Court : Gujarat
Gujarat High Court Case Information System BODY {SCROLLBAR-FACE-COLOR: #d4d0c8; SCROLLBAR-HIGHLIGHT-COLOR: #808080; SCROLLBAR-SHADOW-COLOR: #d4d0c8; SCROLLBAR-ARROW-COLOR: #ffffff; scrollbar-dark-shadow-color: #ffffff} SPAN.searchword { background-color:yellow; } function loadSearchHighlight() { var chkParamC = "txtSearch" if (chkParamC == "txtSearch") { SearchHighlight(); document.searchhi.h.value = searchhi_string; if( location.hash.length > 1 ) location.hash = location.hash; } } Print CR.MA/12204/20113/3ORDERINTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADCRIMINALMISC.APPLICATION No. 12204 of 2011=========================================PREMBAHADUR@JITU NEPALI VEERBAHADUR RAJPUT - Applicant(s)VersusSTATEOF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)=========================================Appearance :MRFEROZ H PATHAN forApplicant(s) : 1,MS CM SHAH, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR forRespondent(s) : 1,=========================================CORAM: HONOURABLEMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYEDDate: 07/10/2011ORALORDERBywa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1998)2GLR548
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In esse and in reality, the question of interpretation and applicability of provisions of Articles 80(4) and 84 of the Constitution of India and provisions of Sections 30, 33, 36, 39 and 80 to 84 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951) ('R.P.Act') has been placed in focus in this election petition under Section 80-A of the R.P.Act while challenging the election of the returned candidate ,respondent No.2 Dr. Yoginderkumar Alagh (now Union Minister) in the bye-election to the council of States held in November 1996. The petitioner has also questioned the order of the returning officer ,respondent No.1 dated 21.11.1996 whereby two nomination papers of the petitioner came to be rejected on the ground that nomination papers had not been proposed by an elector of Gujarat Legislative Assembly Constituency as required under Section 39(2) of the R.P. Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the expression ''the representative of each State'' in the council o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2004)2GLR1764
R.K. Abhichandani, J.1. These two petitions raising common questions seek to challenge the provisions of Sections 7(1)(b), 14 and 15 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 on the ground that they violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. They also challenge the notification dated 23.2.2000 issued by the Commissioner of Police under the provisions of Section 7(1)(b) by which the areas within the jurisdiction of Chakla Bazaar Police Station, Surat were notified rendering carrying on prostitution in any premises within those areas as an offence.Brief facts and pleadings:2. Special Civil Application No.15195 of 2003 has been filed by a public trust, registered only on 25.1.2002, purporting to be an organization consisting of 214 women in prostitution/sex work as its members at Surat. According to the petitioner-organization, it works along with other non-governmental organizations in the field of HIV/AIDS in Surat and the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1996)3GLR823
S.M. Soni, J.1. Petitioner-detenu, being branded as a bootlegger as defined in Section 2(b) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 ('PASA Act' for short), has challenged the order of detention dated 7-8-1995 passed by the respondent No. 1 in exercise of power under Section 3(2) of PASA Act with a view to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, as his activities are likely to or deem to affect adversely the public health. On the order being served, petitioner was also served with the grounds of detention with necessary documents relied on by the authority to record subjective satisfaction.2. To brand the petitioner as a bootlegger, the authority has relied on as many as six cases registered under the Bombay Prohibition Act, of which three are pending in Court and three are pending investigation. He was also supplied with necessary documents referred in the grounds, which according to the authority, were reli...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1997)1GLR198
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. The enigmatic problem which incidentally we have been called upon to resolve in these two appeals, one of which is for the enhancement of the sentence is a question-'Whether and when in the midst of an intense rampant, unabated, psychic pollution challengingly, spreading like the forest fire all around in the society and in particular engulfing and victimizing the unguarded young generation of slippery age making them prone to commit crimes because of the mesmerizing uncontrolled obscene films exhibiting sex and crime day in and day out beamed through the channels on the TV and the Government as if unconcerned with this doing nothing about it, can the unwary victim of such psychic pollution inflicted disease be punished and if at all punished savagely for the alleged offence of rape for 7 years? Over and above and apart parents, has indeed the Government no public duty rather accountability to its citizens to take care of their psychic health by controlling and preven...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1996CriLJ2744
ORDERS.D. Shah, J.1. The petitioner detenu has by this petition challenged the legality and validity of the order of detention dated 7th December, 1994, passed by the District Magistrate, Surat, Under Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985, on his being satisfied that detenu was a 'dangerous person' within the meaning of the said term as defined by Section 2(c) of the said Act and that his activities were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and, therefore, he was required to be detained. The grounds of detention duly formulated Under Section 9(1) of the said Act of even date are supplied to the detenu.2. From the grounds of detention supplied to the detenu, it becomes clear that the detenu is resident of village Kathor. He is a very head strong person and he is communal minded. His activities have become more dangerous and horrendous after demolition of Babri Masjid in December, 1992 and he and his associates belonging to muslim community hav...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1984CriLJ1790
ORDERA.P. Ravani, J.1. Some questions of vital public importance have arisen in this petition. On this point at least, the learned Counsel appearing for rival parties appear to be ad idem. The questions are : Does it behave to the lawyers as a class to resort to strike and if anyone publicly comments and publishes the same in a rather unhappy or unpleasant language, would it amount to defamation of an individual member of the class of lawyers? Further, if the insinuating remarks are directed against the entire class of lawyers, would it amount to an offence of defamation so as to attract the provisions of Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code2. According to the complainant, since September 23, 1983, the lawyers in Gujarat were protesting against the interference of the Government in judiciary. On account of the agitation, they ceased to participate in court proceedings and resorted to 'satyagraha'. As stated in the Resolution passed on February 2, 1984 by the Executive Committe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2002CriLJ4040; (2002)4GLR3165
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. Both these appeals arise from the judgmentdelivered by the Ld. Sessions Judge, Amreli dated30/9/1992 in Sessions Case No. 38/1991. By saidjudgment original accused no. 1 - Gala Kana has beenconvicted for an offence u/S. 302 of the Indian PenalCode (for short 'IPC') and he has been sentenced tosuffer imprisonment for life. He has also been convictedfor offence u/S. 333 of the IPC for which no separatesentence has been imposed. Moreover, he has beenconvicted for the offence u/S. 135 of the Bombay PoliceAct and has been sentenced to suffer RI for three months.The substantive sentences are ordered to runconcurrently. He has, therefore, approached this Courtby filing Criminal Appeal No. 1200 of 1992.1.1. Original accused no.2 - Mitha Kanabhai has beenconvicted for offences u/Ss. 324 and 332 of the IPC readwith section 109 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer RIfor one year. However, he has been granted benefit underthe Probation of Offenders Act on the condition of givin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2003]129TAXMAN80(Guj)
A.B. Chandani, J.This Reference is made under section 21(5) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, by which the council has forwarded the case to this court after finding the respondent, who is a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, guilty of misconduct other than the misconduct as is referred to in sub-section (4) of section 21 of the Act, and recommended removal of the respondents name from the Register of members of the institute of Chartered Accountants of India for a period of six months.2. The Charge levelled against the respondent in respect of the alleged misconduct reads as under :'The respondent had, authored a book entitled Tax Planning for Secret Income (hereinafter referred to as 'the Black Money')'. on going through the Preface as well as the contents of the book. It was seen that the author had explained in detail the various methods of creation of black money followed by different sections of society and the methods legal as well as illegal genera...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2002)4GLR3734
K.M. Mehta, J.1. D. Barot-petitioner herein has filed this petition for a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or Order, quashing and setting aside the impugned Order of discharge dated 13-1-1999 passed by the Special Additional Police Officer, Rajkot discharging the petitioner from service. The petitioner further prayed that this Court may direct the respondent-State of Gujarat through the Secretary, Home Department and direct the Director General of Police, Gujarat State to reinstate the petitioner with consequential benefits and back wages. He further prayed that this Court may also quash and set aside the Order dated 1-10-1999 passed by the Special Police Officer, Rajkot rejecting the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner further prayed that this Court may also direct the respondents to treat the petitioner as having been confirmed in service on 14-6-1998 when his probation period was wrongly extended for six month...
Tag this Judgment!