Court : Patna
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.1. Both the appellants, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 6th of October, 2004 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions, West Champaran, Bettiah in Trial No. 06 of 2001 holding them guilty of offence under Section 23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psytchotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years each, have preferred this appeal.2. According to the prosecution, on the basis of an Intelligence message Ambassador Car bearing registration No. U.M.Y-2527 having plate of 'Bharat Sarkar' affixed in its front portion, was intercepted by the Valmikinagar Custom Staff at Valmiki Nagar Custom Check Post on 11th January, 2001 at 6 A.M. On interception two persons, namely, Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Lala Tiwari alias Surya Prakash Tiwari, appellants herein were found travelling in the car. On inquiry Manoj Kumar Tiwari disclosed that he is the driver of the Car who had gone alongwith the other accused to drop the officials ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B. Lamare, J. 1. Heard Mr. R. Iralu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. N. Rhetso, learned Addl. Central Govt. Standing Counsel. 2. The petitioner is the father of late Ms. Rukhiezonuo. The petitioner has three daughters and four sons. The deceased late Rukhiezonuo was the eldest daughter. The said daughter of the petitioner was shot dead by one Rifleman No. 13747927 U, Ram Rattan of the 5th Bn. J&K; Rifles on 29.6.1996. The story leading to the death of the deceased is clearly mentioned in paragraph 2 and 3 of the writ petition which reads as follows ;- 'That there is an army post at Chiephobozou Village which is not very far from the petitioner's village of Nerhema. On 29.6.1996 the 'C' company 5th Battalion, Jammu and Kashmir Rifles, then posted at Indira Gandhi Stadium, Kohima, moved to Chiephobozou army post. On the same day, sometime in the evening Rifleman No. 13747927 Y, Ram Rattan, 5th Battalion & A.K. Rifles, left the post fully equipped with rams and ammunition wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2008)11VST303(All)
ORDERPrakash Krishna, J.1. These revisions are at the instance of Commissioner of Trade Tax in respect of the same assessee involving similar question of law and fact for the assessment year's 1986-87 and 1987-88. The opposite party deals in kirana spices, oil-seed and dry fruits, etc. In the assessment year 1986-87 the dealer-opposite party claimed exemption from payment of tax on the sale of spices and haldi of Rs. 2,90,079.50 on the basis of export to Nepal. Similarly it claimed exemption from payment of tax for the subsequent assessment year on sale of haldi worth Rs. 2,24,579 on the basis of export to Nepal. The assessing authority accepted the books of account of the dealer but rejected the claim of exemption in respect of the aforesaid turnover. However, the first appellate authority and the Tribunal allowed the claim of the dealer-opposite party. Challenging the orders of the Tribunal present revisions have been filed by the Commissioner of Trade Tax under Section 11 of the U.P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 18Ind.Cas.149
Carnduff, J.1. Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 provides that, whenever a Sub-Divisional Magistrate receives information that a person within the local limits of his jurisdiction is in the habit of committing such offences as theft, robbery, extortion, breach of the peace and so forth, or is so desperate and dangerous as to render his being at large without security hazardous to the community, he may require him to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for his good behaviour; and Section 117, Sub-section (3), enacts that the fact that a person is such a habitual offender as aforesaid may be proved by evidence of general repute or otherwise.2. Under these provisions, the petitioner, who is an Honorary Magistrate of twenty years' standing and a zemindar of good family and position residing in the Supaul Sub-Division of the Bhagalpur District, was, on the 18th May last, called upon to show cause by Babu Satis Chandra Mukerjee, the Sub-Divisional Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi
1. The following order of the Appellate Tribunal has been delivered by Shri R.N. Poddar, Member. 2. This appeal is directed against the adjudication order No. 415/89/Ad dated 24-10-1989 passed by the Asstt. Director, Enforcement Directorate whereby a penalty of Rs. 10,000 has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 8(1) and 8(2) of FERA, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and also confiscated seized currency wit US $ 7493, DM 290, Nepali Taka 156, Pakistani Rs. 50, Bengladesh Taka 7000 and Bhutanese currency notes 10 in terms of section 63 of the Act. 3. A show-cause notice No. 225/86/SCN/AD, dated 8-5-1986 was issued to the appellant asking why adjudication proceeding should not be held against him for acquiring/purchase of foreign exchange to wit US $ 7493, DM 290, Nepali Taka 156, Pakistani Rs. 50, Bangladesh Taka 7000 and Bhutanese currency notes 10 from person not being authorised in foreign exchange without previous general or special permission of RBI a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
1 Criminal Appeal No. 627 of 2002 Against the judgment and order of conviction dated 24.09.2002 and sentence dated 25.09.2002 respectively passed by Sri.Arun Kumar Roy Additional Sessions Judge Dhanbad in Session Trial No. 304 of 1998. ---------- Pramod Kumar Verma S/O Krishna Prasad Verma resident of Jeetpur,P.S Jsors Pokhar Dist.Dhanbad. ...... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Respondent For the Appellant :- Mr. B.K.Jha Advocate For the State :- Mr. Rakesh Kumar A.P.P PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Ratnaker Bhengra C.A.V On 03.07.2015 Delivered on 1-10-2015 Ratnaker Bhengra,J.This Criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 24.9.2002 and order of sentence dated 25.9.2002 in S.T. No. 304 of 1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad whereby the above named appellant has been found guilty and convicted under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, though he is acquitted under section 412 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to und...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1973Cal425,77CWN535
A.K. Sinha, J. 1. These two appeals are preferred by the husband against the judgment and decree of the trial Court refusing restitution of conjugal rights, and allowing the wife a child's custody briefly, in the following circumstances.The petitioner-husband, who is the present appellant, made an application for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent No. 1, Dulari Bai. His case, briefly, is that he married the respondent No. 1 according to Hindu rites in the month of February, 1955 at a place known as Terhiparha within P. S. Kharagpur, District Midnaporc. After their marriage they continued to live as husband and wife when a daughter was born who, however, subsequently died. Thereafter, another daughter Sukundraj and a son Kishen Singh were born out of their wedlock. Although, they lived happily for a number of years as husband and wife, the respondent No. 2, the mother of respondent No. 1, a woman of questionable character in conspiracy and collusion with others forcib...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :11. h October, 2013 + CRL.A.520/2000 RAM KUMAR ..... Appellant Through : None. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Ram Kumar (the appellant) and Udai Bhan were arrested and sent for trial in case FIR No.298/1997 registered at Police Station Pahar Ganj with the allegations that on 21.04.1997 at about 07.30 a.m. at staircase of Pul Pahar Ganj they along with two other companions robbed Anil of `45,000/- at knife point. During the course of investigation, the police was able to apprehend and arrest only Udai Bhan and Ram Kumar. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against them and they were duly charged and brought to trial. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses. In their 313 statements, the accused persons denied their complicity in the offence. The Trial Court by the impugned judgment dated 04.08.2000 found them guil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Reported in : 2004CriLJ4080
R.K. Patra, C.J.1. The aforesaid twin appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 17th January, 2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge (E and N) Sikkim at Gangtok in Criminal Case No. 19 of 2000 by which the three appellants stand convicted under Section 302 read with 34, IPC and sentenced each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) each with defaulting clause of sentence.2. Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 2003 has been filed by the appellant Ben Kumar Rai alias Jhony Rai whereas Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2003 by Lhakpa Sherpa and Karma Sonam Sherpa alias Jaggu.3. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that Ashok Kumar Bansal (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was residing at Singtam Bazar with his wife PW-19 Sushma and two minor children. In his residential building, he was running a hardware shop. In the evening of 15th October, 1999 (prior to the date of occurrence, i.e., 16th October, 1999) appellant Ben Ku...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2003(II)OLR549
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has filed this petition praying to quash the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in Criminal Revision No. 44 of 1990 confirming an order passed by the S.D.J.M., Hindol in ICC No. 16 of 1990 taking cognizance of an offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.2. According to the petitioner, the alleged commission of offence under Section 500 IPC is levelled against him while he was discharging the duties as an Executive Magistrate being in charge of law and order situation and as such he is protected by the umbrella provided under Section 197 CrPC and unless the impugned order is set aside it will not only prejudice the rights of the petitioner but will also amount to abuse of the process of law.3. To appreciate the backdrop of the factual scenario, it is necessary to state the facts of the case, shorn of unn...
Tag this Judgment!