Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-08-2013
Criminal Appeal No.130-SBA o1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No.130-SBA of 2002 Date of Decision:08.08.2013 State of Haryana .....Appellant Versus Rohtash and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Gourav Verma, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the appellant-State. Mr.N.S.Shekhawat, Advocate, for the respondents. **** MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral) The matrix of the facts and evidence, unfolded during the course of trial, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant appeal filed by the State of Haryana and emanating from the record, as claimed by the prosecution, is that complainant-Jai Parkash (PW7) was working as a over halt agent on commission basis at Railway Station, Nava, District Narnaul. On 14.07.1999 at about 4.45 AM, as soon as he was issuing tickets to the passengers in the booking office of Railway Station, Nava, in the meantime, respondents-accused Roht...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:06. 08.2013 W.P.(C) 7856/2012 and CM No.19738/2012 PRIYANKA GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through:Mr.K.K.Jha, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through:Mr.Roshan Lal Goel, Advocate for R.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) The petitioner before this Court passed out her 10+2 from West Bengal Council of Higher Education with second division. In the aforesaid examination, she obtained 35 marks out of 100 marks in chemistry. A perusal of her mark sheet would show that she had opted for two language subjects (English B and Hindi A), 3 Compulsory Elective (Biology, Mathematics and Physics) and one Optional Elective i.e Chemistry. She obtained 35 out of 100 marks in theory and 38 out of 100 marks in practical in Chemistry. She was declared passed in second division. The mark sheet also shows the following requirement with respect to the pass marks:- Clause 2(b) In Laboratory-based su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Aug-06-2013
A.I.S. Cheema, J. 1. These appeals have been filed by original accused Nos. 1 and 3 respectively. Both of them were charged along with accused no.2 Govardhanlal Shriramdas Sachdeva, the father of original accused no.1 Bhupendra. Accused no.2 Govardhanlal came to be acquitted by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad of offence punishable under Sections 498A, 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC in brief). Accused No.1 Bhupendra and accused No. 3 Rupindar were convicted of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. Accused No.1 Bhupendra was convicted under Section 498A of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Accused No.3 Rupindar came to be convicted under Section 114 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Sentences of fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months were also passed under Sections 302, 498A and 114 of IPC. Accused No.1 Bhupen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-05-2013
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.18483 of 2012 Date of Decision:05. 08.2013 Pandu ....Petitioner Versus U.T.Administration and others ..Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.A.S.Nabhewala, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harkesh Manuja, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. The prayer made in this writ petition is for regularization. The petitioner joined the Chandigarh Administration as a daily wager on 01.01.1982. After the lapse of 14 yeaRs.the services of the petitioner along with many other employees was transferred to the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation, where the petitioner joined on 21.05.1996. In the year 2010, when the case of the petitioner and other similar employees was bein...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Aug-01-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2013 10TH SRAVANA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 3225 of 2013 --------------------------------- [C.C.NO. 1907/2013 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-1, HOSDRUG AS SPLIT UP FROM C.C. NO.733/2009 ON ITS FILE, CRIME NO. 107/2009 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION , KASARGOD DISTRICT] ................ PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 AND 5.------------------------------------------------ 1. NABEEL, AGED 2 YEARS, S/O.AJMEER MOIDU, RESIDING AT AJMEER HOUSE, NEAR IQUBAL GATE, KANHANGAD, HOSDURG TALUK, KSARAGOD DISTRICT.2. M.SALEEM, AGED 2 YEARS, S/O.MAMMUNHI, RESIDING AT MOYILAKKARIYATH HOUSE, ATHINHAL, AJANOOR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.T.MADHU, SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI. RESPONDENT/STATE: -------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HOSDURG POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-01-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR CR. APPEAL No.935/2004 1. Tularam aged about 35 years S/o Vipat Lodhi 2. Sakharam, aged about 42 years, S/o Vipat Lodhi Both R/o Village Devrimaal Police Station Chand, District Chhindwara Appellants Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Respondent PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice Ajit Singh & Honble Shri Justice B.D.Rathi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Smt. Durgesh Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. Shri Amit Pandey, Government Advocate for the respondent- State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (1/8/13) The following judgment of the Court was delivered by: B. D. Rathi, J.Being aggrieved with the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.5.04 passed in Sessions Trial No.211/2002 by the Court of II Additional Judge to the Court of I Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, this Criminal Appeal has been preferred u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-01-2013
CRA No.698-DB of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:01.08.2013 CRA No.698-DB of 2009 (O&M) Nahar Singh & another .... Appellants Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CRA No.41-DB of 2010 (O&M) Basant Singh .... Appellant Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY Present: Mr. A.P.S.Deol, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vishal Rattan Lamba, Advocate for the appellants in CRA No.698-DB of 2009. Mr. N.S.Swaitch, Advocate for the appellant in CRA No.41-DB of 2010. Mr. B.S.Bhalla, Addl. AG, Punjab. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. Anita Chaudhry, J.(Oral) This judgment shall dispose of two criminal appeals bearing not CRA-D-698-DB of 2009 and CRA-D-41-DB of 2010 as these arise out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-31-2013
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) 1. The appellants who stand convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC') and in addition, the appellant No.2 Dinesh who stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and each accused to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo SI for three months; RI for seven years and each accused to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo SI for one month; RI for two years; RI for seven years and each accused to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo SI for one month, respectively and appellant No.2 Dinesh being sentenced to RI for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo SI for one month for an ofence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC, by the Ad-hoc District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Pune by Judgment dated 6th April, 2013, in Sessions Case No.321/2012, challenged their convic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-30-2013
CRA not S-972-SB of 2001 - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA not S-972-SB of 2001 Decided on: July 301. Paramjit Singh s/o Ronak Singh resident of Village Jawaharpur.2. Gurdial Singh s/o Ronak Singh resident of Village Jawaharpur 3. Aflatoon Mohd. @ Kola son of Mehar Din, resident of Village Pabhat, Police Station Sohana, District Ropar.4. Ashok Kumar s/o Agya Ram, resident of Village Singwal, P.S. Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur.5. Sarman Bahadur s/o Kalu Bahadur resident of Village Shera, P.S. & District Dathlag (Nepal) .....Appellants Versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. BANGARH ***** Present: Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate with Mr. Amol Partap Singh Mann, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, AAG, Haryana for the respondent. ***** S.P. BANGARH, J The case of the prosecution is that on 28.01.1997, Rajinder Singh son of Labh Singh was going to Manimajra from Barwala in jeep bearing registration not DL-4C 9976.When at 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1 Murder Reference No.8 of 2011 State of Punjab .....Appellant Versus Resham Singh and others ..... Respondents 2. Crl. Appeal not D-1119-DB of 2011 Resham Singh and another ....Appellants Versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent 3. Crl. Appeal not D-1172-DB of 2011 Date of decision:29. .7.2013. Gurmukh Singh and another ....Appellants Versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SARON. HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.BANGARH. Present: Mr. R.S.Cheema, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arshdeep Singh Cheema, Advocate for the appellants in Crl. Appeal not D-1172-DB of 2011 and for respondents No.3 and 4 in Murder Reference No.8 of 2011. Amit Khanchi 2013.08.01 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh Mureder Reference No.8 of 2011 & 2 CRA not D-1119-DB of 2011 & CRA not D-1172-DB of 2011 Ms. Baljit Mann, Advocate and Mr.A.P.S.Mann, Advocate for the appellants in Crl. Appeal not D-1119-DB ...
Tag this Judgment!