Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-23-1976
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
Decided on : Jan-14-1976
Reported in : AIR1976Raj144
ORDERD.P. Gupta, J.1. There was a bus route from Borawar to Pushkar (hereinafter referred to as 'the route') about 90 Kilometers in length, which lay partly in Jodhpur region and partly in the Jaipur region of the State of Rajasthan. The operators of the route appear to have submitted an application for the extension of the route from Pushkar to Ajmer, but the State Transport Authority, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the S. T. A.') rejected the aforesaid application by its resolution dated February 5, 1973 and did not grant the desired extension. The petitioner No. 1 is the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Baser in Nagaur district, while the petitioner No. 2 is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Kadel in Ajmer district. The two petitioners, acting on behalf of the inhabitants of the area and the Panchayats of which they were Sarpanchas some time later submitted representation to the S. T. A. that the route in question should be extended upto Ajmer so as to make available the inhabitan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-14-1976
Reported in : 1976CriLJ1134; 1976(9)WLN13
M.L. Jain, J.1. This appeal has arisen in the following manner.2. Excise Inspector, Phalodi, namely, Khanusingh P.W. 4 and Excise Inspector Banwarilal P.W. 1 checked the field of Sohansingh respondent in village Chhoti Sewahi, Tehsil Osian on April 4, 1970, and found that he was cultivating? the field in collaboration with respondent Kumbha Ram and they had grown poppy. There were 2600 plants in the field which were uprooted and taken in possession in the presence of witnesses Sukhram P.W. 2 and Lalu P.W. 3. The accused were also arrested and forwarded to the police. The poppy plants were got chemically examined and were found to be positive for opium by the Assistant Director, Chemical Section, Police Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. When the challan was put up before the learned Magistrate, it was stated that it was for offence under Section 9 of the Opium Act. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Phalodi, charged the two respondents under the aforesaid section on the allegatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-14-1976
Reported in : 1976WLN91
D.P. Gupta, J.1. There was a bus route from Borawar to Pushkar (hereinafter referred to as 'the route') about 90 Kilometers in length, which lay partly in Jodhpur region and party in the Jaipur region of the State of Rajasthan. The operators of the route appear to have submitted an application for the extension of the route from Pushkar to Ajmer, but the State Transport Authority, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the STA) rejected the aforesaid application by its resolution dated February 5, 1973 and did not grant the desired extension. The petitioner No. 1 is the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Baser in Nagour district, while the petitioner No. 2 is the Sarpanch of Gram panchayat, Kadel in Ajmer district. The two petitioners, acting on behalf of the inhabitants of the area and the Panchayats of which they were Sarpanchs some time later submitted a representation to the STA that the route in question should be extended upto Amer so as to make available the inhabitants of the area a di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-16-1976
Reported in : 1976WLN(UC)11
V.P. Tyagi, C.J.1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949 is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated December 1, 1972 and it arises our of the following circumstances:2. The following facts are not in dispute between the parties. Plaintiff Hibtullah Bhai purchased a shop which was rented out to Bhanwar Lal. Sagarmal and Chandmal. The shop was situate in the town of Nimbahera. the tenancy in favour of the defendants appellants commenced some 30 years before cling of the present suit Hibtullah Bhai was in need of money and, therefore, he borrowed Rs. 4 000/- from the defendants appellants after executing a mortgage deed Ex. 1 on 25th of October. 1957. It was agreed between the parties that the mortgagor shall not get the mortgage redeemed before 7 years of the execution of the mortgage deed and that during the continuance of the mortgage the landlord shall not pay any Munafa on the loan secured against ibis mortgage & the m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-21-1976
Reported in : 1976WLN32
P.D. Kudal, J.1. This is a revision petition against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate. Shri Ganganagar dated 20th February, 1975, whereby be awarded maintenance allowance of Rs. 250/- per month to the non-petitioner Smt. Rukma Devi.2. The facts of the case, in brief, relevant for the disposal of this revision petition are that the applicant was married Smt (sic) Devi about 40 years back. Out of this wedlock two daughters were born to Smt. Rukma Devi. But, as no son was born, the application married a second wife Smt. (sic) Smt. Rukma Devi continued to live with the applicant even after his marriage with Smt. Dikha for some time and, then she left living with the petitioner, and started living with her parents Smt. Rukma Devi then moved an application under Section 488, Cr.P.C. Old.) on 16-5-1959, which was allowed and a maintenance allowance of Rs. 200/- per month was fixed Later on, the petitioner obtained a decree of divorce against Smt Rukma Devi on 4-12-1971. He then ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Feb-17-1976
Reported in : 1976WLN135
Kalyan Dutta Sharma, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 698 of 1975 filed by Poosa Ram and S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 749 of 1975, filed by Amia alias Amrit Lal arise out of on and the same judgment of the Additional Sessions judge, Jodhpur, dated 25th October, 1975, by which Poosa Ram was convicted under Section 307, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer eight months rigorous imprisonment and Amia appellant was convicted under Section 326/34, I.P.C. and awarded sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 400/-, and in default of payment of fine rigorous imprisonment for four months By his very judgment another co-accused Ghanshyam was convicted under Section 352/34, I.P.C. and was released after admonition under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, Ghanshyam, however, did not file an-appeal against his conviction and sentence.2. The prosecution cases against b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Mar-03-1976
Reported in : 1976WLN129
C.M. Lodha, J.1. The petitioner is a Rajasthan Government Undertaking for supply of milk to the city of Jaipur. It is alleged by the petitioner that it is under the Animal Husbandry Department of the Rajasthan Government, though this fact is denied by the non-petitioner No. 2 Manoharkumar, who is the contesting respondent in this case. The respondent No. 2 Manoharkumar was appointed as a Van Clerk on temporary basis for a period of three months vide Annecure. 'A' and his period of service was extended from time to time. He was suspended from service along with three other employees by the order dated 26.7.1969 (Annexure 'F') by the General Manager of the petitioner undertaking on account of a complaint having been received from Sawai Man Singh Hospital, Jaipur about adulteration of milk. Thereafter his services were terminated with effect from 31.10.1969 vide Annexure 'O' dated 30.9.1969. It appears that after the termination of his services, he was served with a chare-sheet on 3.11.19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Mar-04-1976
Reported in : AIR1976Raj142
S.N. Modi, J. 1. This is defendants' second appeal against the appellate judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Sirohi, dated September 30, 1974, confirming the decree and judgment for ejectment passed by the Munsiff-Magistrate, Abu Road. 2. The dispute relates to a residential house situated at Abu Road which is fully described in paragraph No. 2 of the plaint. This house admittedly belongs to Ramanlal Manaklal, who let-out the upper storey of this house to appellant No. 1 Chandrasen on a monthly rent of Rs. 32/-. Besides the monthly rent, the tenant also agreed to pay Rs. 0.75 per month as latrine-tax. Later on, Ramanlal Manaklal sold this house to respondent Murarilal on March 27, 1971. The appellant No. 1 Chandrasen neither paid nor tendered rent after August 8. 1970 to Ramanlal Manaklal and after the sale on March 27, 1971 to the respondent Murarilal: The respondent served notice to quit terminating the tenancy with effect from August 9, 1971. Ultimately when no rent was paid by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Mar-04-1976
Reported in : 1977CriLJ591; 1976(9)WLN51
ORDERM.L. Jain J.1. This application has been made under Section 439 Criminal P.C. by four accused persons Ramji Das s/o Chela Ram, Basantilal, Bhajansingh and Dharam Singh. I have heard arguments.2. The facts appear to be that in the town of Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar, there is a truck Union which allots loads to its members. But Jasbir Singh deceased did not agree to abide by the directions of the union in respect of transporting some cement. Some words were exchanged between Union people and Jasbir Singh towards the evening of 16-11-1975 and Jasbir Singh and party left for home. It is alleged that at about 9.15 p.m. Subhash Jain and 15 others armed with guns, knives, and lathis came to the workshop of Jasbir Singh and attacked them, Jasbir Singh and Faqir Chand died on the spot, while Roop Singh and Hukam Singh father of the deceased were severely wounded.The case was registered in the police station, Anupgarh against 18 persons but it appears that after some time, the inve...
Tag this Judgment!