, but they did not heed. He, therefore, made the application under Section 9 of the Act in the court of the learned District Judge on 14-12-1968. The wife appeared to be a minor at the time the proceedings were commenced and,therefore, a guardian ad litem was appointed for her. The guardian ad litem resisted the application on a number of grounds. It was pleaded that there was no 'Muklava' ceremony and, therefore, the marriage was not complete and then th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1975CriLJ968; 1975()WLN1
S.N. Modi, J1. The two appellants. Bakhtawar Singh and Karnailsingh along with their fathers, Narsingh and Gurbux-singh respectively were tried for offences under Sections 302 and 307, Indian Penal Code as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar acquitted Narsingh and Gurbux Singh and convicted the appellants for ant offence under Section 307, Indian Penal Code for attempt to murder Jaggasingh and Balbirsingh by causing injuries to them by 303 rifles and sentenced each one of them to suffer imprisonment for life, Jaggasingh succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The appellants were further convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and each one of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. The appellants have come-up in appeal against their convictions and sentences.2. The incident relating to this, case took place at village Khaliwala, district Ganganagar, on 23-3-1972 at about p.m. in killa No. 5 of the field belonging t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1977CriLJ68; 1976(9)WLN377
S.N. Modi, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Kota, dated January 29, 1973, convicting and sentencing Janardan Prasad. the appellant, to life imprisonment for the murder of Mool Chand.2. The incident, to which this case relates, took place in Kota on April 14, 1972 at about 1.15 p.m. at the shop of P.W. 9 Gopi Chand. On the date of the incident, the appellant was holding the post of Sub-Inspector of Police. At about 12 noon on that day, the appellant, the deceased and P.W. 10 K.P. Mehta assembled at the shop of P.W. 9 Gopi Chand, and all of them including Gopi Chand commenced taking drinks. The appellant had a revolver Ex. 1 with him in a leather case. He took out the revolver Ex. ]. from the leather case. He loaded it with cartridges and commenced cleaning it. Soon thereafter, all of a sudden, a report of a gun fire was heard and Mool Chand, the deceased, who was sitting in front of the appellant on a bench, fell down on the ground and died instantaneou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1979WLN224
M.C. Jain, J.1. These 26 are writ, petitions where in orders passed by he Sub-Divisional Officer, Sojat, (respondent No. 3) dated 18.9.75 and the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur (respondent No. 5). dated 26.3.76 in ceiling proceedings in relation to the lands held and transferred by respondent No. 4 in favour of the petitioners, have been sought to be quashed.2. The petitioners have averred in their writ petitions that they are agriculturists domiciled in Rajasthan within the defnition of the term as given in explanation to Section 30DD of Chapter III of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') They are permanently residing In Rajasthan since birth and earn their livelihood wholly from agriculture and cultivate their lands by their own labour and the labour of the members of their family They being landless cultivators as defined in the Act purchased Agricultural lands described in para 2 of the writ petitions not exceeding 30 acres from respondent No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1984Raj78; 1984()WLN116
ORDERK.S. Sidhu, J.1. Birla Jute and Industries Ltd. (petitioner 1 herein) is the proprietor of Birla Cement Works Chittorgarh; and M. M. Goswami (petitioner 2 herein) is the Senior Vice-President of Birla Cement Works Chittorgarh. The petitioners filed this application for issue to the State of Rajasthan (respondent 2) and the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (R.S.E.B.) direction, order or writ including writ in the nature of mandamus directing them to supply continuous electric energy of 10824 KVA to the petitioners' Cement Works at Chittorgarh and to refrain from showing discrimination in favour of M/s. Modi Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd. Alwar (respondent 4) as is being done pursuant to the letter, dated Dec. 20, 1982. The impugned letter which was addressed by the Special Secretary to the Rajasthan Government in the Industries (GR. I) Department to respondent 4 is as under:I am directed to refer to your representation dated the 23rd November, 1982 regarding power supply to your unit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1985(2)WLN615
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (1), Hanumangarh dated February 13, 1981, by which the appellant Mithasingh was convicted under Section 302, IPC, and Section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to imprisonment for life and three years' rigorous imprisonment on the respective counts.2. The prosecution case is short and simple and in succinct it is as follows. Azyabsingh the deceased victim in the case was the son of PW 1 Gulabsingh, Jat Sikh and cousin of PW 2 Sukhdeo Singh. He was living with his parents in village Chandro P.S. Hanumangarh, district Ganga-nagar. The accused is also resident of the same village. Azyabsingh was convicted under Section 307, IPC and was sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment for making attempt on the life of the appellant. The appellant, due to this attempt on his life by Azyabsingh, started harbouring ill-will against him. Azayabsingh, went in appeal. The appeal was admi...
Tag this Judgment!